UNREST Erupts After AG Says NO CHARGES In Death of Breonna Taylor, Leftists In Uhaul Deliver Shields
They called it, though one officer was charged with wanton endangerment, none of the officers will be charged in the death of Breonna Taylor.Already BLM Leftists and Antifa types are delivering shields in a Uhaul, a man was seen trying to pull a gun before other activists and crowd members stop him and talk him down.Chaos may be coming as leftist unrest is already brewing.Democrats now own the riots and this will prove Trump and the Republicans right once again.As we face what may be the worst night of mass rioting since George Floyd, Joe Biden and Kamala Harris will have to account for their support for those doing the rioting.
Support the show (http://timcast.com/donate)
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Moments before recording this segment, a man is seen on video trying to draw a gun.
A crowd runs up to him and stops him from pulling the weapon.
I can't tell you what his intentions were, but I can tell you the reason why he wanted to pull out the weapon.
The announcement has been made.
There will be no indictments in the death of Breonna Taylor.
Three officers who were involved in the raid on Breonna Taylor's home will not be charged in her death.
The headlines are wrong.
You see, this story from the Courier-Journal says Louisville grand jury indicts one of three officers in fatal Breonna Taylor police shooting.
But that's unrelated.
The charge is wanton endangerment.
It has nothing to do with the death of Breonna Taylor on the surface.
In reality, this was about endangering the neighbors.
So yes, the activists realize these cops will not be indicted, and Breonna Taylor, her killing, was deemed justified.
And guess what?
It would seem that CNN even agrees.
The information being shared wildly by activists is completely incorrect.
They said it was a no-knock warrant.
That's not true.
They said these officers fired into her room while she was sleeping in bed.
Not true.
Not only did the officers repeatedly bang on the door and announce themselves, not only did neighbors witness this and wonder what the commotion was.
A man in the home fired at the officers first, hitting an officer in the leg.
The only reason there's an indictment here is because one of the officers started firing blindly into the building and was rightly criticized for doing so.
The indictment has to do with endangering others.
Already, organized protests have erupted and we are just now entering what may be civil unrest and serious rioting.
I hope things don't get as bad as I... I don't want things to get bad, but I kind of feel like we are heading towards what may be the worst rioting we have seen yet.
And all of this obviously is extremely bad news for Democrats.
The extreme emotional reaction from people who don't understand what happened in this case will only serve to hurt them more.
And I think we all know it.
I think Joe Biden knows it.
In an article from Politico, they said the riots are a problem that Democrats can't escape.
And the riots are about to get worse than we have seen.
In a tracking poll on sentiment and support for Black Lives Matter, we see that following the killing of Brenna Taylor, support for Black Lives Matter actually went down a little bit.
And I'm not entirely sure why.
But it could be related to the fact that even CNN's investigation found that this was not murder and charges would not be justified.
And anybody who was paying attention would have known this for months.
Full disclosure, I made a mistake last night on my IRL podcast by not getting the details correct.
See, even I made the mistake.
Because the messaging and propaganda from the activists is powerful.
I'm worried.
I think by the time you watch this, we may be in the midst of massive, widespread riots, maybe across the country, maybe just in Louisville, Kentucky, but I certainly hope people stay safe.
Louisville has already declared a state of emergency.
Buildings have already been boarded up, courthouses, police departments, and warnings have gone out repeatedly.
You won't be able to park downtown, and I've said repeatedly, You need to get out of this city before it's too late.
I don't know how widespread the riots will be.
I'm sure many people think they can stay home and defend themselves.
We've already seen what happened to the McCloskeys.
We've already seen what happened to Jake Gardner in Omaha.
And now this man in Milwaukee.
If they find their way to your neighborhood, you will not be legally protected if you try to defend yourself.
Which brings us to a very difficult question.
Should you stand your ground or should you flee?
It's entirely up to you.
Don't take my word for it.
I'm just trying to make sure you stay safe and you're aware of the risks.
But it's entirely upon you to do what you think is right.
Just please, please everyone.
Stop the violence.
Please.
Because it's only going to create another cycle of revenge.
People will be hurt by the riots, their businesses will be destroyed, and they'll call for more police action and more funding, and they'll target the protesters, and they'll be angrier, they'll come out to rally, and the violence will persist until we decide it must stop.
Let's not waste any words.
Let me show you the breaking news from Courier Journal.
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.
There's a P.O.
box, but the best thing you can do, share this video.
I'm going to show you that even CNN is debunking the activist narrative.
I have chosen CNN on purpose because it's considered to be a very credible source by the left, and the right doesn't seem to think CNN's credible.
Well, the right, in my opinion, rightly believes CNN's not credible.
But in this instance, what CNN is reporting, and they reported this months ago, seems to line up with the documents, the data, and witness statements.
You can't deny the truth.
The activists want to make this about evil cops targeting minorities.
That is not the case here.
CNN says the activists got it wrong, and thus these officers will not be charged in the death of Breonna Taylor.
From the Courier-Journal, Louisville Grand Jury indicts one of three officers in fatal Brenna Taylor police shooting.
They say, A Jefferson County Grand Jury has indicted one of the three Louisville officers in the March 13th fatal police shooting of 26-year-old Brenna Taylor.
It was announced Wednesday.
Former Detective Brett Hankison was indicted on three counts of first-degree wanton endangerment.
Sergeant Jonathan Mattingly was not indicted.
Detective Miles Cosgrove was not indicted.
A wanton endangerment charge is a Class D felony and carries a penalty of one to five years in prison.
The charges read by Judge Annie O'Connell on Wednesday said that Hankison wantonly shot a gun into adjoining Apartment 3.
The occupants of the apartment were identified by initials.
None of them was BT, Breonna Taylor.
That means the grand jury did not find that Hankison wantonly fired into Taylor's apartment the night she died, or that the officers are criminally liable in her death.
In May, Taylor's neighbor, Chessie Knapper, filed a lawsuit against the LMPD officers, claiming that the officers' shots were blindly fired and nearly struck a man inside.
Knapper was pregnant and had a child in her home, according to the lawsuit.
The judge set a $15,000 cash bond for Hankison.
A warrant has been issued for his arrest.
Cameron said the grand jury decided homicide charges are not applicable because the investigation showed that Mattingly and Cosgrove were justified in returning deadly fire after they were fired upon by Kenneth Walker, Taylor's boyfriend.
CNN confirms.
This man, Kenneth Walker, fired first, shooting the officer.
The officers then returned fire.
Now, you can argue that this one officer was justified in shooting, but blindly and wantonly, perhaps not.
And for this, he's being charged.
Several activists have pointed out that this charge doesn't even necessitate prison time.
In fact, he might just get probation, a slap on the wrist, a suspended sentence, who knows?
It is not a very serious charge, though it is a felony.
Justice is not often easy, and does not fit the mold of public opinion.
And it does not conform to shifting standards, Cameron said.
I know that not everyone will be satisfied with the charges we've reported today.
My team set out to investigate the circumstances surrounding Ms.
Taylor's death.
We did it with a singular goal in mind, pursuing the truth.
Kentucky deserves no less.
The city of Louisville deserves no less.
If we simply act on emotion or outrage, there is no justice.
Mob justice is not justice.
I have to say, based upon my readings of what was going on, and I will also add there are some leaked documents I'm not going to get into.
It's a bit into the nitty gritty, and so for that I apologize, but on the surface, from what we can see from all of these stories, these officers, aside from the wanton endangerment, which may be warranted, and that's a charge, not a conviction, It seems like these officers did not commit a crime.
I'm sorry, it's just not the case.
If you'd like to change the system, I'm welcome to hear it, and we can figure out what needs to be done.
But based upon what the AG is saying, based upon what CNN of all places is reporting, these officers knocked repeatedly.
They announced themselves.
When no one answered, they used a battering ram to break the door down and were immediately fired upon with one officer being hit in the thigh.
This wasn't something you could... I don't know what you could change in this circumstance.
What should the cops have done differently?
Maybe just kept knocking?
Well, no.
They have to serve a warrant.
So they break the door down, and they got shot, and they returned fire.
These things sometimes happen.
It's tragic.
But I don't know what you think should change about this.
They go on to say...
Around 200 protesters gathered at Jefferson Square Park as the announcement was played on a loudspeaker.
As the decision concluded, there was confusion at first, then anger from those who had gathered.
Is that it?
One woman asked.
Protesters almost immediately began chanting, no justice, no peace.
Several cried at the grand jury decision.
I'm heartbroken.
Logan Cleaver, a protester, said Wednesday immediately after the grand jury's decision was announced.
This is not a justice system.
It's not for everybody.
The announcement comes after Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron's office presented its findings to the Grand Jury earlier this week.
His team has been investigating the Taylor shooting since May.
In anticipation of Cameron's lawsuit, Mayor Greg Fischer invoked a 72-hour curfew, effective Wednesday night from 9 p.m.
to 6.30 a.m.
Last week, Fischer announced the city agreed to a $12 million settlement with Breonna Taylor's family that includes more than a dozen police reforms.
The uncertainty swirling around the decision on possible criminal charges in Taylor's death has drawn both local and international attention, as protesters have marched and chanted on Louisville streets for 119 consecutive days.
Protesters in Louisville and supporters across the U.S.
have called for justice for Breonna.
And other black Americans, such as George Floyd in Minneapolis, who have been killed by police.
Taylor's death and the ensuing protests have been showcased in news reports and in public statements by celebrities, athletes, sports leagues, and politicians from Joe Biden to Beyonce to LeBron James, all calling for justice and the arrest of the officers who killed the unarmed Louisville woman.
Now they say in the past week, tensions escalated to an unnerving pitch as national network crews arrived in Louisville and rumors spread wildly that a decision was imminent only to be proven wrong and wrong again.
Wednesday's announcement comes as images of a restricted downtown Louisville have flashed across the world.
Downtown has taken on the appearance of a city under siege.
With plywood nailed across business fronts and concrete barriers cordoning off a 25-block perimeter, Louisville Metro Police Interim Chief Robert Schroeder said the restrictions, long planned amid unprecedented times, were meant to protect public safety, property, protesters, and avoid conflicts between drivers and demonstrators.
I want to show you this tweet thread from Greta Wall to give you some context as to what's going on.
She tweets, a Kentucky grand jury indicts one officer in the death of Brenna Taylor, who was killed by police in a no-knock warrant on March 13th.
This is factually incorrect.
She says former Sergeant Brett Hankison has been charged with wanton endangerment.
KY Attorney General Daniel Cameron says the warrant served on the night of Brad Taylor's death was not a no-knock warrant.
Officers chose to breach the apartment after no one answered the door, says Taylor's boyfriend Kenneth Walker, fired upon officers as they entered.
So this reporter, Greta Wall, With OANN.
This is One America News.
This is a conservative right-leaning outlet.
Even she thought it was a no-knock warrant.
That shows you just how far and wide and powerful the left's propaganda really was.
What's surprising to me is that even I got this wrong.
I did last night in the IRL podcast.
I was giving the gist of this and I was wrong.
And I got a bunch of comments saying, Tim, you messed up.
And I was surprised to find, yeah!
Even CNN says it!
Look at this quote.
We kept banging.
CNN says hours after Shaw signed the warrants, police began the operation, conducting near
simultaneous raids at various locations.
Taylor's apartment, according to police, was considered a less volatile soft target.
As such, police commanders decided in advance to have officers knock and announce their
presence before entering.
That decision was communicated in a pre-operational briefing, according to a source familiar with the details, of the operation, who requested anonymity due to the ongoing investigation.
Sometime after 1230 AM, Sergeant Jonathan Mattingly began pounding on the door.
He later told investigators he believed Taylor was alone, and he wanted to give her sufficient time to answer.
His officers waited for a response.
A neighbor poked his head out to ask what was going on.
One of the officers, Brett Hankison, extended his gun and told the neighbor to get back inside his apartment.
Mattingly would later tell investigators.
Brett was a little bit worked up, Mattingly said.
I remember looking at Brett saying, Brett, relax.
Brett, just relax.
Relax.
When there was no answer after repeated knocks, Mattingly said, he announced he was a police officer, there to serve a warrant.
Police, come to the door, he said.
Another officer on the search team said he heard movement inside and thought someone was about to answer the door.
We kept banging and announcing, Mattingly said, but still no one answered.
Eventually, a lieutenant at the scene gave the order to go ahead and hit the door with a battering ram.
Quote, who is it?
Taylor had been watching a movie in bed together with her boyfriend, Kenneth Walker, when she drifted off to sleep beside him.
Walker told investigators he heard banging at the door after midnight, and his first thought was that it was Glover.
He said he knew Taylor had dated the accused drug dealer during their on-and-off seven-year relationship.
He was concerned there might be trouble.
Taylor, who had awoken, shouted, Who is it?
Walker said there was no response.
He said he and Taylor scrambled to get dressed and that he grabbed his gun, which his attorney says he legally owns.
The pounding at the door continued.
She's yelling at the top of her lungs.
And I am too at this point.
Who is it?
He recalled.
No answer, no response, no anything.
As they made their way down a hallway toward the front door, Walker said the door flew off its hinges.
So I just let off one shot, he said.
I still can't see who it is or anything.
CNN.
Following orders and police procedure.
Mattingly was first to the door.
He could make out a man and woman in the darkened hallway, he said, and the man had a gun in his hand.
I remember seeing the barrel, Mattingly said.
Then, in an instant, he saw the flash of the muzzle and felt the heat of a bullet hit his leg.
The round had severed his femoral artery.
Mattingly returned fire, squeezing off multiple shots in rapid succession.
Boom, boom, boom, boom, boom, he recalled.
In all, he fired six times.
He remembered falling to the ground and being helped to safety outside the apartment before hearing fellow officers return fire.
Hankison and Officer Miles Cosgrove were later identified as the other officers who discharged their weapons that evening.
An attorney for Cosgrove declined to comment.
Hankison's attorney did not respond to calls and emails from CNN.
Mattingly's attorney, Todd McMurtry, defended his client's conduct.
Sergeant Mattingly was following orders of superior officers, was not involved in the planning process of the arrest, and at all times followed established police procedures.
None of the officers has been charged with a crime.
You know why?
Because this story from CNN is from July 23rd.
It is September 23rd.
It was several months ago that CNN reported accurately the police knocked, bang, bang.
No one would answer over and over again.
A neighbor witnessed this.
And finally, when they decided to breach the building, they got shot.
A bullet to the femoral artery can kill you.
Fortunately, this officer was with other officers and was treated in time.
He may have lost his life.
The story is a tragedy.
No one should have lost their life or been injured that day.
But these things happen in the line of duty, in the line of law enforcement.
We cannot have a system where we ask officers to enter into dangerous situations where they quite literally did get shot, and offer them up no opportunity to defend themselves against lethal force.
Let me just stress, and I mean this with a heavy heart, because I am not happy to hear about anyone getting hurt or anyone dying, and I truly am sad that Breonna Taylor lost her life.
If that man, if that officer, was by himself, he would be dead.
A bullet to the femoral artery.
I'm sure the officer himself knew how to stem the bleed.
But that is a potentially lethal shot.
And it could have been bad for him.
And so naturally, not understanding why you're being shot at, and you're trying to serve a warrant that you are told you have to do, It creates a real problem.
He was doing his job.
He was just following orders.
Ooh, I hate that line so much.
I believe in that regard the system must be changed.
We can never accept just following orders as an excuse for what went down.
But we also have to consider what the orders were.
These orders weren't to harass an innocent person.
These orders had to do with stopping drug dealers and people committing crimes.
The warrant was about targeting someone based on identity or some fringe ideology.
It was something we asked them to do because we felt that, as a society, the things these people were accused of were wrong.
These men were shot.
They knocked several times.
They say they announced themselves.
Brent Taylor's boyfriend says he didn't hear them.
It's possible.
It's entirely possible that the police did announce themselves, and this man didn't hear them.
So what?
Who's the guilty party?
If both acted appropriately, then we would call this a tragedy.
The officers announced themselves, used a battering ram because they were serving a warrant.
Kenneth Walker, I believe his name was, didn't know who was breaking into his home, and so he fired, thinking someone was coming to attack him.
Brenna Taylor lost her life because of it.
In this instance, based on the evidence, I'm not sure anyone should be charged in relation to this horrifying tragedy.
Neither one officer will be charged because he fired blindly and nearly hit other people in other apartments.
And well, there you go.
I think that might make sense.
And it must be stressed, these are charges, not convictions.
It's likely the cop could even get off.
And if he does, I welcome you to the next wave of riots.
I certainly hope that this doesn't get bad, but I have to show you.
In this clip from BG On The Scene, a man just nearly pulled his gun in reaction.
Crowd had to stop him.
Louisville is on edge.
I'll clarify.
I don't exactly know for sure exactly what this man was doing.
You just see people rushing up, yelling, and stopping him.
But I think I lean towards that, you know, being accurate based on what I can see.
It's not fair for me to say I know 100%.
I haven't confirmed this.
The video does appear to show a man reaching for something and people running up and stopping him.
I want to make sure I'm very clear on what was potentially happening here.
But I want to show you this.
From Julio Rosas.
While the BLM, while the Black Lives Matter crowd was marching in Louisville, a U-Haul truck pulled up with shields and supplies for the group to use.
U-Haul.
Allowing these people to pull out shields and signs?
Is that true?
We can see that they're pulling up a lot of banners.
I don't necessarily see any shields in the immediate.
Let's see how this plays out as the video carries on.
But you can see one thing that's really important.
These protests are extremely organized and prepared.
They're pulling out big, what looks, there we go, shields.
Straight up shields being brought out.
Julio is 100% correct.
And it's important to realize another tactic used by the far left in relation to a lot of these kinds of actions.
Often they will have what looks like a banner.
Fabric with writing on it.
And when they carry it, you think they're carrying a sign.
And then when they pull the banner away, they're holding giant shields or ladders.
Some kind of device to help them or assist them.
Barricades.
They disguise them.
They do the same thing with flags.
They use thick flagpoles so they can claim they're just flying a flag, but then they can wrap the flag and they have a stick to use as a weapon.
U-Haul.
Allowing this to happen?
They probably don't know, and I wonder if U-Haul can track down who was using this to deliver riot shields And if riot shields are being handed out, I can only guess what's going to happen in the next several hours.
The announcement was made around 1 20 p.m.
I started recording this just about an hour after and this video likely was uploaded to YouTube within like 30 minutes of the time it went live but I imagine you're probably watching this video well after it's been published and so maybe you've already seen the aftermath of this and maybe it isn't as bad as I think it is.
The most important thing that you can do and that I ask of you is share the video if you made it this far because Well, people need to know exactly what happened.
People need to understand the full context of what happened.
And I'm going to leave you with a couple important thoughts.
First, from Politico, how Portland became a nightmare for Democrats.
The violence is escalating and no one can figure out how to stop it.
I can.
It's called arrest and prosecute.
The reason the violence continues is because the district attorneys under the Democrats will not prosecute.
They don't care.
They're letting him go.
Donald Trump took some swift action, and when it comes to the feds, they've been able to shut this stuff down, so I'm sorry.
The Republicans seem to know how to figure it out.
Or how to stop it, I'm sorry.
The Republicans seem to have already done it, but these Democrat jurisdictions have not.
And now Louisville is probably going to face the brunt.
But I assure you, man, look, maybe you're watching this well after I published it, and you're laughing at how wrong I was.
But all in all, this will be a nightmare for the Democrats, and they need to accept it.
This is something I've shown over and over again.
This is the net support for Black Lives Matter.
And we can see that at the end of around 2018, Net opposition turned into net support.
When Breonna Taylor was killed, Black Lives Matter enjoyed 11% net support, but it fell down within the next month to 10%.
When the CDC announced data by race, Black Lives Matter support went up.
When we reached the George Floyd incident, it was at 18%, or they say 17 now, so it's been changing, I guess.
It spiked and reached 25%.
After Jacob Blake was shot, it fell to 11%, dropped down to 9% very briefly, and now it's sitting at around 10%.
They've lost all of their gains from this year.
But the reason I'm highlighting this once again is that after Breonna Taylor was killed, support actually went down.
I have to wonder if people heard the details immediately and knew.
Many of us in media, including a reporter from One America News, didn't know that it was not a no-knock warrant.
That they actually did knock.
They were not given the right to just smash the door down.
But according to CNN, the judge was told only if necessary.
Meaning, they had to knock, and then once there was no answer, they could break the door down.
As opposed to a real no-knock warrant, where they run up, smash the door, and go charging in.
The activists might know this.
They might not.
But I don't think it matters.
I think all that matters is they want retribution.
They don't care what's just.
They don't care what's right.
If that were the case, they wouldn't have burned down small businesses.
They wouldn't have attacked people.
They wouldn't have killed somebody in Portland.
These people just want retribution.
They want an emotional release.
They want to destroy a symbol.
Something that they think represents what oppresses them.
These three cops may have made mistakes, may have exercised poor judgment, but they didn't commit crimes.
They were shot at first, and they knocked on the door.
Even Kenneth Walker says they were knocking, and he was yelling, who is it?
Who is it?
So we all know it wasn't a no-knock warrant.
So what does that mean?
It means sometimes bad things happen.
We cannot function as a society if we can't understand that.
I hope this was informative enough for all of you.
I'm going to now start preparing my next segments and likely begin talking about what's to come for tonight.
I have a lot more stories, three more segments coming up later in the day, starting at 6pm over at youtube.com slash timcastnews.
Please consider sharing this video if you know someone who doesn't understand the full context I used CNN, okay?
It's the best I could muster.
Thanks for hanging out, and I will see you all next time.
The defense team for Kyle Rittenhouse has put out a new video showing what happened on that fateful night in Kenosha during the riots.
For those that aren't familiar, this is the story of the young man, Kyle Rittenhouse, who was armed with a rifle and equipped with a medical kit, who went down to protect businesses, render first aid, and, of course, he had a weapon to defend himself.
Ultimately, he ended up shooting three people.
Two of them had died.
In this video, there are things I've never seen before.
For instance, a group of these guard members, or whatever this group is, the people Kyle were with, said that they were actually on the side of the protesters.
They said, no lives matter until black lives matter.
They literally say that.
They offer first aid.
They say, just don't attack each other and we're with you.
They also show footage of Kyle Rittenhouse carrying a fire extinguisher.
They show footage of the rioters stealing dumpsters and running off with them.
They go into detail about how Kyle Rittenhouse is seen with a fire extinguisher, and then the guy who is masking up and starting the fires is then later seen chasing after him.
Somebody fires a gun.
Now this, this video...
I gotta say, man, I think it's very definitive, and I think it was very well put together.
They show you several clips where throughout the day in Kenosha, people are armed.
They zoom in, they show you the guns.
Now, when Kyle Ritnas was running away after putting out these fires, and all of this is corroborated by witness statements, people I've interviewed personally, who have published footage, who were there on the ground.
As Kyle Rittenhouse is running away from this guy, another man fires a gun.
In this video, they've identified the man.
This is more than even the New York Times was able to put together.
Of course, this is a legal team offering up defense.
Naturally, they're trying to defend their client.
Some things may be omitted, but based on what I've seen, it's extremely comprehensive, getting into the finer details, and it shows, I believe, beyond a reasonable doubt, this kid was acting in self-defense.
However, That doesn't absolve him of the misdemeanor gun charge, but that's something entirely different.
Should Kyle have been there?
Personally, I don't think so.
I think he was too young.
But I don't think he was a white supremacist or a bad guy.
He was rendering aid to people.
In the footage they put out, Kyle is... They show him yelling, if you are hurt, I'm an EMT.
He hands his gun to someone else, and people come up to him.
He was rendering aid to these people.
Well, YouTube has censored the video.
I...
This is just the way things are going to be.
This is just the way things are from now on, huh?
The following content has been identified by the YouTube community as inappropriate or offensive to some audiences.
They've removed the share function of this clip.
The only way to share it is to directly link to it.
I had a friend I was talking to the other day.
I've referenced this several times in the past week or so, but it's because we had a several hour long conversation.
This is someone I think is a really good person, very progressive, doesn't like Donald Trump.
And when we got into the conversation about Kyle Rittenhouse, she told me that he was a white supremacist who crossed state lines armed, you know, and ended up shooting peaceful protesters.
And I was just like, dude, dude, please!
So I found this video.
I should say, I knew about the video when it came out.
Tucker Carlson aired it.
It's from the Legal Defense.
And so when I was watching, I said, I am going to share this with my friend so she knows what really happened.
And the share button is gone.
And you have to go through a bunch of, you know, sort of restrictions, walls, to get through to actually watch this video.
The video is still up on YouTube.
You just have to sign in, agree to their terms.
You can't share it unless you have the direct link.
This is, uh, I think it's called restricted access or restricted mode.
And I'll tell you what.
I think...
I partly agree with some kind of restriction on this, because they literally show the video of Rosenbaum dying.
I can't show that on YouTube, and I understand why they would say it's inappropriate or offensive to some audiences.
But it does create a problem whether or not you think they were right to do it or not.
Perhaps the public right to know is more important than people's, I don't know, objection to obscene material.
We have a problem.
You may have heard about what happened to Jake Gardner.
This guy was a small business owner.
He came out of his bar.
His dad got into a scuffle with some guys.
Let me slow down.
His dad pushed some guys, but then they decked him.
Disproportionate response.
He went over there.
They started threatening him.
He warned them several times.
They attack him.
Clear-cut case of self-defense.
You've probably heard this story over and over again, but I think it's one of the most important stories, and it's really relevant to what I'm talking about now.
This guy, James Scurlock, jumps on Jake Gardner's back and is choking him out.
Gardner tells him to get off, it's 18 seconds of being choked, switches the gun to his left hand, over his shoulder, fires.
Scurlock took a bolt to the clavicle and died.
When people set up a GoFundMe to defend Jake Gardner, because it was self-defense, GoFundMe took it down.
His landlord at his apartment kicked him out.
His landlord for his business kicked him out.
He had lost everything, but he was acting in self-defense.
The only way we can solve problems like the things that happened to Jake Gardner, who eventually took his own life, it's a horrifying and tragic story.
Marine veteran, two tours in Iraq, I believe two tours.
And he was driven to suicide because of this.
The only way we help people and stop the violence and the madness is if we know about it.
But naturally, big tech falls on the side of letting extremism happen.
It's the leftward lurch.
It's the pipeline.
It flows in one direction.
Well, at the individual level, the left will push you out, and everything flows towards the right.
Because the left is attacking their own, and conservatives are recruiting, baby!
The right's like, come over here and have a beer!
Vote for us, and we'll talk.
The left is saying, get out, bigot.
But at the cultural level, it's going the other direction, which is really interesting.
You can post videos all day and night of police brutality.
Now, of course, they've restricted certain videos as well of police brutality, but police brutality videos are everywhere, going viral on Facebook, getting millions of views, being shared like crazy on Twitter.
But what gets restricted?
The videos and the content and the fundraisers that defend those on the right.
Because the valve is blocking anything from going the other direction.
Now, there's a lot of reasons why this may be, but I will tell you this.
This video, you can see the URL tag.
I can't link this video.
I can't, you know, because I'll get restricted too.
But you can see it right there.
It's a long code, you can type it in.
It's been posted by Tucker Carlson and many other people.
But YouTube is restricting it.
And this video, I believe, I really do think it is an excellent and comprehensive view of what happened, what was going through his mind, and showing you that the rioters were the aggressors and Kyle Rittenhouse was acting in self-defense.
Kyle Rittenhouse deserves some responsibility for what happened that night.
He was an underage kid out there with a gun.
At first I thought, and I said this in several videos, so we'll call this a straight-up correction.
I thought that he actually had an exemption because there's a hunting provision in Wisconsin.
Apparently that's not the case, and more importantly, it's a misdemeanor charge.
We'll see what the trial, or his trial decides, or what happens.
Maybe he'll plead down.
I don't know.
But many of the other charges are insane.
First-degree intentional homicide, implying that he wanted to kill people.
I gotta slow down.
It implies that he wanted to kill these guys.
He was running away.
In fact, in this video that they posted, you can see someone put their hands up, and Kyle Reynolds immediately lowers his weapon.
But man...
I wish I could go through this video frame by frame.
They bring up another really important point.
The first guy who dies, Rosenbaum, who is chasing after Kyle Rittenhouse, he got shot in the back.
He got shot in the left thigh, the groin, and in the back, and I think his lower abdomen.
After Kyle Rittenhouse, so some guy, they've identified him, I'm not going to say his name, he fires.
The New York Times said he fired in the air.
I actually don't know that's true.
It actually looks like he may have fired at Rittenhouse, triggering Rittenhouse to turn around and fire at Rosenbaum, who was grabbing for his gun.
However, I believe three more shots, three or four more shots ring out from an unidentified shooter.
And it's possible Rosenbaum, the first guy, actually took the lethal hit from somebody else.
We don't know.
But I think it's important to point out the footage shows, definitively, Kyle Rittenhouse was rendering aid, and he was trying to stop people from torching dumpsters, and then pushing them into a gas station.
Now, it wasn't actually him who stopped the fires, but in one of the videos, you can see they're pushing dumpsters, flaming dumpsters, towards a gas station.
I think, and I talked to many witnesses and reporters who were there, that it's possible they would have blown that gas station up.
Because what people don't realize, you know you go to a gas station, they say, don't have your phone because there could be a static shock and it could ignite fumes?
That could start a fire.
And we've seen how fires sometimes accidentally start.
People will like put the pump, you know, the hose into their car and like a sparkle happened, and then there's fire everywhere.
Imagine watching people push a dumpster!
Into a gas station.
Well, some guy put this fire out.
Another thing they point out in this video, which is really interesting, is this guy was wearing very similar clothes to Kyle.
And perhaps Rosenbaum thought it was the same guy.
It's really simple.
Kyle and this group were saying, just don't attack each other and we're with you.
No lives matter until black lives matter.
They actually yelled that to the protesters.
But the rioters wanted to start fires, and they kept putting them out.
And in other footage that we've not yet seen, Rosenbaum is seen setting more fires.
So they speculate that maybe Rosenbaum attacked Rittenhouse because he thought it was the same guy who kept putting out the fires, though we do see Kyle putting fires out.
What was the alternative?
Let them blow up the gas station.
How many people would have lost their lives if that was the case?
You know what?
It's kind of scary when you realize, if that happened, maybe it would have shocked this nation and made them realize that these rioters have lost their minds.
Instead, what we got were concerned citizens who came out and stopped the gas station from blowing up, and then chaos and tragedy.
I don't know what's going to happen with the trial, but I can tell you that this is, look, I can't show you the footage, I can't show you the videos, but I can talk to you about it, and I can talk about the danger of the censorship.
Because with this restriction, which may be reasonable because it shows, you know, literally somebody dying, Less people are going to get access to this information, and it's extremely important they do.
So let me just offer my breakdown, my explanation, my excuse, maybe.
Look, I'd love to show you this video in full and go frame by frame, but I think what I'm doing here is kind of, I'm trying to create a window into what happened with this content.
This video I'm doing right now and everything I'm saying in this podcast will allow you to hear a lot of what this video is telling you, but this video likely will not be restricted because I'm not showing you it specifically.
You get it?
So I'm trying to do the best that I can to sort of filter this to you, bypassing the censorship, and I'm doing it in ways that YouTube is okay with.
Hopefully this is enough, but we're going to move on because I want to tell you why this is happening.
What happened in Kenosha was a tragedy, and I think everybody agrees.
Certainly there's going to be a lot of people who are going to gloat and laugh and cheer, and I'm not a fan.
I think it's horrifying that these people lost their lives and that Kyle's in this position.
But this is the result of police not intervening, not arresting these people, and it's been happening across this country.
This is a result of Wisconsin not accepting help from Donald Trump and the feds.
And this is another reason why I am so on board and just saying, I'm going to vote for Trump.
You know why?
Because you are doing this.
Okay?
Trump is sitting there saying, let me help you.
And you're saying no.
And then Kyle Rittenhouse situation happens.
Well, let's kick it up to Seattle.
Seattle City Council votes to override Mayor Durkin's budget veto.
Now what does that mean?
It means they're defunding the police.
The mayor tried stopping them, and they said, nah, we're gonna defund the police.
So what happens when you defund the police?
What happens when you tell cops, like they did in Seattle, you can't use riot control, crowd control, munitions, you can't use tear gas?
Then they can't effectively disperse crowds.
The police put out a statement a while ago, it was brief, I don't know if they're still in this position, where they said, our hands are tied, we can't protect businesses.
The rioters came out, smashed up a bunch of stores, stole property, burned it in the street, and the cops couldn't do anything about it because a court, I believe it was a judge ruled they couldn't use, or I believe, I'm not sure if it was the city or the judge, said they couldn't use crowd control tactics and munition.
So like tear gas and stuff.
So they said, okay, we can't.
And then they went, the rioters went around destroying everything.
If that keeps happening, you know what, you know, what's going to come, what will emerge from that?
More situations like we see with Kyle Rittenhouse.
More people saying, I have no choice.
The police are not here.
What am I supposed to do?
And I'll show you some.
We'll come back to this story and I'll read it for you.
Matt, I'm sorry, that's not the right story.
PPB planning response to mass gatherings on September 26, 2020.
Portland police have their hands tied.
And this is where things are getting really scary.
You see, the Proud Boys have announced they're going to be in Portland on the 26th.
We are only a few days away from that.
Antifa has announced they will be there to counter this.
It's gonna be bad.
It's gonna be real bad.
What do we need?
We need the police to lock everything down in such a way that Antifa can come and they can have their little space and they can yell, and the Proud Boys can come and have their space, wave their flags and yell, but keep them separated.
Because Antifa's gonna try and start a fight with the Proud Boys, accusing them of invading their home turf.
The Proud Boys are gonna say that they have a First Amendment right to be there.
It's true, they do.
They absolutely have a right to be there, to march and to protest, but Antifa doesn't care.
They're going to say, you're fascists, and they're going to want to fight.
If that happens, it will be absolute chaos, and if you think the Kyle Rittenhouse situation was bad, multiply that by ten.
We need the police.
We need the police funded, and we need Portland Police to prevent these two groups from coming into contact with each other.
Look, I respect the First Amendment for both groups.
The right to free speech, the government can't stop you from speaking is what I'm saying.
The right to free speech separate from the First Amendment, I'm saying.
You can come out, you can speak.
As it pertains to the First Amendment, the police shouldn't stop you from doing so.
But the police should stop people from crossing barriers and interacting with each other because it will just be It's going to get brutal.
So I look at what the PPD is planning.
And I also look at what's going on in Louisville.
Louisville has declared a state of emergency.
They're locking the downtown area.
They're shutting down parking.
Why?
Because they know riots are coming.
This is what we need police for.
Well, Seattle, they're getting rid of their police.
Here's what's going to happen.
They say, as part of the amended budget proposed by the council, which has now been officially adopted, the spending plan calls for cutting the police department staff by roughly 100 officers.
Eliminating the department's navigation team, which serves as an outreach effort to the homeless.
The council voted 72 to override this budget bill, while voting 9-0 to override the other budget bills.
Trimming the salaries of SPD command staff.
The council's 2020 amended budget will strip the department of roughly $3 million, which equates to less than 1%, a 1% defunding of the department's 2020 budget.
These suggested cuts will now fall on the Durkin administration for implementation.
Council, as a legislative branch of city government, can pass legislation and budgets, Gonzales said.
We cannot force the mayor to spend or not spend as we have directed.
Now listen.
Less than 1%.
And they're trying to get 50%.
That's what they're saying.
They're basically saying that this is on their path towards getting this budget slashed by 50%.
It's what the activists want.
I'm not going to pretend that cutting 1%, less than 1% of the budget is the end of the world.
I'm talking about the worrying trend in trying to abolish police departments or defund them.
In Minneapolis, they voted outright to abolish, but they can't because it's getting jammed up and now crime is surging, violent crime.
And now these council members that voted to get rid of police are now complaining because their constituents are freaking out that cops won't respond to these calls and they're, well, the cops are just doing it to punish us, blah, blah, blah.
Are you kidding?
You're charging four officers who are doing their job.
I think the biggest problem that the activists don't realize, they don't see, is the system itself just needs to be changed.
No, they want a face.
They want someone to suffer.
I don't want anyone to suffer!
Am I mad about what happened with George Floyd?
You betcha!
And there's a lot of circumstances around this.
Did he die of fentanyl?
Did he die from asphyxiation?
Depending on who you ask, you'll get a different answer.
I'm not here to argue which tribe is right, although I obviously have my opinions on which one I think is right.
I'm just trying to say, listen, if we can figure out ways to make sure people don't die, that would be a good thing.
But you gotta understand that sometimes these things happen.
There's nothing we can do about it.
The problem isn't the officers, it's the system as it stands, which means reform makes a lot of sense.
But reform means more funding!
It means fund the police!
I know, it probably means more taxes or something like that, and maybe that's a problem, but if you want social workers, I say this.
Don't cut 100 officers, that's crazy!
You see where this is going?
Look, I don't think cutting less than 1% of their budget is going to be the end of the world.
I don't know if that's on top of the staffing cuts and the salary cuts, or if it's the total cost of things.
But we cannot, we cannot move in that direction.
I think we want to demilitarize.
Can we sell off somehow some of these ridiculous armored vehicles the cops probably don't need?
And I understand that certain jurisdictions do need them, but perhaps the appropriate
response is to have a specialized jurisdiction with a, I guess you can call it a militarized
defensive capability, you know, armored vehicles and SWAT officers, but at a regional level,
not at a city level.
And so we can reduce a dramatic amount of the police militarization.
We can reduce the, try and deescalate things between criminals and police in terms of the
kind of weapons they use.
Still have the capability to use this technology because I do think it benefits us, but focus
a lot of the extra revenue on more police, better paid police, better trained police,
and yes, social workers to accompany police in some extreme situations.
Or I shouldn't say extreme situations.
I mean like non-extreme.
I mean the total opposite.
So here's what I'm thinking.
Can we give cops more money?
Can we give them better pay?
I think cops deserve... I do.
I'm gonna say it.
The left's gonna get mad.
They deserve more money.
They absolutely do.
You don't understand, man.
A lot of these cops get paid nothing.
They get paid like trash.
I think in New York City 10 years ago it was like $28k a year, like $30k a year.
And you want these people to go out there, risk their lives?
They're not gonna do it!
They're gonna be like, not for $30k!
Pop, pop, pop!
You see a wanted gang member.
He's on a warrant.
And the cops are told to go arrest him.
And they're going to be sitting there thinking, I make nothing.
I can barely afford my apartment.
I definitely can't afford to live in this city.
It's too expensive.
They say that you need to make like $150,000 a year to live in New York City as middle class median because the cost of living is so high.
So you want to have a cop who's making $30,000, $40,000 a year living in that city?
They're not going to do it.
Then you're going to tell them to go risk their lives?
They're not going to do it.
And I don't blame them.
Pay them more, pay them better, and train them better.
Maybe we should consider that we need more taxes or something, or reallocate funding from other areas to better fund cops, because safety is our priority, right?
Look, If you can't eat, you can't live.
If you can't drink water, you can't live.
If you can't breathe, you can't live.
And then you need shelter, and you need security.
Security is up there on the top of the list.
If we do not feel safe, then people are going to get anxious, and they're going to go crazy.
And that's part of what's happening, and it's partly the media's problem.
It's a problem of the media, coming out and saying all these things, lying to people, not giving them the truth.
You know, just trying to fan the flames.
I think defunding the police is a horrifying trend that may not continue because, look at Minneapolis.
The people who live there are freaking out, and the council members are like, uh-oh, people don't really like that we did this!
But Seattle's moving forward, getting rid of a hundred cops.
That's going to make everything worse.
And then we get Donald Trump saying, you know, Portland, Seattle, and New York are anarchist jurisdictions.
They're going to lose their funding.
I think that'll make everything worse.
I get why Trump is doing it though.
He's doing it for different reasons.
Not that I'm necessarily a big fan, but I don't know how else you get these cities to fall in line and stop doing this.
The general idea is simple.
Trump says, if you don't want cops and you're trying to defund Then why am I paying the bill for it?
The federal government should have... Like, why?
I don't live in New York.
Why am I paying, you know, taxes to the federal government to give to New York when they don't want the police?
They cut a billion dollars off their budget.
Makes sense, I guess.
It makes sense.
So I don't know what else to tell you in that capacity.
If they don't want cops, they don't get cops.
I do think it'll be worse, though.
We need to fund the police movement, but these activists, they can't see beyond their emotional rage.
And so what do we get?
The police don't intervene.
The riots get worse.
And they're about to get really bad in Louisville.
I hope you're paying attention, man.
They're boarding up businesses.
They're boarding up courthouses.
They're boarding up police departments.
Because we know what's coming.
These cops in the Brenda Taylor case are not going to be indicted.
At least I think so.
And the rioters are going to come out.
But you know what?
I think they're going to come out no matter what.
No matter what.
And we know it.
This is why we need cops.
We can't allow rioters to romp around and destroy everyone's lives, innocent people's lives, because they're mad at a system.
We can change the system, man.
When they chant around, the whole damn system is guilty as hell, I'm like, sure!
Like, yeah, it's okay!
Right?
Fine!
So, listen.
Rand Paul wanted to put out a bill to ban no-knock warrants.
Apparently the Breonna Taylor warrant wasn't a no-knock warrant.
There's a lot we've got to go through in that story.
But anyway, regardless, Rand Paul says, I'm going to introduce the Justice for Breonna Taylor Act.
And what happened?
They still attacked him.
Nothing will satisfy the mob.
So you know what we need to do?
We need to make sure our police are well-funded, well-trained, and well-equipped.
And we need to make sure that we hold them accountable when they do commit crimes.
That's all that it is.
That's all that matters.
And that means we can't throw people under the bus who defend themselves, but the mob wants it.
And the mob is gaining ground and gaining traction.
Heaven forbid Joe Biden get elected and bring these lax, pro-mob policies to the federal government.
Because what do we see in Seattle?
Slashing cops, defunding police.
Portland, having the cops stand down.
DAs refusing to prosecute.
You want that at the federal level?
Trump's the last stand.
The federal government's the only thing standing between us and absolute chaos.
And Joe Biden's staff was bailing these people out.
I'm sorry, man.
Trump is the only person standing in front of us and what these people are doing.
Now look, I get it.
If you live in a Republican area, you're probably fine.
Because in Utah and Nebraska, they just shut this stuff down and said, nope.
What was it?
I can't remember what city it was, but they were like, we're not Seattle.
And they just went in and arrested everybody.
And that's what you gotta do, man.
Stop the riot before they get out of control.
More police.
But police accountability, 100%.
Demilitarization, 100%.
I mean, like, 100% in the sense of, we should do it.
Total demilitarization.
I think the best way to explain it is too many departments have crazy vehicles and weapons.
They don't need... And so we can definitely reduce that and try and figure out how to better allocate funds.
But I'll leave it there, man.
This video is crazy, Kyle, and the censorship is nuts.
But I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 1pm on this channel.
Thank you all so much for hanging out, and I will see you all next time.
The silent majority is real, and you will not be able to convince me otherwise.
I was reading this story, which I view to be rather silly and probably unsubstantiated, but it made me realize that there are a lot of people who are scared to speak up, who are bending the knee, at least in appearance, and probably will secretly vote for Donald Trump, down-ticket Republican, across the board.
The story I have for you for this segment is about Costco pulling a popular cheese brand from 120 stores after dairy company founder slammed Black Lives Matter as a terror organization.
I don't believe that these things have anything to do with each other.
In fact, the founder has said it's normal for stores to rotate products and perhaps they'll come back at some point.
The founder of this company issued a very long, well, I mean, not very long, but he made a post on Facebook, and he was complaining about the state of Black Lives Matter, the riots, Antifa, saying we need to call them out for, well, as terror organizations, or something to that effect.
And then look what happened.
They came for him, demanded his resignation, and then he eventually apologized.
I mean, that sounds like overt terrorism.
Think about it.
You have a story, the story he was referencing.
was about a black man who got into a car accident with some white people, and then this man killed those two white people.
The point made by the founder of this cheese company was, why aren't we talking about the tragedy of these two people who were gunned down in cold blood?
Why is it that the media narrative is focused specifically on only one group of people in only one circumstance?
And why then do we tolerate violence and riots?
For this, he was attacked, they demanded his resignation, and now at least some people believe he's having his cheese brand removed from stores.
I know, it sounds kind of silly, but this is how the culture war works.
This is the power of controlling cultural institutions.
It's the valve I talked about.
Things only flow left in the mainstream.
But it results in a back current.
It's going to push this man as far right as possible.
Now, he apologized.
He says, it was insensitive of me to call out this story in the way I did.
But do you think he really changed his mind?
No.
You see, regular people are starting to stand up.
And some of them can't take it, and some of them get scared.
So my question for you, will you stand when the mob comes for you?
Or will you bend the knee?
Now, listen, listen.
There may be good reasons to actually retreat and to cave.
I mean, if the people who never refuse to accept they're losing a battle and retreat to regroup, well, they'll get crushed.
At a certain point, you look outside, you're fighting a battle, and you realize, we're outnumbered, and we need to retreat.
Otherwise, we will lose the war.
So retreating from one battle may be the right choice.
But what if everyone stood up?
What if what we're really seeing is that when we look out and see this battlefield, we don't see the silent majority?
I believe there is a silent majority, and I believe this man is a part of it, but he's scared.
In secret, he can vote for Trump.
In public, they will destroy his business.
So I wonder how many people will truly come out and vote.
Let me read you the story to break down how this went down and what I think this means for regular people.
The Daily Mail reports, Costco has removed Palmetto Cheese from 120 of its stores nationwide after the founder of the Pimento Cheese Company posted a controversial message on Facebook, slamming Black Lives Matter and Antifa movements as terror organizations.
Owner Brian Buck Henry, who is also the mayor of Pawleys Island, South Carolina, has confirmed that his brand of spicy cheese spread was being yanked from store shelves, but has sought to downplay the move.
He says, And, um, I really don't think this is because of Black Lives Matter.
during the course of the year.
They will occasionally add and drop products as a matter of normal business,
Henry told the Post and Courier.
We remain optimistic that palmetto cheese will be back on the shelves in the not too distant future.
And I really don't think this is because of Black Lives Matter.
I mean, he made the comments a month ago, okay?
But maybe it is.
Maybe he really is having his business destroyed.
People were calling for a boycott of his cheese because he stood up for himself and what he believed in.
Do you think the inverse would happen with Black Lives Matter?
No.
The NBA, the NFL, the MLB, they're propping up Black Lives Matter all over the place.
Brands are slapping Black Lives Matter logos or whatever.
They do activism across the board.
That's just it.
What month?
I think June.
Every single company logo turns into a rainbow.
I really don't care.
Do your thing, if that's what your company wants to do.
I got no beef.
But what if this guy wants to say, hey man, we're tired of the murder.
Why would he then be attacked?
You see how the valve flows.
How the valve controls the flow, I should say.
You can post all the left-wing activism in the world, and nobody bats an eye.
But one guy comes out and condemns murder.
And that's it.
And they say, shut him down, boycott his product, and he must resign.
That's amazing.
He didn't come out and attack people based on race.
He said, what about these people who have been killed?
Apparently it doesn't matter.
Apparently it doesn't.
So let's see exactly what he said.
They say Costco has not commented on its decision to remove Palmetto Cheese from a portion of its 785 big-box stores.
I really don't think it has anything to do with this, I gotta be honest.
But okay, okay.
They say, Henry Screed referenced the August 24th killings of Nick Wall and his 21-year-old stepdaughter Laura Anderson, who police say were shot and killed by Tasheem Walters III after a car crash and altercation in Georgetown, which also injured a third person.
So here's his post.
I'm gonna read it for you.
He says, I am sickened by the senseless killings in Georgetown last night.
Two innocent people murdered, not two thugs or people wanted on multiple warrants.
Two white people defenselessly gunned down by a black man.
Tell me, where is the outrage?
When and where will we begin rioting and burning down businesses in Georgetown?
Answer is simple.
It won't happen.
Because we live in a civil society.
And it won't change what happened.
The victims' families and friends will mourn and undoubtedly feel anger and confusion.
Can't imagine their pain.
So why do we stand by and allow Black Lives Matter to lawlessly destroy great American cities and threaten their citizens on a daily basis?
Should they have a carte blanche license to pillage and destroy?
Why?
This has gone on too long.
Rise up, America.
This Black Lives Matter and Antifa movement must be treated like the terror organizations that they are.
Law and order, protection of liberty, and right of peaceful enjoyment.
If we don't have that, we no longer have a country.
My wife cried last night when she read about these murders.
I'm sure their family is devastated.
This did not have to happen.
Does this senseless murder of these people not matter as much?
Because it doesn't fit the media narrative?
You are damn right their lives matter.
And we should all be outraged and engaged to demand action and stem the tide of this lawless fringe.
We can't stay silent anymore.
All lives matter.
There I said it.
So am I a racist now?
I think not.
How about the POS who just gunned down three defenseless white people?
You be the judge.
We need law and order now.
Suffice it to say, Donald Trump's messaging seems to be effective.
Seems to be working.
This guy said, we can't stay silent anymore.
You don't need to go out and protest.
You don't need to join a militia.
Heavens no.
You just need to speak your mind and make posts like he did.
However, I guess this guy has a lot to lose, and he ultimately decided that he would keep his head down because he apologized.
And that was a mistake, because apologies don't matter.
It doesn't.
And here we are a month later, and his product is being removed from store shelves.
Now listen, like I said, I don't think so, but it's entirely possible it really is the case that they're pulling his product from certain stores because, well, activists are complaining about it.
Assuming that's the case, your apology didn't work.
Now he's saying, you know, look, these things happen, and I suppose His cheese could still be at other stores, and I really do think the cheese thing is silly.
The important thing here is not about his cheese being pulled from stores.
I certainly don't care, and that's his business, but there are ramifications to businesses doing this.
The main issue here is this is a guy who had a lot to lose who spoke up, and he should have stood firm.
He should have been willing to sacrifice everything.
I mean, Colin Kaepernick was, and now look how well he's doing with his massive contract.
You see, this is the problem This is the problem we face.
Now, I don't consider myself to be a conservative, and most of you know that.
I'm liberal.
But I'm, like, left-leaning independent.
I don't care for the far left's ideas.
I think many of them are wrong.
I agree with them on some things, and I agree with conservatives on some things.
But I'll tell you this.
The right has a conviction problem.
A conviction problem.
They won't... This guy couldn't tell anyone else to F off.
Listen.
You come to me and tell me, I'm going to tell you to go F off.
Get out of here.
I don't care.
You could destroy everything I have.
You can kick me to the curb.
And I will, with a smile on my face, go down by the river and just go fishing and say, I will not bend my knee.
That may be stupid.
Compromise can be a good thing sometimes.
You don't want to be a moral absolutist.
And you got to recognize sometimes retreating could be the appropriate move.
Maybe that's what he's doing.
And that's why I'm focusing on the fact that he spoke up in the first place.
But we should point out that he did apologize.
They're going to say, Henry, who is white, went on to state All Lives Matter.
I read that part.
They say there is no evidence to suggest that Walters has ties to the Black Lives Matter movement or that the violent incident was related to it.
He has been charged with two counts of murder.
You see, I'll first address one of the big issues that the left has with police.
They'll kill somebody and then not get charged.
I think many of these leftists don't understand the context of why the cops don't get charged.
For sure, sometimes there are dirty cops who get away with it because the departments will protect them and their unions will as well.
But some of these circumstances they bring up, it's because there's procedure in a system and maybe that procedure is wrong.
But if a cop is told, here's what you have to do in these circumstances and someone dies, well, what do you do?
There's a video that went viral where an officer was responding to, he was a rookie officer
I guess, was responding to a woman in distress or something like that and it was a homeless
woman with a 40 pound Labrador.
When he approached her, the dog started charging and snarling.
He panicked, fired three rounds and one of the bullets struck the homeless woman in the
chest and it killed her.
And now I believe he's facing charges.
And that's a tough situation.
What do you do when you're being charged at by a dog snarling and barking?
And he panicked.
He did bad.
And I understand he did not have intent to kill.
But maybe there's... I'll tell you this.
I'll put it this way.
If a random person decided they're gonna carry a weapon with them for self-defense, and they panic and they shoot somebody, there's gonna be some culpability.
There's gonna be some accountability.
But we asked that officer to do that.
We put him there.
We said, we need you to go do this.
And then he freaked out and panicked.
So I don't know what the appropriate response is to punish the guy for a panicked accident when we asked him to go do it.
Come on, man.
If you... To quote Joe Biden, I'm always saying that now.
If you ask someone to, like, walk down the stairs and they slip and fall, yeah, they'll probably sue you.
I'm talking about, like, your business or something.
If you say, you're an employee, I want you to do a thing, they go do it and they get hurt, they say, you have some responsibility.
What was going on here, there, you know.
Should this cop face some kind of charge?
I mean, I don't know.
I don't know.
But I'll tell you what.
Many of these circumstances brought up by the left are not instances where it's a clear-cut case of murder.
In this instance, you know why there's not a lot of protests about this guy?
Because he was charged.
And that's a fair point.
The left will say, this guy's going to prison, okay?
So what's the protest?
The law worked.
And I will also point out, I think a lot of people attacked this guy simply because he was talking about black-on-white crime.
And I'd like to see more people like him stand up and talk about crime in general.
I don't like it when people are like, what about black-on-black crime?
It's like, okay, well, what about white-on-white crime?
Look, I get it.
The numbers are disproportionate.
I don't have the full stats.
I'm not here to say one group is better or worse.
There's a whole bunch of issues and factors involved.
I don't know.
You want to talk about poverty, crime rates, education, etc?
All I'm going to tell you is this.
I don't care.
What the race of a person is.
Like the left does.
The left does.
I don't!
I care about whether or not someone got hurt!
And if they did, how do we stop it from happening?
Okay?
When you have a murderer, alright?
Somebody commits a murder, why do we arrest them and lock them up?
For one, stop any potential murders that may happen in the immediate, so they're locked in a box.
And two, rehabilitation!
So that eventually we can bring them back out, grant them their freedom once again, saying you've wronged people, so we've restricted your rights.
Now, once we deem you not to be a threat, you're free to go.
That's what we want.
We want to fix things.
I don't care what your race is, and I don't care who does it.
It's about the system, and it's about stopping people from getting hurt.
The same is true for the police.
They want to complain about police brutality and all that stuff.
I'm like, great, we change the system, okay?
You ask a cop to do it.
And you have a case where, like Michael Brown, it's all up in the air.
That's not the same.
If a cop kicked in a door without a warrant, without a warrant, I'm not talking about Brian Taylor, kicked in a door without a warrant because they do this in Chicago, panicked and shot somebody, well now you got breaking and entering, and yeah, murder, because they killed someone while committing a crime.
That's a problem.
That's the kind of stuff that needs to get solved.
And I think we do have cultural problems in many police departments.
But the answer is not defunding the police.
And the media's extreme bias is going to trigger regular people to rise up and vote for Donald Trump and say, drop the hammer.
Okay, so the guy apologized, right?
They're going to say, earlier this month, Henry called a press conference and apologized for his remarks, saying, I am profoundly sorry to those I offended with my post last week.
My comments were hurtful and insensitive, Henry told reporters on September 3rd.
I spent that past 10 days listening and learning.
Okay, fine.
I'm not a fan of the apology, and I'll tell you this.
How many far leftists have posted insane messages on social media saying, burn it down, burn it down, target people, attack people, you know, the far right, blah, blah, blah.
How many of them called for violence against regular people?
Against Trump supporters?
They do it all the time.
Where's the apology?
They don't!
This is one of the biggest problems that we as Americans have.
I'll tell you something.
Joe Rogan recently apologized for something he said in his podcast.
It's a respectable move.
With all due respect to Joe, I think he's a great dude with a great show.
But let me tell you something.
Joe Rogan said on his show that there were crazy things happening, and I'm paraphrasing.
Crazy things happening, you know, people are setting fires up in Portland and they arrested some people, like some leftist activists, and you know, it's crazy, blah blah blah.
Media Matters for America targeted him and Spotify, saying he was lying to his audience.
First of all, Joe wasn't lying, he just was incorrect.
There's a big difference.
So, Joe decided to issue two apologies.
One on Twitter, one on Instagram.
It's effectively one apology, but he posted to Twitter and Instagram.
On Twitter he wrote it up, and on Instagram he recorded a video to millions of views.
The first statement made by Joe Rogan was incorrect.
There was one Black Lives Matter leftist who was arrested for starting a fire.
We don't know if it was politically motivated.
There were several other instances, I mean like a dozen plus, of arson on the West Coast, notably in Portland, but these were not, as far as we can tell, related to Antifa in any way, but it was arson.
Joe Rogan's apology was wrong.
He said some- I mean, maybe he was trying to frame it in the context of leftist activists, but what he said was that people aren't starting these fires.
He was wrong.
So here's the main point.
Joe Rogan's initial statement was incorrect.
And the left attacked him.
So Joe, for whatever reason, issues an apology.
Joe's apology was also incorrect and put out dangerous disinformation.
No one from the left is complaining anymore.
No one is saying Joe Rogan is lying to his audience.
You see the point?
The left attacks.
The right apologizes.
I'm not saying Joe, I'm just saying in general.
And then when the left says misinformation, there's no one to do anything.
There's no apology.
There's no correction.
So here we have a man who came out and said, I am upset about this.
And he didn't even call for violence.
And they said, apologize, or else, or resign, or we'll strip your brand from our stores.
And so he did.
Is the left going to ever apologize for the violence they've pushed?
Is Joe Biden's staff going to apologize for bailing out the rioters?
Will Kamala Harris apologize for soliciting funds to bail out the rioters?
Nope.
And will anyone call on Joe Rogan to apologize for getting his post wrong on Instagram?
No.
Instead, what do we see?
A bunch of people who are kind of liberal-leaning, moderates and conservatives who are like, class act, Joe, we really appreciate it, thank you.
Where was any outrage?
I mean, I made, I've issued several comments saying that Joe made a mistake on that one, and I'm not the kind of media matters type person who's going to harass him or his business and demand an apology.
It's none of my, I mean, to an extent, I'm like, I think Joe should have, you know, correct the record.
But I'm gonna mind my own business.
I'm gonna say my thing.
And maybe everything I'm saying does still push in that direction.
I'm not saying that because I'm trying to drag Joe or anything.
I think his show's fantastic.
And I think he's a guy who hosts a conversational podcast.
But when I keep seeing things...
Like this.
Where if you're a liberal, moderate, or conservative, if you're anything but far left, you must apologize for anything and everything.
Well then we're in a dangerous position.
And that's one of the biggest problems we're seeing right now.
So we have this guy.
He spoke up, and I'm sure regular people are feeling the same way, and they're going to speak up in a different way.
In the voting booth.
This guy's voting for Trump, and you know it!
And so is his family, and everyone he talks to.
And he issues this apology, but I tell you what, I'm willing to bet in private he's saying all this stuff about...
No, man.
You know, I probably shouldn't have posted, but I stand by it.
Things like that.
Because people in private will speak very differently.
They'll speak openly.
But when it comes to, you know, the political activist groups that are going after him, he has no defense.
For whatever reason, our culture is under the boot of the far left.
And I don't know why.
I don't know why Gillette, why Nike, why the NFL, why the MLB, they're all getting woke like crazy.
And people hate it!
They hate it!
Are they trying to get Trump elected?
I have to wonder.
I absolutely have to wonder about what their goals are.
Here's a guy who was upset.
And in his anger and frustration, he complained that it's not fair.
These people got killed.
Where's the outrage?
And it's not the same circumstances.
And I think I would calmly say to Brian, I'd say, well, to be fair, Brian, I mean, the guy who killed these people, he did get charged with murder.
The protesters on the left are upset because the cops aren't being charged.
I'm not saying the cops should be charged.
That's their complaint.
They think they should be.
All right, well, let's review the evidence.
But I don't want to see that turn into another Jake Gardner situation, where it's clearly self-defense.
The Omaha bar owner, you probably heard me talk about it a million times.
And then the mob comes and demands an indictment, so they get one.
Regular people must speak up.
You must.
I'm not going to play the game the left plays.
I'm not going to demand that he apologize for the apology.
I'm not going to rant and rave and demand Spotify, oh, I'm so angry with Spotify because Joe made a mistake.
You see, whatever it is that I am, I don't know, I'm not conservative, I'm not a progressive, I'm just like a left-leaning independent, I'm not playing these games that the left is playing.
Now, some people on the right play the same games for sure, but they don't have any cultural power.
They have governmental power, I guess, and if they take the Supreme Court, which it sounds like they're gonna do, wow, it's gonna get crazy.
But you see, right now, Conservatives will apologize.
They'll kick out people like Steve King for saying nasty comments, and he got primaried by the Republicans.
They will absolutely criticize and condemn the far right and extremism.
The left won't.
They won't.
And so long as people on the right are playing the game, the left is winning.
Why?
Because the left is cheating!
They say, you can't say that, you have to apologize!
And then you'll see Rogan, you'll see this guy, you'll see everybody say, I'm so sorry, I shouldn't have said that.
I should not have said that.
If the apology is warranted, then so be it, I've got no problem with that.
But what if you... What do you do when they don't return that same courtesy?
And then the media only pushes a further and further left-wing narrative.
Everything's gonna fall apart, man.
Unless, of course, these people come out in droves for Donald Trump.
This is just the story of a small-town mayor and a cheese company.
And I thought it was funny when I saw this.
I'm like, they really pulled this guy's cheese off the shelf because he posted a comment on Facebook?
How dumb.
All right, I'll tell you what.
Palmetto cheese guy, I'll order it.
The cheese looks really good, I gotta admit.
Like, you know, it's too bad it's not gonna be in the stores anymore.
It's gonna be in, I guess it'll be some of them.
Because it looks pretty good.
I'll buy some.
I'll tell you what, I'll buy some of the cheese.
I'm assuming I can get it.
I don't know.
I probably can't.
You probably can't order like that.
But I'm worried that if we continue down this path, we're gonna create parallel economies.
And I've talked about this in the past.
That if If he can't sell at Costco, then some conservative businesses are gonna pop up.
You know, Tucker Carlson loses his sponsors because of far-left outrage, and the MyPillow guy fills the gap.
Not that you can eat a pillow or live in a pillow, but it's still a sponsor.
And so what happens when the left keeps banning people?
Like, GoFundMe bans conservatives all the time, but lets antifund the far-left and arsonists raise all the money they want.
No joke!
The people in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, who got arrested, charged with arson, were able to raise a hundred plus thousand dollars for the defense.
But Jake Gardner, who was attacked on the ground, they took his defense down.
And the Kenosha kids, same story.
It is ratcheting in one direction and regular people are going to get wound so tight they will snap.
I certainly think so.
And they're going to snap first by voting for Donald Trump.
I got to, uh, listen.
In about an hour from when I'm recording this, they're supposed to announce what's happening with Breonna Taylor, so I guess I can only wait with the police officers.
But we're expecting riots in Louisville.
And there's this really interesting graph that was just released by NBC News that shows only a tiny change needs to occur.
If 5% more of the black community comes out and votes for Trump, just 5%, than they did in 2016, Trump wins.
Easily.
And that seems likely.
So I don't know what that means for the Senate.
I don't know what that means for the House.
But if people vote Republican down ticket, then the Republicans take everything.
I could be wrong.
I don't know how people are going to react in many different districts, but it scares me that there are moderate people in the suburbs that have no idea what's happening right now and would support the terrorism and the violence in our streets.
We're in serious trouble, especially if Joe Biden wins, so I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 4 p.m.
over at youtube.com slash timcast.
Thanks so much for hanging out, and I will see you all then.
No charges related to the death of Breonna Taylor, but one of the cops is being charged with wanton endangerment.
I talked about this on my main channel over at youtube.com slash TimCats, but I want to talk about something I find really interesting, sort of after the fact.
Whatever ends up happening tonight with riots, as we see videos emerge of leftists pulling shields out of U-Hauls, the Democrats own it.
According to Civics, Black registered voters support Black Lives Matter near universally, like 90%, some ridiculously high number.
I think it's more than that, actually.
For some reason, Trump is enjoying massive support among black voters, and this is according to several different polls, from Emerson to Rasmussen, Zogby.
Yes, sure, a couple of these polls are seen as biased towards Trump, but Emerson isn't.
And they had a poll out earlier in the year showing 30% black approval for Donald Trump.
So I wonder why it is that people might support Black Lives Matter, but then also support Donald Trump, especially among black voters.
I can't say for sure, but I can say there's interesting data released by NBC that discusses what will happen if Donald Trump increases black support by near 5%.
That's it.
See you right now.
Rasmussen says Donald Trump's support among black voters is 33%, and Latino voters is like 60%.
I don't know if that's true, because that could be noise.
But if Donald Trump gets even a little bit less than half of that, he won.
It's over.
End of story.
And maybe that's why the Democrats are so freaked out, and are desperately trying to support Black Lives Matter, even though the Black Lives Matter riots are really, really damaging to the Democrats.
I'm going to show you this data and you're really going to understand why the Democrats are willing to sacrifice everything to maintain all black votes.
You see?
The black community, the black voter may be the most important voting block right now.
Donald Trump's approval among black voters might show that he is going to landslide and there is nothing they can do to stop it other than support the most fringe and extreme positions, even if we all can see how bad the riots have gotten.
Now, of course, Joe Biden himself ran out of the basement freaking out because many speculated he saw his internal polls and they said, look, We know you're desperate to maintain support among black voters, but you're really losing everyone because of this, including black voters.
I'll tell you what.
The reason I bring up civics is that I think you can see that even though there are black voters who support Black Lives Matter, they're going to support Trump.
Why?
Because they don't support the rioting.
And there's the story from Politico.
How Portland became a nightmare for Democrats.
The violence is escalating and no one can figure out how to stop it.
And what's the photo?
Why, it's a riot with fire.
And there's a woman waving a sign that reads, Black Lives Matter.
A big chunk of people of color and white people with degrees are behind Trump.
That's from September 8th from 538.
Fascinating data.
But what does a big chunk mean?
I honestly don't know.
So how about we look at some real data?
Trump's black voter boom could potentially cost Biden the election.
Polls showing consistent black voter support for President Trump at levels higher than those of previous Republicans may cost Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden the election.
Biden's backing from this key voting group is less than it was for 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton and former President Barack Obama.
In surveys of Black voters, pollster John Zogby pegged support for Trump from Black voters at 14%.
For Biden, he said, that support from Black voters was between 77 and 81.
The numbers from likely Black voters are nowhere near where they should be, as they fall well below 90%.
He added, this alone could potentially cost Biden the election.
And in a poll from Newsmax, Zogby said in 2008 and 2012, Barack Obama won 96% and 93% of the black vote.
Hillary Clinton's 89% to Trump's 9% victory among blacks was not enough to win the presidency.
89%!
And she couldn't beat Trump!
Now that is remarkable.
He added, if Trump's 14% total holds into November, this could hurt the Democratic nominee again in must win in the critical rust belt, along with Minnesota, Georgia, and Texas, which Biden hopes to win.
The black vote has been the focus since Trump was elected.
Since entering the White House, the President emphasized programs targeting black people, boosted employment for African Americans, and featured several black speakers at the Republican National Convention.
Some White House insiders said that if Trump can get 11% or more of the black vote, he will win the November election.
Several other pollsters have found sustained support for Trump among black voters at levels higher than recent Republicans have enjoyed.
Zogby found unusual pockets of support from Black voters for Trump, such as young African Americans, and the addition of California Senator Kamala Harris in the Democratic ticket hasn't helped Biden.
The president does especially well among young Blacks, 18- to 24-year-olds, with 38% to Biden 61.
When the names of the vice presidential nominees are added, the needle hardly moves at all.
If Biden's support from Blacks remains this low, that alone could cost the election.
I bring you now to NBC's Swing the Election, Decision 2020.
See how the changes in voter turnout and support could shift the outcome in the 2020 election.
The chart you see before you is based upon… well, let me just read.
Start with the results of the previous election, adjusted for demographic change since 2016.
Then adjust the sliders to see how shifts in turnout and support among different demographic groups could swing the Electoral College.
See the scenarios below for example.
Here's what we're seeing.
Right now, based on what happened in 2016 adjusted for demographic shift, Joe Biden is predicted to win with 307 electoral votes to Donald Trump's 231.
Trump's 231.
Joe Biden will hold 52.1% of the major party votes with Trump 47.9.
I want to show you one thing that made me laugh out loud.
First, states that have flipped, they say Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Florida, will flip from Trump in 2016 to Joe Biden based on the demographic changes.
We can see here.
Black votes.
For Joe Biden, 92%.
For Donald Trump, 8%.
Now, of course, what have we seen?
Well, Zogby said Joe Biden is at 77 to 81, and Donald Trump is around 14%.
I am going to make but one simple change to this chart.
I am not going to change college-educated white, non-college white, a strong Trump base of support, Latino, or Asian.
I am simply going to lightly alter the black vote in favor of Trump.
Zogby says Trump has 14% approval.
Let's move the slider to see what happens if in 2020 Donald Trump receives 14% of the black vote.
The shift has occurred.
Now, if you look up top, you can see Joe Biden loses with 262 electoral votes to Donald Trump's 276.
51.4% of the major party votes to Trump's 48.6.
Donald Trump will lose the popular vote, but he will win the Electoral College with only 6% more of the black vote.
But it gets better.
Zogby says 14%.
Let's scale it down to 13% and Donald Trump still wins with near the same metrics.
If we go down to 12%, it then shifts in favor of Joe Biden.
The big change?
When you reach 13, one state doesn't flip.
And that's Florida.
So Donald Trump will win.
Now what if?
What if Donald Trump's support among the black community is actually much higher than this?
A lot of people have told me that it's probably not, but we've seen polling showing Trump as high as 30%.
Let's say nothing else changes, and Donald Trump sees 30% support from the black community.
He wins with 319 electoral votes, 50.6% of the major party votes, in what can be called an electoral landslide, and a decent win in the popular vote.
I'm not entirely convinced Trump is going to get 30% of the black vote.
That would be very bold.
But we can just do some other changes real quick.
Let's say he only gets 11%.
They said if Trump wins 11% of the black vote, he'll win.
But if I make that change, he doesn't.
Maybe it's because they're not considering what 538 said.
A big chunk of people with degrees, black and white.
So let's add a couple more points from college-educated whites.
And all of a sudden, Trump just wins.
That's it.
You add some more college-educated white people, probably from the suburbs, and with 11% support, Trump wins.
I don't care about the college-educated whites.
I care about the black community right now.
You know why?
Because I feel like Donald Trump is speaking to them, and I feel like people like Candace Owens and the Hodge twins and Terrence Williams have been greatly disrespected by the left and insulted for simply having their opinions.
Their opinions are fine.
I don't think their race should play a role in what their opinion is on certain policy issues, but I think when it comes to issues of race and social justice, I think their opinions are worth hearing.
And I think this shows exactly why the Democrats are in full on panic mode.
Black Lives Matter must be the cause.
Joe Biden is losing support.
among the black vote.
But guess what?
He's also losing support among Latino voters.
This is why they're so desperate to smear Trump and claim he's a bigot, because Trump is actually helping all Americans.
It's surprising, right?
This guy we were told over and over again in the media was a bigot.
Let's reset everything.
And then see, Donald Trump gained only 11% of the black vote, but his support from Latinos goes up three points as well, to 31%.
Once again, Donald Trump wins.
They're saying that Joe Biden is doing bad among Latinos and Hispanic voters, and that it's Trump's fault because Trump is doing well among this group.
Trump needs only a couple percentage points from these groups in order to win.
Now, we don't know exactly what's going to happen.
This is data based on 2016.
There's going to be many different shifts in demographics.
They're trying to account for them.
And for all we know, it's just not the case.
This data could be incorrect.
I can't tell you for sure exactly what's going to happen.
But I'll do one more thing.
Let's reset this and say Trump, nothing changes other than he gets more of his base to vote.
When I alter non-college educated whites by only a couple points, Trump wins in an electoral landslide, flipping New Hampshire and all of his states remain.
Trump only needs 3% more support from non-college-educated whites.
It looks like Joe Biden is sitting on the precipice, on the verge of falling.
And Trump's gonna win.
And as he falls, he will knock over some boulders, triggering a Landslide.
We'll see how things play out.
But I think the riots are going to play a big role, and this is why I brought it up.
And, ultimately, the point of this segment was to say, this is why Black Lives Matter is so important, and why the Democrats won't denounce it, even though they are rioting.
But regular, college-educated white voters, non-college white voters, we don't like riots!
You know?
I should say, we as Americans, because there's actually... I fall in the Asian and Other.
I guess I qualify as an Other.
Whatever.
You get the point.
I'll leave it there.
I got a couple more segments coming up in a few minutes.
Stick around, and I will see you all shortly.
From BuzzFeed News, the victims of violence during the Kenosha protests are suing Facebook, citing a law that dates from Reconstruction.
Four people, including the partner of a man killed during the protests, are taking the company to court.
And almost immediately, I thought, what a dumb waste of time!
Section 230 will not allow this.
And that may be the case.
But the DOJ has just dropped their official guidance.
The Justice Department unveils proposed Section 230 legislation on behalf of the administration.
We've already heard this.
The announcement's already been made.
So I'm not going to spend too much time on this.
They previously announced they wanted clarification of the language and among other things, so they've drafted proposed legislation of things they think should change relative to Section 230.
For those that aren't familiar with what 230 is, it basically shields these companies from liability based on what other people do, but gives them the ability to remove posts they find objectionable, so long as they're acting in good faith.
Well, these tech companies, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, etc., they have removed things that are not objectionable.
They have removed things to protect their political interests.
There's a name.
There's actually a couple names I can't say.
Now, we often know about the 1CIA whistleblower guy.
He's the guy I usually reference.
There's another name I can't say.
Kid you not.
And my videos have been removed in a very strange way.
You'd think that if you did something in violation of the rules, you'd get a guideline strike.
Well, saying one of these names isn't against the rules.
There's no rule saying you can't say a name.
So what do they do?
One day I went into my YouTube studio, and there was a video that had no links, no buttons.
You could see the video, you could see the title, you could see the view count, but nothing else.
And when I moved the mouse over it, none of it was a link.
It looked like an image.
Like it wasn't really there.
I couldn't interact with it.
The video basically did not exist.
And it's because I said a naughty name.
Section 230 doesn't protect these companies from things like this.
You're not supposed to remove me talking politics.
So now we have this lawsuit.
I'm actually glad the lawsuit is happening, for a couple reasons.
This is people, they're blaming Facebook, saying that Facebook allowed the Kenosha kid to organize with his friends, and they get a lot of this information incorrect.
But what this lawsuit is doing is it's challenging 230.
To what degree does Facebook have the right to moderate their content?
Now this lawsuit doesn't strike at the core of what needs to be struck at, so I think it's going to be a big waste of time for everybody.
But I guess you can say it's good news for Kyle Rittenhouse.
His lawyer is happy about it.
When asked, Lynn Wood, an attorney for Rittenhouse, called the lawsuit nonsense, saying, quote, As to Kyle Rittenhouse, this lawsuit is errant nonsense, but may provide a golden opportunity for obtaining documents and sworn testimony from Facebook to bolster Kyle's future defamation case against Facebook for falsely accusing him of mass murder.
Wood told BuzzFeed News, referring to Facebook's decision to designate the incident a mass shooting and remove Rittenhouse's account and any content celebrating his actions.
Thus, I view the lawsuit as a blessing in disguise.
Facebook and other defendants did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
I'm curious.
Why does Facebook think that most people would prefer to oppose Kyle Rittenhouse?
Let me tell you something.
Facebook knows when you poop.
I know you're laughing.
It's a funny thing to talk about.
But it's true.
I was reading an article about this.
Because they know when you're moving around because of your location and services on your phone.
They know what time you typically eat because they've built a profile around you.
Every day at this time, they go to this area.
It's typically lunchtime.
Their algorithms can track all of this stuff.
Their AI is smart.
If they know exactly what you're thinking, why would they side against you?
Unless this is a sign that Trump will not landslide.
You see, Facebook has the data.
They know what people think.
And they're trying to protect their bottom line.
Thus, by doing this, you can sort of see through the thin veil.
What is it?
Most Facebook users were shocked and appalled and don't like this.
So Facebook said, get rid of it.
Right?
And if most Facebook users feel that way, doesn't that symbolize or show us that Donald Trump is going to lose because, well, we all may be on the wrong side of history.
I'm gonna stop there and say that's actually not the case.
You see, Facebook removed this likely because of other countries.
And now we start getting into the interesting conversation.
You see, I have often complained about this idea that Kyle Rittenhouse was banned from Facebook, not convicted of any crime.
He wasn't convicted of anything.
Why remove him?
Why is it that Kyle Rittenhouse can have his ability to speak on a platform removed, but some Australian guy can complain about Donald Trump and call for action and launch petitions?
They're interfering in our elections.
It's that obvious!
That's okay?
Since when have we decided that it's okay for foreign citizens to hold protests in our country against our politicians?
Think about it.
If a bunch of Australian people came to America and started protesting Trump, would we just be like, that's totally fine?
I mean, maybe.
It's kinda weird though, but I'm sure something like that happens.
But what if they stayed here, always influencing, influencing?
Well then you've got real problems.
No, I'll tell you something else.
The top content shared on Facebook comes from Ben Shapiro.
Oh man, I'm a little jealous.
I'm like, wow, he owns Facebook, basically.
I gotta get on that Facebook game.
I'll tell you what, I don't do the same thing he does.
I mean, we both do podcasts.
His is way bigger than mine.
But, you know, he's got daily wire content, articles, And the top content is consistently conservative and run by Ben Shapiro.
I think what we're seeing here is Facebook bending the knee to foreign governments.
Why would he designate Rittenhouse a mass shooter?
Because of the dainty little governments of these more left-leaning European and Commonwealth countries.
And that's it?
Blanket statement?
We're banning it?
People don't want to see it?
That's fine.
Our audience says no.
But do Americans say no?
That's the more important question.
And I have to imagine, for the most part, Americans aren't saying no.
Americans are saying, there's no way, this story's legit.
Why?
Well, take a look now at Joe Biden's polling and the way he's been reacting to the riots.
Panic.
Desperately trying to hold off Trump because the riots are backfiring miserably.
He won't call out Black Lives Matter by name.
But I think we're starting to see a- it's almost like a Sudoku puzzle where we can see the numbers and we're putting the pieces together.
Facebook is beholden to a global audience, so they adjust their rules accordingly to adhere to the lowest common denominator of a global audience.
However, in the U.S., Ben Shapiro Daily Wire content, Fox News, and conservative content dominates the platform among Americans, and Joe Biden is desperately trying to disavow the riots, thus.
Actually, I think we're looking at a Trump landslide.
In a previous segment, I went over this data from NBC News, a little slider bar showing that Trump only needs a couple percentage points more support in order to win.
Don't you think the riots have done that?
Don't you think the riots that have been going on now for what, four months?
Have convinced people, we've got to stop this.
Now Trump's the one offering help to stop it.
And the Democrats are the ones who are standing down and defunding the police.
So Donald Trump says, look at this video, look at this photo and Joe Biden's America, this is what you will get.
And the lefties laugh and some conservatives say, but Trump, you're the president now.
And those, those videos are from your America.
What do you think's going to happen if you elect Joe Biden and other Democrats who want to defund the police while these riots are happening?
Are the rioters simply going to be like, yay, Joe Biden won, we're no longer Marxists or Communists?
No!
They don't like Joe Biden.
Joe Biden is a means to an end.
He's bending the knee, quite literally.
There's a photo of him bending the knee.
There's some rumors that during the debate he's going to walk out and take a knee on stage.
People are begging him to do it.
Please do it, Joe!
It'll be terrible.
Joe will lose.
I think we can see that Joe Biden has bent the knee to the far left, figuratively and literally, and the far left wants this.
So if you're upset about the riots, well, then don't vote for Joe Biden.
Now, I'm getting a bit off track.
How does this pertain to Section 230, the lawsuit?
I don't think it'll actually do anything.
I think the lawsuit is ridiculous, and I don't think Facebook is under obligation to remove things, and so this challenge won't fly because Facebook will not be held responsible for what other people post.
Facebook is a private platform, as it were.
You can't have it both ways, though the Justice Department is trying to make certain changes because there's censorship on these platforms.
In the end, lawsuits like this can't work.
Now, the far left, the leftists, the Democrats, oh, they want to get rid of 230.
Oh, you know it.
You know why?
Because they want to force these companies to ban hate speech.
So, conservatives, don't let them do it.
I haven't read through the exact language of what the bill they're proposing.
I read through the actual Justice Department announcement about 230 reform, and they make a lot of really good points.
They've talked to a lot of groups, and it's about reform, not removing.
Trump has called for removing it outright.
That would be the end of conservative and independent media as we know it.
That's not what we need to do.
We need to change it so that these companies can't remove things unless they're illegal.
And that's basically what we're seeing with this lawsuit.
They're demanding that Facebook actually take this stuff down.
If the left gets their way, and Section 230 is completely revoked, and Facebook is held responsible for what this guy did, it's the end of conservative media.
Because Facebook's then going to start taking down anything that may result in violence.
I mean, that could theoretically be the end of the far left too, but I really doubt it.
And therein lies the big problem.
Are we going to get what we want?
Are we going to be paying attention?
Or will Facebook eventually just use this as a pretext to give the left what they want?
And that's the point I was bringing up in the beginning.
You see, Facebook is beholden to a global audience.
And these countries around the world, they're authoritarian.
We don't want to live like them.
We're lucky enough to have a constitution.
But hate speech is illegal in the UK.
Facebook will likely err on the side of banning what they call hate speech.
I guess we can only wait and see how this plays out.
But the most important thing is that you all go and vote in November for the Republicans.
Isn't that crazy?
I was talking to a journalist earlier and he was like, you know, you used to be a liberal.
I still am a liberal!
I'm still all about regulating big corporations that are violating the public interest.
That's not conservative!
I mean, for the most part, it's not typically conservative, but you get the point.
I'll leave it there.
I got one more segment coming up in a few minutes.
Stick around and I will see you all shortly.
You may have seen that viral video of Nancy Pelosi's brain breaking where she was asked
whether or not she would consider impeachment for Donald Trump and Bill Barr by George Stephanopoulos
on ABC.
And then her response was, good morning, Sunday morning.
We have an obligation.
And everyone said, uh, what?
Okay.
To be fair to Nancy Pelosi, she was asked by George Stephanopoulos.
It's kind of a leading question.
Did she ever bring up impeachment?
No.
She was asked if she would consider it.
She said, we have a lot of arrows in our quiver.
He asked her again, and that's when her brain went, and she was like, good morning, Sunday morning.
Well, leave it to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to remove all doubt!
You see, when it comes to Nancy Pelosi saying something, or I'm sorry, when it comes to a journalist giving a leading question to a politician, I can't blame Nancy Pelosi for this narrative the media planted.
They wanted the news cycle impeach Trump.
You see, Nancy, are you going to impeach Trump?
Well, I haven't thought about it, but now I'll consider it.
And here we go.
It's exactly as they wanted.
Now that the narrative is out there, AOC is on board.
Ocasio-Cortez threatens impeachment of Trump and Barr to stop Supreme Court nominee.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez told reporters that impeaching President Trump and Attorney General William Barr are potential options for Democrats to stop the nomination of a new Supreme Court justice.
No.
No, it isn't.
You can't do that.
If you try to impeach them over this, you are literally saying you want to destroy the U.S.
Oh, that's right.
I forgot who I was talking about.
Yeah, they do.
They're talking about changing the rules.
If we win, we're going to change all the rules because we're sore losers.
Wow.
Come on, man.
To quote Joe Biden, you're a regular American, right?
Most of you?
Not too far right, not too far left?
You recognize that sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, right?
I'm a liberal.
The Republicans won.
I went, eh, well, you know, sometimes you lose.
I've lived through Democrat presidents and Republican presidents, and these things happen.
I don't want to live in a country where one party is trying to sabotage the actual constitution and government because they want power.
I'm sorry.
Get those people out of there.
AOC, get out of there.
What are you doing?
Here's the quote.
I believe that certainly there has been an enormous amount of law-breaking in the Trump administration.
I believe that Attorney General Barr is unfit for office, and that he has pursued potentially law-breaking behavior, Ocasio-Cortez said.
That being said, these are procedures and decisions that are largely up to House Democratic leadership, but I believe that also, we must consider, again, all of the tools available to our disposal, and that all of these options should be entertained and on the table.
The New York Democrats' remarks largely align with those of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who hinted Sunday that impeachment is just one of the tools Democrats could use to stall the nomination process.
Look, I don't care if you're left-wing media, right-wing media, up-down, whatever.
This idea that Nancy Pelosi introduced the impeachment thing is just... I think the media wanted it.
I think they wanted to entertain it.
I talked about it the other day.
Of course, I got good traffic on the video.
But I try to make the point clear, like, the media seeded this concept.
George Stephanopoulos is the one who's got us talking about this right now.
It's all... I'm sorry, man.
Trump is running against the media.
And there you go!
Often, I talk about Democrats.
And I'll talk about the media too.
And I have to clarify for people who don't understand, I'm talking about the establishment.
The Republican establishment is against Trump and endorsing Joe Biden.
The Democrat just means establishment at this point.
And the media is leading them.
Nancy, don't go and impeach Trump.
Well, I wouldn't recommend that.
You know, I'm a journalist.
And then she goes, oh, okay.
And then what do we get?
I know he didn't really say that.
I'm making a point.
That's what they're doing.
They say, quote, We've taken an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.
We have a responsibility to meet the needs of the American people when we weigh the equities of protecting our democracy that requires us to use every arrow in our quiver, Pelosi said.
Trump has vowed to move quickly to fill the vacancy left by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and even promised the nomination of a woman.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said the Senate will hold a vote this session on the nominee.
Democrats have urged Republicans to wait until after the election to nominate a new justice, citing the precedent Republicans set in 2016 by refusing to hold hearings on a new nominee during an election year.
Along with the impeachment, some Democrats are threatening to pack the Supreme Court with more justices in 2021 should Trump continue with the nomination process.
Yet they'll do that if they win the presidency and the Senate.
But one thing often left out by media outlets is that the Merrick Garland incident wasn't that they were just like, we're too close to the election so we're gonna wait.
It was, the American people elected a Republican majority and now we have the votes.
If the people want a check on the president, we will do that.
It's just that simple.
They oppose—the political parties are at odds with each other.
So offer up a negotiation, or don't.
And it's really the fault of the Democrats, because I went over this the other day.
The Democrats are the ones who changed the rules back in 2013, so what do you want me to say?
You reap what you have sown, and you can bask in it.
Now, as for impeachment, this just goes to show that the Democrats Really would consider lighting the government on fire.
It's almost like someone's evicting you from your apartment.
Or they're not even being evicted, they're still there.
It's just like, dude.
You know, imagine you're in your house.
You got like five roommates.
Let's say you live with five people, like a college dorm or whatever.
And out of the five people, two of them want things no one agrees with.
So eventually they just say, you know what?
If we can't have our way, we're gonna light everything on fire.
But let's reframe it another way.
Let's play it this way.
Every dorm room is given one vote, and there are four dorm rooms.
There should be four votes.
Except one person doubled up, and now there's two people in one of the rooms demanding more vote power.
You say, no, we don't vote based on how many people are in your room.
Just because you started dating Sarah, dude, doesn't mean she gets to have a vote on what we do with our apartment or our dorms or whatever.
You see the point I'm trying to make?
Just because California's big, doesn't mean that they get to change all the rules because they've lost.
And then you got one dude who's paying all the rent, and he's like, I'm paying the rent so I get to decide.
Anyway, analogy over.
Listen, the point is, they're angry they keep losing.
Have they tried negotiating?
Have they tried going to red states and offering up some real changes?
But now the point of the analogy was, when they don't get their way, they just start setting fires.
And then you're burning the house down.
Nah, that's... You know what they end up doing?
They say, well, when we win, we're gonna take a sledgehammer and knock all the walls down.
Then what are you gonna do about it?
And you're like, okay, um... Nobody give them a sledgehammer?
That's kind of what I'm saying.
Please don't give the Democrats the sledgehammer, because if they get power, they're going to literally tear apart our country's... our government!
They're gonna be ripping up the Constitution.
They're gonna be shredding every norm.
They are threatening to go nuclear, and they kept doing it.
What we're seeing right now is their own making.
It was Harry Reid, a Democrat, who changed the rules, resulting in Trump getting three Supreme Court justices.
Democrats, if you're mad, you gotta blame Democrats!
Well, McCarthy threatens motion to oust Pelosi if she moves forward with impeachment.
Well, you know what?
Good.
The Hill reports.
Minority leader Kevin McCarthy on Wednesday threatened to introduce a motion to oust Speaker Nancy Pelosi if she attempts to impeach President Trump or Attorney General William Barr as a delayed tactic to prevent the Senate from confirming Trump's Supreme Court nominee.
Some have pushed for Pelosi to impeach Barr or Trump for a second time as a stall tactic to keep the empty seat vacated by the late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg until after the presidential election.
Appearing on Sunday's ABC's The Week, Pelosi said, we have our options, we have our errors and our quiver, and I'm not about to discuss that right now.
McCarthy blasted the comments and said he believes the president is correct in moving forward with the nomination ahead of the election.
The president is supposed to move forward and they will.
The Senate is supposed to take action and they will.
It's their constitutional right and they are following through.
I think the whole argument about Mitch McConnell in the past is a waste of time.
And in the past, I had said I wasn't a fan of what McConnell did.
I'll tell you, Merrick Garland was a moderate.
That's my understanding.
And so I think the Republicans could have confirmed the guy and said, okay, it's a compromise.
They didn't want to do it.
And I'll tell you what, they didn't have to.
The president nominates, the Senate confirms.
The Senate was controlled by Republicans.
That's it.
End of story.
Obama did his job and nominated someone, and the Senate did their job saying no.
That's it.
Now what do we have?
Now we have Donald Trump saying, I'm going to put forth a nominee, and the Senate saying, we're going to do our job and say yes.
If the Democrats want to win, they need to vote.
They need to win the vote.
They need to get their politicians in.
You know what?
Maybe they will.
But I think one of the problems Democrats face is that California, too population dense.
But what's happened recently?
Well, earlier this year we saw a pandemic and people started fleeing these blue cities.
And what did that do?
It could potentially shift a lot of demographics in favor of Joe Biden.
Because now you have people in California who have very little relative power in the Electoral College voting in other states.
How many of them went home?
to the Midwest.
How many people from across the country spread out?
It could theoretically benefit the Democrats, assuming vote-by-mail works, and assuming these people registered, and assuming they actually care.
You know what's really funny?
I have a bunch of friends in Chicago who, uh, uh, you know, they, I say a bunch, it's a handful, and they post stuff on Facebook, dumb things about how Trump is bad.
These people are not gonna vote.
I would bet a lot of money they're not gonna vote.
They go on Facebook, they go, And they do nothing.
Trump's base, however?
Oh man, they're fired up!
And the silent majority?
I believe there's a silent majority.
I could be proven wrong.
But I think there are regular people who are scared and tired, sick and tired, of what the Democrats are doing.
And thus, I think, it's not going to play out well for the Democrats.
If they use impeachment to delay, that will be a ridiculous violation of our norms.
You know what?
I hope they do.
I really do.
Because they will lose so bad if they do.
There'll be a Republican sweep across the board everywhere.
