Democrat COVID Hysteria BACKFIRES As Dem Voters Are Too Scared To Vote And Mailed Votes Get REJECTED
In California nearly 100 voters tried to disinfect their ballots invalidating them.As Democrats rushed to get their voters to vote by mail Trump was raising warnings about potential fraud. The media was quick to condemn Trump as a liar and encourage people to vote by mail.Now that is backfiring as COVID fears run rampant among Democrats voters. Mail in votes have a higher failure rate according to Washington Post and the Atlantic.If Joe Biden voters are more likely to vote by mail than Donald Trump voters than it stands to reason that Republicans face a huge and serious advantage as Democratic votes are more likely to be rejected.A major failure.
Support the show (http://timcast.com/donate)
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
It's no secret that the coronavirus has scared Democrats to a rather extreme degree.
If you look at the media, you'll see the left saying, what is going on?
Why won't Republicans wear masks?
To be completely honest, You probably should wear a mask.
I mean, I have no problem wearing a mask, and, I don't know, it's cool.
Someone sent me a really cool mask, got a little beanie on it.
And it's true, a lot of conservatives don't wear masks, and some of them get really angry about it.
But there was a video today from the Amy Coney Barrett hearings, where I think it was Mark Meadows.
He, like, backs away from the press, like, ten feet, and takes his mask off to talk, and they go, oh!
And they, like, gasp.
And he's like, what?
He's like, I'm ten feet away from you!
And they're like, no!
And then he goes, okay, whatever, and he walks off.
The hysteria put out by the media over COVID is backfiring on Democrats in a crazy way.
Now, let me clarify.
The media is really, really hysterical about COVID.
I think COVID is a problem.
I think we want to be safe.
I think you should listen to your doctor and I think we should wear masks.
I think if we get some medication out that helps treat COVID, we'll be better off.
And I do think Trump has played fast and loose.
But Republicans are much less likely to be scared of this.
Which is creating very serious problems for Democrats.
One, according to a Gallup poll, Democratic men and women are absolutely not ready to return to normal activities.
And this is why so many of them want to vote by mail, and it's one of the big reasons why the Democrats want universal mail-in voting.
Look at this.
95% are not ready to return.
A Gallup poll says, Ready to return to normal activities right now, 5% of Democratic men, 3% of Democratic women.
This means, as the errors of mail-in voting pile up, and they are, the Democrats are going to lose a lot of votes.
Not only does mail-in voting already negatively impact minority voters and first-time voters, young voters, but there's a higher margin of error across the board.
But get this.
Not only are Democrats not willing to go out and vote in person, they're actually disinfecting their mail-in ballots, ruining them completely.
I'm sorry.
I couldn't help but burst out laughing when I heard this.
Not at anyone in particular.
This is bad.
People's votes need to be counted.
But these people, many of these voters, are so out of it.
Terrified of COVID, they're wiping down their ballots, ruining them, and they have to be thrown out.
That, to me, was one of the most insane and shocking things I have seen yet.
Now, of course, we've got more stories about mail-in ballots being found in garbage cans, stories about people stealing mail-in ballots, and The Atlantic and The New York Times talk about how there is a very serious problem for Democrats related to mail-in voting.
This is reality.
I'm sure YouTube is going to put some tag underneath my video.
Don't take my word for it.
I'm going to show you the Atlantic and the New York Times and what they're saying about it.
It would seem.
And there's another Axios story on this too.
Democrats are trying to move away from mail-in voting because it does have a higher margin of error.
Votes are more likely to be disqualified if they're sent through the mail for a variety of reasons.
But Democrats are just too scared.
And I'm not trying to be mean, but it's true.
Look, I've been trying to book leftist guests for the TimCast IRL podcast for some time.
I've tried booking leftist guests on this channel and other channels for a long time, and it's very difficult.
It's always been difficult.
Going back to the days when I worked at Vice, and when I worked at Fusion, ABC News, it was very, very difficult to get leftist personalities, and it still is.
And right now, the number one complaint I hear from people is, but what about COVID?
Okay, look, if you can't handle it, we got alcohol wipes, we take serious precautions, we got hand sanitizer.
I got right-wing individuals feeling totally fine.
It's totally safe and legal where we're at.
Travel, it's totally fine, but they just don't want to do it, and they cite COVID as the number one reason.
Of course, I'm sure many conservatives would say they're just scared.
No, these people really want to, like, you know, own the cons or whatever it is they think.
They're going to come and debate me and whatever.
I don't debate people.
They're scared of COVID.
Republicans aren't.
So let's take a look at what's going on with mail-in voting and how the hysteria from the left over COVID is backfiring and may, the polls may be right.
Listen to this.
The polls may be completely right.
Donald Trump may be on track for a resounding defeat, one of the worst defeats ever, flying in the face of precedent.
And then the Democrats wipe their ballots down, which get disqualified, and they don't show up to the polls because they're scared of COVID, and it backfires on them.
Yikes, man.
Before we get started, head over to TimCast.com slash donate if you'd like to support my work.
There are many ways you can give, but the best thing you can do?
Share this video.
This is something I think Democrats need to hear.
So maybe you can share this with one of your, you know, left-leaning friends, or maybe you're a Democrat and you have many left-leaning Democrat friends who need to hear this.
If you are too scared, To go out and vote.
It's going to negatively impact the Democrat vote in this election.
And if you're someone who is scared of COVID, please do not disinfect your mail-in ballots.
I'm going to show you the story.
Your vote will be disqualified.
We want all votes to count.
If that means Biden wins, then so be it.
Please let me share this information with you and hopefully it will help make sure your vote counts.
It also helps support the channel.
And as you know, I don't got a big marketing department.
I just rely on word of mouth.
But also don't forget to like, subscribe, hit the notification bell.
Let's take a look at this first poll just to quickly go over this as we start moving through what's happening with the backfiring of this COVID response.
From Gallup, October 7th, the COVID-19 responses of men versus women.
Gallup did a poll, data collected via the Gallup panel as part of COVID-19 tracking poll, reveal that throughout the panic, women have expressed more concern than men.
Now that's the general breakdown.
And I think this shows why Democrats, one of the reasons why they're more likely to be hurt by this, in fact, Donald Trump is doing very poorly among women.
He's tried very hard to get the suburban female vote.
He's struggling.
We'll see how it plays out.
But women are more likely to be worried about COVID than men.
And Democrats are more likely, or I should say women are more likely to be Democrat.
According to a poll by Pew, I believe it's around 68% of millennial women are registered Democrats.
We can see percentage of Americans wearing masks outside the home.
Only a few points more for women than men.
But the main story here, as far as it goes in terms of the election, attitudes and behaviors related to COVID-19 by party and gender.
Now, I am a bit upset that Gallup didn't include independent voters because that could show That could show that Trump is on track to win.
If it turns out 30 or 40 percent of independent voters feel safe and are ready to return to normal, then they're probably going to go out and vote.
But of course, just because they're independent doesn't mean they will support Trump.
They may actually go out and support Biden.
Could be good for Biden as well.
So they don't show this, but check it out.
Democratic men, ready to return to normal activities right now, only 5%.
Democratic women, only 3%.
Majorities of both Democrat men and women are avoiding public spaces, 70% and 73%.
Then you take a look at Republicans, and it's inverted.
Republicans, only 31% are avoiding public places, 64% of Republican men are ready to return to normal, and 54% of Republican women.
Think about what that means for voting in person, which will be happening in most places.
Universal mail-in voting is only affecting a few states.
This means Republicans don't care.
They're gonna go out, they're not gonna care about masks, and they're gonna vote.
And the ones that do vote by absentee also probably not gonna care.
But this suggests, at least in my opinion, Democratic men and women are very unlikely to go out and vote, more likely to vote in person, and The Atlantic and The New York Times note this.
In a story from The Atlantic, how voting by mail could cost Biden the election, I kid you not!
While in-person voting looks safer than expected, mail-in voting looks more dangerous, not because of fraud, but because of human error and partisan politics.
Are you kidding me?
You mean if the Democrats just listened to Donald Trump, they would be better off?
Trump has been saying over and over again, fraud, fraud, fraud!
Not because of fraud.
And I've said the same thing.
It is not fraud.
Trump needs to get off the fraud train because it's impropriety and error.
The margin of error for mail-in votes, according to the New York Times, is 2 to 1 compared to in-person voting.
You are twice as likely to have your vote discounted.
According to the Washington Post, the groups most affected by this will be minority voters and young voters.
The voting bloc's Democrats are counting on to win.
Could you imagine if the polls are right and the Democrats just get disqualified because of this?
The New York Times has a similar story.
As Trump sows doubts on mail, some Democrats push in-person voting.
Good for them.
Look, man, Trump's right.
Mail-in voting has its issues.
You want to vote, and we want to make sure your votes count.
I want to read you this story from the Atlantic, because this is a serious statement.
How it could cost Biden the election?
I mean, that would be scary for Democrats, right?
But I want to give you the hard and official warning first.
From WHIOTV7, California election officials to voters, stop disinfecting your mail-in ballots.
I couldn't believe it when I saw this.
People are actually spritzing down their ballots and smearing the ink.
It's becoming garbage.
Don't do this.
Please.
We want all votes to count.
I like Trump for the war stuff.
He's got these peace deals.
He's pulling out of the Middle East.
That's big for me.
Banning critical race theory is big for me.
But look, I'm a big boy.
If Donald Trump loses, I'm going to laugh.
Joe Biden, I can't believe he'd win if he does.
But hey, I laughed when Trump won too.
I'm not going to cry about it.
I want your vote to count.
I want everyone to have their say.
And that means if you're a Democrat scared of COVID, your vote counts.
Do not disinfect your ballots.
Take a look at this.
They have some photos.
Stephanie Lynn says, do not do this if you want your vote to count.
Election officials tell me they've gotten at least a hundred damaged ballots so far from voters who've tried to disinfect the paperwork.
In one case, someone tried to microwave their ballot.
Oh no!
Aw, man.
Now, these are not all Democrats, mind you, but California is two-thirds Democrat in the state.
Could you imagine?
Republicans aren't scared of COVID.
For the most part, they're less likely to be doing things like this.
The Registrar of Voters tells me pink envelope and mail-in ballots were processed by machine weeks ago and are safe to handle.
We understand if for the outgoing white envelope that you get, that maybe the mail service carrier may have touched, you want to kind of hold it aside for 24 hours.
Bailey Kanellos told the news station.
Everything inside the pink return envelope, the ballots themselves, they have been inserted by a machine weeks ago so they are safe.
Officials told KCRA that they are working to get new ballots to people who sent in damaged ones.
Good, good, good.
I want their ballots to count.
This was a mistake.
But think about this.
People are voting early.
If people start doing this in large enough numbers, and a hun- a hun- what did they say?
A hundred?
A hundred ballots?
Someone tried to microwave it?
At least a hundred.
That's a lot of votes, man.
And if that happens in places across this country, mostly in blue areas, where there's a tendency to be more scared of COVID.
Yikes, man.
Now, I want to make sure I get the context correct.
When we say that Democratic men 5% are ready to return to normal and women are only 3%, it could be because many of these people live in urban centers where there's a ton of people.
For a Republican who lives in a rural area, getting back to normal might mean driving 5 miles or 15 miles to go to the grocery store.
In which case, you're barely around people at all, and normal for you is, you're not really around people.
Whereas for people who live in big cities who tend to be Democrats, you walk out the front door and there's people everywhere.
So that could be a huge factor here.
And that's why many of these Democrats might be worried about going and voting in person, because the density, the population density is massive.
Although I was in New York for the last election, and some of these polling places were absolutely empty.
But here's a story for the Atlantic.
Mail-in voting could be the demise of the Democrat Party's chances.
Take a look what they say.
As the coronavirus pandemic fanned across the country in the spring, Democrats looking ahead to the presidential election urged people to stay home in November and vote by mail.
Minnesota's Secretary of State encouraged all eligible voters to cast their ballot by mail.
Virginia Governor Ralph Northam told every Virginian who can vote by mail to do so.
The instruction echoed from Pennsylvania to Nevada, where Governor Steve Sisolak said, We prefer that people stay home, especially if you're in a vulnerable situation.
The message was heard loud and clear.
An August Wall Street Journal-NBC poll found that roughly half of Biden voters expect to cast their ballot by mail this fall, an unprecedented figure.
And you might ask, why not?
Mail-in voting reliably expands the electorate with minimal fraud, without forcing people to queue with strangers and chance transmitting a deadly virus.
But the past few months have complicated the idea that voting in person is risky and that voting by mail is entirely risk-free.
Trump's made a big mistake.
Trump kept saying voter fraud.
There's voter fraud.
I think it'd be absurd to ignore the instances I've actually covered where, like, they've arrested people for voter fraud.
But the real problem is error and impropriety.
And what I mean by impropriety is, like, in Maryland, I think it was Baltimore, somewhere in Maryland, 68,000 votes were held by the post office for five days for unknown reasons.
Impropriety.
What I mean by that is laziness, neglect, no real malintent, just no chain of custody.
So ballots just end up sitting on a floor for a week and then election's over.
You've also got ballots getting rejected because people who don't know how to fill them out Don't know how to fill them out!
And thus, you end up with people losing their vote.
And it tends to be Democrats.
Why?
Because they're the ones voting by mail.
Universal vote by mail may have been the biggest gift to Donald Trump.
And he's been fighting against it!
Isn't it weird if the Democrats just listen to Trump on this one?
I know he keeps saying fraud over and over again.
He's wrong.
They would have been better off.
Now they're desperately trying to tell people to go and, okay, okay, drop your vote off in person.
That doesn't solve the problem.
What if someone disinfects their ballot and then drops it off in person?
Meaningless.
What if someone doesn't know where to sign and drops it off in person?
Now the signature's in the wrong spot?
Meaningless.
One of the biggest problems, the primary, is that these mail-in votes weren't being signed properly.
Some ballots you had to sign the outside, some on the inside.
Then you've got two different envelopes.
People who didn't know what to do made mistakes and got disqualified.
First-time voters most impacted.
Now maybe that's bad for Trump because Trump is getting a bunch of people to vote for the first time.
But they're voting in person, man!
They're going to show up in person and be told, here's what you do, and here's how you do it.
They're going to say, okay, many of them are going to press a button on a screen and walk out.
The Democrats voting by mail, man, they're going to regret it if they don't already.
Voting in person, this is The Atlantic again, is probably not as dangerous as Democratic leaders initially feared.
Since the CDC urged Americans to wear masks in public, no major outbreaks have been traced to voting queues.
Experts now say that voting with a mask is no more dangerous than going to a grocery store with a mask on, something millions of Americans do every week.
Evidence of the safety of in-person voting spans the world.
South Korea, where public mask wearing is nearly universal, held a national parliamentary election in April with its highest turnout in three decades.
No outbreaks there.
Thank you!
I have been saying this over and over again, and if people just listened, the Democrats would have been better off.
It just feels like they are adamant in their narrative, that they're correct, and they're... You know what, man?
It's like, when you're trying to warn someone, like, I wouldn't do that if I were you, because if you stick that fork in that thing, you know, some bad's gonna happen, and they're like, I know what I'm doing.
And then you watch the bad thing happen, and you're like...
I wasn't being mean, I wasn't lying, I was telling you, like, this is gonna backfire.
Well now the Atlantic, the New York Times, they're telling us these things.
As if my word wasn't good enough.
Apparently it's not, because I'm just some random YouTuber.
Fine, that's fine, I don't care.
But I'm happy to see that the Atlantic is pointing out the exact same thing I've been saying since the start of this.
There are real errors when it comes to mail-in voting.
Unfortunately, the media was late to pick this up.
The Democrats ran with whatever narrative was in front of them, and now they are more likely to be disenfranchised.
And I really do think that's a problem.
Because when it comes to election night, when it comes to election week or month or whatever, when you have thousands of people tweeting like, dude, where's my vote?
This is BS.
Why was I disqualified?
Well then what do we do?
Is the left going to argue that we should reinstate all of their disqualified votes?
Trump's going to say, no way, the election's over.
That's your fault.
And he's right.
If you encourage people to do this without giving them proper instruction and it leads to widespread error, that's your fault.
As the Atlantic said, we know it's safe to vote in person.
Please, be safe, wear your mask, social distance, and vote in person, everyone.
I don't think it matters what I say, though, because the leftists are going to say, oh, Tim's wrong about this.
Oh, people don't feel safe.
Okay, man.
All right.
While in-person voting looks safer than expected, mail-in voting looks more dangerous, not because of fraud, but because of human error and partisan politics.
Mail-in votes require several steps, and different steps in different locations, including postmarking the ballots, signing in various places, and using the proper number of envelopes.
For that reason, it can confuse first-time voters and even experienced voters used to queuing at local high schools.
Two studies, the 2018 midterm elections in Florida and Georgia, found that young and minority voters are especially likely to have their mail ballots rejected.
Both of those voting groups skew Democratic!
Well, Republicans, you will be granted the opportunity to say, I hate to say I told you so, on November 10th or whenever, when we finally realize the mail-in votes just didn't turn out for Joe Biden.
If Joe Biden is polling comparably to Hillary Clinton, and he's kind of doing better, You have to factor in the margin of error, which in some polls shows that Trump and Biden are actually, they could be close, because the margin of error is out like 6% in one NBC poll.
But imagine this.
Imagine the mail-in voting margin of error.
If half of Joe Biden's voters, 30 plus million, vote by mail, and then we end up seeing 2 to 5% failure rate for mail-in votes, Joe Biden's going to lose a million plus votes, around a million.
Maybe not enough to lose him the national popular vote.
But Donald Trump won the electoral college in some states by razor-thin margins.
Could you imagine if 100,000 votes in, say, Ohio were wrong, and they skewed Democratic, 70,000 to 80,000 were Democrat votes?
Wow, man.
It's gonna be a disaster.
They're gonna call for, like, an election do-over.
Look what happened in Patterson, New Jersey.
Do you remember that?
They found bundles of ballots in random mailboxes, and they were like, that's weird because ballot harvesting's illegal.
What are these doing?
And so a federal judge said, do the election over.
We can't do that at the presidential level.
There will be bedlam.
There will be chaos in the streets.
Trump will declare victory.
The Supreme Court will say, no way.
The Supreme Court will probably rule in Trump's favor.
I have no idea what to expect, but I can tell you at least, based on what we're seeing with this mail-in voting thing, we may see what's called the Red Mirage, where Trump wins in a landslide on election night from in-person voting.
Then they say, yes, yes, but Biden's mail-in votes are still expected to come, and then they don't!
And then by November 10th, everyone's like, uh, Trump won!
I guess we'll see.
In November, states should be more prepared for the onslaught of mailed ballots than they were this spring.
We've remedied several of the problems we had earlier this year, including new rules to allow election clerks to avoid overwork in November, to avoid bookkeeping errors.
But even as voters and states are struggling to adhere to new rules, the GOP is fighting to limit admissibility of mail votes.
The Pennsylvania GOP has asked the U.S.
Supreme Court to overturn the state law and declare invalid any ballots that arrive after Election Day.
Even if they are postmarked before November 3rd.
That state's Supreme Court recently ruled to throw out naked ballots, mail votes that aren't sealed within two different envelopes, which could invalidate hundreds of thousands more votes.
It's like the Democrats are trying to lose, but make it look like they're trying to win.
I tell you, man.
Well, my friends, let me give you a look.
You get the general idea of what's going on with what Derek over at The Atlantic has to say, but let me show you some stuff.
Check this out.
This is from The Washington Examiner.
I thought it was somebody playing a prank.
Man finds dozens of ballots in California trash.
ABC7 covered this.
These are more likely to be Democrats.
Republicans are going to vote in person.
They're not worried about their votes for the most part getting thrown in the trash.
There's other stories and there's other reasons to be concerned about this.
Thief grabs mail ballots in North County neighborhood.
It's from Fox 5 San Diego.
The dude, I don't believe, was trying to steal actual mail-in ballots, but he was stealing mail and thus ended up with mail-in ballots.
Now, it could be that people take mail-in ballots and then vote, you know, fraudulently.
I don't really think that's going to be the case.
I don't know for sure, right?
I think there'll be some instance of voter fraud.
We saw the Project Veritas video that the New York Times is claiming is bunk, but the dude posted the videos himself, so I think the videos speak for themselves, where we saw what looked like illegal ballot harvesting.
I say what looked like because I haven't gone over everything that James O'Keefe has, but James O'Keefe showed, this guy posted videos, And according to one official, I believe, they said collecting more than three is illegal.
Now there's other accusations that this guy up in Minnesota was taking blank ballots.
I don't know about all that.
But look, it's possible.
And I think universal mail-in voting can increase the likelihood of fraud, and probably will.
But that's not the big issue.
That's really, really not the issue.
So when Trump comes out and says fraud over and over again, what ends up happening is the Democrats get an easy rebuttal.
Maybe that's Trump's play.
Think about it.
Trump wants Republicans to vote in person.
So he says, fraud!
And all the Republicans go, ah!
And they all go out and vote in person, right?
By saying this, he's scaring Republicans, making sure they vote in person, which is what they need to do.
But saying something that is not true, so the Democrats see the media say, it's not true, no fraud, fraud doesn't exist, and they go, it's safe!
Ignoring the fact that it's actual error and impropriety.
Maybe.
I'm not going to claim that Trump is that strategic.
Trump is probably just saying fraud over and over again because Trump speaks less literally.
And that's been the big thing, right?
They said in 2016, Trump supporters took him seriously, but not literally.
And the left took him literally and not seriously.
And thus, you ended up with a lot of people voting for Trump.
The famous moment that exemplifies this is when Bill Maher asked Ann Coulter, of the candidates right now in the GOP primary, which one has the best chance of winning.
She said Donald Trump, and they all laughed.
Ha ha ha ha, we're so smart!
Maybe the polls are right.
Yeah, I'll say it.
Maybe the polls are right.
Maybe the forecasts are right.
My question is to Nate Silver.
Are you factoring in the failure rate for mail-in voting and the amount of people who are expected to vote by mail?
Because even though only a few states have universal vote by mail, Democrats are going to be voting by mail across the board in many different states.
Did you factor this into your projections?
And if you did, and you increased the margin of failure for ballots being rejected, What does that say about the election?
I don't know.
But if it can swing it by, you know, two to five percent, whatever the margin of error is gonna be.
So I think the New York Times said that it's like three percent.
So maybe it'll be three percent.
Maybe we're only looking at like a million or two million votes lost.
Trump won certain states by thousands of votes.
That's it.
If they lose millions, Trump's gonna win.
And it'll look like an electoral landslide again.
And that'll be their own fault.
That's what's happening.
I'll leave it with one last final warning.
Please do not disinfect your ballots.
Follow the instructions.
We want your votes to count.
This is... I can't... I can't believe people are doing this!
Follow the instructions.
Go online if you need any assistance.
I'm sure there's some kind of notification under this video, okay?
That probably has information on how you can make sure to vote properly.
We want everyone to vote.
I don't care if you're voting for Biden, Jorgensen, the Green Party, whatever.
We want you to vote.
We want your vote to count.
It's an important election.
Please do it properly.
Please follow proper instruction, and I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 6 p.m.
over at youtube.com slash timcastnews.
Thanks for hanging out, and I will see you all then.
Ladies and gentlemen, it has been an absolute rollercoaster ride in this story pertaining to the pro-police rally attendee who was shot and killed by a man the police claimed was a security guard.
We now know this guy was not a security guard.
It's complicated.
He may have been hired by a local news outlet, but he was not licensed to be a security guard.
He was acting illegally.
This story gets weirder and weirder, but to give you the quick context for those that may have missed the story, during a rally and counter-rally in Denver, there were pro-police, many pro-Trump individuals, rallying in support of police, and a counter-demonstration called the Antifa Soup Drive.
At some point, an altercation broke out between a man wearing a shirt that said, Black Guns Matter, and people were talking to him, the guy was saying, come on, mace me, things like that.
All of a sudden, just to this person's side, the camera pans and you see one of the right-wing rally-goers go down.
He was shot in the face.
It was first stated by the Denver Post that this man was a left-wing demonstrator.
That was the initial report that came out.
Of course, we then saw the Post Millennial say, alleged Antifa individual, likely because the story was still early.
The Denver Post later issued a correction when the police issued a statement.
The man who shot the Trump supporter, pro-police biker guy, I'm assuming he's a Trump supporter, I could be wrong about that, but I think it's fairly obvious to assume, This guy was private security for a local news outlet.
Immediately, retractions started coming out from people like me.
I should say I put in, you know, updates and stuff, because the statements that came out through me were, like, alleged antifa, and I didn't really make strong statements, just showed the news article.
But immediately I updated Denver police saying this guy was a security guard unaffiliated with the protests.
That was technically untrue.
It turns out, yesterday, with all of these updates coming in, this shooter is a Bernie Sanders-supporting pro-Black Lives Matter leftist who is very active during Occupy Wall Street protests.
This doesn't mean the individual is very active now, but the organization with which he is involved, called Sub.Mission, has solicited donations to bail out rioters just this past June at the peak of the George Floyd riots.
So this guy may not be Antifa, And this is a very important distinction, but he was pro-Black Lives Matter.
Then the story became that this guy was a security guard, but he was a leftist.
So why is it that Pinkerton or the news organization did not vet this man and sent a left-wing tribalist, pro-Black Lives Matter individual armed with a gun to a Trump-supporting, police-supporting rally?
You can clearly see, it is easy to understand what would happen in a circumstance like that.
If you send someone down who's pro-Trump, they're gonna have no problem hanging out with the pro-Trump people.
The same is true for Antifa and the Antifa people.
But if you send a security guard who's a Black Lives Matter activist, Occupy activist, into a Trump rally, Well, you know there's going to be tensions, and one guy was armed.
A photographer did an amazing job capturing everything that happened.
Shooting sequential photos at probably about nine frames per second, I believe.
It's probably a standard rate.
They have put together an animated GIF of the shooting, giving us a sort of rudimentary video.
A sequence, if you will, but it's an animated sequence.
And you can see, this man, his name is, I believe his name is Lee Kelter.
He's been identified.
According to the reporter, the photographer on scene, the security guard, now we now know he's not a security guard, this is the update, this guy was not a legal security guard.
What he was doing, I have no idea.
According to the photographer, he came up behind her, approaching the Trump-supporting police biker guy.
Approached him.
In a photo, you can see his hand stretched out, looking like maybe he's going for the pepper spray, the mace.
The right-wing rally attendee, Lee, strikes him in the face, knocking his hat off.
He takes two steps back, and as he's backing up, in the photos, you can see this man, Matthew Doloff, the murderer, Grab his gun before the right-wing rally attendee ever makes any moves for his mace or anything like that.
And as Doloff draws his weapon, he raises the spray and sprays him, and then takes a bullet to the face.
First-degree murder charges for Matthew Doloff.
The big breaking update right now is that Doloff is not a security guard.
So let's walk all of these things back.
Well, perhaps.
We're still waiting for official statements.
Colloquially, he was a security guard.
He was hired to provide security to a journalist.
Legally, he was not a security guard.
He was an armed leftist, hired and sent to a Trump-supporting, police-supporting rally.
This story just gets weirder and weirder.
And I think there's going to have to be some very serious lawsuits for the Kelter family.
I'm sorry, Keltner family.
But let's read the news from the Daily Mail and see what's going on.
The suspected gunman who allegedly shot and killed... Okay, I'm going to stop you right there.
There are certain moments when you want to say allegedly.
Now is not one of them because we have witness statements.
Video of it happening.
We have sequential photos showing it happening.
Matthew Doloff is seen on film shooting this right-wing rally-goer in the face, killing him.
Okay?
You don't need to say allegedly.
They say...
He was not licensed to work as a security guard.
Matthew Doloff, 30, a Pinkerton contractor, who was hired to serve as security for Denver Station 9 News, was arrested on suspicion of murder after he opened fire on Lee Keltner, 49, who deployed mace at him during dueling rallies on Saturday afternoon.
I gotta stop you right there.
He opened fire on Keltner, going for his gun before the mace went off.
Keltner was backing away.
The Denver Department of Excise and Licenses on Sunday confirmed there was no record for an active licensed security guard now or ever for Doloff, who was hired to protect staff during the demonstration CBS 4 reported.
If he was operating as a security guard, he was in violation of the law, department spokesman Eric Escudero told the news station.
Security guards are prohibited from carrying or using a firearm without getting an armed firearm endorsement for their license.
All security guards in Denver are required to get a federal background check before they receive their license.
Escudero added that Doloff could face up to a year in prison or a $999 fine for the offense.
In images snapped by a Denver Post photographer, Keltner appeared to slap Doloff and then deployed a stream of mace into his face before the guard lifted his handgun.
False.
False, false, false.
Fake news.
In the sequence of photos, which I'm sorry I can't show you on YouTube, Keltner is backing away and you see Doloff grabbing his gun and drawing it before any mace is fired.
Doloff immediately surrendered to riot police who rushed in to arrest him, seconds after the gunshot rang out.
He was taken into custody on suspicion of first-degree murder, but has not been formally charged, and apparently is being held without bond.
So, no charges.
Keltner was identified as a victim by family members, who revealed their grandfather and military veteran was shot dead in front of his 24-year-old son.
Carol Keltner, who said she is the victim's mother, wrote in a social media post that her son was murdered because he supported the police.
My son Lee was at the Patriot Rally today in Denver, Carol wrote in a Facebook group called Northeast Arkansas Tea Party Group.
After the rally, a person on the Black Lives Matter anti-facade went up to him, said a few nasty words, and then shot him in the head.
He was murdered because he backed the police.
His 24-year-old son was with him.
I moved to Arkansas because Colorado got too expensive and liberal.
The left has gotten out of hand.
Now, here, listen.
This, uh, saying the security guard was on the BLM and Antifa side is going to be argued as either true or false by both sides.
The right will say he clearly was on their side.
The left will say he wasn't on their side.
You see the semantic difference?
The left will argue that he was there as a security guard and was not on the side of that counter-rally.
The right will argue that as a leftist, he was on their side, figuratively.
Do you understand what I'm trying to say?
He was tribalistically on Antifa's side, straight up, no question about it.
His posts on Facebook show this, saying hashtag leftist best.
He also ragged on Dave Rubin as a shill, very clearly a leftist, watching left-wing YouTube programs, being an Occupy activist.
Now, he wasn't there in the capacity that he was joining the rally.
That's the important distinction.
The Denver Police Department has said Doloff had no known affiliation with the Black Lives Matter and Antifa group that staged a counter-protest against the Patriot-Muster rally.
Let me stop you right there.
Antifa is an idea.
When people show up to these rallies, they don't receive a... there's not a light in the sky saying, Antifa, assemble.
They put out a general flyer and call for people to support them.
So the Denver Police Department screwed this one up royally by saying he was unaffiliated.
They did no work and putting out this statement made everything worse.
Now the left is claiming the right is lying.
Now you've got high-profile news outlets saying he was nothing to do with the rally.
They are lying.
I don't care what the circumstances of his arrival were.
In fact, it's worse.
A news organization hired a fake security guard to bring a gun to a Trump-supporting, police-supporting rally.
This individual was a tribal pro-Black Lives Matter leftist, given an excuse to bring a gun to a right-wing rally where he approached a Trump-supporting right-wing guy And then put a bullet in his face.
There's no justification for that.
Police declined to confirm whether the victim, who they have not yet named publicly, was pronounced dead at the hospital.
In an update shared on Sunday by the DPD, said further investigation revealed Doloff was acting in a professional capacity as an armed security guard for a local media outlet and not a protest participant.
That's the important distinction.
However, he wasn't a real security guard.
So you have to wonder if there's something else here.
This guy was working for Pinkerton, and the leftists are laughing it up.
Pinkertons are a very famous, very old private security contractor from 1850 till today.
And they, I don't know the full history, but something to do with Chicago and anarchists or something like that.
So they're laughing.
Keltner's sister, Suzanne Keltner, on Sunday said her nephew has been struggling to cope after witnessing his father's death.
He was my brother, my only sibling, Susan told the New York Post.
He also served our country.
Jay Keltner, who identified himself as one of Lee's sons, also posted about the tragedy on Facebook, writing, I can't believe my dad's gone.
This will never be right.
He also changed his cover photo to a video grab from the fatal incident showing his father spraying mace at Doloff.
We can see here this is part of a previous argument with, uh, I believe this may be Keltner.
I'm not entirely sure.
Maybe not.
Maybe not.
No, it looks like that is Keltner.
Yeah.
You can see he's got mace in his hand and this man in the Black Guns Matter shirt is saying something like, mace me, mace me.
Jay told the Denver Post his father wasn't a member of any group and was there to rally for the police department as he had done so at previous protests.
It is unclear if Jay was present during his father's death.
The moments leading up to the shooting were captured in a video posted on social media, which show Keltner engaged in a shouting match with another man, believed to be with the group Black Lives Matter and Antifa counter-protesters.
No, his shirt says Black Guns Matter.
It's a different group.
Although, he very likely was on the side of the left, Antifa.
The counter-protesters continued shouting as Keltner walks out of the video frame.
Seconds later, a gunshot rings out, and Keltner is seen lying on the pavement.
Nine News confirmed that it had hired the guard through the private Pinkerton Detective Agency to watch over its staff during Saturday's dueling protests between pro-police groups under the name Patriot Muster and a BLM Antifa soup drive.
I'm going to make something very, very clear and say something very important.
Antifa organized this as a counter-rally, as I so often have warned about.
The right-wing individuals did not show up to a left-wing rally and attack the left.
The Black Lives Matter soup drive was a counter-protest.
Counter-protest the fascist rally nearby, Civic Center Park.
Join the Denver Communists, Colorado Socialist Revolution, a non-resistance movement, Witch Denver Hoes, Help on Every Street, FrontRage Mutual Aid Network, and more for a Black Lives Matter anti-fascist soup drive.
And you can see there are rainbow trails coming off soup cans as they fly through the air, a reference to throwing heavy cans at individuals they don't like.
They said we will be counter-protesting a fascist rally that is supposed to happen at the same time and place.
We want to send these worms back into their holes, demoralized and isolated, with only their racist president to console them.
We'll have soup for our family music speakers, communist books, and plenty of angry anti-fascist chants.
Denver communists.
The far left organized an event calling these humans, these people who were rallying for the police, worms.
Reminiscent of what Keith Olbermann said when he called them maggots who must be removed from society.
It is not the pro-police right-wing groups showing up to anti-fascist rallies and attacking them.
It is not the Proud Boys showing up and attacking the far left.
It is the other way around.
And in this circumstance, a news organization hired a man who was not legally allowed to be doing this job, who was a leftist, to go to this rally put on by Trump-supporting, police-supporting reporters.
I want to be more specific.
Approached him, according to the reporter.
The reporter said he came up behind her, angry and shouting.
And when he approached the Trumps, uh, Keltner, Keltner smacked him in the face, knocking his hat off, took steps, several steps back, and then this guy drew his gun and shot him.
That was a rage killing.
That was a passion crime.
There was no threat from Keltner.
None.
Pepper spray.
Not a lethal threat.
And so again, I mentioned this the other day, we looked up the law and you do not have the right to shoot someone and kill them.
To shoot someone at all.
If they are retreating from you and only holding pepper spray.
Pepper spray does not constitute a lethal force.
And shooting someone in the face does not constitute reasonable use of force.
In this circumstance, if the guy was punching at him, still, apparently in Colorado, if Keltner even swung a fist at him repeatedly, lunging at him, would not constitute a right to use lethal force.
I kid you not.
Specifically, you have to... I believe, you know, because we went through a bunch of, like, posts and stuff, like NRA stuff about this.
For this to have been justified, Keltner would have to be, like, holding him down and pummeling him.
Pepper spray does not constitute a serious lethal threat.
Now, there's a lot more going on that I think I may have to save for other segments, but, you know, maybe I'll just jump into it now.
This is from SarahCarter.com.
Antifa rioters destroy Lincoln statue, Roosevelt, and more on Day of Rage in Portland.
I think, you know, I might get into this a little bit more a little bit later because we've also got the police now arresting Jewish men in New York for staging protests.
The same kind of protests Black Lives Matter had.
Things are getting scary, man.
Things are getting really, really messed up and scary.
And so you have Antifa showing up, destroying property, burning down buildings, killing people.
And now we have a security guard.
So let me say something, man.
A lot of people aren't going to want to hear it, but the first thing that needs to be said is, do not engage these people.
I think the stupidest thing the Proud Boys could have done is announce they're going to Portland.
And they should not.
They should not have.
Now, to be fair, when they showed up, they stayed away, and the police kept everything separate, and there were no real confrontations between the Proud Boys.
But the last thing anyone needs is any political tribe, tribal group, faction, to be showing up to these events.
To be fair, again, Antifa shows up to the rights events and is killing them in Portland.
What did we see?
Trump supporters held a rally in Portland.
I think it was a dumb move.
I absolutely think it was stupid and would encourage everyone not to do this.
They were driving through the city.
I understand they have the right to do it.
And then, a lunatic Black Lives Matter antifa stalked two men and put two bullets in the chest of a man killing him.
Now, in Denver, a local news outlet hired an avowed leftist who said, I kid you not, recently, left is best.
And he shot a man in the face.
He engaged him.
The security guy, the fake security guard, engaged the right-wing dude.
Not the other way around.
So I don't know what the answer is.
Because it's not the right killing the left.
It's not... Sure, there are extremist incidents, and I think everybody disavows them, and no one wants that to happen.
And those people should be condemned beyond totally.
They should be locked up, throw away the key.
But we're talking about Trump supporters here.
No one cares for the actual, you know, white supremacists and neo-Nazis.
Throw them out.
Lock these people up when they get violent.
And I'm glad that the FBI is tracking down the extremists and locking them up.
Good.
You want to get violent?
You want to threaten people?
You want to kidnap people?
You go to prison.
Now, if you're a Trump-supporting guy waving an American flag, and you want to go and march, yeah, that's what you're allowed to do.
And therein lies the big problem.
I don't want to see anybody clashing.
But in this circumstance, what do we say?
Trump supporters aren't allowed to have parades anymore?
They're not allowed to have rallies?
No, that is unacceptable.
Trump supporters are allowed to stand on a street corner waving a flag.
But the left keeps showing up, and attacking, and now killing them.
But the media will give you the opposite narrative.
They'll claim the Proud Boys are the real problem.
Oh, please.
A bunch of frat bros who want to go to a bar and get drunk and wave American flags is not a threat.
Not a threat.
Though, it is true, Antifa shows up to their rallies, fights break out, and that's why the Proud Boys, they say they're acting defensively, but in too many circumstances, you know.
More specifically, The Proud Boys had a thing called the fourth degree, which, you know, everyone should be critical of, where you upgraded your rank by defending Western values in a fight, which meant, you know, if Antifa comes and attacks your rally, you fight back.
And I can understand the idea of self-defense and all that stuff.
And if you have a right to go march around, you shouldn't be scared of these people.
I don't know what the answer is.
What I do know is it is not the right wing that is going around showing up to rallies and killing people, and the media is lying to everybody.
And this is why things are getting scary.
I'll tell you what the scariest thing now is.
You know what's worse?
Everyone's trying to claim, this security guard was Antifa!
He's not flying Antifa flags, and that is worse than Antifa.
He is one of these Bernie Sanders-supporting generic leftists who just killed a Trump supporter.
You want to tell me that Antifa shows up, like the guy with the Black Lives Matter tattoo on his neck, and shoots a guy?
And it's horrifying, but it's factional, and we get it.
We are now escalating to the point where regular leftists are just shooting Trump supporters in the face.
That's worse than Antifa.
Stop trying to make Antifa the absolute boogeyman.
They're a problem.
They exist.
They have cells.
They're organized.
And the media will lie to you about it.
Black Lives Matter is something else entirely.
And so far, the two killings we've seen have been pro-Black Lives Matter leftists killing Trump-supporting right-wing individuals.
That's scarier.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 1 p.m.
on this channel.
Thanks for hanging out, and I'll see you all next time.
It started with Confederate statues.
You know, these are people that lost the war and that most people in this country probably don't know about, and to be completely honest, probably don't care about.
Now, there are people in the South and in certain areas that do like their statues, but it was a very tough argument, because you had a lot of people saying, hey man, the Confederates lost.
These statues were put up in like the early 1900s, not even just after the Civil War.
So, how about we get rid of them?
I tell you, my stance was put him in a museum.
I think it's a way better place for him anyway, because then you could actually learn all about the history of the Civil War, and I think that'd be really cool.
Then you could put up a plaque or something so we never forget what was there and why it was there.
Well, then they graduated to, you know, Thomas Jefferson and George Washington, proving Donald Trump was right.
You see, there was a point I think it was just after Charlottesville where Donald Trump said, where do they stop?
They want to tear down a Confederate?
What's next?
Thomas Jefferson?
George Washington?
Hey, they own slaves.
Do they come down?
And the media laughed.
unidentified
And John Oliver said, it's current year, Donald Trump.
Of course, they're not going to tear down George Washington.
And Hans Christian Hegg, a Civil War hero who fought for the side of the Union, a staunch abolitionist, who died sacrificing his life for the greater good.
They tore his statue down, too.
And for some reason, they tore down a statue of Frederick Douglass, who himself was a slave, who became a free man, who was awesome, by the way, and then fought for civil rights and an end to slavery.
Now they're coming after the guy who literally ended slavery, and it's sending me like a confusing mixed message.
Oh, but there's a reason, you see.
This was the indigenous day of rage.
Theodore Roosevelt and Abraham Lincoln must come down!
Because they were expansionists.
And they stole Native American land.
And I'll tell you this.
This is actually interesting.
A lot of people don't know this.
You should drive across the country and you'll see.
I mean it's recent history.
Some of these rulings that took land away from Native Americans.
Like the 1900s.
Like no joke.
Like early 1900s.
We grew up.
In this country where we have California to New York, sea to shining sea, and we're not used to the fact that there was a period where there was still ongoing fights over Native American land versus the country of the United States.
There was a recent Supreme Court ruling that actually said, I think, half of, what is it, Oklahoma?
Or is it Kansas?
I can't remember.
Half of, I think it was Oklahoma, of the state is now a Native American reservation.
And it's because these treaties and these rulings, they're actually still relatively recent.
Now, I think, for the most part, The last people, uh, no one's alive from when these, you know, these treaties were enacted or anything.
But the main point is, well, to wrap up on that thought, I just gotta tell you, like, look, man, we're where we are, the boundaries are drawn where they are, we'll respect people's rights, we must, and we'll try and move forward to make sure everybody's prosperous.
I think we as a society have moved past the point of, like, seizing lands with, like, the Geneva Conventions and the Hague Conventions and stuff like that.
I mean, you'd like to think so.
But I mean, not really, but hopefully, at least here in the U.S., fine.
Here's what's happening.
The left has their racism narrative.
And so when they're like, the Confederate statues must come down, it's their excuse to the left to say, this is why we're destroying pieces of American history.
I'm no fan of the Confederacy.
Good, good riddance.
Put them in a museum, I guess.
But they're destroying them.
That, I'm not okay with.
And they're not doing it by vote.
They tore down Christopher Columbus.
And then I say, you know, put them in a museum.
Listen.
I think about Columbus.
He didn't discover the Americas.
First of all, he landed in the Bahamas.
Second of all, there were already people there.
So, which one of them discovered it?
In terms of a Eurocentric view, he did discover it.
And I think if people want to look up to him because he's a symbol of their, you know, their culture and where they come from, that's fine.
There are people that Native Americans look up to that I probably never even heard of, and that's fine too.
Probably some people who killed a lot of people too, especially in, you know, in North America during colonial expansion and stuff like that.
They're probably really horrible things.
The point is, we don't cherish the bad.
We get rid of it, and we cherish the good.
So first, we got rid of the slave owners and the confederates.
First we got rid of the confederates, sort of.
Then it was, like, all slave owners.
Now it's just presidents.
The real goal, in my opinion, of what Antifa is doing in tearing down these statues is trying to just erase symbols of American history.
They hate this country.
They don't want it to exist.
They want to replace it with nothing.
They are just... It is a kind of, you know...
Mind virus rage, where they just go around angry, smashing things for no reason.
They don't want discussion.
They don't want reason.
They don't want peace.
They don't want prosperity.
They want retribution for perceived slights.
How much you want to bet the people who pulled down these statues aren't even indigenous?
It's just anger.
It's an addiction.
It's a paranoid delusion.
Here's a story from Oregon Live.
Portland protesters topple statues of Theodore Roosevelt, Abraham Lincoln in day of rage.
Police declare riot.
A group of protesters toppled statues of former presidents Theodore Roosevelt and Abraham Lincoln and shattered the entrance to the Oregon Historical Society in Portland's South Park blocks late Sunday before moving on to other areas in downtown, smashing storefronts and engaging in other acts of destruction.
Bravo.
I'm clapping for the Democrats.
This is on you.
This is your city.
This is your state.
It's your jurisdiction.
Your senators.
All that stuff.
They smashed up the Historical Society?
Now come on.
Now they're just coming after American history.
Police declared the event a riot and ordered people rampaging through the city streets to disperse but did not directly intervene until nearly an hour after the first statue fell.
The crowd scattered when police cruisers flooded the area and officers in tactical gear Appeared to make several arrests.
Protest organizers had promoted the event on social media as an Indigenous People's Day of Rage.
Monday is the federally observed holiday of Christopher Columbus.
But many states and cities now recognize the day instead as Indigenous People's Day over concerns that Christopher Columbus's arrival in the Americas helped launch centuries of violence against Indigenous populations.
The organizers had signaled their aggressive stance for the night, calling for direct action, and demanding that the video live streamers and photographers who had become staples of such events stay away.
Oh, now they don't want evidence.
I have a question for you guys, okay?
I'm part Irish.
I was wondering, at what point does demanding back stolen land become kind of weird?
So, like, what if I started making videos where I demanded Northern Ireland back?
I've been to Northern Ireland once.
I am part Irish.
I'm like a quarter or more Irish.
So a decent amount of me is Irish.
Could I start going around smashing up, I don't know, statues of British people and be like, I want Ireland back!
Genghis. Yeah, cuz you know or the Japanese like dude I live in America life's pretty good
You know I got my plot of land I've laid my claim, and I'm gonna mind my own business and
just try not to infringe on anybody else What if someone came back to where I lived was like this is
my land. I want it back. Oh, yeah Well, it's actually my land cuz my ancestors were suppressed
by your answer. Nuh-uh prove it. Like what about like you know indigenous people?
Because Native Americans were stealing each other's land all the time.
So, like, what happens if, like, they keep going back through, like, various historical texts trying to figure out who was the original person to actually have the land?
Which reminds me of this really great video.
It's called, uh, This Land is My Land.
I think it's called this.
And it's basically showing all the warring factions who declared that the, um...
The Fertile Crescent, I think it's called, was belonging to their culture, so like Israel-Palestine.
And it's basically one person singing the song about how the land is theirs, but the person keeps changing.
It's like a different, you know, it's like a Roman, and then like a Palestinian, and whatever.
And that's, is that, is that the game we're gonna play?
Like, to figure out where this, it's just, it's just absurd.
We can't do that.
They say, people in the crowd were repeatedly admonished not to film.
Passersby who happened upon the group were ordered by demonstrators to stop filming or delete photographs, including an apartment resident who had lasers shined in his eyes and liquid thrown in his face as he appeared to shoot video of the scene from his terrace.
Whoa!
They're attacking locals, man!
This is nuts.
The group, about 200 strong, marched through downtown Portland, at one point occupying all four lanes of West Burnside Street.
Most dressed head-to-toe in black.
Many wore body armor, carried shields or wielded nightsticks and other weapons.
As the crowd reached the South Park blocks, some threw chains on ropes.
On the Roosevelt statue, a bronze sculpture originally titled Theodore Roosevelt, Rough Rider, as others took a blowtorch to its base and splattered it with red paint.
They began to pull until the statue rocked from side to side before falling down at 8.51 p.m.
The crowd erupted in cheers as dance music played on a large portable speaker.
I think it's funny that people ignore this and they laugh at it.
And it may be too late.
You know, regular people don't want to be involved in this stuff.
But what we're seeing is revolution.
Now, maybe it doesn't succeed.
Maybe it's not going to result in, you know, a new glorious leader or anything like that.
But this is revolution.
I was in Ukraine when they pulled down statues, okay?
And then they ejected their... I think Yanukovych was the president.
And then got a new government.
And... it's revolution, man.
Tearing down statues is an element of this.
Whether or not they succeed is an entirely different story, but...
I'll tell you what happens.
The revolutionaries, as they call themselves, are going around and destroying things and pulling down statues, and they've been escalating.
They lie to you about their intentions.
Oh, it's just a confederate!
Who likes them?
And you're like, that's a good point.
I don't like them.
I mean, who does?
Literally.
But then I get worried.
I'm like, it's really unsafe.
They pulled a statue down and hit somebody in the head.
Like, seriously injured the guy.
I see that and I'm like, okay, that's bad.
You're hurting people, and this is dangerous.
Perhaps we should vote on removing these things."
And they say, yeah, but when we try that, nobody agrees with us.
And I'm kind of like, well, that's kind of how things work in a constitutional republic with democratically elected leaders.
We have referendum and a democratic process in many smaller jurisdictions for how we would deal with something like this.
They do it anyway.
They convinced the left, the liberals in this country, that it's just the bad people.
Then they started tearing down George Washington and Jefferson.
And where was the media to be like, yo, maybe a little too much?
They said, well, they were slave owners.
Let's run an op-ed.
Now Abraham Lincoln?
Wow.
They want to tear down a statue that shows Abraham Lincoln, like, breaking the chains of a slave.
And the argument is that, from their perspective, they should never have had, like, they don't, they don't look up to a man who is letting them go.
I think it's a fair point.
Like, Dude, you shouldn't have been enslaved in the first place.
We're not going to look up to the guy who's like, okay, I now agree to grant you rights.
They had rights from the get-go.
But the thing is, Abraham Lincoln, you know, opposed slavery, as did most of the North, as did most of this country, even during the Revolutionary War.
Problem was we had southern slave states and they were expanding.
And so we fought a very, very bloody war over it.
They want to tear down a statue that was paid for and put up by former slaves to honor Abraham Lincoln.
This should make it obvious to each and every one of you, they are not talking about Over the course of his life, Roosevelt expressed hostility toward Native Americans.
That's true.
destroying the Portland Historical Society.
What is that?
When was that built?
How does that...
Oh, it's all white supremacy.
It's white Eurocentric worldview or whatever.
Over the course of his life, Roosevelt expressed hostility toward Native Americans.
That's true.
In fact, the Declaration of Independence does as well.
The group then turned to the nearby Abraham Lincoln statue, pulling it to the ground at 8.59 p.m.,
Spray-painted on the base on the statue was Dakota 38, a reference to 38 Dakota men executed after the Dakota-U.S.
War of 1862, and the largest mass execution in a single day in American history.
Lincoln commuted the same sentence, handed down by a military tribunal, for 265 others.
I'm part German, part Irish, so I can be mad at the Germans and mad for them.
How stupid is that logic?
I'm part Korean so I'm really mad at the Japanese.
Oh wait, I'm also part Japanese.
So I'm mad at the Koreans too.
This is so dumb.
Maybe this doesn't work for someone like me.
I don't know.
Because...
You know, like these alt-right people were saying that Tim Pool has no cultural identity, because I'm, like, a variety of different ethnic backgrounds.
Maybe that's true.
I am not going to be mad at Japanese people from my Korean side, nor mad at the Koreans from my Japanese side, nor the Irish for the British, or... I'm also part British.
Yeah, I'm just everything, you know what I mean?
So I am part British, and I am part Irish.
It's different, based on Ancestry.com.
So should my Irish side be met at my British side?
My British side met at my Irish side?
Should my British side decide that Northern Ireland should remain the United Kingdom, but my Irish side argue against it?
It literally makes no sense.
Why are we even bothering with these kinds of conversations?
I don't know, to be completely honest.
I think it's patently absurd.
But while this is going on, and the left is destroying history and, you know, kind of getting away with it, I have to wonder, what does—what say you, New York, about civil unrest?
It's not like, you know, New York has decided, with this ongoing unrest, they're going to, say, you know, target a specific ethnic minority group and arrest them.
Oh man, I can only laugh at the sheer absurdity of where we are as a country.
Orthodox Jews rally outside journalists' homes in NYC after anti-lockdown leader Heshi Tischler is arrested over assault on the reporter as city fines five synagogues $15,000 for COVID violations.
Who did you fine?
de Blasio?
Cuomo?
When the Antifa Black Lives Matter people were going around vandalizing property and ransacking stores?
Did you find any of those organizations?
How about Thousand Currents, the non-profit that organizes for Black Lives Matter?
Nah, they good.
When these people went out, there was no beef.
Bill de Blasio actually was like, you know what, I'm gonna paint your message all over the ground.
Welcome to our brave new world.
They're destroying the historical society, they're tearing down statues, and quite literally they are starting to arrest Jewish people.
Is there a red flag here for somebody?
You've got overt identitarian groups that believe hard work is a trait of white people, and their allies who paint their message literally just went out and arrested a Jewish man and fined synagogues.
Apparently in the book, In Defense of Looting, which is, you know, In Defense of Looting, they argue that they believe, I think it's Asians and Jewish people, according to this book, are the face of capital.
That's what they're claiming.
You know, can I wave a flag?
I have a big red flag.
Should I just wave a red flag?
Should I get a plane and trail a big red flag flying over the city?
Because I feel like I'm warning people about what all of this means.
And so long as it's under the name Left, it's okay.
The left, of course, being a reference to revolution, right?
The revolutionary French and the French Revolution versus the right that wanted to kind of keep things the same.
So does that mean that the left is always going to be good?
No, because right now they're targeting Jewish people.
Come on, man.
What are you doing?
What are we supposed to do about this?
What's going on in New York to the Jewish community, to me, is like a whole new level of psychosis.
It's terrifying, to be completely honest.
They have a constitutional right to practice their religion, to gather, how they see fit.
You can't change that.
In fact, the Supreme Court in numerous states has shot down these unconstitutional edicts, saying you can't stop them from engaging in their constitutionally protected activities, which includes worshiping at a synagogue.
And the city's coming after him.
Here's the most important point about all of this, and the reason why I bring up the Jewish community.
Antifa has given carte blanche.
They're tearing down Abraham Lincoln.
And where is anyone to stop them?
Now, I know the police try, but many of these people are getting released by the DA.
The same thing happened in New York.
Now let's make one thing clear.
They argue the reason the Jewish people need to be arrested and have their events shut down is because they're hotspots.
It is a fact.
There are other hotspots in New York that are not being targeted.
This is called an excuse from an anti-Semite.
So what you get?
You've got an identitarian leftist mayor, Bill de Blasio, who paints Black Lives Matter, which is aligned with, like, many of these high-profile Black Lives Matter activists are fans of Farrakhan, who hates the Jews.
And this is what's starting to happen in New York City.
There's no excuse for what they're doing to these people, man.
They arrested a guy.
Now that's crazy.
So what should any of us do as this is happening?
Well, I'll tell you what, the first thing you gotta do is speak up against it.
The good news is, it seems like the good guys are winning for now.
What I mean by that is the Supreme Court is ruling against these unconstitutional edicts.
Start suing!
You don't need to go out and rally to the Orthodox Jewish community.
You file all the lawsuits in the world.
Go after them through legislation because you will win through the judicial process, I should say.
You'll win.
They can't do this.
And until the lawsuit happens, they're gonna keep pushing this.
But I'll tell you, it's scary, man.
I have to imagine all these people are voting for Trump.
And that's New York.
Seriously.
New York.
That's where these protests are happening.
They're waving Trump flags.
They tell me that Trump is going to lose.
That scares me.
Are you the person that's going to sit back and say you're okay with the government locking up Jewish people for practicing their religion while ignoring other hotspots in New York?
Are you going to say it's okay that the man who quite literally ended slavery with the Emancipation Proclamation had his statue toppled?
That's not okay.
What is this?
These people want racism.
They want it.
They use it.
They want the other.
They want enemies.
So they can rally people and say, look at that person, they're the bad guy.
I'll tell you what the bad guy is.
Ideology.
The specific ideologies of tribal warfare that we need to resist.
We are the great American melting pot.
I don't care where you come from, what you believe, you know, gender identity, any of that stuff.
We work together.
We argue ideas.
We don't tolerate this.
This needs to be the end of de Blasio.
Well, de Blasio can't run, so he won't be mayor anyway.
But Cuomo needs to get out.
And now we're hearing Joe Biden may make Cuomo AG.
Talk about a nightmare scenario.
I want you to think about that.
As Cuomo specifically targets Jewish people in New York, imagine what he would do as the Attorney General.
Don't take my word for it, though.
I'm just a dude reading the news on the internet, I guess.
Read it for yourself.
Kind of crazy, isn't it?
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 4 p.m.
over at youtube.com slash timcast.
It is my main channel.
Thanks for hanging out, and I will see you all then.
The Trump-hating TikTok teens got owned!
You got played at your own game!
You see, there was this big thing that happened where these TikTok teenagers thought they screwed over Donald Trump and they didn't.
But the story was basically that Trump was having this big rally and it was going to be in Tulsa.
They were expecting like a million people.
And it turns out, according to The New York Times and a bunch of other outlets, that TikTok actually did a viral campaign to get people to sign up.
And this resulted in Trump thinking way more people were coming, and then it didn't really happen.
And they said, oh man, because, you know, they RSVP'd and then the people couldn't get in.
That's not at all what happened.
You see what happened in Tulsa was?
Donald Trump, his campaign sent out an email saying, RSVP for the, you know, COVID comeback rally.
And even if you're not coming, show your support by RSVPing.
They then got like a million people to say they were coming, even though they weren't.
Then nobody showed up.
And shortly after, Brad Parscale got kind of fired, demoted, whatever.
It wasn't TikTok.
But now we have this story.
You see, the TikTok teens are at it again.
Thinking that they won, they tried to pull a fast one by starting a viral campaign to get everybody to sign up for a Staten Island rally.
Instead, they ended up helping Donald Trump and the GOP raise $15,000.
Because all the GOP did was say, okay, first of all, it's open-air seating.
Second of all, we'll just charge you five bucks.
How about that?
RSVP.
Reserve hold.
And they all did it!
And now the GOP has raised 15 grand.
Congratulations, TikTok teens!
You got owned!
You got played!
Oof!
You lost!
Oh, these poor kids.
Why would you give Donald Trump $5 to try and prank him is beyond me, but let's read the story.
Staten Island GOP turns tables on Trump-hating teen TikTok trolls.
Take that, Trump-hating TikTok tricksters.
Thousands of teens tried to sabotage a Staten Island Republican rally last week by hoarding online tickets, just as they did to embarrass President Trump in Tulsa, Oklahoma in June.
But that wasn't real.
All that did—actually, I'll tell you this.
For the Tulsa thing, they were like, haha, we tricked Trump.
We signed up for his event and tricked him.
Actually, you created a massive positive press cycle where for like weeks, the news was like, how did Donald Trump get so many RSVPs?
Whoa, man, crazy.
So if you go and think you're going to, I'm going to own Trump by, by showing my support for him.
I got a question.
Your brain.
But of course, these are kids who don't know politics, don't know media relations, and don't know how news cycles work.
So to them, they were like, it's going to be so funny not realizing Trump doesn't have seating.
It's open.
It's first come, first serve.
They just let everybody come in.
And the reason people didn't show up had nothing to do with TikTok.
They tried it again.
The GOP bamboozled these TikTok teens into pouring nearly $16,000 into party coffers.
Oh, kids, kids, kids.
On September 19th, out-of-staters using fake, frequently lewd names including Grab-Em-By, De Puce, Ivana Punch You, and F.U.
Trump began signing up online for the Triumph Rally, a free get-out-the-vote event.
We had about 1,500 RSVPs from Staten Islanders.
Then all of a sudden we started seeing numbers tick up to 10,000, 15,000, 75,000.
Staten Island GOP Chairman Brendan Lantrie told the Post, we knew something was not right.
Lantrie's wife Jessica, an avid TikTok user, soon traced the signups to their source.
A clip posted earlier that day by a 19-year-old from Brooklyn calling herself Felisray.
Do you hate this orange bee as much as I do?
The teen asks in a 51-second video.
It turns out that Trump is having a rally in Staten Island.
Oh, I love how teenagers have become so establishment.
This was really funny.
We talk about, like, how generations rebel against the previous.
The funny thing now is, I remember when I was a teen, and the thing was, like, teenage angst.
Like, F you, man!
I'm gonna do whatever I want!
I don't need no establishment telling me what to do!
And now you got a bunch of teenagers being like, F you, man!
That's so cool that you conform to what massive, multi-billion dollar corporations tell you to do.
I think you have, uh, uh, uh, Maybe, maybe, no individuality, no character.
Man, all these young people who are just like turning on Oreo commercials and like Pepsi commercials to figure out what to think, that's kind of, that's kind of stupid.
Like, I don't know man, when I was growing up, if you just did whatever your parents told you to do, or like whatever the major corporations were saying, you weren't considered cool.
In fact, like where I grew up, I guess maybe it's like a punk rock thing, You know, we were just like, you're really dumb if you're listening to this, like, manufactured pop culture music and stuff.
Like, be your own person.
Rebel.
Not to like, for no reason, just to stand up for yourself and find your own way.
But hey man, if you want to just do whatever you're told, you know, and just be kind of like a stodgy corporate cog, I guess that's the cool thing now.
You know, hey, look, far be it from me to tell the kids what it's all about, huh?
I'm old man.
I'm 34.
I just think, you know, it's kind of weird that today's generation of young people are desperately trying to fit in with the mass of multinational corporations.
Isn't that funny?
Anyway, they say, so what I did was I reserved myself two seats, but I'm pretty sure that I'm having something to do that day, she says gleefully.
So do what you want with this information.
The video rocketed around social media, racking up 523,000 views, and spurred scores of adults to spread the word.
Register for this!
I did.
Debbie Ingber, Deutsch of Armonk NY, wrote on Facebook.
The bare minimum to not be a moron is to just search on Google if something is true.
Everyone's like, Tim, you're such a great journalist doing all this work.
I just Google-searched it, dude!
Okay, and to be honest, I do have some other services and background check stuff that I do.
But, for the most part, you do a Google search, you try and figure out what other information is around, you would have found out, this didn't work last time, it's not gonna work this time.
Order them so their numbers will be way off and they'll expect more people," explained Twitter user Earth Angel from Cheshire, Connecticut.
As in Tulsa, the troll's goal was to snatch up as many tickets as possible so that the event would become a sea of no-shows.
Trump foes, led by AOC, preened when the president's first post-lockdown campaign rally in June was an attendance bust.
But that's Trump's fault.
TikTok had nothing to do with it.
You just got rocked by teens on TikTok who flooded the Trump campaign with fake ticket reservations, AOC tweeted.
Y'all make me so proud.
I love that AOC is cheering for, like, electoral interference and scams to try and win an election.
Bravo, AOC.
To deter the troublemakers, Lantry added a non-refundable $5 fee to the online sign-up form.
But they kept coming, Lantry said, from Colorado and California and Chicago and Houston, all over the country.
Multiple Ruth Ginsburgs from Salisbury, Maryland and Greensboro, North Carolina gladly paid for their Dukats.
By the time the October 3 rally began in a commercial parking lot on the South Shore, the Trump haters had shelled out $15,785 to buy more than 3,000 vouchers they had no intention of using.
They hate this president so much that they're willing to donate to the Republican Party to troll him.
Okay, hey, win-win, right?
You get to feel good and claim that you're going after Trump, and then you get to give him money at the same time.
And the thousands of Trump-hating no-shows were barely missed.
No seats were provided at the open-air rally, and the event drew 2,500 locals who filmed a get-well message for Trump as he recuperated from his bout with COVID-19.
Thank you, progressives, for helping us put out a successful rally.
This, to me, is the perfect example of one.
You don't want young people voting.
They're too stupid.
Okay, okay, I'm being a little bit mean, alright?
There are a lot of smart young people, and some of them are on the left and some of them are on the right, and there are a lot of dumb young people, but the truth is, there's a lot of dumb people.
So I think it was like Kamala Harris who said young people are stupid.
Well, you know, I don't know if stupid is the right word.
I think a human is, at a certain point, just, you know, lacking skills or knowledge, and that stupid is something different.
You can be young, quick-witted, smart, and have good comprehensive skills, but in this instance, we're just seeing a bunch of dumb adults, too.
Just because some teenager's the one who started it doesn't mean anybody gets a free pass here.
These adults who are like, oh man, like Tulsa, whoa!
Did you even bother searching?
Do you even care how any of this works?
It makes me think about...
All of the things these people believe when it comes to politics, and how they have no idea how any of it functions.
And, you know, I don't want to call anybody out by name, but there are a lot of high-profile left-wing personalities on YouTube and social media that haven't even bothered to look up whether or not their ideas work.
So they'll be like, we should just give people healthcare.
There's a really famous funny tweet going around where this woman's like, we like made the economy up.
Like, let's just give people food.
Oh, I love that one.
Let's just give people food.
Yes.
Okay.
First of all, we do.
They're called food banks.
They exist.
And people have food.
Starvation is not the problem in this country.
We have fat homeless people.
The problem is something very different.
Now we do have people in this country who go hungry and are malnourished.
That's a problem we gotta solve.
But, like, we literally have EBT cards, food benefits, and food banks.
You know, you could walk into a food bank and be like, one food, please, and they're like, here's a bag, have a nice day.
That simple.
Now, not every place in the world has food banks, but it's funny that this is what people think.
I love when they're like, there are so many empty buildings, let's just put homeless people in them.
Why is the person homeless?
Are they homeless because they lost their job, or are they homeless because they have a mental health issue?
I worked for a homeless shelter.
For several, actually.
It was a network.
Most of it was mental health issues.
You can't just put a mentally ill person in a home and walk away.
These people don't know how to use Google!
Eh, but of course they vote.
And you know what?
That's fine, I guess.
When they end up giving money to the Republicans because they think they're hating Trump, as long as they feel good, giving that five bucks to Trump must have felt real good.
I'm sure Trump can do wonderful things with that $15,000, but nice try.
Better luck next time.
I got a couple more segments in just a few minutes.
Stick around and I will see you all shortly.
Proving that journalism is not, in fact, dead, Glenn Greenwald of The Intercept drags The New York Times, who is desperately trying to prove that journalism is dead.
Now, The Intercept has its problems.
I think Glenn Greenwald does a pretty good job, and he always has.
I'm critical of some of his opinions, but for the most part, he calls it out where it needs to be called out.
But then you end up with many of these other people at The Intercept who have Trump derangement syndrome, and they write these garbage fake news articles because they just don't like the orange man.
But this story I bring you now is about the New York Times 1619 Project.
Many of you are probably familiar with this.
It's the one that claims the United States did not start in 1776.
It started 1619 when the first slaves arrived in North America.
That's patently absurd, not true, and has been refuted by many, many historians.
In fact, some of the, most of the, well, I don't know about most, but many of the founding fathers Notably, Thomas Jefferson tried abolishing slavery in the Declaration of Independence, but southern states that had slaves refused and would not have joined the revolution unless they were allowed to keep them.
I kind of feel like it's a cop-out, and there's a lot of interesting bits of historical context.
Notably, that Since the inception of this country, we've done an amazing job of granting civil rights to many people.
But slavery did end in the UK before the US, my understanding.
So some have actually argued, if we never had the revolution in the first place, slavery would have ended first.
But I think the revolution was good for many, many reasons.
It's created a great nation, one of the most progressive nations in the planet, and one with a constitution and a bill of rights that protects our rights as citizens from the government.
If we didn't have revolution, we wouldn't have that, and we'd end up like the UK, where people are getting arrested for speaking.
But anyway, I bring you back to this story.
You see, Bret Stephens for the New York Times actually wrote, criticizing 1619, saying, "...journalism does better when it writes the first rough draft of history, not the last word on it."
And the New York Times Guild comes out and demands censorship of their colleagues.
Why?
The New York Times does not want news.
You see, some time ago, the New York Times began to hire cultists, the dogmatic intersectionalists who believe a bunch of fringe, crazy ideas about white people.
They believe, like, hard work, they say, is a trait of white people, which is Ridiculous, and racist, and wrong.
You know what's really funny about all that?
You know that in China, the compass was invented in like 200 BC, and Europeans didn't develop their own version of the compass for another thousand years!
But these culty leftists think, you know, what did Prince Harry say?
He believes the world was made by, he says, white people, and that, he says, it was made, according to Prince Harry, for white people?
I break it up like that on purpose because Prince Harry said those words and I'm not a fan of them.
Well, here's the story.
Glenn Greenwald writes, The New York Times Guild, the union of employees of the paper of record, tweeted a condemnation on Sunday of one of their own colleagues, op-ed columnist Brett Stevens.
Their denunciation was marred by humiliating typos, and even more so by creepy and authoritarian censorship demands and petulant appeals to management for enforcement of company rules against other journalists.
To say that this is bizarre behavior from a union of journalists, of all people, is to woefully understate the case.
I'm sorry, friends.
It's not a union of journalists.
It's a sect of the dogma.
They're not journalists!
Please!
They were journalists that actually do investigations.
What angered the Union today was an op-ed by Stevens on Friday, which voiced numerous criticisms of the Pulitzer Prize-winning 1619 Project, published last year by the New York Times Magazine and spearheaded by reporter Nicole Hannah-Jones.
One of the project's principal arguments was expressed by a now silently deleted sentence that introduced it.
that the country's true birth date is not 1776, as has long been widely believed, but rather late 1619, when the article claims the first African-American slaves arrived on U.S.
soil.
Despite its Pulitzer, the 1619 Project has become a hotly contested political and academic controversy, with the Trump administration seeking to block attempts to integrate its assertions into school curriculums, while numerous scholars of history accuse it of radically distorting historical fact.
With some, such as Brown University's Glenn Lowry, calling on the Pulitzer Board to revoke its award.
Scholars have also vocally criticized the Times for stealth edits of the article's key claims long after publication, without even noting to readers that it made these substantive changes, let alone explaining why it made them.
Those are called stealth edits.
To put it mildly, the 1619 Project is such an absurd piece of bunk drivel, they've made numerous changes without telling anybody!
That's not journalism.
In sum, the still-raging political, historical, and journalistic debate over the 1619 Project has become a major controversy.
In his Friday column, Stevens addressed the controversy by first noting the project's positive contributions and accomplishments, then reviewed in detail the critiques of historians and other scholars of its central claims, and then sided with its critics by arguing, for all its virtues, buzz, spinoffs, and Pulitzer Prize, the 1619 Project has failed.
I am sick of the critical race theorist lunatics who would erase the history of my family and many other families around the world with their psychotic nonsense.
And of course I'm talking about Asians.
unidentified
I love it when the left says, for all that Tim tries to condemn identity politics, he sure loves to use identity politics.
You see, I understand that identity politics can be a good thing.
Notably, the civil rights movement.
An identity politics movement that made it illegal to discriminate against people on the basis of race.
Recognizing there are differences between cultures.
There are differences between the biological sexes and different races.
And however you want to quantify it, fine.
But let me tell you something.
If it took y'all Europeans a thousand years to invent a compass they were using in China a long time before, a thousand years before, then how could these people try and assert this psychotic nonsense they're trying to assert?
I think we all understand slavery's bad.
Well, guess what?
Thanks to Obama and Hillary Clinton, you've got active slavery in Libya right now.
It wasn't there before.
But you know what Hillary said?
We came, we saw, he died when they killed Gaddafi.
Congratulations, power vacuum, and now you've got rampant militias and, you know, military factions and open, open slavery.
They've royally screwed everything up.
But they want to act like, you know, these critical race theorists are white.
No, no.
Let me just start over.
These critical race theorists are white supremacists with guilty consciences.
That's about it.
So, when we say that, what we're trying to claim is that they believe that they are superior, but they're sorry about it.
They believe they have more power than you and power over you if you're a minority.
But they're sorry about it.
Yeah, the core tenet of what they believe is that they have power.
You don't.
You didn't.
And you never will.
Look, there are a lot of people in this country who were facing, you know, Arguably, uphill battles.
I say arguably because there are some people who are white who fought in the Civil War, and there are some people who are slaves who absolutely had a mountain to climb in terms of what this country had been doing for a long time.
But countries around the world have slavery.
Many of them still do.
And the U.S.
ended it.
It was abhorrent.
It was horrific.
And we learned important lessons and ended it.
And now this country is a glorious melting pot.
But this idea the left has that white people are superior in so many different ways, oh, they'll deny.
When I ask them, do you believe that white people have privileges that other races don't?
They'll say, of course.
I'll say, okay, so you believe that in this society they hold a superior position of power.
No, no, I didn't say superior!
What's the definition?
Do you think white people, in terms of how the society has functioned, are above?
That they'll say yes to.
That, my friend, is white supremacy.
They're not.
The only difference is that they think they need to end it.
But I don't think they really do, I don't.
The policies they propose, the things they're enacting, would result in overt and outright racial discrimination in favor of white people.
Let me give you an example.
Right now, under the guise of positive discrimination, California Democrats have voted to repeal Proposition 209, which banned discrimination based on race, gender, national origin, in public accommodation, contracting, and education.
So I asked my friend, do you know what the percentage of California's, like, do you know what their racial demographics are?
Yeah, it's mostly white.
The last count, I think, had it between like 70 and 80 percent white.
Kid you not.
Lots of white people.
Okay.
So what do you think is more likely?
Do you think it's more likely that white people are going to set up, you know, affirmative action, now that you're allowing discrimination?
Do you think the white people are going to set up signs saying like, you know, hiring only Latinos or only black people?
Or do you think it's more likely that things will probably stay the same in many of these cities, but at government institutions in more rural and racist areas, they'll make white-only spaces?
Well, it's an argument.
Some people say the Republicans would never do that, but they're white supremacists, and why wouldn't they do it?
The issue is, it doesn't matter how many people are racist.
It matters that there are just substantially more white people.
Thus, you have a substantially higher potential that repealing this law will create white supremacist systems for white, you know, or white-only spaces, which is something we don't want in this country, and we got rid of a long time ago.
That's what the left is creating.
This country is majority white.
The laws and the rules they're proposing and the things they're saying are overtly white supremacist.
I've had enough.
But I'll tell you what, the gist of this segment... The New York Times is done.
You know, I'll still use them for the most part, but look at this.
They're arguing for more censorship.
No joke.
Even Reason wrote about it.
New York Times Union hits Times columnist for daring to criticize a 1619 project.
They want more censorship.
That's not journalism.
That's the opposite of journalism.
And that's where we're going when the paper of record is being infected and infiltrated by dogma that cares not for doing the job of journalism, but for propagandizing.
The New York Times' goal needs to be to inform the public so they can make decisions.
Instead, what do we get?
How many news organizations endorsed politicians like most of them?
Get out of here.
The New York Times.
What a sad shell of an outlet you've become.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up in a few minutes.
Stick around and I will see you all shortly.
It's almost like things are getting back to normal, because we're gonna talk about aliens!
Former Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid says the government is covering up huge amounts of evidence of UFO encounters.
Oh, I love it!
Isn't it gonna be fun to talk about things that aren't like Donald Trump?
But let me tell you, as I often say, Harry Reid probably doesn't have access to a lot of privy to information.
There probably is a ton Of documentation about UFOs, or... What is it called?
Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon now?
But I'll tell you this, man.
I was reading one story about UFOs, and it was like... We noticed these strange vehicles in the sky!
Flying above a naval research center, and I'm like... What do you think it is?
Come on!
Okay, fine.
If you want to believe it's aliens, maybe the aliens are spying on us.
I mean, to be fair, it could be the Russians or the Chinese spying on us with some kind of future weapon.
Or it's just, in my opinion, the U.S.
conducts super top-secret, like, above-top-secret weapons drills and stuff like this.
And, you know, the Manhattan Project.
If you think you know what the U.S.
arsenal has, you would be sorely mistaken.
Because this stuff is beyond confidential, okay?
Super top-secret.
Not even Harry Reid probably knows about it.
In fact, Trump probably barely knows about it.
These are top-secret projects for national security.
And, to be fair, like global security, too.
So, you gotta wonder.
But let's at least see what Harry Reid is saying.
Most of it hasn't seen the light of day.
Former Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid says the government is covering up huge amounts of evidence of UFO encounters.
Reid made the claim in the newly released documentary, The Phenomenon, directed by James Fox, which examines the history of UFO sightings in the U.S.
from the 1940s all the way up to this spring's revelation, guarding a Department of Defense probe into unexplained military sightings.
Why the federal government, all these years, has covered up, put brake pads on everything, stopped it, I think it's very, very bad for our country, Reid tells Fox in the film.
When asked if he's saying there's still some evidence that hasn't yet been publicly disclosed, Reid replies, I'm saying most of it hasn't seen the light of day.
Here's a photo, I guess.
Uh, what is this?
Examines the history of UFO sightings in the U.S.
from the 1940s.
A lot of it was just stupid, fake nonsense.
Reid was among the lawmakers behind classified, but since closed, Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program, a Defense Department unit devoted solely to investigating unexplained phenomena and aerial encounters from deep within the Pentagon.
But let's be real, man!
If there was secret US technology, okay?
Special weapons and crazy aircraft and vehicles that could zoom around.
There would be aspects of the military that wouldn't know about it.
And if they didn't act like it was a threat, people would start asking questions.
Well, if the Navy isn't worried about strange vehicles flying over their bases, perhaps it belongs to them.
So they launched the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program probably because many of these people don't have access to this information.
Like, I think if they're gonna do the Manhattan Project, and it's gonna be super top secret, nobody knows about it, and they compartmentalize everything.
What that meant was, everything was need-to-know.
Then I think you're going to end up with a lot of people seeing these vehicles and being like, we need to do something about this.
And then nothing really ever gets done other than track these things.
Since leaving office in 2017, he has become increasingly outspoken about UFOs.
In April, following the Pentagon's release of three videos taken by US pilots that reportedly show unexplained aerial phenomena, Reid tweeted, The American people deserve to be informed.
Reid has, however, stopped short of confirming evidence of otherworldly activity, tweeting in August that he wants the issue studied and that we must stick to science, not fairy tales about little green men.
Reid stands firm on that point of view in the phenomenon, telling Fox, Nobody has to agree why it's there, but should we at least be spending some money to study all these phenomenon?
The answer is yes.
The existence of AATIP was first unveiled by the New York Times in 2017, though at the time, the government said the program, secretly commissioned in 2007, was shuttered due to a lack of funding in 2012.
The Times later confirmed it continued its existence under a new name, the Unidentified Aerial Phenomena Task Force within the Office of Naval Intelligence.
For more than a decade, the Pentagon had been conducting classified briefings for congressional committees, aerospace company executives, and other government officials.
The briefings were centered on sightings, video footage, and radar logs by military pilots of unexplained aerial phenomena, which seemed to transcend existing flight technology, such as an aircraft with no visible engine at 30,000 feet traveling at hypersonic speed.
Three videos documenting such unexplainable encounters were released by the Pentagon in April, with the footage captured between 2004 and 2015.
The one thing I find truly fascinating about how these vehicles moved, according to the documents, is how they bypass friction.
Uh, you know, so when you see the vehicles, like, re-entering the U.S.
atmosphere, not the U.S., the Earth's atmosphere, well, yeah, I guess it's the atmosphere above America, and they start getting really, really hot, it's because they're hitting into the gases and particles in the atmosphere, and the friction hitting the vehicle starts heating it up.
That's because orbital speeds, you know, the vehicle has to travel very, very fast to remain in orbit.
So, the way orbit works is the vehicle's always falling, but it's moving so fast that it's wrapping around and never actually coming down.
If it tries to re-enter, it's gonna slow down dramatically once it hits the atmosphere, kind of like when you throw something into water, and it slows down dramatically.
Then it heats up.
So you have these vehicles moving around really fast, But I guess the question is, you know, it's beyond just how do they fly.
It's how do they move so quickly at hypersonic speeds, traveling super quickly, without feeling the effects of friction.
That's something I think most people don't actually talk about.
One of the clips shows the notorious 2004 Tic Tac incident, which was recorded over the Pacific Ocean.
A second video was captured off the coast of Jacksonville, Florida in 2015.
The third clip, also captured in 2015, features a Navy pilot remarking, what the F was that thing?
As he spots an unidentified flying object.
Now, the reason I bring up the friction thing is they're shaped like Tic Tacs.
So they're like blunt objects moving at high speed.
Our vehicles that go, you know, several, what is it, Mach 3?
I don't know what Mach we're at, but it's a hypersonic.
They're aerodynamic.
They pierce through the air.
And they use it to fly.
A Tic Tac would be slamming into air the entire time.
The DOD official said they released the videos in order to clear up any misconceptions by the public on whether or not the footage that has been circulating was real, or whether or not there is more to the videos.
The aerial phenomena observed in the videos remains characterized as unidentified.
The disclosure of these clips serves as the grounding theme of the phenomena.
That's the name of the film.
In addition to Reid, Fox also speaks to a number of high-ranking government officials, such as former New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson.
And also sits down with longtime UFO researcher Jacques Vallee, the inspiration behind the character of Lacombe in Steven Spielberg's Close Encounters of the Third Kind.
The film traces the relatively recent history of UFO fixation, which began around eight decades ago.
Interesting.
Eight decades ago.
What were we working on then?
The theory, coming from many UFO enthusiasts, is that once we detonated the first atomic bomb, we notified the aliens that we were acting a fool.
And so they came and intervened.
There's one crazy story where apparently, like, all of the nuclear warheads disarmed instantly.
And that's what, like, I don't know much about it, but other than UFO enthusiasts and alien enthusiasts believe, that aliens were actually showing us, your weapons are no threat to us.
Perhaps what they were really saying, assuming the story is true, which I honestly don't believe it is, what they were really saying is, y'all better turn these things off before you kill yourself.
It'd be like watching a kid playing with a knife.
You'd be like, dude!
Like a little kid running with scissors.
Hey, no, no, no, no, you're gonna hurt yourself with that.
You've got this fledgling civilization, we're manipulating our environment, and here we got nuclear bombs, we're gonna blow ourselves up.
Aliens come, and, you know, there you go.
The rest is history.
I don't actually think any of that happened, and maybe there are aliens, but I kinda don't think so, at least not here.
But of course, our understanding of technology is extremely limited.
Our developments in technology are not very old.
I mean, the big explosion in information tech is only in the past 20 or so years.
It's been a slow build-up for sure over the past hundred, but we've had a major explosion in information communications technology and methodology.
So maybe 2020 is gearing up for that special October surprise.
Aliens.
A lot of people were joking that 2020 is so crazy that aliens have to land.
I mean, that'd be pretty cool.
I'm just, it's the waiting I can't stand.
I don't think it's gonna happen, though.
But I do like, I do like seeing, you know, stories like this for two reasons.
One, man, it is really good to get away from the political garbage of today.
And two, you know, I don't know.
Seeing official people talk about this makes it feel like there's something more to life than just this pale blue dot.
So I started thinking about, what do we do?
You know, we stare up at the stars.
At a certain point, we're going to have an existential crisis.
Why?
I know I have a buddy who's like super rich and met him a long time ago and he told me that super rich people go through a period of existential crisis when they make so much money they never have to work again and they don't know what to do with themselves and then they become depressed and question what they're doing and then try and find something to do but they can do anything there's no struggle anymore you beat the game!
Well, most of us are reaching that level.
We have more food than we need, we're comfortable, we've got air conditioning.
What do we do?
We have no purpose.
So you end up with the woke left and the Trump supporters, everyone trying to find their purpose.
And maybe there's something more out there to strive for.
I think we need a new space race.
Trump is working on that.
That's cool.
I think we need something to inspire people to work towards something beyond where we're at right now.
A lot of people like to say something I find silly.
They say, I was born too late to explore the Earth and too early to explore the stars.
And I say, you are wrong, dude!
Just because you can't fathom it.
No, we have not covered every inch of this Earth.
We have not explored the ocean depths.
There's a lot of exploring that needs to be done.
And, uh, we're working on exploring the stars, so get to it, dude.
If you want to explore the Earth, you should.
There are a lot of islands people have never been to.
There are a lot of places no one on this Earth has been to.
Just because we have satellites and we can see the planet doesn't mean we've been to these places.
There are deep, dense areas in the Amazon rainforest we've never been to.
So how about you actually just try to explore areas and actually look into it?
And if you want to explore the stars, maybe you should do it, and then we as a nation can strive towards something bigger than ourselves.
And the world, maybe.
But I'll leave it there.
Maybe there are aliens.
Maybe there aren't.
I don't know.
I guess we, uh, we'll just cross our fingers and hope one of these UFOs lands at some point.