Trump WINS Legal Battle In PA REJECTING Votes, But Trump Is Still FAR From Winning Legal Victory
A Court has sided with the Trump campaign barring certain votes in PA.While the legal victory may be minor for now it could possibly open the door for many more legal challenges brought by Trump. The Pennsylvania court rules that the secretary of state had no authority to change ballot deadlines and thus these ballots corrected by the 10th to 12th shall not be counted.While media and Democrats are celebrating Joe Biden as the president-elect they aren't countering Trump's actual legal challenges.While many agree its a serious long shotIt is possible that Trump could pull off a triple hail mary and end by winning through legal means.
Support the show (http://timcast.com/donate)
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Donald Trump has scored a legal victory in Pennsylvania.
A judge has sided with the Trump campaign saying the Secretary of State had no right to alter a deadline by which people who needed to prove their identification for some ballots would be allowed to do so.
Long story short, many ballots will now not be counted.
I don't have the official numbers, but this goes back to an Election Day lawsuit when Trump sued Pennsylvania because they were effectively allowing some voters to cure their ballots.
If there was an issue with the mail-in ballot, they were actually contacting voters and telling them, you can provide information, fix this ballot by a certain deadline.
Trump has won this fight, albeit it's probably not enough yet.
But Trump is promising there's going to be many more results in the coming week.
I gotta be honest, I'm not entirely confident.
Now, I understand, look, my opinion.
On this matter is irrelevant.
It's going to play out in the courts, and I'm not a lawyer or a judge, but certainly sounds to me like we are getting to a point where this just isn't going to be enough.
Many lawyers have said straight up Trump needs three Hail Mary passes to pull this off.
They called Arizona for Joe Biden.
Donald Trump is suing in many different states, and this lawsuit actually might be good news for him.
But I got to say, in my opinion, We are just ever inching closer to certification that will favor Joe Biden, who will end up the actual president-elect.
To be fair, so long as this election is disputed and Trump is going through the process, we should wait until we get to the actual electoral vote on December 12th before Joe Biden starts acting like he actually is the president-elect.
I understand there's a tradition where we just go through the process, but we're not quite there.
Now, this lawsuit is really, really good news for Trump because this is not a Supreme Court ruling.
It's a Pennsylvania court ruling.
It may not be enough.
I just told you my thoughts on the matter.
However, this ruling may actually be some kind of precedent that the Secretary of State, the government of Pennsylvania, doesn't have the right to arbitrarily change these rules at the last minute.
Some people have said, why is Trump suing after the fact?
You can't do this.
We got one legal expert who said, Trump trying to challenge these ballots in many different states under the 14th Amendment makes no sense because he should have sued beforehand.
That guy's wrong.
Far be it for me to question The expertise of a legal scholar.
But Donald Trump is suing because they sued on election day because the Pennsylvania Secretary of State was allowing people to cure their ballots in certain areas and not in others.
That may actually create a very serious problem.
Thus, Trump has this victory.
Now, I don't know if these are the exact.
I've got a couple of stories here about these lawsuits, and it's really hard to track because there are so many.
But I'm going to try and go through this and break down the current victory for Donald Trump, whether or not it actually will bring him about to this actual electoral win in the long run.
I don't know.
And I have a story saying it ain't going to happen.
But Lincoln Project and leftist activists are going after the law firms that are helping Donald Trump in this matter or just representing him.
And it's kind of weird.
Why would you why would you dox and target and harass clientele for a law firm?
Unless you weren't so confident, or unless this isn't actually about what's true and right, it's about just winning and gaining power.
And that's certainly what Trump's opponents are actually doing.
And in the media...
They're lying, and it's really weird.
To be fair, Donald Trump is not helping so much, or maybe it's part of his plan when he puts out, you know, these all-caps tweets about voter fraud and these computer systems.
And that's one of the other big stories from today.
Donald Trump tweeting that millions of votes were taken from him and given to Joe Biden based on a report from One America News, which these things are just Ridiculously difficult, if not impossible, to actually verify.
But Trump is certainly saying it, so the narrative now in the mainstream press is that Trump is focused on fraud.
But if you look at the actual legal challenges coming from the lawyers, it's an entirely different story.
Maybe it's on purpose from, I don't know, one side or the other to distract people, while Trump actually challenges ballots under the 14th Amendment.
The ACLU is certainly taking this seriously, saying that they are filing a suit to stop Trump from disqualifying hundreds of thousands of votes.
That's the real battle.
And that's why I'm not leading this video with Trump claims dominion, stealing votes, because it's all a distraction.
The real battle is under the 14th Amendment, the Constitution, the process, whether or not the Secretary of State was violating the law and going against the wishes of the state legislature.
It's going to be very, very different than what we're seeing on the surface level in the media.
So let me try and break this down for you to the best of my abilities, and I'll admit it is quite difficult.
But the first story is that a court has ruled in favor of the Trump campaign.
Just a small legal victory so far.
We'll see how things play out, but 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.
I got a P.O.
box if you want to send me some stuff.
But the best thing you can do is share this video.
If you think this information is really important, if you think I'm doing a good job, sharing the video really does help me grow my channel and sustain my business.
But don't forget to like, subscribe, hit the notification bell.
Let's read.
Fox News reports, Pennsylvania Court Secretary of State lacked authority to change deadline two days before Election Day.
Judge ruled ballots that were previously set aside should not be counted.
A Pennsylvania judge ruled in favor of the Trump campaign Thursday, ordering that the state may not count ballots where the voters needed to provide proof of identification and failed to do so by November 9th.
State law said that voters have until six days after the election, this year that was November 9th, to cure problems regarding a lack of proof of identification.
After the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled that mail-in ballots could be accepted three days after election, Pennsylvania Secretary of State Kathy Bookvar submitted guidance that said proof of identification could be provided up until the 12th, which is six days after the ballot acceptance deadline.
That guidance was issued two days before the election.
The court concludes that Respondent Kathy Bookvar, in her official capacity as Secretary of the Commonwealth, lacked statutory authority to issue the November 1, 2020 guidance to Respondent's County Board of Elections insofar as the guidance purported to change the deadline for certain electors to verify proof of identification, Judge Mary Hanna-Levitt said in a court order.
This was in line with the Trump campaign's argument.
Which was that there was no basis in the state's law to extend the identification deadline, and that Bookvar did not have the power to unilaterally change it.
So, good news for Trump.
The court had previously ordered that all ballots where voters provided proof of identification between the 10th and 12th should be segregated until a ruling was issued determining what should be done with them.
On Thursday, Leavitt ruled those ballots shall not be counted.
This is one of several legal challenges the Trump campaign is bringing in Pennsylvania.
On Friday, they are scheduled to have a hearing over thousands of ballots that they claim were improperly counted, despite lacking required information.
Additionally, the campaign awaits action from the Supreme Court regarding whether the Pennsylvania Supreme Court acted properly in granting the three-day extension for accepting mail-in ballots.
Now, the important thing to understand is that Joe Biden has a lead in Pennsylvania, regardless of whether or not they count ballots that came in after November 3rd, Election Day.
And this is where the Veritas story comes into play.
Project Veritas has a whistleblower, more than one, from the United States Postal Service alleging backdating was going on.
This means that when they went out and collected a ballot after the deadline, somebody put the previous date so that it looked valid.
Now here's the challenge.
This witness was sitting down in a meeting with a federal agent and then started to question, was being questioned on whether or not he remembered exactly what was said.
Now, many people on the right have said the FBI agent, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, the federal agent, the USPS agent, not FBI agent, was using pressure tactics to manipulate and make this Richard Hopkins, this whistleblower, question his own memory.
But he doubled down and said, I did not recant.
And it's very strange the media pumped out a story saying he did, because this is the real challenge.
Even if Donald Trump wins in Pennsylvania, and they say, you can't count ballots after November 3rd, your extension is unjust, and it looks like Trump's on track to win that argument, they'll just say, but don't worry, all of these other ballots, they came in on the 3rd, they were postmarked by the 3rd, thus, they're all okay.
There's a lot of legal challenges here.
Trump may even challenge whether or not ballots postmarked by the third are even acceptable to be counted after the third, because that may create a parallel track, a violation of the 14th Amendment, which is another big play in Donald Trump's legal arsenal.
I have to admit, I'm reading the news all day every day, and as time goes on, it's starting to look more and more like Trump is not winning this.
However, we're still a long ways away from knowing for sure.
And just because Trump is, you know, in the dip right now doesn't mean he can't pull out.
But I'm telling you, I really do think we're headed towards a Joe Biden electoral victory.
Trump has many paths to victory, as much as the mainstream media, for the most part, is saying there isn't one.
Ignore the right wing media echo chamber.
There's no path for Trump.
We're starting to now see The Atlantic and Vox.com both say, OK, OK, well, Trump does have a way to win.
He actually has several ways to win.
They're unorthodox, might be bad for the country in the long run, they're legal challenges, but Trump absolutely can still win.
Like I said for the millionth time, I'm not entirely confident, but if Trump can win at the Supreme Court level, citing an equal protection clause violation, meaning if you have one ballot That is allowed to be brought in after Election Day, but in-person ballots must be counted on Election Day.
Well, that's not treating ballots equally.
There's many arguments they have under the 14th that may get many ballots disqualified.
Now, the Atlantic, in an op-ed, a professor of law said, if Trump succeeds in this argument, and it seems ludicrous, then He's going to nullify mail-in ballots across the entire country.
Now that seems far-fetched, right?
But listen, just because you're waiting for lightning to strike doesn't mean it can't.
And that's the point.
That's why I say I don't see it personally working out, but I'm not a lawyer, and I just want to make sure you know it exists.
And the media is telling us it exists.
Now, the lawsuit we just read about, Just the News has a story going back to November 4th, which I believe may be the same lawsuit, but honestly there are so many suits that could be slightly different.
This one, this article goes into a bit more detail explaining what was wrong with these ballots.
And the most important thing is that they were saying, well actually let me read it.
They say, a lawsuit filed on election day against the Pennsylvania Secretary of State.
Alleges that a last-minute rule change to the state's ballot counting process is privileging some voters over others and potentially slanting the outcome of the election.
The suit filed by two Pennsylvania politicians and several of the state's voters asserts this is a different lawsuit.
argues that Secretary of the Commonwealth Kathy Bookvar's guidance issued just hours before the election is in clear violation of the law.
Pennsylvania state law does not allow voters the opportunity to cure perceived defects in a timely manner.
Does not allow.
The state Supreme Court ruled last month The state also forbids election workers from sharing any details on voters' ballots from pre-canvas meetings.
Nevertheless, on Monday, Bookvar directed officials with County Board of Elections to provide information to a party and candidate representatives during the pre-canvas that identifies the voters whose ballots have been rejected so that the voters can be notified and the ballots can be cured.
The complaint notes that multiple Pennsylvania counties have refused to accept Bookvar's guidance.
Because it is in contravention of the election code.
As a result, the guidance is allowing only certain voters to cure their defects.
This is not the same lawsuit as the one I just read you, but this is extremely important.
Do not count out Donald Trump just yet.
After everything I just said, I'm still recognizing this.
What they're saying right here sounds very similar to Bush v. Gore, that different counties were treating the ballots differently, and thus, you had a violation of the Equal Protection Clause.
If some counties were allowing curing, and others weren't, based on a unilateral declaration by the Secretary of State in violation of the Supreme Court's order, Boy, do we have a problem.
A very serious problem.
Because it sounds like you've created preferential treatment for some counties.
And it sounds like you acted in violation of a court order.
I don't know how you handle this one.
I don't know what the judges are going to say in this.
We'll see how things end up playing out.
But I'll tell you, when you got a Supreme Court, a legislature, and a Secretary of State, when you have three different branches fighting each other, disagreeing, and ignoring each other's, you know, orders or laws, Well, it sounds like the rule of law is breaking down almost, doesn't it?
How can we function when one branch overrules a court order because they feel like they can?
I can only imagine that these ballots may be disqualified, and if they're not, then Donald Trump, as he's already doing, will likely make it to a federal lawsuit, maybe to a Supreme Court ruling, that Pennsylvania treated their ballots differently in different counties, and thus, we don't have certifiable results.
As of right now, many states have already certified their election results, but none of the key swing states so far, so it's like Delaware and, you know, South Dakota have already.
Wyoming, I think Wyoming may have, I'm not entirely sure, but many states already have.
The issue is that, I gotta tell ya, I'm worried that they might actually agree with Trump, and what I mean is what I'm worried is, it's not that they agree with, if they agree with Trump, good for Trump, he's within his legal rights.
I'm worried that it will result in massive destabilization, and I'm worried that there's no clean way out of this.
Because if we can plainly see that they were treating some ballots differently to others, and privileging some people, no one's gonna accept that, no Trump supporter's gonna accept that was okay.
And the same is true for absentee ballots and mail-in votes.
It was privileging certain people over others.
But if a court rules you can't do that, the left is going to say you're disqualifying legit and legal votes.
And now we can see, as the left has already said over and over again, count every vote.
Oh, well, too bad.
Pennsylvania court has ruled those that were being cured between the 10th and the 12th will not be counted.
The left is going to say, no, it's not fair.
We must count every ballot.
I tell you, the media is going to say over and over again, Trump is losing.
Don't believe them.
Okay?
Let me clarify.
I'm trying to tell you this.
Trump has a clear path.
He has several, actually.
There are outlets like Vox and The Atlantic saying, yeah, he could pull it off, but it's a big long shot.
I agree with that assessment.
I've asked a lawyer.
It sounds like a long shot, but possible.
But when you see these these stories that say President-elect Joe Biden, when they say Trump lost, it's over.
That's not true.
Right now, what we are going through is the normal legal process for certifying an election and determining who the next president will be.
We're just so used to this uniparty, Democrats and Republicans just shaking hands and waving and saying, better luck next time, that we don't know what it's actually like to have a real election in this country.
Like I mentioned this on the IRL podcast last night, Aaron Burr shot and killed Alexander Hamilton.
We used to have very serious, contested politics in this country.
And today, we are going through the motions as the Constitution requires for the media to come out and say, Trump has no proof, Trump is searching for fraud, and Joe Biden won, it's over.
That is freaky.
It's freaky.
It's partisanship.
They're attempting to manipulate.
You've got to wade through this stuff and seek out the real information.
Listen, I'm not telling you that I think Donald Trump is going to win.
I'm telling you that there are some outlets that are being honest and saying there is a legitimate legal path to victory for Trump.
But I'm not telling you what the probability is, okay?
Because I don't know.
I'm telling you that I think, quite honestly, it's very, very likely it's going to be Joe Biden.
But again, I'm not entirely sure.
But let me tell you what those on the left are actually doing.
They're targeting the lawyers representing Trump.
In a push to challenge the election.
Now that is not fair, in my opinion.
That is not how this process is supposed to go.
But that's exactly what they're doing.
The Lincoln Project published the phone numbers and the emails of lawyers working with Trump.
Sending a harassment wave at them to try and disrupt their ability to do their jobs as is their legal right, as is Trump's legal right, and is the standard process for what we're supposed to be doing with the Constitution.
It's how we're supposed to be moving through this.
Instead, they've already begun to resort to dirty tactics.
So let me just say, you can claim that Trump has few legal victories.
You can say that Trump can't even prove fraud.
It's a misrepresentation.
They're lying.
You can play the media game all day and night.
You can say whatever you want.
Fine.
But Donald Trump's legal tactics are legal and normal, and he's allowed.
It's far from a coup.
What they're doing now, manipulation and lies and targeting his lawyers, are horrifying, unethical, amoral, dirty tricks.
Let me show you this from the AP.
During a Pennsylvania court hearing this week, on one of the many election lawsuits brought by President Donald Trump, a judge asked a campaign lawyer whether he had found any signs of fraud from among the 592 ballots challenged.
The answer was no.
Accusing people of fraud is a pretty big step to the lawyer, Jonathan Goldstein.
We're all just trying to get the election done.
Trump has not been so cautious, insisting without evidence the election was stolen from him, even when election officials nationwide from both parties say there has been no conspiracy.
Do you see what the AP just did there?
I'm impressed.
Like, the manipulation technique.
First, Donald Trump's lawsuit over 592 ballots, in this particular instance, is not about fraud.
It's about cured ballots, misidentification, and impropriety.
Notably, that many of these ballots didn't have addresses on them, thus, they are disqualified.
So when a judge said, are you implying there's fraud?
The lawyer said, no.
This is about the legal code, the election code, and whether or not these ballots count.
The AP is using this to manipulate you into thinking that Trump's lawyers are saying one thing while Trump is doing another.
No, Trump has alleged fraud.
Rudy Giuliani is alleging fraud.
Rudy Giuliani also represents Donald Trump.
But in this one case, it's not about fraud.
In the Pennsylvania case Trump won, not about fraud.
Impropriety.
Trump has many lawsuits.
This is a manipulation.
Saying Trump has not been so cautious, insisting without evidence, that's not true at all.
Rudy Giuliani says, I have never seen an election case with half this evidence of fraud.
even noting that Giuliani said, this is from just the news, Giuliani said that the Trump
campaign legal team has an affidavit in the Michigan case from someone who worked for
Dominion who said that 100,000 ballots were brought in at 4 a.m. that were all Biden ballots,
not a single Trump vote.
The Dominion staffer is someone who works for the voting machine.
So this is not a poll watcher, this is someone who actually works on the voting machine saying to Giuliani, now, maybe Giuliani is not telling the truth.
We'll figure out in court.
There have been many accusations and claims that have been made that have turned out to have been wrong already.
That's true.
Trump has already had many cases thrown out.
But what Trump is doing is he's firing off in every direction to try and win this fight.
Now let me tell you, because people are already saying, why is Trump accepting the results of the Republican, you know, Senate races and House races, but not the presidency?
First and foremost, it's about trying to win.
Trump's not going to sue New York for a recount.
New York is going to Joe Biden.
But he's going to go after the key swing states, where things are very close, because Trump is trying to win.
But Trump accepted the results in 2016.
That's right!
Because he won, and Hillary Clinton didn't contest it.
And now that Trump is not projected to win, he is fighting it.
This is just how the legal process works.
And what I'm saying is, I'm not going to pretend that Donald Trump is a man of utmost honor and integrity, saying, well, you know, I said this last time.
No, Trump wants to win!
Trump is a fighter who wants to win.
End of story.
You can criticize him for it.
Please do so.
I'm not defending it.
I'm saying Trump has said, if it's going to be for me, I'll take it.
And if it's not, I will fight to win.
Congratulations.
You found someone who is a cutthroat business person.
Surprise, surprise, Trump became a billionaire.
He'll accept every shortcut for himself and challenge it when anyone else goes for it.
What do you think was going to happen with someone like Donald Trump?
He's not going to give up.
But for the AP to say there's no evidence, for all these outlets to claim this, actually, in my opinion, kind of freaky.
Kind of freaky.
It's a manipulation from just the news.
Multiple Michigan residents swear they witnessed widespread voter fraud in Detroit.
Early witnesses who signed affidavits range from a longtime city worker to a former assistant attorney general.
Now, I can say, I've looked into some of these claims, they appear to not be correct.
In many instances where people are claiming dead people voted, we've already had rebuttals that sometimes people have the same names, and sometimes there are clerical errors.
I can accept that.
But what I can't accept is 35 to 100 clerical errors all in the same place.
In my opinion, that's smoke, and now we're asking, is there fire?
But I'm not going to pretend like these things can't be explained away.
The issue here, and I'll tell you what I am not a fan of, People coming out with these government conspiracy ideas, talking about, you know, a widespread conspiracy, mathematical analysis.
I'm like, hold on.
Hold on to all that.
Okay, maybe.
Fine.
It's not helping.
Okay?
We have clear and identifiable claims.
We can work through these things.
Okay?
We'll go... You tell me you've got these statistical anomalies.
I heard you.
I hear about Benford's Law.
I hear about these things, and I say, interesting.
It doesn't prove anything, though.
It's just interesting.
A grain of sand in a potential heap.
Multiple residents swearing voter fraud.
Here we go.
But there's one thing you really got to understand about this stuff.
First of all, I don't think fraud is the appropriate argument for Donald Trump to win.
Trump is likely going to win on process, impropriety, and process failure.
That's his best path to victory.
Fraud may be a distraction, but it's also very hard to prove.
And when you have 328 million people, 208 million registered voters, and 150 people voting, you will absolutely find failure rates.
You will find people cheating.
The question is, was it enough?
And were there targeted and directed instances of fraud?
I do not believe fraud is the issue.
I don't.
I'm sorry.
I believe that the bigger picture is going to be, did the state of Pennsylvania, Michigan, Arizona, Nevada, act improperly with how they carried out their elections?
And if they did, we have a very serious problem.
And no, I'm not just going to say, well, Joe Biden should win for the sake of civility.
If the elections were screwed up and the courts decide, well then I don't think we can accept those results.
And therein lies the bigger picture.
Will Donald Trump be able to pull this off, pointing out impropriety and thus negating some of the states Joe Biden needs to actually win?
It is within the realm of possibility.
But as we've heard from many legal experts, it's a Hail Mary.
It's three.
CNBC says, What if Trump never concedes?
The Constitution will end his term, conservative lawyer John Yoo says.
John Yoo says, Trump has the right to mount legal challenges, but we should be clear that these are Hail Mary passes, said John Yoo, a former legal advisor to the George W. Bush administration.
Several lawsuits by the Trump admin are underway in six battleground states that Democratic president-elect Joe Biden won closely.
One challenge has successfully triggered a full recount in Georgia, where Biden led by 14,000 of nearly 5 million votes cast and 99% of the expected vote counted.
They're doing a full hand recount.
That's really good news for Trump.
Because, and Trump supporters.
Now this is where I say, we don't need to talk about these mathematical manipulations, these conspiracy things.
I tell you this, if they exist, this is how you find them.
Not by alleging a grand conspiracy, but by straight up saying, we had a glitch, we had an improper result, we call for a recount, and we want a full audit.
The audit is where Trump will find success if there's fraud, and the courts is where Trump will find success if there was impropriety.
My opinion, as I've stated 50 billion times, and to which many, I guess, you know, diehard Trump supporters are upset with, is that I think we are inching closer and closer to a Joe Biden presidency.
I'm not happy about it.
I think Joe Biden's awful.
He's already stacking up his transition team with lobbyists and corporate interests.
Surprise, surprise.
He's going to undo executive orders that Trump made that were good, and he's probably going to get us back involved in the Middle East in no time.
So yeah, not happy.
But Trump is fighting a massively uphill battle.
In fact, I'll tell you this.
Trump is on an inverted mountainside, climbing.
Climbing his way up.
Can he do it?
Let me tell you.
You count Donald Trump out, you will regret it, because Trump is a fighter, he doesn't give up, and it's clear based on what we're seeing.
The media will tell you, oh, Trump's real plan is to start a news network.
They said it last time.
Trump never wanted to win anyway.
I'm telling you, the guy is fighting this.
And he's got a path.
John Yoo didn't say he's going to lose.
He said they're Hail Marys.
Well, many of you probably watch football.
You see a Hail Mary pass.
Make it.
You've seen it.
You say, wow, I can't believe he pulled that one off.
It may be Trump this time.
We'll see how things play out.
But let me remind you.
Donald Trump appointed Amy Coney Barrett and Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court, two people who helped advise the Bush campaign during Bush v. Gore.
And John Roberts, also on the Supreme Court, did as well.
And then three years later, Roberts got a federal appointment.
Two years after that, Roberts was appointed Chief Justice by George W. Bush.
I'm not saying politics is clean and honest.
I'm saying they're all playing games.
They're all fighting for power.
And Donald Trump's not going to walk away from this.
And he may have lined up his chips, his pieces on the board, so that just when you think you've won, he makes that move and you go, wait a minute, I didn't see that.
How did you?
That's right.
Take it seriously.
As much as I can say over and over again, I think it's going to be a Joe Biden presidency and the media is calling him president elect.
It's not over.
It's not by a long shot.
We'll see how things play out.
But Trump has already got one legal victory in Pennsylvania, many more defeats.
I don't know what's going to happen.
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.
A new federal lawsuit seeks to throw out 1.2 million ballots in Michigan, flipping the state to Donald Trump.
And I don't think it's going to happen.
I think all of these legal plays are extreme long shots.
As The Atlantic put it, Trump needs three Hail Mary passes to land in succession in order to flip the results of the election.
But what I love is that the media is slowly coming around to, hey, wait a minute, maybe Donald Trump actually is trying And maybe there's actually a way for him to pull this off.
First and foremost...
We have two disparate realities, as I've talked about, you know, quite a bit.
The mainstream media, for the most part, is running this narrative, Trump lost, we know he lost, Biden is president-elect, even though the actual constitutional process as to how we determine the winner has not been, is not anywhere near completed.
We're going into several recounts, and that could take until, I think they have until the 20th, and I think this is Georgia, otherwise they're not gonna have a certified result.
And that may be a legal path to victory.
So sure, a lot of these outlets are saying that privately Donald Trump knows he's not really trying to win.
I got this one tweet where it's like, Trump says it's all theater.
Oh, I'm sorry.
Trump is very aware there is not a path to victory, but he believes the 72 million who voted for him deserve a fight.
So he's battling as a form of theater for them, a top White House aide tells me.
You know what I think is really funny?
When it comes to what the media says about Trump and their anonymous sources, Trump is actually just playing everybody, trying to raise money to pay off his debt, has no intention of staying.
And then when you actually look at what Trump is doing, you're like, uh, this dude has no intention of leaving.
So why are we getting this narrative from the mainstream press?
I honestly don't know.
Trying to convince people that it's over and Trump can't win?
Maybe trying to erode his base of support?
Maybe Donald Trump really is privately saying, I'm just going to dupe all these people for all they're worth and take their money to pay off my debt.
Perhaps.
Perhaps not.
I don't know.
I'll tell you this.
I don't immediately just trust the press.
I think perhaps there's some potential veracity to the claims they're making that Trump knows he's lost, but he wants to just give everyone a good performative fight.
Because I've actually talked to some high profile Trump supporters who said, I don't think Trump can win at this point, but I want to see him try.
Sure.
Maybe that's what it's all about.
You take a look at what's going on at the Pentagon, though.
Donald Trump fired Mark Esper and several other high-ranking officials in Pentagon leadership.
And it doesn't sound like somebody who is putting on a performance to try and win.
You know what I mean?
Like, what I'm saying is, When you talk about Donald Trump saying, we're going to sue and we're going to fight, we're going to raise money, that's about the election.
OK, maybe you can argue Trump is just trying to make it seem like he's refusing to give up.
You look at the Pentagon, you're like, that has nothing to do with the election.
He's just getting rid of this leadership.
And then he hired people who are, let's put it this way, big fans of the president.
I don't know what that means, but the media is calling this, they're saying that Trump may be gearing up for a coup.
I'm not exaggerating.
It's this ridiculous.
Can Trump actually stage a coup and stay in office for a second term?
This is where the narrative is going.
And perhaps.
They're going here because the media has finally started to realize that Trump does have a path to victory.
If Donald Trump does find a legal victory here and ends up being certified as the president, they'll need to say, it was a coup!
Okay.
Well, they're already doing it.
Check out this tweet from Glenn Greenwald.
This woman, Alice from Queens, said, it's not a coup attempt by any normal definition of the word.
It's a pathetic legal effort that will fail, combined with disinformation effort that will accomplish certain goals for Trump but not secure him a second term.
Trying to make it seem like what Trump is doing is a coup, saying, this was a response to another tweet, the coup attempt happening in plain sight probably won't work is an accurate take.
Also incredibly depressing that that's where we're at.
Glenn Greenwald's response to this, if you file lawsuits in a duly constituted court
asserting legal rights to contest a certified election outcome, that isn't remotely close to
a coup. And anyone using that word is reckless. It'd be a coup if he refused to leave power after
his legal resource was exhausted. Yes. In which case, OK, if Trump loses in court and the Electoral
College is certified for Joe Biden, Joe Biden is announced the certified winner. Everybody agrees.
The constitutional process happens. And Trump says, no. OK, then you can call it a coup.
But I got to be honest, at that point, if Trump has exhausted all of his legal means and he's sitting in the White House on January 19th like, I'm not leaving.
I wouldn't even call it a coup, because if we all agree on the constitutional process and lawsuits, I doubt there's going to be anyone who would take Trump seriously and he, as the left wants to believe, would be escorted off the property.
I don't think that is what will happen.
Now, to be completely fair, I do think it's worth noting that in removing the top Pentagon leadership, there is some questions about counting heads.
And you may have heard me talk about this before.
We talked about it last night in the IRL podcast.
Counting heads is the phase in a coup or civil war when two opposing factions start figuring out which departments and which people are loyal to them.
So Trump getting rid of top Pentagon leadership In this, what is traditionally a lamed-up period, has a lot of people wondering why he would do that.
In the event of some kind of actual coup, he's going to have Pentagon leadership in his corner.
I'm not suggesting it's in any way likely, but many people are asking the question of why he did it.
Perhaps it's because Trump just wanted to fire these people.
He didn't get re-elected, so now's the best time to do it.
Okay, well, you know, Joe Biden's on track to win, so we'll just fire these people.
Maybe Donald Trump is aware these victories aren't going to work, so maybe he should do what he needs to do before he leaves.
At any rate, I think it's kind of hilarious the media is acting like Donald Trump is not really trying.
You have these stories coming out.
Trump endorses McDaniel to remain RNC chair, ponders 2024 run.
Lots of framing coming from people close to Trump, people who know Trump and sources.
Who are saying Trump is actually going to run in 2014.
Oh, look at this.
A source familiar with internal discussions.
My friends, what Donald Trump is doing is very, very different from what the media is claiming someone told them he is doing.
You understand?
I don't think Trump is prepared to lose.
Dan Scavino just tweeted out a video from, I think it was Jimmy Kimmel, where he says, how would your co-workers describe you?
And Donald Trump says, as someone who would never give up, we will never, never give up.
Which brings me to the main story, which forgive me for not jumping into immediately.
It's not just Trump.
This federal lawsuit to throw out these votes is coming from voters, citing numerous instances of fraud and irregularity.
I don't think the lawsuit will work.
But it's not just these voters doing it.
Donald Trump is actually filing lawsuits as well.
And it's shocking to me that the left is ignoring the very real and serious legal challenges that Trump has.
The 14th Amendment.
So you've got districts, you've got counties that the Trump administration has pointed out did not allow for meaningful access where others did.
They're going after unequal treatment of ballots, and the media is just acting like it's all about fraud.
But there's no evidence of fraud.
There is, but it's not the point.
Trump's lawsuits are about process, and they're ignoring it.
Perhaps these lawsuits will fizzle out and go nowhere, but let's see what's going on.
Michigan Live says, four voters filed a federal lawsuit seeking to exclude presidential election results from three Michigan counties due to allegations of fraud, echoing several other legal challenges brought forward since Trump refused to concede defeat.
I do want to point out, Trump doesn't need to concede.
The constitutional process has not been completed.
We're just used to people conceding because They didn't think they had a path to victory and didn't want to waste any time and money and would rather focus on re-election or another election campaign or perhaps Congress or something.
You could admit Romney.
And he loses by millions of votes.
There's no challenge here.
Trump lost by millions of votes in the popular vote.
But in key swing states, it's thin margins.
Trump said, we're going to go through the absolute constitutional process, and he could actually win.
They keep trying to say Trump can't do it, and that's the most ridiculous lie ever.
I'm not saying it's likely Trump pulls it off, but I'm saying he's got some decent arguments, and now we have to go to state certification, and if the state can't certify, nobody wins.
So in Georgia, they ordered a full hand recount.
Hand!
Many people are pointing out this is going to take forever.
It's gonna take forever!
And they gotta get it done before the 20th, which is the deadline.
Georgia might not be certified.
In which case, there's no electoral votes for anybody.
If no one gets 270 because several states are contested, Donald Trump will win in-house delegation votes.
Anyway, let's read.
They say, Trump earned 147,000 fewer votes than Joe Biden in Michigan, according to unofficial election results.
You see, unofficial.
Why would Donald Trump concede to unofficial results that are this close?
That's ridiculous.
The new lawsuit seeks to eliminate ballots cast in Wayne, Washtenaw, and Ingham counties, which would amount to 1.2 million votes, giving Trump the lead in Michigan.
Birmingham attorney Maxwell Goss and Indiana attorney James Bopp Jr.
are representing plaintiffs in the lawsuit.
Bopp serves as a campaign advisor to Trump.
He was an Indiana delegate for Trump in 2016 and served as a legal advisor for George W. Bush and Mitt Romney.
The lawsuit filed in U.S.
District Court for the Western District of Michigan cites an assortment of allegations made by the Trump campaign, Republican National Committee Chair Ronna McDaniel, right-wing media organizations, and ongoing lawsuits filed since the election.
Plaintiffs also cite ongoing investigations launched by the Michigan legislature and a variety of other claims that have been debunked.
The allegations include charges of Republican ballot challengers being harassed and illegal tampering with ballots.
When they say debunked, that doesn't mean anything.
What you need to understand is that in court, they don't debunk, they just deny.
Debunk is a media term meaning that journalists have determined it's not true.
It doesn't matter what the journalists think.
If the court rejects it or throws it out, that's what matters.
They say, Plaintiffs conclude that the evidence suffices to place in doubt the November 3rd presidential election results in identified counties and or the state as a whole.
However, the group of voters also claims to have additional evidence of illegal ballots being included in unofficial results based on expert reports and data analysis.
Quote, upon information and belief, the expert report will identify persons who cast votes illegally by casting multiple ballots.
One, immaterial.
I'll get back to this.
Were deceased, immaterial.
Had moved, that's not immaterial.
Or were otherwise not qualified to vote.
Also, so those last two are material.
In the November 3rd presidential election.
Along with evidence of illegal ballot stuffing, material, harvesting, material, and other illegal voting.
Okay.
The reason why I said people casting multiple ballots is immaterial or were deceased, While those could matter to a certain degree, they likely will not be enough to actually swing Michigan or justify a recount of some sort.
You would need to pull up records of thousands of people who are listed as dead who have voted.
Now some people claim to have that.
So perhaps that could lead to some kind of actual Maybe it's wrong to say immaterial, but it will spark potentially an investigation.
What I'm trying to say is, if you've got evidence that people moved, which is very easy to prove, then we're talking about total realm of normalcy.
We're not talking about... Look, looking up the voter rolls, To track down, like, a dead voter, we have those accusations.
So that's important.
But when you have someone who moved, you can easily just say, that guy doesn't live here.
Like, look at him!
He's in Arizona!
He voted in Michigan, he didn't live here!
That's easy.
Pulling up records for dead voters is difficult.
You have to contact the voter.
With the moving thing, it's a much... Actually, I'll put it this way.
Maybe saying multiple ballots and deceased is immaterial is wrong.
And what I should say is it's the next tier.
The first I'm going to do is take a look at the very, very easy and obvious claims.
Did they move or were they not qualified to vote?
Was there ballot stuffing or harvesting?
These are things that in the immediate can show us a larger impact.
When it comes to deceased voters, You have to prove what?
146,000 or several thousand?
It's much more difficult.
Important to call out nonetheless.
So I'm not saying they shouldn't have it in their lawsuit.
I'm just saying what we need to focus on right now is the easy and obvious.
Cross-referencing change of address databases.
And, I gotta admit, even investigating ballot harvesting is going to be very, very difficult.
Because mail-in voting destroyed the chain of custody.
We don't know where the ballots came from, where they were mailed from.
We probably know which mailboxes they went through, but we don't know who put them there unless we have cameras on all the mailboxes, which maybe we do.
So we'll have to investigate.
But moving and not being qualified are very, very easy to check first.
Anyway, I digress.
At least one of several other Michigan lawsuits making similar allegations has been thrown out for lack of evidence and other flaws.
And that's the big issue.
Lack of evidence.
It's very, very difficult.
If you can pull up a list of change of address databases and say, these people voted in this county, but actually live in this county, that could matter.
You could say, these people voted in Michigan, but moved to Ohio.
Now that really matters, and that's easy to prove, and we've already got reports that people are making this effort.
That Trump supporters, and people interested I suppose, are doing massive database cross-references of people who have changed their address and, you know, ballot submissions.
They say Oakland County residents Lena Bally and Gavriel Grossbard, Eaton County resident Carol Hatch and Jackson County resident Stephen Butler are listed as plaintiffs.
They go on to mention Gretchen Whitmer and the Board of Canvassers, yada yada.
Plaintiffs are seeking to exclude votes from Wayne, Washtenaw, and Ingham counties.
They argue that including results from counties where sufficient illegal ballots were included would unconstitutionally cause legal votes to be diluted.
Biden earned $838,425 from the three counties according to unofficial results, while Trump earned $398,000.
It would negate $1.2 million, giving Trump the swing of $293,000.
I personally do not see this one working.
But what does it mean to work?
Most people would probably say, is the lawsuit going to pass?
However, we could be looking at lawfare strategies.
Lawfare is typically described as using the court system as the actual means of attack.
So, if these people are filing a lawsuit, and a judge actually says, you know what, this thing about people who have moved, that's a real argument.
And they got me a list of people who have moved, That's interesting.
And even a list of some people who have died.
We're gonna have to hold off on certifying until we can investigate this.
But the deadline for federal certification is December 8th.
So right now they have just shy of a month.
If the Donald Trump campaign, they don't even need to win the lawsuits.
If they can freeze up these states until then, no certification, no electoral votes, no Joe Biden victory.
I can already hear the left screaming, Tim, you're talking about Trump freezing legitimate votes and stopping legitimate people from voting.
If Donald Trump uses a lawfare victory, he will actually jam up states and all of its legal voters in this path.
There's several other paths I haven't even talked about yet.
I've talked about in other videos.
But if there are also fraudulent votes and the courts see this evidence and it freezes things, well then blame the people who committed the fraud or the crime or the impropriety.
You have people in Pennsylvania.
You had Pennsylvania violate a court order.
This is Trump's lawsuit, his argument.
They violated a court order where they said observers had to be within six feet.
Okay, well blame those people for violating a court order.
Now they might get everyone's ballot thrown out because Pennsylvania might not get certified in time.
Look.
I want to show you this.
West Virginia Governor Jim Justice doesn't acknowledge Joe Biden as election winner.
Right.
Conservatives, and not even every conservative, even some liberals, you got people like Glenn Greenwald and Maajid Nawaz saying, we're going to let this go through the constitutional process.
Just because you're used to the media calling a winner doesn't mean that's what happened.
And I got to tell you, it's really freaky that we have a contested election, And Joe Biden is already meeting with foreign leaders, seemingly in violation of the Logan Act.
As if anyone's ever been prosecuted under it.
But they went after people, didn't they?
Michael Flynn?
Got him for lying.
That's ridiculous.
Joe Biden has no right to be doing what he's doing in a contested election.
And what Joe Biden is doing could be undermining national security, because Trump is still president, and the election is still contested.
Just because Joe Biden leads in several states as of right now, before any certification has been done, doesn't mean he will win.
I believe it is extremely likely, and beyond a reasonable doubt, Joe Biden will.
But it doesn't matter.
The media doesn't dictate.
The constitutional process does.
Which brings me to Trump needs three consecutive Hail Mary passes.
The president's litigation strategy is unlikely to succeed.
But it's doing great harm in the meantime.
Is it?
Just because you're used to this uniparty Republican-Democrat high-fiving each other and bowing out of the race doesn't mean that's the way elections are supposed to be.
We had presidents, we had one guy who shot another guy, Alexander Hamilton.
He died.
Yeah, because these people were not happy with each other.
It was not going to just go down as a, well, you won, good sir, here's a handshake and I'll walk on by.
No, these people were like, good sir, I will kill you!
That's how serious elections were way back when.
And just because we've had this, you know, tradition of, well, the media said I lost and I'm just going to bow out, doesn't mean that in a contested election Trump should do that.
And that means that when we're going through how we actually determine the winner, constitutional process.
Joe Biden is not president-elect.
You could argue that he is in the sense that he's projected by the media, but the media doesn't dictate and we have a contested election.
I believe Joe Biden will likely end up being the president.
I know a lot of Trump supporters don't like hearing it.
I think most Trump supporters recognize there's a legal battle.
It's a long shot.
We'll see what happens.
But there are Trump's diehards who are upset, demanding that I must reject the results of the election.
I'm not playing these games.
I entertained the stupid Russiagate nonsense, and that was a huge waste of time.
And I actually think we have legitimate evidence of fraud, in which case it should be investigated.
And then in the end, I think The likelihood that Trump pulls off what they call three Hail Mary passes is not likely.
Look, they've called Arizona for Biden now.
I think, actually, I have the Wall Street Journal right here.
Is this the correct one?
No, that's the Karl Rove one.
So here we go.
Wall Street Journal election results has called Arizona now for Joe Biden, putting him at 290.
Which means, with Georgia now leaning for Joe Biden by 14,000 or so votes, If Georgia goes Joe Biden, Trump would need to overturn the results or freeze three states.
He could do it.
I warn you leftists, he could do it.
If Trump succeeds in a 14th Amendment argument citing Bush v. Gore pertaining to mail-in ballots, then he might actually be able to freeze more than just three states.
He could throw the whole election into question.
Will that happen?
Honestly, I don't know.
But let me just say, Amy Coney Barrett, Brett Kavanaugh, and Chief Justice Roberts all worked on Bush's side of Bush v. Gore.
I don't know what that means, but isn't it funny that Trump appointed Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett, huh?
I find that very interesting.
Over at The Atlantic, they say, Despite the clear math showing that Joe Biden has won the election, Donald Trump has refused to concede.
He has directed his legal team to keep on fighting to try and overturn the results of the election, including a new 105-page federal court filing in Pennsylvania.
These legal maneuvers are unlikely to pay off in the form of a second term for Trump.
He would need the equivalent of three consecutive Hail Mary passes to stay in office.
It could happen.
Also, I asked a lawyer about it, and they said Trump's argument under Bush v. Gore, 5% chance of success.
Like, slim.
But I'm like, that's 1 in 20!
Like, that's not bad!
We're not talking about a lottery ticket here.
We're talking about Trump defying the odds again.
Maybe he will.
They say, but what Trump and his legal team are doing can nevertheless cause real harm to the country going forward.
Should millions of people believe Trump's false statements that Biden won the election through fraud, that's not what the lawsuit said.
Did they even read the lawsuit?
Apparently they didn't.
It is this near certainty, and not the long-shot possibility of Trump staying in office, that is reason for grave concern.
They say the state of play can be described as follows.
Biden appears very likely to win 306 electoral votes, 36 more than he needs for the presidency.
It's a comfortable lead.
Recounts in even the closest states where the candidate are 10,000 to 20,000 votes apart are extremely unlikely to change any of these vote totals, for sure.
The lawsuit filed in Pennsylvania and elsewhere are highly unlikely to go anywhere.
The most recent complaint filed in federal court in Pennsylvania amounts to virtually nothing.
Its core idea, that the different procedures by voting by mail and voting in person constitute an equal protection violation, is ludicrous.
Okay, thank you for actually pointing it out.
First, the differences between mail-in and absentee voting were obvious for months, and nothing prevented the Trump campaign from suing earlier over this.
A late suit now is barred by a legal doctrine called laches, which says that you cannot simply wait until after an election you don't win to sue over an election problem you could see beforehand.
Perhaps.
The problem, however, is that Donald Trump did sue in Pennsylvania over the deadline extension beforehand, and they said, we won't rule on this until afterwards.
They said, segregate the ballots, and we'll come back to this.
Potentially, that could be the argument Trump has, that we tried suing over the various processes, and we were told we had to wait.
Now again, long shot, don't think it's likely.
Plus, I'm not a lawyer.
But I did ask one, and they said, Around 5% chance, maybe?
Take a look at who the judges are, though.
Further, having different procedures for mail-in and person balloting does not create an equal protection violation.
This is just the opinion of a professor of law, Richard Alhassen, and that's fine, but it's going to come down to the opinion of the Supreme Court justices.
I can respect his opinion, however.
He's the expert, not me.
He says, if this claim succeeds, it would mean that voting was unconstitutional across the entire country.
Yes.
The claim is especially weak when voters had the choice to vote using either system.
The other claims in the complaint are mostly retreads of issues that have been rejected legally, factually, or both in other lawsuits.
There has been no proof of widespread fraud.
However, one of Trump's arguments is that in some counties they allowed for curing.
And in some counties, they didn't.
That is probably a decent argument for equal protections violations.
Anyway, look, I do think it's a long shot.
But the point is, people are suing.
There's new lawsuits emerging.
And I think it is fair to say Donald Trump is serious that he's going to exhaust every possible measure to try and win.
But just because one professor says it so, doesn't mean it is.
It does mean, however, his opinion way better than mine, and he knows way better than I do.
And in all likelihood, this is why I believe Joe Biden will end up becoming president-elect when all certification is said and done.
But Trump isn't just bowing out.
And we don't know how the Supreme Court would actually rule on this.
It's hard to know for sure.
He does make a good point.
If Trump succeeds on the equal protection violation of our mail-in voting, It could negate every state that did this.
Mail-in voting for the most part.
However, if Donald Trump wins on the fact that some counties allowed curing and others didn't, it wouldn't negate all votes.
It would simply say, you can't give preferential treatment to some voters in some districts.
I think the Supreme Court might agree with that.
I guess we can only sit back and see, but I'll tell you this, it ain't over.
Whatever you want to believe, certification happens in the states in the next coming days and weeks, and then Electoral College votes on the 14th.
We'll see how it plays out.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 1 p.m.
on this channel.
Thanks for hanging out, and I will see you all then.
While the legal battle continues over the office of the presidency, we're getting a glimpse of what Joe Biden would like to bring about.
One of his advisors said, we need a nationwide lockdown.
That's right, COVID cases are getting worse, and the news is fairly obvious.
New York is shutting down.
New Jersey is shutting down, to varying degrees, mind you.
Phase 1 lockdowns as the infection rate is skyrocketing.
Joe Biden's advisor, of course, saying, we need to shut the whole country down.
And we're also getting a glimpse of the post-pandemic reality.
Ticketmaster's post-pandemic plans include checking vaccination status of concertgoers.
That's right.
Your ticket will let them know if you have received the vaccine.
It's kind of creepy, isn't it?
But more importantly, I think it's going to be devastating to the economy.
It's going to result in a lot more suicides and depression, mental health issues.
And ultimately, we're going to see economic devastation and potentially starvation.
But that's what you get with the Joe Biden presidency, which we may be on track to receive.
I don't know exactly what the appropriate argument is at this point.
And what I mean by this is, Some would say Trump must win at all costs to avoid the complete destruction of our economy.
Some will probably say that Joe Biden must win to lock everything down to save lives.
I think the lockdown is wrong.
Donald Trump is certainly fighting tooth and nail to win.
And if Donald Trump does actually end up winning the presidency, though it's considered to be a long shot, we probably will avoid the worst of the worst.
But mind you, Donald Trump did not lock this country down in the first place.
The Democratic governors did.
So even if Trump does become president by, you know, some long-shot legal tactic, we're still going to get lockdowns.
They're already happening.
It's going to be, in my opinion, substantially worse relative to what we saw earlier this year.
Because when you look at the numbers in Europe, they're saying it's worse than it was the first time around.
And now they're saying it's going to be worse here than it was the first time around.
Here's the story from the Daily Mail.
Biden's COVID chief says the US should go into a total national lockdown for six weeks to avoid virus hell, and the federal government can borrow to pay workers while the country is shut down.
Oh, can they?
Our massive deficit?
I'm not going to pretend that Donald Trump did a good job on that.
No, we've been Generating a massive deficit and a massive national debt.
So sure, let's just keep doing that and see how long it takes until our economy completely collapses.
Is that the plan?
Apparently it is.
I hear from lefties so often, let's just give everyone money during the pandemic!
Because that works so well for Venezuela, for instance.
Yeah, we see what happens when they just print out money and give it to people or borrow.
It doesn't work.
They say a coronavirus advisor to President-elect Joe Biden believes that shutting down businesses nationally for between four to six weeks could help the U.S.
from entering COVID hell.
Dr. Michael Osterholm said Wednesday that a national lockdown may be the best way to keep hospitalizations and deaths down across the country until a vaccine can be distributed.
He claims the country's economy will not suffer as a result.
Won't?
Yet?
Well, if enough money is borrowed to pay wages during the shutdowns, talk about stupidity!
It's really, really frustrating, isn't it?
I know!
If no one is working, let's just borrow money to give to people so they can get the things they need, which actually come from other people who are working.
Apparently these people don't understand basic economics.
If nobody is working, there's nothing to buy.
Get it?
A guy has a farm.
On his farm, he gets milk from cows.
That's working.
You want to shut everything down nationwide.
We saw what happened last time.
These dairy farms had to dump all of their milk out, because it doesn't just go from cow to store, it goes from cow to processing, to bottling, etc., to warehouse, to distribution.
You shut all that down.
You know what happens?
Then there's no milk.
And then you give people green pieces of paper and they're like, I wonder what I can do with this!
But there's no milk!
So what do they buy?
Nothing.
Man, I remember when the lockdown hit the first time.
You remember this?
You remember what it was like going to those stores?
And I went to the milk section.
Nothing!
Not even almond milk or soy milk.
I think they had, like, almond creamer, which I was lucky enough to get, because I'll take it.
I'll take the cream for my coffee.
But there wasn't... there was... it was dramatically limited.
Because it's not just about what's being produced.
It's about the fact that work is everything.
You can't shut the country down, nationwide, and then say, we'll give people money.
I tell you this, man.
You've got these really, really dumb leftists who are just like, why can't we just give people money?
That'll work.
If you have no goods and no services, what good is your money?
What are you going to do with it?
You're going to eat it?
You can't eat it.
You're going to take your debit card and go to the store and be like, I'll buy nothing because there's nothing here.
Or if the stores are shut down, you can't do anything with it.
Ah, but it'll allow people to pay their rent.
Oh, that's great.
I'm sure landlords are going to be like, I would love to take money I can't do anything with.
Now, I get it.
To a certain extent, there's got to be some money within the system.
But ultimately, this will just be mass devastation to our economy.
And they know it.
And they're lying about it.
There's been UN scientists already saying, we cannot do this again.
It needs to be a last resort.
We are not there yet.
We need to protect the vulnerable.
We need some measure of level of lockdown, for sure.
But that's for the most part for the elderly and the vulnerable.
Young people, who are not particularly susceptible to this, should be allowed to carry on and allow the economy to keep functioning.
They're not going to do that, though.
They don't care.
They don't want to take responsibility.
And Sleepy Creepy Joe is going to be terrified that they're going to call him out like they called out Trump.
And so he'll say, shut the whole thing down!
Burn it to the ground!
Figuratively, of course.
They say, Osterholm, the director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota, is one of the public health experts that the Biden transition team has appointed to its advisory panel.
Biden says, the advisory board will help shape my approach to managing the surge in reported infections.
It comes as the U.S.
on Wednesday recorded the highest number of daily COVID-19 deaths in six months, and infections and hospitalizations continue to spike to record highs across the country.
The death toll spiked to 1,893 on Wednesday, which is the highest number of fatalities since May 8th during the initial peak of the outbreak.
It puts the seven-day rolling average of fatalities back over 1,000 per day, a figure not seen since August.
Isn't it really interesting how we just had this period?
It wasn't the heat, and it's certainly not the cold.
But just around October, it goes down.
Okay, okay, let's ease things up.
We'll reopen.
Don't forget to go vote!
Now, oh no, it's coming back again!
I'm not alleging a conspiracy.
I'm saying, isn't it convenient?
You can't even point these things out to leftists without them saying, haha, you're a conspiracy theorist!
I'm not a part of your cult, dude.
I can point out it's kind of funny.
And people can think whatever they want to think.
That's exactly what they do.
A week after the election, just this past week, this past Monday, they announced Pfizer said their COVID vaccine was 90% effective.
And I said, perfect timing.
And what does the left say?
Conspiracy theorist much?
Dude, I'm pointing out that if this news came out before the election, it would have helped Trump.
You guys are trapped in tribal bubble world.
These people, man, I tell you what.
And so they come out, just print more money.
Yes, that will solve the problem of not having goods and services.
I hope y'all have prepared for this because Joe Biden has promised a dark winter.
Or I shouldn't say he promised it, but he said a dark winter is coming or whatever.
They're going to lock everything down.
The governors are going to lock things down.
Joe Biden's going to inherit this and say it's Trump's fault.
And then when the economy never recovers, it was Trump's fault because of COVID.
Take a look at this from Bloomberg.
Trump's economy really was better than Obama's, at least until the pandemic.
The president's unconventional policy got unprecedented results.
October 30th, 2020.
That's right.
So when Joe Biden inherits a broken and fractured economy, he can just say, well, it's Trump's fault for not solving COVID.
It's not my fault the economy is damaged.
Then they're going to say now they've already got this story from the Washington Post saying the easy lifting is done.
Now the economy will stagnate.
Uh-huh.
This is their excuse for when Joe Biden comes in and reverses Trump policy, increases corporate tax rate, enters into these free trade agreements, and then we see factories move overseas, he's going to say, well, the real reason that the economy is bad is because of Trump and COVID and we had to lock everything down.
It's not our fault.
It is your fault, dude.
It will be your fault.
Trump's economy was better than Obama's, and anybody paying attention knows.
They say, despite Osterholm's calls for a national lockdown, Dr. Anthony Fauci says he wants to avoid that because there is no appetite for locking down the American public.
He has insisted that a national lockdown doesn't need to happen if people adhere to public health measures like mask wearing and hand washing.
Well, forgive me if I don't take Dr. Fauci's word for it, because he was the guy who very early on said, don't wear a mask.
He was wrong about that.
And the guy who said Donald Trump was doing the best possible job.
I couldn't imagine anyone doing anything better.
So if you think Donald Trump did a bad job, Fauci was wrong.
If you think he should wear a mask, Fauci was wrong.
He's allowed to be wrong.
That's right.
But you can't say Donald Trump was doing the best possible job and in hindsight say, well, maybe he could have done better.
That's not fair.
You should have advised him.
But welcome to the politicking of a disaster.
Joe Biden is on track to become president.
We'll see how it plays out with the courts and Trump's legal challenges.
And we got some news.
I got another segment on Trump's challenges.
We'll see how this plays out.
But it does seem like a long shot.
A lot of people need to understand one thing.
I'm not talking about this.
There's a few layers to the Donald Trump election challenge.
The first is, are his arguments sound?
And he's got some good arguments.
I've seen the article saying, those are ridiculous arguments.
I'll never work.
It's not up to you.
It's about the fact that the argument makes sense.
But will a court agree?
Okay, we'll see how that plays out.
That is the long shot.
But the issue then becomes, will the Supreme Court say, everyone sees Joe Biden as the winner, but we're going to change that?
You see, the Supreme Court would have to decide to be the catalyst for some massive upheaval or civil unrest.
Now, I believe we have a six to three court Five to four, if you don't count Roberts, that probably will say, the law of the land must be upheld no matter what the consequences are.
We must uphold the rule of law.
Because the consequences for not would be worse.
In which case we end up with mass civil unrest or something.
So then you've got to consider that.
They might say, I don't want to be the person that sparks this chaos.
But ultimately, it comes down to, is Joe Biden just going to roll over and watch it all happen?
Is the ACLU or the left?
Will it really be as simple as Trump files a legal challenge, they agree with him, and then Trump is appointed?
Or is Joe Biden going to go insane and the left will go and burn everything down?
It's not going to be so simple.
So I don't know what's going to happen.
That's why I say it looks likely, based on preliminary projections, Joe Biden victory.
We'll see what Trump can pull off.
I believe if Trump does somehow end up getting a second term through these legal challenges, we will avoid the worst of this.
It'll be a second term.
Trump's not going to play any of these games, but the Democratic governors probably will lock everything down.
They'll then blame Trump for it, no matter what happens.
No matter what happens.
Take a look at this chart.
They say, number of new U.S.
infections per day.
It's higher than it's ever been in the U.S.
per day.
They are going to lock us down worse than we've been, and it seems like the lockdowns didn't do anything in the first place.
We locked down for, what, seven months or whatever, and we still saw massive spikes?
Now you want to lock down again?
It's not going to change anything.
You take a look at Sweden, and they didn't lock down.
I got friends over there, and they're like, everything's normal.
Everything's normal?
Like, yeah, some people get sick, but, you know, it's alright.
We're carrying on as normal?
That's ridiculous to me.
It seems that maybe the lockdowns are actually backfiring.
But these pathetic and terrified politicians don't want to accept responsibility that sometimes a natural disaster happens.
So what do they do?
Make excuses, burn it all down, and say, it wasn't my fault, it was the pandemic.
Now we can see, even though the cases are skyrocketing, the number of deaths, not so much.
I mean, it's going up, for sure.
You can see the little blue line, we're seeing a spike.
But it's not a skyrocket the way cases are.
Number of new infections per day.
Could it be a tabulation issue?
Could it be better testing?
Well, Donald Trump said that the more we test, the more cases we get.
If people are mildly ill and don't care and don't get tested, the number of infections stays the same.
But if people are now are, you know, uppity, worried, anxious, and testing is easily available, then the number of cases will skyrocket.
It's the number of deaths we should be concerned about.
I don't believe we should institute a nationwide lockdown when the number of coronavirus deaths is substantially lower than where it was when we first initiated the lockdown.
And it didn't seem to do anything anyway.
We still saw the spike.
Now, to his credit, Fauci is saying, no lockdown.
He says, we would like to stay away from that because there's no appetite for locking down the American public.
I believe we can do it without a lockdown.
You don't necessarily have to shut everything down.
The best opposite strategy to locking down is to intensify the public health measures short of locking down.
If you can do that well, you don't have to take that step, which has so many implications both psychologically and economically.
Help is on the way.
Vaccines are going to have a major positive impact.
It comes as New York Governor Andrew Cuomo on Wednesday began pulling back opening hours of bars, ordering them to close at 10 p.m.
daily.
New Jersey is doing the same thing.
Osterholm, however, believes that a more stringent national lockdown is needed, with uniform restrictions taken in each of the states if the rise in cases is to be combated.
He told Yahoo News that cases are rising as more people are being forced indoors due to the cold weather, where the virus can spread more easily.
He also suggested that people are suffering from pandemic fatigue and are growing tired
of wearing masks and social distancing. We could pay for a package right now to cover
all of the wages, lost wages, for individual workers, for losses to small companies,
to medium-sized companies or city, state, county governments. We could do all of that, he said.
If we did that, then we could lock down for four to six weeks.
You see, this is the problem with letting scientists lead the charge.
They're not economists.
They don't know how production works.
They don't know how manufacturing, shipping, bottling, etc.
They don't know how any of that works.
They're just like, just give people money and we'll be okay!
How about this?
How about we take what Dr. Osterholm is saying, we sit him down with some economists, and they come up with a compromise.
The best way to minimize deaths from the virus, and the best way to minimize deaths from economic despair and disaster.
You're probably going to need psychological doctors, mental health professionals, to talk about how people have been committing suicide in larger numbers because of the lockdown.
But just taking these doctors, these scientists, and saying, they should just tell us what to do.
It's probably one of the most absurd statements I've heard in a long time.
And it's so funny when you see these politicians and Democrats say, we believe in science!
It's become almost a meaningless bit of drivel.
It's not about just science.
We believe in science, yes, because science helps us develop new technologies and progress and live more comfortably, increase our standard of living.
But we also listen to policy experts and economic experts to make sure the machine is working.
The way I see it is like this.
Imagine your car broke down.
I'm trying to figure out what's wrong with it.
And you say, well, we think there's something inherently wrong with, you know, the fuel that went into it.
So you talk to a petroleum engineer and he says, here's my solution.
We're going to make this, you know, we're going to put this in there.
And you're like, well, the engine's not turning over.
Maybe we should also talk with some, you know, a mechanic.
Someone who can look at it and say, here's how the machine works.
No, no, no, just trust me, just put all this more fuel in it.
It's not going to fix your engine.
Okay?
You need to make sure you're getting a balanced approach, and the people who know how the machine works are going to be there talking to you.
Just because you're having a problem with the fuel you're using, and the scientist is telling you how to improve it, doesn't mean it's going to make the car work anymore.
Our economy is a machine.
We see a transfer of goods and services.
That's what the economy is.
It's household management.
How do we get food production here to be shipped here?
And it's decentralized.
Shutting everything down and destroying our economy didn't work the first time.
And I'm not convinced it'll work again.
But these people who are... Look, this guy's an infectious disease expert.
How does he know how to solve the problem?
He knows how to deal with infectious disease.
I respect him for that.
But he doesn't know how to save the country during a crisis.
And certainly, Joe Biden and Kamala Harris don't either.
You can criticize Donald Trump all you want, but Donald Trump was willing to make the hard decisions.
We'll see how things play out.
But I'll tell you what's to come in our post-pandemic reality.
Did you get your shot?
Did you get your vaccine?
If you wanna go see a show, you gotta have your vaccine tag on your ticket.
I've been to many countries.
Some countries require vaccination cards.
That's true.
I think when I went to Venezuela.
Maybe I was wrong.
Maybe I'm wrong about that.
But before I went to Venezuela, I had to get a bunch of inoculations or whatever, vaccines.
It was funny.
I went to Egypt.
I didn't get anything.
And that's probably because Vice just doesn't need probably better experts consulting on that.
But anyway, I went to Egypt.
Didn't get any shots.
Came back.
I was planning on going to Venezuela.
And we did a security consultation and they said, you need a card saying you've been vaccinated for yellow fever.
And so we recommend also getting a bunch of other vaccinations as well.
And so I went to the doctor, I explained it, and he said, right on, we'll give you all the shots you need.
And then he was like, wait a minute, you went to Egypt without getting yellow fever?
Wow, you're brave, getting the yellow fever shot.
And I was like, I don't know, they just don't know what they're talking about.
So I can understand, when it comes to international treaties, why it's like, these diseases exist here, and they're very, very serious diseases.
Way more serious than COVID is.
But COVID is serious, don't get me wrong.
But it's somewhat unprecedented to mandate that people, on their tickets, show that they're vaccinated.
Now listen.
There's a very simple argument, and I'm gonna have to say, buttin' my private business here.
If a venue wants to make sure people have the COVID vaccine or have tested negative, I mean, that's their business.
It really is.
It's very different from, say, Facebook or Twitter, when we talk about buttin' my private business, because Facebook and Twitter have monopolized the space.
If there was only one place you could go for a public gathering, and they were mandating things of people, I'd make an argument that this is the commons.
Twitter and Facebook and YouTube, social media has become the commons where we have our political discussions, where you hear things, you know, from me, where I speak.
And thus, there's got to be some level of protection, so long as these companies own the space and there's no alternative spaces.
There's certainly, I would say, viable alternative spaces.
Certainly Parler is doing really, really well now.
A bunch of high-profile conservatives are moving over there.
This is just polarization that I think will ultimately lead to, you know, dangerous situations in our country.
Because now people, you know, we already have disparate realities.
Now you're going to have two platforms where no one will ever cross over.
It's hyper-polarization on steroids.
Anyway, the point is, if a venue says, or Ticketmaster says, we're not going to sell you a ticket unless we know for sure, because the venue has a right to make that decision.
Yeah, they do.
They do.
I just think it's creepy.
And I think we're headed towards an authoritarian, command economy, despotic system.
There was always going to be a reason.
I've said this before, but it bears repeating.
There was always going to be a reason.
When you read that novel, 1984, when you read Fahrenheit 451, when you read these dystopian sci-fi novels about a future with an authoritarian government, they don't just arbitrarily one day show up and say, we're in charge.
Right now, we are faced with a very serious crisis.
For one, we have a pandemic.
It's not the most serious disease we've ever faced, but it does have lingering health effects that affect around 20% of people or so.
The mortality rate's actually very, very low, but it is a bit worse than the flu.
I say a bit because I don't have the actual numbers, but it's worse.
It absolutely is.
It's not the flu.
It is worse.
The lingering health effects are kind of scary, to be honest.
People have lingering breathing problems.
So I can understand why we want to make sure we limit the spread, you know, and we do what we can.
The problem is lockdowns aren't the solution, and we know this.
We've done this.
It's failed.
We've been advised against doing it, and you have these zealots who are just saying, just do it again!
It didn't work the first time.
The UN doctor said don't do it again and you're saying do it again?
We got a failure of leadership here.
So this is a major crisis for this country.
It's the pandemic and now the potential economic shutdown all the while we have a contested election and hyperpolarization in this country.
I don't know what the solution is, but I tell you this, Joe Biden was the wrong choice.
And I was just talking to a friend the other day who said, maybe you're right, maybe Joe Biden was the wrong choice.
Naomi Wolf, the famous progressive leftist, said, if I had realized Joe Biden was for locking down, I would never have voted for him.
Maybe if y'all paid attention.
But you sold us out because you didn't like the orange man.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 4 p.m.
over at youtube.com slash timcast.
It is a different channel.
Thanks for hanging out, and I will see you all then.
As the legal battle for the presidency continues, ground zero in our political war is quickly becoming Georgia, where there's going to be two runoff elections to determine the senators from Georgia.
If Democrats win both, they will have 50 Senate seats tying the Senate, but giving the tiebreaker to the vice president.
If it ends up, and it seems very likely, to be Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, the Democrats will control everything.
They'll control the House, albeit they've lost a bit of their power there because Republicans are gaining a ton of seats.
They'll control the Senate and the presidency.
Now I understand.
The battle between Trump and Biden isn't completely over, but Trump is on the ropes.
He does have some legal paths to victory, as now noted by, say, Vox.com and The Atlantic, but they do think it's a long shot.
And I think it's fair, which means Republicans need to make sure they win Georgia runoff elections come January.
But here's where things get really creepy.
Democrats are urging voters to move to Georgia before the Senate runoff election.
Is it fraud?
Unclear how long a new arrival has to stay in the state without breaking voting laws.
At the very least, is that really what our elections are becoming?
Wealthy, well-to-do liberals saying, I'm going to move to a swing state so I can impact the election.
Sounds about right.
Right now, there are people urging voters to go and move to Georgia right now so that you can claim residency before the runoff election and thus give Democrats control of the Senate.
It's going to be two races, and they're very likely going to have the same result.
I mean, you're going to go and vote, and you're going to say Republican, Republican.
I really doubt people are going to be like, Republican, Democrat.
So either Republicans win, or the Democrats win.
The Republicans need only one seat, then they'll have 51.
The Democrats end up with 49, and the Republicans control the Senate.
But if it goes to a tie, like I said, the Vice President would be the tiebreaker.
If it turns out that Donald Trump is able to pull off a legal victory, I'm willing to bet Democrats will come out in such force in January, they will get these seats, but Donald Trump would then still have the power, or I should say Mike Pence would be the tiebreaker.
We shall see.
So far it's looking better for Democrats, although they didn't get the blue wave they really wanted.
Fox News reports, liberals urging voters to move to Georgia to vote in the January Senate runoff elections may want to think twice.
Moving to Georgia for a short time just to vote is against state law.
But how long a new arrival has to stay in the state without breaking the law is not clear, according to reports.
Governor Brian Kemp declined this week to get behind his fellow Republicans' push for a special session to tighten voting rules ahead of the runoff elections, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported.
I hope everybody moves to Georgia, you know.
In the next month or two.
Registers to vote and votes for these two Democratic senators, New York Times columnist Thomas L. Friedman told CNN on Monday night.
Quote, These runoffs will decide which party controls the Senate, and this, whether we'll have any hope of a large stimulus climate bill.
If you have the means and fervor to make a temporary move to Georgia, believe anyone who registers by December 7th can vote in these elections.
Intelligencers Eric Levitz wrote in a now-deleted tweet that was captured by Washington Examiner reporter Jerry Dunleavy.
The likely reason he deleted the tweet?
It's probably a solicitation to commit a crime.
And, uh, you probably don't want to do that.
Fox says such suggestions come as the battle for power in the Senate hinges on two runoff elections in Georgia, where the Republican incumbents are fighting to stay in office.
Quote, I've seen people saying they'll move to Georgia, but it's a lot more difficult than they think, Eddie Zipperer, assistant professor of political science at Georgia Military College told Fox News.
It would be very dangerous and ultimately, I presume, not worth it.
The deadline is December 7th.
You would have to set up a residence with your name on it, receive utility bills with your name on it, all just to get a Georgia license.
It would make more sense for people to donate to the campaign.
Politicians and celebrities are expected to converge on Georgia to turn out the vote.
My understanding, I learned last night, is they're even inviting people to move here to come vote, Senator Marco Rubio said in an event for Senator Kelly Loeffler in Georgia on Wednesday, prompting boos from the crowd.
One-time presidential hopeful Andrew Yang said he would move to Georgia to push for Democratic candidates John Ossoff and Raphael Warnock.
Great news, Yang gang!
Evelyn and I are moving to Georgia to help Ossoff and Reverend Warnock win.
Yang wrote on November 7th.
This is our only chance to clear Mitch McConnell out of the way and help Joe Biden and Kamala Harris get things done in the next four years.
More details to come, but let's go!
Yang did not address whether he'll register to vote in Georgia.
North Carolina's Senate contest just made history as the most expensive Senate race ever, with more than $230 million spent on advertising alone.
But the Georgia races could blow that out of the water, Zipperer said.
What's going to pose the biggest problem is going to be all manner of outside money coming in.
If I were a Republican, I'd be much more concerned about outside money coming in than outside people coming in.
Both conservatives and liberal groups are announcing big spending in Georgia.
Conservative super PAC Club For Growth Action announced Wednesday that it will spend at least $10 million there.
Former Democratic gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams' organization Fair Fight has raised a whopping $9.8 million since Friday amid the runoff elections.
Fair Fight confirmed the haul to Fox News and said the cash will be split three ways, the organization and both Democratic Senate candidates.
Fox News' inquiry to the Georgia Secretary of State's office and Yang's organization, Andrew Yang, was not returned by the time of publication.
We shall see.
But I'll tell you, I'm not entirely confident for Republicans, y'all better step up and get ready.
This is going to be a race in a state that will shape the future of this country.
A constrained Joe Biden is a good thing.
Okay?
Fine.
You'll have some power for Republicans, some for Democrats.
They'll have the White House.
They'll get what they want, to varying degrees.
But if they get control of the Senate, they are going to steamroll through insane things, probably even pack the Supreme Court, ending that 6-3 conservative majority.
Well, probably more 5-4 at this point.
Lindsey Graham has stepped in.
He's going to counter a tsunami of liberal money by donating $1 million to help Georgia Senate candidates.
Graham said Democrats will try to pack the Supreme Court and do away with Electoral College if they control the Senate.
My first question!
Why do so many of our public servants have millions of dollars they can just dish out?
Good for you, Lindsay.
Fine.
I don't like the idea of outside money going into these states.
I don't like the idea that the Senators are supposed to represent the people of Georgia, but these races are going to be funded by people all over the country.
It's going to be ground zero.
And I'm saying...
It is not going to be your typical Senate race.
It is going to be every single celebrity hanging out in Georgia for months, rallying people and getting them to vote.
Republicans, I do not think, will have that kind of star power.
We shall see.
Maybe the Republicans in Georgia will realize what they're up against and rally on their own side, do some outreach, hopefully for them.
They'll actually win.
But I don't know if Lindsey Graham's $1 million is going to be enough to be completely honest.
They say, Graham said Dems will try to pack the Supreme Court and do away with the Electoral College if they control the Senate.
Probably.
But getting rid of the Electoral College would require a two-thirds ratification.
It's Possible they could get it, but not likely in the least, to be honest.
Like, a new amendment to get rid of the Electoral College?
The red states aren't gonna go with that.
That's ridiculous.
No one's gonna sign away their power, you know, and what little they have.
Wyoming has three electoral votes.
They don't even have a full congressional district, technically.
It's like the whole state is one congressional district.
And that's, I gotta say, that's probably tough for the congressman up there.
Gotta travel around that whole state to go and talk to everybody.
But it is, in my opinion, better representation.
Because, in many of these places, you got, what, like 750,000 people per congressperson, and it's getting intense.
Like, how do you represent that many people?
How do you know what those people want?
It's kinda crazy.
Anyway.
In the long run, this power the Democrats would wield would dramatically alter, if not set this country on a course that would crash it into a wall.
I know, we hear it all the time, this election is the most important election, but we really are dealing with this hyper-polarization and an extremist far-left, socialist policies, and ridiculous notions like the Green New Deal.
The Green New Deal would absolutely devastate the economy of this country.
They would probably ban fracking.
Outright.
Goodbye, Pennsylvania.
Congratulations on voting for Joe Biden.
I wonder what's going to happen to the state when the entire Western PA has no industry anymore.
Not that I think fracking is the best thing in the world.
I just think we want to fight towards green energy, and I can respect the idea behind the Green New Deal, not the way they're going about it.
We don't have moderate, reasonable populist candidates.
We have the fringe far left, and then we have conservative populists.
All right.
I can disagree with the right-wing populists.
But what about the far left?
They're nuts.
Sorry, man.
That's just true, okay?
Getting rid of planes, you know, replacing planes with trains, and then having a train go to Hawaii?
It's not gonna happen.
You can't get rid of planes.
And planes aren't even the most carbon-emitting means of travel.
I'm sure trains, in many capacities, probably use more fuel, or at least ship, you know, large shipping container vessels, you know, probably do.
But I'll tell you this.
I'm all about the green energy, man.
I'm all about it.
Nuclear energy, for one, that sounds like a good idea.
Investing in new technology sounds like a good idea.
But they're not gonna do that.
The Green New Deal they're proposing is ridiculous.
Retrofitting every building in the country.
And they'll go right for it.
We will see a dramatic change to this country.
And the left is probably saying, good!
Change is good!
Nah.
Random change is not good.
Well-thought-out, constrained action is.
I'm all for the idea of progress, especially in the energy sector, maintaining energy independence, but they're out of it.
They're not gonna give us a real chance.
They're gonna go pie-in-the-sky, seven-year-old solutions, like, I think that we should solve homelessness by giving everyone a home.
It's like, okay, I get it.
You're a kid.
You don't understand how the economy works and resources work.
But that's what they're going to be implementing.
So my friends, all eyes on Georgia.
We'll see how things play out.
We'll see if people actually end up getting arrested for like voter fraud or whatever.
But anyway, I'll leave it there.
I got a couple more segments coming up for you in a few minutes.
Stick around and I will see you all shortly.
Now this story I find absolutely hard to believe from Variety.
CNN, Fox News, and MSNBC could face post-Trump bumps as they seek viewers and revenue.
No.
They're going to go down in flames because they have been suckling the teat that is Donald Trump for the past four years.
And before Donald Trump, their ratings were in the gutter.
Memberships were down.
And these various digital and cable TV outlets were suffering.
So much so, they started to blame the likes of me and other people on YouTube for all that ails this country.
Well, congratulations.
Y'all voted out Donald Trump.
We'll see if the current legal proceedings play out in his favor.
I'm not entirely sure, but I'll tell you this.
If it ends up that Donald Trump does not become, does not get re-elected, and it does seem likely, I will tell you this.
One thing that makes me really, really excited is that the media will have nothing left to write about.
Oh no, no more Orange Man.
Whatever will we do?
Now, to be fair, they'll probably just start writing about, I don't know, me and other people and say, You're the problem!
They'll try and find something to fill that void in desperation, which will lead to even worse hyperpolarization, and eventually it'll all just crumble and fall apart because they're so absolutely desperate for news.
But I do find it quite funny that they're trying to argue they could see more viewers like anyone believes that post-Trump bumps.
They say this, Quote, the thing about our industry, Dana, and you know it very well, when there is information, when there is data, when the story is changing, you can run on adrenaline for a long time.
He said, this is Bill Hemmer, to Dana Perino during hours spent on air.
If those periods where you hit the walls and nothing is new and you start to think, hmm, what's next?
A lot of top media executives will be called upon in the coming days to answer Hemmer's question.
Gobs of influence and millions of dollars are at stake.
Fox News, CNN, and MSNBC have for more than four years been caught up in a whirlwind of the Trump presidency.
A period when tweets, not physical news events, could scuttle the lineup for an hour-long show at a moment's notice.
The frenzy has lifted the ratings and ad sales of all three networks and the anchors who fill their schedules, to the point where more people tuned into the cabler's primetime coverage of the election aftermath than they did CBS, NBC, and ABC.
The numbers have been helped by people stuck at home due to the coronavirus pandemic.
Tucker Carlson on one October night lured in 7.56 million viewers to Fox News.
While Rachel Maddow drew her largest audience to MSNBC with 5.7 million viewers in July.
Yet there's palpable concern the spotlight may fade with the departure of President Donald Trump and the arrival of President-elect Joe Biden.
What happens when the level isn't DEFCON 5 all the time, asks Frank Sesno, a former CNN Washington bureau chief who is now director of strategic initiatives at George Washington University's School of Media and Public Affairs.
We may be about to find out.
You guys ever watch Ryan Long comedy?
Funny guy.
He has a skit about this where all of these people, all these digital lefty journalists are in the newsroom and they're like, it's Joe Biden, he won.
And then it's like a month later and they're all sweaty and like, what do we write about?
There's nothing left.
And someone proposes, maybe we write about Trump.
He went, no, Trump is just a guy now.
We can't write about him.
There's nothing left.
There's nothing to write about.
Maybe they'll go back to basics.
This movie about a dog who learns to pilot a rocket ship is racist because the dog is a yellow Labrador.
Dog should have been a chocolate lab.
Things like that.
The absolute ludicrous nonsense they were writing before Donald Trump.
But before Donald Trump, this was mostly the venture capital clickbait blogs.
You know, these were VC-funded little digital outlets and they were writing about their culture war nonsense.
When the New York Times and many of these other outlets started fading, they began to write about Donald Trump.
They weren't always writing about culture war garbage.
So will the culture war get worse in a desperate attempt to feed the beast?
Or will they be left holding an empty bag, unsure of what to write about?
You know, I think that might be the best possible scenario here.
Let them slowly wither away and be gone with ye!
And let independent commentary and news and media take over.
Enough with these top-down, broadcast-tower, ivory-tower elites, the likes of CNN.
We're the smart ones.
Don't go watch any other channel.
They'll lie to you, says the guy lying to you.
Well, perhaps that may be, and perhaps there may be something else.
Trump Eyes Digital Media Empire to take on Fox News.
I gotta say, I don't believe it!
Sorry Axios.
When you get me an anonymous source telling me that Donald Trump is going to do a thing, I'm going to tell you, you're probably lying.
Because they do this all the time.
This story may just be, uh, you know, oh, we heard someone said it and there's no real, you know, Trump could be sitting there.
I've, I've had this happen to me.
Trump could be sitting there being like, yeah, you know, I could probably do a news outlet way better than Fox.
That would show him, huh?
Anyway, what do you guys want for dinner?
And then someone hears it and goes, oh man, Trump's going to start a news network.
And then they write a big old article about it.
Or they're trying to make it seem like Trump isn't actually trying to win the presidency, when he really is.
Okay, fine.
You know what?
Maybe.
Maybe Donald Trump does want to launch a digital media empire.
Sure.
I'm not entirely convinced, but let's entertain the thought from Axios.
President Trump has told friends he wants to start a digital media company to clobber Fox News and undermine the conservative-friendly network sources tell Axios.
Some Trump advisers think Fox News made a mistake with an early call of President-elect Biden's win in Arizona.
That enraged Trump and gave him something tangible to use in his attacks on the network.
He plans to wreck Fox, no doubt about it, said a source with detailed knowledge of Trump's intentions.
With loyal viewers and longtime dominance, Fox Corp CEO Lachlan Murdoch said on a November 3rd earnings call, quote, We love competition.
We have always thrived with competition.
Fox News has been the number one network, including broadcast networks, from Labor Day through to Election Day.
Here's Trump's plan, according to the source.
There's been lots of speculation about Trump starting a cable channel, but getting carried on cable systems would be expensive and time-consuming.
Instead, Trump is considering a digital media channel that would stream online, which would be cheaper and quicker to start.
Trump's digital offering would likely charge a monthly fee to MAGA fans.
Many are Fox News viewers, and he'd aim to replace the network and the $5.99-a-month Fox Nation streaming service, which has an 85% conversion rate from free trials to paid subscribers, as their top destination.
Trump's database of email and cell phone contacts would be a huge head start.
Trump's lists are among the most valuable in politics, especially his extensive database of cell phone numbers for text messages.
Axios is told Trump may use vote count rallies to undercut Fox.
He's going to spend a lot of time slamming Fox.
Trump has increasingly complained that Fox News interviews more Democrats than it used to, which is a good thing, by the way.
He has needled the network by promoting other conservative outlets, including One America News and Newsmax.
Fox has changed a lot, Trump said during the most recent interview he has given anywhere.
With Fox and friends on election day, somebody said, what's the biggest difference between this and four years ago and I say Fox?
I'm not complaining, I'm just telling people, Trump added, it's one of the biggest differences this season compared to last.
Fox News has absolutely moved to the middle.
It's true.
It is true.
They brought on Donna Brazile for commentary.
They hosted a Bernie Sanders town hall.
And they do allow Democrats to come on and speak.
And it is a good thing.
All of these other networks are garbage.
Donald Trump.
You may not get completely favorable coverage from Fox News, but it's way better than turning on CNN or MSNBC and listening to this mind-numbing garbage.
You guys seen what happened recently with Chris Cuomo?
And he went off like, THE PEOPLE WHO ARE ENABLING TRUMP IN THIS FARCE!
Why won't you submit and do what we want, says Chris Cuomo.
Chill out, dude.
But these networks have become just absolutely hyper-partisan, opinion-rage-drivel.
You know?
I don't know what else to tell you.
That's what the media is, and it's been getting worse and worse.
When Trump leaves, I really don't see them having a path towards any kind of meaningful content the way they used to.
Their audience is going to diminish.
They're going to lose tons of money.
They're going to lay people off.
And you know what?
I'm not going to shed a tear for them.
And truth be told, my viewership will probably go down, same as everybody else's.
But it's fine.
I'm just some dude complaining about his feelings on the internet.
Maybe YouTube would ban me by then, I don't know.
But in reality, what's likely going to happen is that the interest around politics will go down.
It happens every election.
But the Trump era was something special.
Something very, very different.
And I'll tell you this, a lot of people, these lefties, who don't pay attention to my career are like, what are you gonna talk about once Trump is gone, Tim?
Huh, you're in trouble.
I was talking about Sonic the Hedgehog and Birds of Prey in January.
I'm not too worried.
I'm gonna do what I always do, and talk about relevant cultural issues.
I talked about, you know, Jordan Peterson and Joe Rogan in the past.
Talked about celebrity gossip where it intersects with cultural politics.
It's what I've always done.
You know, probably likely do.
In fact, I might just start talking about the big breaking news that's important.
Because if you go back to January, I was talking about COVID and China and Wuhan and the dam breaking and all this stuff.
I didn't always just make segments about Democrats and Trump.
It just so happens that that is where the news cycle carried us.
It was an election.
An important one at that.
But it's very likely that moving forward, we are going to see real news come back.
This could be a good thing for us.
Maybe if we start focusing on international conflict and crisis, we might actually stop fighting with one another, and for the most part, you might see CNN reporting the same thing as Fox News for once.
With Trump gone, the big news in this country isn't going to be our partisan fight, for the most part.
But I think these outlets are addicted.
I think they're completely addicted, and they're going to find something to write about.
Trumpism!
That's what they say.
Trumpism!
Donald Trump Jr.
Whoever's planning on running in 2024.
We'll see.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up in just a few minutes.
Stick around, and I will see you all shortly.
Ah, good old Elizabeth Warren, giving credit where credit is due.
Warren credits Biden win to most progressive economic platform ever.
In an op-ed, Warren didn't mention a dollar figure for expected Biden tax hikes that some experts have pegged as high as $4 trillion.
But nonetheless, Elizabeth Warren says, were it not for the progressives and the economic plan, Joe Biden would not have won.
I'm sure Joe Biden is now saying thank you to Elizabeth Warren for with your help and Bernie Sanders and your alliance of progressives in this country.
Joe Biden has won.
Everyone stand and give a standing ovation to Elizabeth Warren.
I'm sure she will be duly rewarded by the Joe Biden campaign.
I'm sorry, what's this?
Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders to be frozen out of Biden cabinet, report says?
Who could have seen that coming?
Now, to be fair, I thought he'd throw him a little bit more red meat than that.
But Joe Biden, you're cold as ice.
Sorry, Elizabeth.
Sorry, Bernie.
Thanks for the help.
Now y'all can leave.
Look, Joe Biden has plans to be progressive.
Joe Biden has said, I believe someone on his campaign, they will be one of the most progressive campaigns ever.
Administrations, I'm sorry.
And Kamala Harris is considered to be the most liberal in the Senate, in Congress.
That's not really true.
It's actually that Kamala Harris is less willing to compromise with Republicans.
It means most of her bills have been sponsored only by the left and Democrats and not by Republicans.
Doesn't mean she's far left or anything.
It just means she's not gonna cooperate or compromise, so that could be bad, I guess.
But so that's their plan.
They get a bunch of weird wacky ideas, the framework of the Green New Deal, probably to appease the progressives to a certain degree and make it look like they're actually going to support them.
But come on!
Did you really think that they would give Bernie a position?
I wanted Donald Trump to give Tulsi and Yang positions to create some kind of coalition and try and bridge that divide.
And Trump's not going to do that either.
Because people in this country are too invested in their tribes.
Now, For Joe Biden, he is the Corporate Crony Establishment Politician.
And I think there are a lot of young people.
You know, I didn't really think about this.
I'm 34, okay?
And so I remember back in 2010, when I was 24.
No, no, in 2010.
In 2011, when I went to occupy Wall Street, I was 25.
So this is now nine years ago.
Long time, huh?
There are people who are, you know, in their 20s, who were little kids.
When all this was going down.
And they don't know who Joe Biden is.
And they don't know anything about what Biden and Obama did, and the crony banksters that were a part of their administration.
Or the fact that Occupy Wall Street started just before Barack Obama's second term.
It was 2011, the end of the year.
Barack Obama had served for three, and now, oh, two and a half or so.
And then you got mass uprisings over financial interests, the 1%.
That was during Barack Obama.
And then what did we get the next year?
Black Lives Matter.
Under Barack Obama.
And now, just about eight, nine years later, depending on which movement we're talking about, you've got these young progressive upstarts popping up on YouTube saying, I am a leftist and we should vote for Joe Biden.
And I'm like, are you nuts?
Oh, I didn't even realize you were 13 when all this was going down.
So you don't know Jack.
Because guess what, my friends?
Joe Biden grants waivers to lobbyists to serve on transition.
Good sir!
Thank you.
Thank you, Joe Biden.
Um, just, Joe, can you give me a heads up on when you're gonna go blow up kids in the Middle East again?
Because that whole thing you did with Obama...
Yeah, I was making videos about that.
Granted, my news and commentary on what they were doing back then was not as good.
Most of the reporting I did was basically live streaming unrest in various countries.
But I got to experience firsthand the foreign policy of the Obama administration, which included VP Joe Biden.
That included the unrest in Ukraine, the separatist movement, the ousting of their president.
It included the refugee crisis, which I covered quite a bit, even went to Turkey and interviewed refugees on more than than one occasion.
It includes me going to Sweden and traveling around Europe, meeting with people forced
to flee their countries because of the Obama administration's Middle Eastern policies and
intervention in countries for which we had no business.
But that's American imperialism as the left used to describe it.
We can also remember just the financial interests.
The people serving on the cabinet from the major corporations.
Big, international, billion-dollar interests.
Here we go, baby!
It's all coming back.
You know, I gotta be honest.
Joe!
I was worried there for a minute.
Thank you for bringing us all back to normal.
Is that what everybody wanted?
Normal?
Congratulations.
We're going back to normal.
So you can rest assured that under a Joe Biden presidency, the rich will get richer, the poor will get poorer, and he'll be blowing up some kids.
Because isn't that what the Obama administration was all about?
We are the 99%?
That was Obama.
That was during the Obama administration.
What did he do to solve that problem?
Nothing.
What about the war, the drone strikes, the extrajudicial assassinations?
What about the NDAA, the National Defense Authorization Act, indefinite detention provisions?
What's that, progressives?
You were young upstarts who helped Joe Biden win, and you didn't do any research into who this man was?
Surprise, surprise, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren are getting the boot.
Joe Biden is going to be a corporate politician who is going to tell you to shove it, he'll give you nothing, and it will reignite all of the same protests we've been seeing.
It's going to be really funny when these Democrats, these Democrats who don't have political experience, don't pay attention, who only got active now, and the younger Democrats and first-time voters who don't know what the Democrats really are, start to wake up to the fact that, guess what?
Donald Trump actually wasn't that bad.
Now, early on Donald Trump made some mistakes.
Hiring, he hired a bunch of dumb people and trusted them, that was a huge mistake.
Hiring John Bolton, I say it all the time, that guy wants to blow everybody up in the Middle East.
John Bolton at one point said we were going to be celebrating in Tehran.
We don't want to go to war with Iran, that's ridiculous!
Okay, I say we don't, like you and me.
They do!
I wonder how long it'll take until we are celebrating in Tehran.
Because apparently, Joe Biden wants to start bringing on neoconservative consultants because he wants to bridge the divide.
No, he doesn't.
He wants to restore the crony establishment, the never-Trumpers who ran crying when Donald Trump kicked in the door and took over the Republican Party.
And you know what?
For all of Donald Trump's faults, I wasn't blind to what was happening.
Donald Trump, the bull, breaking into the ivory tower and saying, enough!
And he's still refusing to let go.
He's still refusing to give up.
Now, I think Trump has many, many faults.
But you think fake-smile-plastic-Joe-Biden-enriching-his-family-off-his-name-using-his-office-to-gain-power-for-himself-and-those-around-him-is-gonna-be-better?
Oh, by all means, criticize Donald Trump for the nepotism of bringing his kids on to his administration.
All right, yep.
What's that?
You're saying Donald Trump was using his private properties and having the military stay there, thus generating revenue for his businesses?
Yeah, sounds like that could be a violation of the Emoluments Clause.
Sounds like something I absolutely would criticize, and literally did many times.
It doesn't change the fact that Joe Biden is substantially worse.
I'll be the first to admit the election was a rock and a hard place.
For me, at least.
I know Trump supporters were diehard like, Trump's the best, and I'm like, dude, I talked to my friends about this, and they're like, Trump's character is the barrier.
It's true.
For some people, it wasn't.
I can respect that.
And for some people, they love Trump's character.
But that was a setback.
And I can accept that.
Now Trump may have his faults in terms of who he's appointing, who he's hiring, and how his family is running his business as he's president.
And sure, I think there are problems.
But I spent so much time, two terms, Barack Obama and Joe Biden.
Let me tell you, there's a reason why Barack Obama lost about 4 million or so votes from 2008 to 2012.
You know why?
I'll tell you why.
Because I remember marching in the streets as a teenager.
The Iraq War.
The war in Afghanistan.
No blood for oil.
I remember the music videos challenging what Bush was doing, calling Bush every awful name.
And I said, I do not like the idea that we seek out energy independence through entering other people's countries, other nations, and just lying about it to get in.
The media lying.
Weapons of mass destruction.
So I've always had a bias against the media, mind you.
And I remember when Obama came up and he said, I'm gonna bring our troops back.
