FEC Chair Calls Election Illegitimate Due To Fraud, MORE Evidence Of Widespread Irregularity Drops
Citing a lack of transparency the FEC official made the bold statements.But it is important to note that Trey Trainor, the official in question, is a Trump supporter and is the Chair of the FEC which does not deal with voter integrity.Regardless of his opinion however there is mounting evidence of widespread irregularity that needs to be investigated. Yet media is adamant the race is over and looking into the issues is wrong. They call Joe Biden President Elect even before we have certified the vote, while litigation is still underway, and the electoral college hasn't even voted yet.Democrats should have no issue with an audit to prove that they won fairly and blocking the process only fuels Trump and Republican arguments that votes should not be certified.If this drags out too long then House Delegations will vote and Trump will win.
Support the show (http://timcast.com/donate)
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
The chair of the Federal Election Commission has called this presidential election illegitimate and says he believes there is fraud going on.
And following a statement from a mathematician, whose analysis says that there is likely widespread fraud, this same FEC chair says that he believes this shows that to be true.
Before we get into all of the details and all the facts, because there's a lot more than just this we've got to go through, I want to make it clear.
Personally, I do not believe, or I should say, I am not convinced that widespread voter fraud resulted in Donald Trump losing this election.
That requires us to prove intent, and it requires a lot of evidence we do not yet have.
Full stop.
There is evidence of fraud.
There is evidence of irregularity, but it is not definitive proof.
The easiest way to understand this is I've said over and over again, the smoke alarm is going off, we now need to investigate to see if there's actually a fire, or if it's maybe just someone burned the roast and the smoke is triggering the alarm.
There are sworn affidavits, there are mathematical anomalies, and this is evidence, a sign or indication that there may be voter fraud.
There is, however, evidence of widespread irregularities.
An analysis by Matt Brainerd of the Voter Integrity Fund finds that many people who requested ballots and sent them in were not recorded as having voted, and that is widespread in many other states.
Anyone who's trying to be reasonable and seek the truth would tell you, we need to look into this.
What do we get?
Well, on the right, I would say the hard right, more of the staunch Trump supporters, are saying definitively Trump was cheated, there is widespread fraud, and many of them have been yelling at me because I don't see it.
I don't have the evidence as of yet, right now.
They're even yelling at Tucker Carlson because he requested evidence from Sidney Powell, claimed he didn't get it.
And that's a whole other thing.
She claimed she did send it to him.
On the left, they're saying there's no evidence.
There's no substantial evidence.
Drop it.
Trump lost.
It's over.
And that is wrong as well.
We have another weird story in all of this.
You see, Trump's lawyers are arguing that Dominion Voting Systems, who made the voting machines, this system, Allowed for votes to be switched from Trump to Biden.
Now, we have seen something like that happen.
It needs to be investigated.
Though they claim in Michigan this was just human error, we did see 6,000 votes that were for Trump be switched to Biden.
Now, maybe it's human error.
I'm not going to take your word for it.
Let's do an investigation.
Well, Dominion Voting Systems was supposed to participate in a hearing and then abruptly pulled out and lawyered up, leading many people to say, Aha!
That's evidence.
Well, I can't necessarily say it is evidence, but I can say that there are top officials who are arguing that it is, and the mainstream press is not giving everyone a fair understanding of what's going on.
To put it simply, while I don't know if widespread fraud exists and resulted in Trump losing, there is evidence of fraud we need to investigate.
It's also true that Joe Biden is not The president-elect, as the electoral certification has not happened yet, and the media doesn't declare the winner of these races.
They can project a winner.
So this whole thing is weird.
The fact that the mainstream media is saying, submit to our perspective, even though it's not true, it's just all weird.
Aside from all of this, there are many leftists who are very angry because Alan Dershowitz, the famous lawyer, argues that Donald Trump has thrown his Hail Mary pass.
And he does, in fact, have a receiver at the end zone ready to catch the ball.
And that's Amy Coney Barrett, who was appointed to the Supreme Court very quickly.
And now, with Trump making this effort to win the election through a legal process, He's got someone waiting to catch that Hail Mary.
But that means it's not incredibly likely it happens.
And as far as I can tell, we are on track for a Joe Biden presidency.
But it's not definitive.
And I think a fair assessment would be this.
Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm just reading you the news stories.
I'm going to show you what people are saying.
And I have my opinions, but...
I'll say this for the intro.
Isn't it strange the media is ignoring all of this?
That the FBI would investigate a garage pull rope at NASCAR but they're not looking into sworn affidavits under penalty of perjury?
Doesn't mean Trump's gonna win.
Doesn't mean it's widespread.
But it is strange that we can't get an honest conversation about it.
Well, let's take a look at what this FEC official is saying, and the story I have from USA Today.
They say it's false claims of fraud, and I think that might be fair, but let's at least hear out what he's saying.
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've got a P.O.
box if you want to send me some stuff.
But the best thing you can do is share this video, and for all the reasons I just stated.
The mainstream press, for the most part, is mocking, belittling, and deriding those who are pointing out there actually are anomalies and there actually is evidence of fraud.
If we want to find evidence of widespread fraud, well, we have to investigate, don't we?
But for some reason, the media just wants you to submit.
Admit that Joe Biden won and give up!
Well, no, I'm a reasonable person.
I'm willing to hear out the case and see it play out in court.
So this is why it's important to share this video.
Not only does it help my channel, but maybe there are some people who need to hear a rational approach to this.
I'm not screaming that Trump won and there's a grand conspiracy.
I don't think that's true.
Mostly because I haven't seen any evidence to suggest it is.
But there is potential fraud we need to talk about.
Isn't that weird we're not getting that conversation from the mainstream press?
Share this video if you like my channel, but don't forget to like, subscribe, hit the notification bell.
Here's the story from USA Today.
Fact check.
Federal Election Commission Chair echoes false claims of fraud.
They say, the claim, Federal Election Commission Chair Trey Traynor calls election illegitimate and said voter fraud is taking place.
They mention that he did an interview with Newsmax.
Recently, Herald.com, a news website, wrote, the chief electoral officer of the FEC made a bombshell statement, saying that from what he saw in Pennsylvania and news that had come from elsewhere in the world, this election was unconstitutional.
It's not just anyone making this announcement.
Trey Traynor isn't just a state election officer.
He's a federal officer.
And on top of that, he's the chairman of the whole commission.
Its story continued.
Quote, "...it really is explosive news.
The top boss of all the election officials, Trey Traynor, has confirmed that in his professional opinion, there has not been transparency in the election, and this, in election, is illegitimate," Sherbert wrote.
Engdahl shared an image that read, "...when the chief of the Federal Elections Commission says, election fraud has taken place, then you better believe that election fraud has taken place."
USA Today says Trainor's claims of election fraud echo allegations made by President Trump and his campaign.
Trump has refused to accept the election's result and insists, without evidence, that a wide conspiracy has robbed him of victory.
Now, typically, I push back on a lot of these statements.
But to be fair, there is no evidence of a conspiracy to steal the election.
And that's true.
Giuliani made the assertion at a press conference the other day that it looks like this may be coming from a centralized place, essentially alluding to any voter fraud that's going on and what they're seeing has come from a centralized source, meaning someone was planning all of this.
It was a centralized effort.
There's no evidence of that.
There is evidence of widespread irregularities.
That's what we've seen from Matt Brainerd, the Voter Integrity Front.
But that doesn't mean fraud.
It does mean we have a smoke alarm going off.
Now we need to check inside and see if there's actually a fire or, like I said, someone burned the roast.
Well, the FEC is the Federal Election Commission.
It's important to note They're tasked with enforcing federal campaign finance laws.
Its duties include monitoring restrictions and limits on campaign contributions and overseeing public funding for presidential campaigns per USA.gov.
The FEC only oversees finances and is one of multiple federal bodies that deals with
elections.
So it is not accurate to call Traynor the top boss of all the election officials.
They also mentioned that Trey Traynor was an advisor to Trump.
Traynor is a Republican lawyer who advised Trump in 2016.
He was nominated by Trump in 2017, though he was not confirmed by the Senate until May
2020, according to The Washington Post.
I gotta be honest with you right now, it's really hard to know what's true, because the media is absolutely lying way too much about what's happening with this voter fraud.
We can see a sworn affidavit.
They're published.
There's people's names.
I've actually been able to bypass redaction on some of these affidavits to see who all of these people are.
It exists.
Some people, for whatever reason, and there's a decent amount, are swearing under penalty of perjury they've witnessed impropriety or fraud.
We also have strange mathematical anomalies signaling some kind of irregularity.
And Matt Brainard of the Voter Integrity Fund has reached out to, using call centers, tens of thousands of people, maybe even more, and found that many Republican votes seemingly were not recorded after they were requested and sent back.
Anyway, let's jump to the end of this, otherwise I'm going to keep repeating myself trying to explain, because I know there's going to be all these leftists who are saying, oh, Tim keeps claiming Trump is right, and Tim keeps claiming there's widespread voter fraud, blah, blah, blah.
I just want to make sure I'm saying the evidence, okay?
Because there is some.
USA Today says our ruling, partly false.
The quotes from the FEC chair, Trey Traynor, are real and came from an interview with Newsmax, but he's not the top boss of all the election officials.
And the FEC's jurisdiction isn't related to vote counting or election security.
only campaign finances.
Traynor himself admitted he wasn't briefed on the issue.
And all of his comments contained factual inaccuracies, echoing false allegations of
election fraud, that have been presented with no proof.
Based on our research, these claims are partly false.
True only in that Traynor expressed his opinion about the elections.
Sure, I don't entirely trust USA Today, but the point is, I wanted to highlight this specifically
because people are claiming this dude is the dude.
He's not the dude when it comes to counting votes and certifying votes in the Electoral College.
It is interesting to see a top federal official making such claims.
I don't necessarily trust USA Today because the mainstream press, for the most part, has been ignoring legitimate evidence, which is what I'm going to bring you now.
The reason I had to start with Trey Traynor is because just the news says.
Federal Election Commission Chairman Trey Traynor says new analysis by Professor Stephen Miller, quote, adds to the conclusions that some level of voter fraud took place in this year's election.
And I think that's actually a fair statement.
Some level of fraud took place.
Sure.
It adds to the conclusions, simply because we have a lot of different bits of evidence.
So, you can convict someone on circumstantial evidence.
It happens.
I'd prefer definitive proof, hard evidence, but if we can't get it because it's been destroyed or otherwise, then I'll settle with what we can, as long as the conclusion is beyond a reasonable doubt.
Just the News reports, in sworn statement, prominent mathematician flags up to 100,000 Pennsylvania ballots.
Williams College professor Stephen Miller, a Yale and Princeton-trained math expert, said he analyzed Pennsylvania ballot data collected by former Trump campaign data chief Matt Brainerd, as well as 2,684 voter interviews conducted by a phone bank, and found two concerning patterns.
One involved possible votes that were not counted, the other ballots that appeared to be requested by someone other than a registered voter.
I estimate that the number of ballots that were either requested by someone other than the registered Republican, or requested and returned but not counted, ranged from 89,397 to 98,801, Miller said in a sworn statement provided to Just the News.
According to Pennsylvania state data, for early and absentee ballot requests, there are roughly 165,000 ballots requested in the names of GOP voters that had not been counted as of November 16th.
Now that's, I mean that would flip Pennsylvania.
If these are Republican voters, and we assume that for the most part they voted for Donald Trump, then Pennsylvania would go to Donald Trump.
Why isn't this being looked into?
Matt Brainerd got data, made phone calls, and got sworn statements from individuals.
Is that not evidence of widespread irregularity?
It is!
Does it mean it's definitive?
No, maybe all several thousand of these people were all lying.
2,684 people interviewed by phone, all lied.
I really don't think that's the case.
Some of them, maybe.
They're all Republicans, so maybe they're trying to make it seem like, oh, I voted, oh yeah, even though they didn't.
I know some Trump supporters who claimed they were going to vote who didn't vote, so maybe that's a possibility.
But like I said, the smoke alarm is certainly going off, and at this point, with this number of people, yeah, all of the alarms are going off and smoke is coming out.
Can we please go and check to make sure there's no fire?
Because if it turns out that some, you know, Trump supporter just burned the roast, and that then we're fine, we just gotta get the smoke out of the building, please?
No, I think there might be something here, and it's strange that Democrats aren't looking into it.
They're going to mention that Trey Traynor, who is legitimately the FEC Commission Chair, said that it shows there's some level of fraud in this country.
He says, therefore, the rush to certify results that are this suspicious from places with known election violations would nullify millions of votes that were legally cast by individual voters.
You know what, man?
Look.
I have to be, to the best of my ability, reasonable.
These are disconcerting.
These numbers are disconcerting.
It is evidence.
We need to investigate this, but I gotta say, based on what we're seeing right now, I don't think we can certify.
The Democrats are going to claim we're playing politics.
Oh, Tim voted for Trump.
Tim wants Trump to win.
You betcha.
I do.
But come on.
I did several videos where I said the Republicans should be proud that they won as much as they did in the House and they're holding on to the Senate, at least for now.
And they should be happy that even though Trump lost, they've made tremendous gains at the state level.
That was like my initial reaction to the announcement that Joe Biden won.
Then we started seeing more and more evidence.
And I said, OK, well, I guess I got to look at what's going on with this evidence.
Now we have too much.
Trump's strategy right now may be to block certifications.
So the left is certainly saying it's all wild, it's all insane, it's all not true.
Listen, just the news is a NewsGuard-certified source, okay?
They're showing this.
It's a legitimate news source.
This is a prominent mathematician citing actual data, actual call centers.
I don't know what you want me to say, but I can't pretend it doesn't exist.
It does.
And that's it.
Ellen Dershowitz explains how Donald Trump could still win the election through the SCOTUS.
Like I was saying earlier, he likened Amy Coney Barrett to the receiver at the end zone waiting for the Hail Mary pass.
He's saying it's not incredibly likely it's going to happen, but it could.
And with this evidence now of widespread irregularity in Pennsylvania, I don't see how we'd certify Pennsylvania.
Then we have two other questions.
Current lawsuits pending in Arizona.
The governor, Ducey, said he's not going to accept the results unless the lawsuits are cleared.
According to Snopes, the governor has to provide, I believe it's called the certification of ascertainment or certificate, something like that, to the federal government so they can move forward.
If he doesn't, then Arizona doesn't certify.
If Pennsylvania gets blocked up by this data, and if Michigan gets blocked up because of other irregularities, Joe Biden does not get 270 votes.
And that means it goes to the House delegations like Alan Dershowitz says, and Donald Trump will win.
But I'm not saying the chance of him actually pulling it off are 100%.
No.
It's astronomical.
Maybe not astronomical, and maybe not a lottery tickets, but I'm not gonna bet on this, okay?
Right now, Vegas is giving Trump 10% likelihood of winning the Electoral College, and that's making a lot of these pundits really angry, like Nate Silver was like, how are they doing this?
Trump can't win, it's over, I'm so angry!
It's not over.
We're in the legal challenge phase, and there's evidence.
Now, certainly, I think Trump's lawyers have slipped on some banana peels.
Giuliani, the weird sweat thing.
But look, man, you want to make fun of the way Giuliani looks?
You're ignoring what's actually happening, and that's to your own detriment.
Giuliani says they've got affidavits.
Sidney Powell says Dominion voting systems did this thing.
You want to ignore all that?
Ignore it at your own peril.
Never underestimate your opponent.
And the left is certainly doing that right now.
Trump might pull off a last-minute Hail Mary victory.
And I don't know what the goal of the media is.
They spend four-plus years telling us that Donald Trump is an evil Cheeto dictator, a master planner, but also a buffoon.
Pick one.
Is Trump an evil genius who's trying to subvert our elections, or is he a bumbling moron slipping on banana peels?
The smartest bet for the left right now is to treat Donald Trump as the true mastermind they sometimes claim he is.
Never underestimate your opponent.
Otherwise, while Trump's lawyers are fumbling and bumbling, so the media says, Trump is behind the curtain planning his actual course for victory.
I think it's hilarious when I see CNN say, there are right-wing YouTubers claiming that Trump can still win.
It's ridiculous.
He can!
Alan Dershowitz is a Hillary Clinton supporter!
And what he's saying right now about how Trump could win through a contingent election, I talked about that months ago when MSNBC's co-founder claimed Trump could try to pull that off.
I'm not just making this up to try and make it seem like Trump could still win.
I'm telling you what legal experts have said.
And I'll tell you this, for some reason, the media, mainstream media, is lying about it.
They're saying it's crazy.
They say that Sidney Powell, the Dominion voting machines, were flipping the results or whatever.
That's a bold accusation.
They say Powell made references to a 2019 investigation from Senators Amy Klobuchar, Warren, and Ron Wyden, as well as other Democratic lawmakers into Dominion voting systems, election systems, and software.
We have concerns about the spread and effect of private equity investment in many sectors of the economy, including the election technology industry, an integral part of our nation's democratic process, wrote the lawmakers in letters about a year ago.
These problems threaten the integrity of our elections and demonstrate the importance of election systems that are strong, durable, and not vulnerable to attack.
Later in the Sunday morning interview, Powell said that her team has detected voting irregularities that are inexplicable in states where officials believe they have valid systems.
So Dominion, did they do anything?
I don't know.
Is there evidence that anything as of right now?
No, there isn't.
There are, I would say there's mathematical anomalies showing that there are huge spikes for Joe Biden and there are instances where it appears that votes flipped from Trump to Biden.
That's not evidence that Dominion did anything.
That could be a nefarious actor who was not involved in any conspiracy, just being like, I hate Trump, hitting a button and flipping votes or something like that.
One thing I've often referenced, and you need to understand, is there's something called a standalone complex.
A conspiracy is when all of these Democrats get together, and then they high-five each other, and they go off and they enact their plan.
These are often very, very difficult to pull off, and someone might often snitch.
But a standalone complex is when many different people do similar things, giving the appearance of a coordinated effort.
In this instance, we may just be looking at some random person who hates Donald Trump kicking a box of Trump ballots down the hallway.
Or in the case of the missing memory cards, these people hate Trump and maybe had the memory card and chucked it into a bin.
In Georgia, three counties had missing ballots and it was a huge swing for Trump.
Trump then broke the historical record for recount numbers, gaining something like 1,800 votes, whereas previously it was Al Gore who got like 1,300.
Trump shaved 13% of Al Gore's lead in Georgia.
Is it widespread fraud?
You can't prove it's fraud until you find a person who can prove their intent, and that is hard.
That's a criminal thing.
Is it impropriety or irregularity?
We can say outright it's an irregularity, and it happened three times, and at a certain point, you have to assume it wasn't just an accident.
But it doesn't mean it's a conspiracy, and it doesn't mean it's fraud.
It could just be that we have seen an increasing amount of people with Trump derangement syndrome.
They all want to stop Trump by any means necessary.
This is a culture war, a political battle, and all it takes is one person with no instruction to say, I hate Trump, and then thumb flick the USB stick into the bin.
End of story.
It's probably why we need a hand recount in many of these states, because there is evidence.
So when Trump comes out and says, widespread evidence of voter fraud, you know, he won if not for this.
I do not agree.
I do not believe that because they have not presented evidence to that case.
It is jumping the gun.
I think there is evidence of fraud.
We've seen it.
And now there's some strange goings on.
After Sidney Powell made these claims about Dominion Voting Systems, the Republicans wanted to have a hearing.
Dominion Voting Systems lawyers-up abruptly backs out of Pennsylvania State House fact-finding hearing.
That's kind of suspect.
To be fair, it could just be that the people who run Dominion said, We're being accused of all of this crazy impropriety, and there's a reason why you can plead the fifth.
We're not going to go into this meeting and be berated without appropriate legal guidance, so we're not going to do this.
We're going to get a lawyer, and then we'll talk about it.
I think that's fair.
If someone wanted me to come and testify at a hearing, I'd call a lawyer too, okay?
But some people do think it's kind of strange that they just immediately backed out.
They say they have nothing to do with any of this.
They just provide these systems.
Then they shouldn't need to back out of a hearing and lawyer up.
They should be able to say, here's what we do.
We sold these machines.
That's about it.
We have nothing to do with anything else.
Instead, they're like, we out.
People think that's kind of suspect.
AM Greatness reports.
Dominion Voting Systems Thursday night abruptly backed out of attending a fact-finding hearing that was set for Friday morning with the Pennsylvania House State Government Committee.
At a press conference Friday morning, State Government Committee Chair Seth Grove said, the 1.3 million Pennsylvanians who use Dominion's voting machines have been hung out to dry and slapped in their faces.
Pennsylvania lawmakers had scheduled the hearing with the voting machine manufacturer to help identify and correct any irregularities in the election process.
It is vitally important.
Voters have faith in the machines they use to cast their ballots.
On the heels of Governor Tom Wolf unilaterally decertifying every voting machine in the Commonwealth, we need to know whether these new machines met expectations, whether they are reliable, and whether they are not subject to interference.
Dominion had initially agreed to attend the hearing before it abruptly cancelled.
I was impressed at what appeared to be the willingness of Dominion Voting Systems to address accusations that it would have put 1.3 million Pennsylvanians who use their machines at ease, including myself, thinking that Dominion was willing to publicly back up their product, which PA taxpayers invested millions to purchase.
He noted during the presser, Unfortunately, last evening, Dominion Voting Systems lawyered up and backed out of their commitment to the people of Pennsylvania to provide their input in a public format.
Grove blasted the company for retreating into the darkness, rather than appearing at the hearing with honesty and integrity.
I'm gonna stop right there.
Well, actually, no, I'm not.
One more quote.
Why would a vendor of public goods fear discussing their products sold to the public for the public good?
If Dominion's products were successful and operated as they were supposed to, why wouldn't Dominion take the opportunity to publicly review its success?
Grove demanded.
How hard is it to say our ballot machines worked exactly as promised and they're 100% accurate?
After weeks of accusations, why has Dominion Voting Systems not released any analysis of the success of its voting machines to the public in order to stop the accusers in their tracks?
If they have nothing to hide, why are they hiding from us?
More importantly, if Dominion Voting Systems is a neutral company that made a voting machine and said, have at it, Then they should have no problem saying, we have no malintent.
Our intentions are just to sell voting machines to the public and by all means ask us any questions you might have about these systems.
Any irregularities or errors can be attributed on the part of the voters or Pennsylvania itself.
Backing out, in my opinion, is suspect.
I have to wonder.
In Michigan, there's unbalanced books, 71% in Wayne County.
Republicans tried to not to certify the vote, then when they were pressured into doing it and threatened, they tried to rescind their vote.
Now it's going to the state board and may get blocked by more Republicans.
I don't know for sure, seems like a long shot.
Arizona says, the governor says, I'm not going to certify the results as long as there's a lawsuit going on.
Well, Trump is planning another lawsuit, they say, and there are lawsuits, my understanding, still going on in Arizona.
Now Pennsylvania.
What if the state Republicans say, when we tried to answer simple questions they ran away and we do not feel comfortable with these lawsuits and accusations in our state of certifying these results?
What happens if these three states do not certify?
I believe Michigan is 16, Pennsylvania is 20, and Arizona is 11, and Joe Biden drops down quite significantly and does not reach 270 votes.
The House then votes.
Donald Trump then wins.
It may be nothing.
Maybe nothing.
I could just be reading too much into it, because I've got all these stories.
Perhaps we're connecting dots where dots need not be connected.
Perhaps Michigan says, no, we're certifying.
Shut up.
Perhaps this hearing was immaterial to the process that's going on in Pennsylvania, and Giuliani loses, and the lawsuits are long shots that were never going to work anyway.
And perhaps it comes down to the wire, and the Arizona governor says, the lawsuits have been dismissed.
Joe Biden, congratulations.
Seems very, very likely.
And I think any reasonable person would say that seems to be the track.
But there is something happening, so I want to show you at least what's happening.
There is evidence of widespread irregularities now, and for any media outlet to claim there isn't, they're just lying.
John Solomon, who runs this, has been accused of maybe being conservative or supporting Trump, but NewsGuard, which is funded by Microsoft, has run a check against them and found them to be a credible outlet.
Are they perfect?
Of course they're not.
But they're more credible than some mainstream news outlets.
So if they're putting out a story about a sworn statement from a mathematician and evidence of irregularity, I think they've done, at least to a certain degree, their due diligence.
However, CNN, NBC, MSNBC, Vox, and these outlets, they're probably not going to tell you the truth.
And that's the scary thing.
I do not believe Trump is correct when he says widespread voter fraud cost him the election.
That's just me.
Maybe I'm wrong.
I'm open to the process, looking at the evidence, and I'd like to see it play out in court.
And if I'm wrong, I will gladly accept it.
My opinion.
I can't definitively say Trump is wrong, I just don't believe it.
So, no, I do not support the president's position.
I do think, however, that if we investigate, it could be true, perhaps.
unidentified
I just honestly don't think stuff like that happens.
You know, maybe it's just wishful thinking of people sitting here saying, Trump can still win, Trump can still win, and maybe he can't.
He, well, you know, he can still win, but maybe he won't is a better way to put it.
I don't know.
I can tell you that a lot of diehard Trump supporters are mad at me for saying it that way, and I'm not going to jump on the Trump train and scream out loud and just support Trump in every effort.
There's a story out from the National Review.
I think I have it right here.
Americans deserve the truth, even if it's unpleasant.
They basically say, you are being conned.
On the menu today, a blunt message about who is conning whom in the aftermath of the 2020 elections.
They mention Rudy Giuliani, Sidney Powell, Fox News Tucker Carlson.
And they say, if you put your faith in President Trump's claim of a presidential election stolen through massive alteration of votes through the use of voting software, and in the legal skills of Giuliani and Powell, I'm sorry to tell you, you have been conned.
Maybe they're wrong.
Maybe they're right.
All I can really do is say the fight is happening and I would be impressed and surprised if hard evidence comes out and proves Trump is correct.
But I'm not going to come and tell you definitively he is wrong.
We don't have the evidence.
It's hard to prove a negative.
So we'll make it to December 8th.
We'll see the certifications happen.
And then on December 14th, we'll see if we have a president elect Joe Biden.
And at that point, if we do, then I think Trump can bow out and concede and he should.
But I'm not entirely convinced he will.
We will see.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment is coming up at youtube.com slash TimCastNews over at 6 p.m.
There's a different channel from this one.
Type it into your URL bar and you will see.
Thanks for hanging out, and I will see you all then.
The war for the presidency is far from over, and while it seems that Donald Trump is on the ropes, things are moving along.
And we don't know exactly where it will end up, but boy is the mainstream media Desperate to convince you Trump cannot win.
It's over.
Submit.
Why won't you submit?
Well, the GOP just won a lawsuit.
This is really good news for Republicans.
Several thousand ballots in Pennsylvania that were not dated are being thrown out.
Of course, the left has been running around claiming that Trump is 2 to 31 with two wins and 31 defeats.
Although Trump's campaign actually hasn't filed most of these lawsuits.
I believe they only have like three lawsuits.
That's what Rudy Giuliani said.
Most of these other lawsuits are brought about by members of the Republican Party in various areas and voters.
It's kind of stupid to be like, Trump lost a lawsuit because some random guy filed a bunk lawsuit.
No, but this is good news.
Now, the left is saying that this win in Pennsylvania is irrelevant.
It's only a few thousand ballots.
It won't change the results of the election.
And you know what?
They're probably right.
While this could have some effect on other counties, maybe more ballots get thrown out somewhere else because they say, okay, we got this ruling, right?
And we're going to go look at a bunch of other ballots.
I don't know if it's really going to have an impact.
Theoretically, it could, because Joe Biden's lead in Pennsylvania is decently high, but I think it's like, well, like 40,000 to 60,000 or something like that.
So if they were to get 2,000 to 3,000 ballots thrown out across the board, or even in a heavy Democrat district, it could have an impact.
So maybe a ruling like this could affect Pennsylvania or, I'm sorry, Philadelphia or something.
They're in Pennsylvania.
I'm not entirely convinced it matters, though.
I don't believe that Trump's strategy right now is predicated upon these lawsuits.
I think Trump is going for a contingent election victory where House delegations vote.
We've heard over and over again about release the Kraken and where's the evidence?
And now there's this feud between Tucker Carlson and Sidney Powell.
A kind of feud.
Tucker Carlson on his show the other night said that they reached out to Sidney Powell, Trump's lawyer, saying, can you show us evidence?
Tucker then accused Sidney Powell of not producing any and then saying, stop contacting me.
It's really strange.
In response to this, a bunch of Trump supporters, like the most diehard, said that Tucker Carlson turned his back on Trump and the MAGA movement or whatever.
He's siding with the Deep State and things like that.
According to Sydney Powell, she offered Tucker Carlson Expert analysis on mathematical anomalies and a sworn affidavit, which apparently wasn't enough.
Now, there you go.
I don't know exactly what the play is or what the plan is, but it seems like Trump is going for a contingent election victory.
And, well, whether or not there's hard evidence of fraud, I don't know if that actually matters anyway.
Not that I think Tucker Carlson is necessarily right because if Rudy Giuliani mentioned one of his sworn affidavits, we've seen many sworn affidavits, we've got many coming out of Georgia.
I find it strange that Tucker would frame it that way when he could have just said they're not producing evidence because they want it to appear in a court of law.
Anyway, what I find particularly interesting now, Trump summons Michigan GOP leaders for extraordinary meeting.
Of course, the left is saying he's trying to pressure them into some kind of non-certification of the Michigan results or something like this.
And Snopes, oh Snopes, I love you, says, could Trump defy popular vote by halting voter certification?
Mixture.
They actually say it's not true.
They're wrong.
There's a bunch of ways Trump could jam the political process.
What the left is now saying is that, and this is crazy to me, I was reading a CNN article, I don't have it pulled up, but they were like, Biden has been declared the winner.
And no, no, no, he hasn't.
And they were like, it's just a formality.
It's ceremonial that we go through the electoral college process.
No, no it isn't.
It is not ceremonial.
That's why we don't have a popular vote.
It is actually the legal process.
If the Electoral College was ceremonial, we would just do a national popular vote and then say, the Electoral College agrees.
They want that, but we're not there.
If the National Popular Vote Coalition actually succeeds, if you're not familiar with this, basically a bunch of states are trying to say, if at any point our coalition reaches 270 votes, or I'm sorry, Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Once their coalition reaches 270, enough to get the president the victory, they'll give their electoral votes to whoever has the popular vote, securing that victory, overriding the cons- or bypassing the constitution.
Sure.
In that instance, then the Electoral College would be ceremonial.
Right now, it's not.
But they are so desperate to claim Trump can't win, and it freaks me out because they should be saying, while Trump can win, it seems like a long shot, and y'all better be prepared for the event he pulls something off.
Could you imagine what's going to happen to these people when they're being told every day non-stop Trump can't win?
And he can?
That's crazy.
But let's read what's going on.
I'll go through this stuff.
We've got the GOP winning this order, and this is significant, but I don't know if it's enough to change anything.
21NBC says, More than 2,000 mail-in ballots cannot be counted in a Western Pennsylvania State Senate race, an appeals court ruled Thursday, saying handwritten dates provide a measure of security.
The two-to-one Commonwealth Court decision could swing the neck-and-neck contest in which Republican challenger Nicole Ziccarelli trails narrowly against Senator Jim Brewster of Allegheny.
Judge Kevin Brobson, a Republican, said to ignore the requirement that mail-in voters date the outside of return envelopes would constitute a judicial rewrite of the statute.
In a dissent, the panel's lone Democrat, Judge Michael Wojcik, said a blank or even simply unsigned declaration on the
outer envelope would be disqualifying, but that ballots are time stamped. I view the requirement
of a voter inserted date on the declaration as similar to the issue of color ink
that is used to fill in the ballot, Wojcik wrote. The case was sent back to Allegheny County.
So for the most part, this is about a state race.
But if the court is ruling as such, the Trump campaign could seize upon something like this.
But again, I gotta say, people are highlighting this saying, you know, victory, woohoo, and it's kind of like, does this really matter that much?
It kind of does if Trump is going to a contingent election.
Check this out.
They say the state Senate is days from the end of its current term, with Republicans holding a 28-21 majority, along with an Independent who caucuses with the GOP.
A Ziccarelli win would give Republicans a 30-20 working majority in January.
So, Pennsylvania's already basically a Republican state.
Which means, if it goes to a contingent election, this probably won't have that big of an impact.
I'm seeing a lot of people sharing this, talking about how it's a big victory, a GOP win.
I'm not sure it matters.
I mean, it matters for people in the state, obviously, but does it matter for Donald Trump?
This is what the narrative currently is.
Trump is trying to overturn the results of the election by lobbying state legislators to not certify or to appoint electors that will favor Donald Trump, vote for Donald Trump.
The AP says, President Donald Trump summoned Michigan Republican legislative leaders to the White House for an extraordinary meeting Friday amid a long-shot GOP push to subvert the democratic process that handed the battleground state to Democrat Joe Biden.
We are not a democracy.
It may, to be fair, subvert the democratic process.
I see what they're saying.
But the process that's actually laid forth in the Constitution and in our country allows for Trump to do this.
It's not illegal.
Literally, you can.
They say.
Two people familiar with the matter told the Associated Press that Trump invited Senate Majority Leader Mike Shirky and House Speaker Lee Chatfield.
They agreed to go according to a state official aware of the leader's plans.
The two officials spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were discussing private conversations.
I don't know if I actually believe these claims about anonymous officials, but it does seem like, you know, Trump, it's probably going to happen.
The question is, can these guys do anything?
I'm not convinced it matters.
You know, the left is trying to make it seem like this is grand conspiracy.
And my question is, are these guys in a position of power to actually do anything?
I don't really think they are.
Maybe they could then come back to Michigan and lobby the board of canvassers, the state board, who would certify the results and send the electors.
Trump could jam up the process in many different steps, they say.
It was not immediately clear what the meeting would be about.
Neither Shirky nor Chatfield commented.
Trump's campaign is openly floating the notion of trying to get friendly state legislatures to appoint electors who would overturn the will of the voters.
If Trump succeeds in convincing Michigan State Board of Canvassers to not certify Biden's victory in the state, state lawmakers could be called on to select electors.
But such a brazen move would be unprecedented and possibly illegal.
It would be certain to draw a swift legal challenge.
Sure.
And it might go to the Supreme Court.
And the Supreme Court might say, the states ultimately decide.
If Michigan's Republicans want to do it, what you gonna do about it?
Maybe that's why Amy Coney Barrett was confirmed as quickly as she was.
I'm just saying.
Well, Shirky and Chatfield have indicated that they will not try to overturn Biden's win.
quote, Michigan law does not include a provision for the legislature to directly select electors
or to award electors to anyone other than the person who received the most votes. Shirky's
spokeswoman said last week on November 6, Chatfield tweeted, whoever gets the most votes
will win Michigan period. End of story. Then we move on.
The only issue, what happens if Michigan doesn't certify?
Then nobody got any votes.
They'll say, but we know Joe Biden got the most votes.
And they'll say, no, we didn't certify.
We don't know if these numbers are legitimate.
So nobody did.
So what do we do?
There's no will of the people.
Then they'll have to appoint electors.
Asked at a Lansing news conference about the plan for legislative leaders to visit Trump, Democratic Governor Gretchen Whitmer said, I hope they wear masks and I hope they stay safe.
All the meetings in the world, though, can't take away from the fact that Joe Biden won Michigan by over 150,000 votes.
That's 14 times the margin that Donald Trump won by in 2016.
So we will be sending a slate of electors that reflects the will of the people of Michigan at the end of this process.
I'll tell you what's scary.
They've not certified those results.
But the media keeps saying they did.
So you're going to have a ton of people who believe these are the numbers when none of us have actually seen official certified documentation of any of this.
In which case, what if the media is lying?
What if the results aren't, these numbers are not correct?
What if CNN just said, eh, 150,000 for Biden?
And then we all just go, okay, that's why we need certification from the actual governments of these states.
Otherwise, I think what the media is doing is extremely dangerous.
Donald Trump is within his legal right to be doing what he's doing.
They're saying it might be illegal, maybe you can make an argument about him not having, you know, influence or something like that, but Trump's allowed to challenge the process.
He's allowed to file legal challenges and people, and this, it might end up with no certification.
That's in the Constitution.
It's how things work.
Of course, I think the left would then use it as an argument against the Constitution, which many, some have already said they want to get rid of.
They say Thursday, state officials said Michigan's largest county cannot revoke its certification of election results after two Republicans who approved Biden's local landslide wanted to revert to their initial stance of refusing to bless the vote tally.
The GOP effort to change position represented another complication in what is typically a routine task.
Monica Palmer and William Hartman, two GOP canvassers in Wayne County, said they only voted to certify the results after hours of sustained pressure and after getting promises that their concerns about the election would be investigated.
According to Crowder, and I haven't seen his full argument, there's like 170 or something thousand people who voted in Wayne, I believe in Wayne County, that don't have a matching voter registration.
I don't, I haven't looked into that, so definitely fact check me on that one, but there are certainly reasons why these GOP members didn't want to certify the results.
And it's very strange, the Democrats are saying, okay, you initially voted not to, but then you voted, you voted to, therefore we're done, nothing, you can, nope, nope, nope, no takesies-backsies.
Okay, I'll say this.
I say no takesies-backsies on the first vote.
If there is no legal process by which they can rescind their second vote, then what legal process is there by which they rescinded their first vote?
Right?
Sure.
So this might actually end up in a legal challenge.
But let's jump over to, uh, good ol' Snopes.
Cause you know we love Snopes for fact-checking.
I'm kidding, by the way.
Snopes is awful.
In a story, in a fact check, they wrote, Could Trump defy popular vote by halting voter certification?
Here's why the country is focusing on the unusually mundane certification process in key battleground states.
I'm sorry, they're usually mundane.
Usually mundane because the media glosses over it and we just ignore it.
But that doesn't mean we are allowed to.
It exists.
Sorry, that's a fact.
They say this, As of mid-November, several battleground states had not certified results of the popular vote in the 2020 presidential race, which meant U.S.
President Donald Trump had an opportunity to defy the election's outcome.
Mixture.
They say it is true they haven't certified all the races.
What's false?
It was a false interpretation of the Constitution, federal statutes, and state laws that govern elections to consider the process of certifying results of the popular vote an opportunity to defy what voters want.
What's undetermined?
While the Trump campaign was attempting to halt or slow down voter certification in several battleground states, the success of those efforts to overturn Biden's victory was unknown as of this writing.
Is it true or not?
Can it actually overturn the results as they stand?
Could it result in Donald Trump getting the electoral college?
The answer is, of course, yes.
Yes, it was the co-founder of MSNBC who wrote about this, and there are tons of articles written about it, and we've now seen several high-profile pundits, the Atlantic, NBC, and Vox all say Trump could pull off what's called a contingent election victory.
Snopes, do a Google search.
Amazing.
Absolutely amazing.
They say, in mid-November, blah blah blah.
It was misleading.
The claim was two-pronged.
Key battleground states had not certified the results of the popular vote, and because of that, Trump had a chance to defy its outcome.
Both of which are true.
They say, first, let's define what step in the country's election process, which functions under the Constitution, statutes and laws, to which the campaign was referring.
Every four years in America, people submit ballots in a popular vote for the president.
Most states grant counties the authority to administer those elections via a board of electors, an election official or officials or both.
Those local jurisdictions operate under varying timelines for processing votes.
Blah, blah, blah.
Come on.
In the Trump-Biden contest, the news media did not announce a winner in several states until days after the polls closed, in part due to an unprecedented surge in mail-in voting and states' varying rules for when they can start processing those ballots.
This we know.
On November 7th, however, Biden secured the majority of the country's electoral votes.
No, he didn't.
That's not how it works.
And it was announced the 46th President of the United States.
Isn't it weird that they're saying all these things?
On the 7th, the media projected Joe Biden to be the winner.
Projected.
Pro-jected.
They didn't declare him the winner.
That's not how things work.
They are trying so freakishly hard.
It's very weird.
They say, historically, it is at this point in the election process when ballots haven't been certified at the county or state level that a losing candidate concedes defeat.
That acknowledgment, while not constitutionally required, has come to represent a losing candidate's willingness to help the winner transition into the White House.
It also serves to help the losing candidate's supporters accept the election's outcome.
Cue the above-mentioned claim.
They say, under state and federal laws, the process of cementing voter tallies continues regardless of a candidate's acceptance of the popular vote.
First, and it's not the popular vote, it's state level.
Be specific, man, these people are awful.
First, local election boards certify ballots at a precinct level.
After that, state executive authorities seal states' results via a certification of ascertainment, a document that lists the names of the state's chosen electors who will cast official votes for president through the electoral college.
Deadlines for completing certifications vary by state.
Georgia is the 20th today.
Pennsylvania, the 23rd.
Michigan, the 23rd.
Nevada, the 24th.
Arizona, the 30th.
Wisconsin, December 1st.
Once completed, governors submit their Certificate of Ascertainment to the U.S.
Archivist.
The electors listed on the document then meet at state capitals to formally cast their votes for president and vice president on the Monday after the second Wednesday in December per guidelines outlined in the Constitution in 2020.
That's December 14th.
In other words, it was accurate to state, as of mid-November, several battleground states had not certified results of the popular vote, including Georgia.
However, less clear was whether that fact meant Trump had a chance to overturn Biden's victory.
Via lawsuits and campaign messages to supporters, like the above-displayed fundraising email, the Trump campaign was trying to convince Americans that governments should hold off on certifying ballots because of widespread voter fraud tainted the numbers, even though no evidence showed that was true.
I will say this.
We do not have evidence of widespread voter fraud.
And they keep saying widespread.
There is evidence of voter fraud, such as sworn affidavits.
It's not definitive proof, it's circumstantial evidence.
There are strange mathematical anomalies.
And we do have now from the Voter Integrity Fund, Evidence of widespread voter irregularity.
Very serious differences between that and widespread voter fraud.
The implication that fraud would be intent, that someone actually planned it.
And as we heard from Rudy Giuliani, there seems to be a central, you know, a plan of some sort.
Is it something like that?
I don't believe that.
As of right now, I tell you this.
Show me the evidence.
If you're going to release the Kraken, apparently they already did.
I'm not seeing it.
So I do not agree with the President in that regard.
I do agree, however, that there is clearly evidence of fraud and irregularities that need to be investigated, period.
That's a fact!
It's crazy to me that there's even media saying there's no evidence at all.
There quite literally is evidence.
We have probably hundreds of people now who have signed sworn statements saying, this doesn't add up.
You've got poll watchers and you've got people who submitted ballots and then the state never received them.
That's an irregularity.
Widespread irregularities have been found.
Yet we keep saying no evidence.
They do this trick.
The media says, no evidence of substantial voter fraud that would affect the outcome of the election.
Yes, that's true.
That's 100% true.
There is no evidence of substantial voter fraud that would affect the outcome of the election.
That's because we are hearing the smoke alarm going off and we've yet to go and look to see if there's a fire.
The problem for me is there's no middle ground here.
The way the media is defining this is either you believe there's fraud or you believe there isn't.
And if you believe there's fraud then you're a crazy conspiracy theorist and there's no fraud so you're nuts.
There's actually evidence of fraud and that doesn't necessarily mean Trump should win.
Yeah, there's no middle ground anymore.
The bifurcation is upon us.
They're going to say that it's not clear if Trump has a chance to overturn the results, but let me tell you this.
If the governors have to submit their certificate of ascertainment, then there are multiple more paths.
How about this one?
Ducey defends legal challenges to Arizona election results by Trump backers.
The governor of Arizona said he won't accept the election results until all lawsuits are settled, which means they could certify and then the governor holds the packet and doesn't turn it over to the federal government and says, we are currently facing a legal challenge.
And thus, I'm not going to just hand this off because we haven't resolved these.
And you know what?
It may be political.
It's a good point!
If you've got a legal challenge going through the courts, you can't just ignore that and then send in the results.
There is a deadline, however.
So if at a certain point they said to Trump, you know, you're past the deadline, we're certifying, we're moving forward, I would understand that.
And of course, you're going to see Gretchen Whitmer, she's going to shovel those things so fast.
As soon as she gets the certificate of ascertainment, she's going to overnight it, you know, high speed.
But the governor of Arizona won't.
And that means Joe Biden is potentially going to be losing out on some electoral votes.
I believe that... Do they have the number here?
I don't know.
I think Arizona is, what, 11, I think?
So it's not enough to take away, based on the projections, Joe Biden's projected win.
We don't know how much he'll end up with.
But if Arizona, frozen, If the Michigan State Board won't certify, because this is what people are talking about.
The State Board now has to certify the results of the state, and two of the people on the... It's two Republicans and two Democrats, that's my understanding.
So maybe they don't certify, and then Gretchen Whitmer complains, and then they can't do anything, and they break the deadline, and then two states are out.
And then maybe there's Pennsylvania.
But Trump needs to get three states not to be able to certify.
And then what happens, and Alan Dershowitz has talked about this, is that Joe Biden won't have 270.
Snopes, it's not a mixture.
It's true.
It doesn't mean it's likely to succeed, but it's possible.
I don't know exactly how, if, or how Trump is going to be able to pull it off, but I will say, evidence exists.
The fact that Democrats are saying, ignore this, and the fact that the media is saying, don't look behind the curtain, is really pissing me off.
If they really wanted to solve this problem, they would say, Trump is claiming widespread voter fraud, fine.
Hand recount every single one of these.
Instead, they are running as fast as possible and hiding.
That's not a good sign, is it?
If Joe Biden actually thought he won, he'd say, look, do your recounts.
Don't care.
Do them.
Fine.
Whatever.
I'm going to be prepared to become president because I know I won.
Instead, the media rushes out and says, he won.
He won, everybody.
Ignore the Constitution.
He won.
He didn't.
They're saying he's been declared the winner.
He's not been.
The media doesn't have the official capacity to make these declarations.
This is where it gets freaky because what if Trump actually ends up figuring it out?
This GOP win is probably minor.
The bigger question is Trump's strategy, but I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 1pm on this channel.
Thanks for hanging out, and I will see you all then.
He's calling for Sidney Powell, Trump's lawyer, to show us her evidence.
Now, according to Tucker Carlson, he reached out to her and she refused to provide any evidence.
He said that she eventually got angry and said, stop contacting me.
Now, Tucker has absolutely said there are irregularities, there's fraud, these things should be looked into.
But when he went to Sidney Powell, who made very, very bold claims, She had nothing.
Now here's where it gets spicy.
Sidney Powell says she actually did give Tucker Carlson evidence.
And more to the point, Trump supporters are arguing she shouldn't be releasing all of the evidence in the court of public opinion, which they actually said at their press conference, because they wouldn't get a fair shake.
Not only that, it would make the judges angry.
So listen.
There are two divergent realities.
One in which it is a fact Donald Trump had the election stolen from him.
There are mathematical anomalies.
And I'll tell you this.
From where I stand, I have seen the mathematical anomalies.
They exist.
They're very strange.
I have seen the sworn affidavits alleging fraud.
They exist.
It is evidence.
I have seen widespread irregularities.
They exist.
Does this mean that Donald Trump is correct when he says he won the election if not for the widespread voter fraud or it being rigged?
We have evidence, and I put it this way every time, we hear the smoke alarms going off, it would be prudent of us to check to see if there is fire.
But the mainstream media doesn't want to do that.
They don't want to look for evidence.
They want to claim it doesn't exist.
Tucker Carlson is in an interesting position because he's similar to me saying, yes, we see the evidence, and now he wants to see more.
You know what?
I agree with Tucker.
I want to see something.
To be fair, they've put out some affidavits.
I've seen that.
But the big deal, the kraken, I suppose, is at war.
I think this is the kraken.
I don't know what the kraken is.
They keep saying release the kraken.
It's like the meme now.
Apparently, Dominion voting systems, according to the Trump campaign, were flipping votes from Biden to Trump.
Now, I don't know if that's true, but I can tell you that there was a reported glitch in Michigan where 6,000 Trump votes went to Biden, and it was only because a GOP member saw this and said, that makes no sense.
How is a Republican county voting for Biden in these numbers?
Turns out, glitch.
They later came out and said, no, no, human error.
Well, forgive me if I don't take your word for it.
If we have evidence that votes switched, and they did, then we should look into it.
In Georgia, in three different counties, they found votes for Trump.
Now that sounds like some kind of human error, I suppose.
But if we know that it happened one time, we heard the alarm.
It's time to check it.
Especially, I think that the official numbers now out of Georgia are that Joe Biden's lead dropped by about 13% when they did this, this, this.
It wasn't really an audit.
It was like a risk-limiting audit or whatever.
When they found these ballots.
I think we need to actually take a hard look at these ballots simply because we have so many affidavits saying that these ballots had no creases, they were perfect-looking, and it looked like they were machine-printed.
That's a sworn affidavit of circumstantial evidence.
From there, we should probably get some kind of investigation.
But you know what I love?
I love about all this?
Who was that guy, Bubba Wallace?
His pole rope from his garage triggered a bunch of FBI agents to descend on NASCAR.
And now we've got sworn affidavits alleging fraud and we can't get anything?
Therein lies the big problem.
Now, I can't tell you who's right or wrong in this capacity.
Sidney Powell fires back.
Tucker Carlson was insulting, demanding, and rude, saying, In fact, I sent an affidavit to Tucker that I had not even attached to a pleading yet to help him understand the situation.
I offered him another witness who could explain the mathematics and the statistical evidence far better than I can.
I'm not really a numbers person.
But he was very insulting, demanding, and rude.
And I told him not to contact me again in those terms.
Who's lying?
Tucker says that he reached out for evidence and they didn't give him any.
He has this big long piece, and I think he fairly approaches a lot of the questions of fraud, but I'll tell you what I think.
I think Tucker Carlson, and with what limited respect this is deserving, will call out the issues that need to be talked about, but I do think he's begun hedging his bets.
That's about it.
I'm not going to play any games.
As long as there's outstanding evidence, I will call for it to be investigated, and I will absolutely say as I've said, release the Kraken sounds an awful lot like trust the plan.
But if Tucker Carlson reached out for evidence, and Sidney Powell did provide some, it sounds like Tucker's hedging his bets.
He goes on to say the media's not interested if you watch the coverage.
After the press conference, you saw credentialed reporters all saying, you know, basically, they're clowns or whatever.
Giuliani says the Jacob affidavit has been made public, but they can't be bothered to check.
Instead, they launched new editorials about how dishonest and crazy Giuliani is.
They're making fun of him for sweating.
They're showing these photos that make him look crazy.
I am not a fan, and I will not trust the media when they don't take these things seriously or they don't play fair.
Giuliani claimed that voters in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh were allowed to change their ballots after the fact.
So this is the key point of Trump's lawsuit in Pennsylvania, that some districts were allowed to cure, meaning if their ballot was deficient in some way, they'd notify the voter and others weren't, thereby taking away the right of some people to vote.
That's what the judge asked.
To put it simply, the way I see it is this.
If you ask people, we're going to have a fair race.
Everybody's going to run.
And then right before the race starts, you say, oh, hey, you know, you've got to fix your shoes.
You put your shoes on.
And the other person isn't given the opportunity to put their shoes on.
Well, then clearly the person wearing shoes is going to win, right?
That's the big problem.
In Democrat counties, they are allowed to cure.
But anyway, I digress.
It's a pretty long-winded thing.
He goes on to say, On Sunday night, Tucker Carlson Tonight texted Sidney Powell after watching one of our segments.
What Powell was describing would amount to the single greatest crime in American history.
Millions of votes stolen in a day.
Democracy destroyed.
The end of our centuries-old system of self-government.
Not a small thing.
Now to be perfectly clear, we did not dismiss any of it.
We don't dismiss anything anymore.
Particularly when it's related to technology.
He goes on to mention that they actually do segments on UFOs.
He says, there's evidence of a lot of things that responsible people dismiss out of hand as ridiculous are in fact real.
The louder the Yale Political Science Department and the staff of the Atlantic Magazine scream conspiracy theory, the more interested we tend to be.
That's usually a sign you're over the target.
A lot of people with impressive-sounding credentials in this country are frauds.
They have no idea what they're doing.
They're children posing as authorities, and when they're caught, they lie, and then they blame you for it.
We see that every day.
It's the central theme of our show, and will continue to be.
That's a long way of saying we took Sidney Powell seriously with no intention of fighting with her.
We've always respected her work.
We simply wanted to see the details.
How could you not want to see them?
So we invited Sidney Powell on the show.
We would have given her the whole hour.
We would have given her the entire week, actually, and listened quietly the whole time at rapt attention.
But she never sent us any evidence, despite a lot of polite requests.
When we kept pressing, she got angry and told us to stop contacting her.
When we checked with others on the Trump campaign, people in positions of authority, they also told us Powell had never given them any evidence to prove anything she claimed today at the press conference.
Powell did say that electronic voting is dangerous, and she's right.
But she never demonstrated that a single actual vote was moved illegitimately by software from one candidate to another, not one.
Why are we telling you this?
We're telling you this because it's true.
And in the end, that's all that matters.
The truth is our only hope and our best defense.
It's how we're different from them.
We care what's true.
We know you care too.
Maybe Sidney Powell will come forward soon with details on exactly how this happened and precisely who did it.
We are certainly hopeful that she will.
What happened will be the vote counting this month at the polling places in Detroit and the polling places in Philadelphia.
And so much else actually matters.
It matters no matter who you voted for.
Whether or not you think this election is already over, until we know the answers to those questions conclusively and we can agree on them, this country will not be united.
Now, what's at issue here?
Because I agree with Tucker.
I mean, that was a very rational approach.
What's at issue is whether or not Sidney Powell actually sent him evidence, because she says she did.
I'll tell you my problem with this.
First and foremost, I would not be surprised if Tucker Carlson wants to hedge his bets, but Fox News is burning.
Like, they're burning down in the ratings.
I don't think Fox News intentionally wants to destroy their viewership.
So then what's the deal?
Are they secretly part of the Deep State?
I don't know.
I can't, I don't, I'm not, I should say probably not is the easier way to put it.
I don't think so.
I think Tucker is fairly reasonable and principled.
I will say Fox has been very bad at this outside of Tucker for the most part.
Many of the reporters on Fox are saying things like Joe Biden is the president.
That's irresponsible.
We can project Joe Biden the winner.
I have no problem with saying that.
I believe it's very likely Joe Biden will be the next president.
But he's not the president-elect right now, so long as Trump is fighting.
You can argue that Trump is wasting time and throwing a temper tantrum, whatever you want to say.
I don't care.
Until the Electoral College votes, there is no president-elect.
Respect the Constitution.
The media wants to just say it.
Fine, they can say whatever they want.
That's ridiculous.
But here's my problem.
Sidney Powell coming out and saying, I did send an affidavit to Tucker.
Okay.
Can you prove that to us?
Because I gotta trust one of you, right?
Tucker says you didn't send him anything.
You're saying you sent him an affidavit, but I still can't see the affidavit, and there's no third party to vet that you actually did.
To be fair, the response from Trump supporters and from Sidney Powell and the Trump legal team was, we can't publish all of this evidence before we go to court with it.
But I tell you this.
She mentions a witness that's going to explain the mathematics and statistical evidence far better than I can.
There is.
A lot of mathematical evidence.
I don't know how you vet that other than it's just expert testimony.
And maybe it matters.
Maybe it warrants an investigation to go find hard evidence.
I would say so.
Evidence is defined as signs or indications of something.
And the available body of evidence, the available body of information, to indicate that something may be.
In which case, seeing all these mathematical anomalies that need to be explained cannot just be debunked by the media.
And that's what CNN keeps saying.
We've debunked these claims.
No, offering up a passive explanation is not debunking anything.
It's like if they say, why is it that at 3 in the morning, at 3.42 a.m., 143,000 votes came in, 98% for Joe Biden, or 100% for Joe Biden?
23,000 votes came in 98% for Joe Biden or a hundred percent for Joe Biden
They say oh easy because they count them all and then publish the numbers. That's not debunking
That's just you trying to explain something.
Debunking would be like going to the actual security camera footage and finding witnesses and having sworn statements where they say, here's exactly what we did and how it works, looking at the machines and saying, that's the process.
That would be debunking.
Just saying it doesn't debunk anything.
Having a journalist go, oh, that's easy.
They all came out at the same time.
Duh.
That's the concern.
They're saying that, well, we trickle in all the other counties, but the mail-in votes all come in at the exact same time.
That may be, and I'm fine with that.
But you need to do better than just say, that's it.
Okay?
Just telling me, here's why you think it happened this way, or here's what they've said, is not debunking something.
It's not evidence.
I'll tell you what though, I'll tell you what.
My friends, I know, maybe I go back and forth on whether or not I think Trump is going to win because there's constantly changes in this.
I've been saying I think Joe Biden's going to win for some time.
I think it's extremely likely.
I don't outright just believe Trump lost due to widespread voter fraud.
I believe there's evidence of fraud and there's widespread irregularities.
Proving the irregularities is fraud is going to be very difficult, but it needs to happen.
We need to look into this if we want to actually have a constitutional and democratic election process, which we're not going to have if the media just thinks they can declare victory.
But I'll tell you, look.
You can make fun of Trump's team and dismiss their claims, but they've got evidence.
They got the affidavits.
There's irregularities.
But you can also, look, to those that want to dismiss the absurdity of these press conferences, I'm sorry, man.
There's a middle ground understanding of it.
I think it's fair to say that the Trump legal team has Made some mistakes, to put it mildly.
It doesn't mean they're going to lose.
And there's only a few things.
I shouldn't say the Trump legal team necessarily, but the lawsuits on behalf of Trump, certainly many of them have floundered.
For Trump himself, his campaign, I'm not entirely convinced.
Could they be doing better?
Yes.
And I think one of the challenges is with Sidney Powell coming out saying that, you know, Hugo Chavez had a hand in these Dominion voting systems and it was used in Venezuela years and years ago.
Those are bold claims!
And there's an old saying, those who know don't say, and those who say don't know.
If you really have the evidence, she should say, wait till our day in court, you'll see.
And that's it.
Instead, they come out and they make these claims, but they don't back them up.
So here's the problem.
I recognize.
I recognize 100% that she shouldn't put out evidence, it should go before a judge and not some talk show.
That makes sense.
But then why come out and make the bold claims knowing you can't actually back them up publicly?
Why not just say, right now, we have evidence of fraud and impropriety.
The evidence needs to be presented before a judge, before the court of public opinion.
For that, I apologize, but please understand we're lawyers, we take these matters very seriously, and we hope you respect the legal process as we bring about these challenges.
Instead, we get, the Dominion voting system's the biggest crime in American history, they're switching votes, votes, millions of votes, look at the math, it's crazy!
Do you have evidence?
Well, I can't show you the evidence right now.
Fine.
Maybe at the worst, it's just irresponsible.
But let me show you this.
From Powerline.
Powerline blog is right-leaning.
They've investigated Ilhan Omar to an extreme degree.
In fact, most of the breaking news about Ilhan Omar's impropriety comes from Powerline.
And they published this.
Do Trump's lawyers know what they are doing?
They do bring up very interesting data.
Check this out.
lawyers, including Giuliani, Sidney Powell, held a press conference in which they alleged
they have convincing, if not conclusive evidence, that the presidential election was rigged
and that in addition to garden variety voter fraud, hundreds of thousands of votes were
added to Joe Biden's totals through electronic manipulation.
They do bring up very interesting data.
Check this out.
They mentioned this based on the significant anomalies and red flags that we have observed.
We believe there is a significant probability that election results have been manipulated
within the Dominion premier system in Michigan.
Another statistical red flag is evident in the number of votes cast compared to the number of voters in some precincts.
A preliminary analysis using data obtained from the Michigan Secretary of State pinpoints a statistical anomaly so far outside of every statistical norm as to be virtually impossible.
There were at least 19 precincts where the presidential votes cast compared to the estimated voters based on reported statistics exceeded 100%.
This is a screenshot of a list of 19 precincts.
We can see in Benville Township, estimated voters to the reported votes, I suppose, is 350%.
Voter turnout well exceeded the amount of votes they were actually supposed to get.
Monticello P2 was 138. We can see 104, 103. Numbers exceeding 100% are huge red flags.
They say, Wayne County uses Dominion equipment.
46 out of 47 precincts townships display a highly unlikely 96% plus as the number of votes cast.
Using the Secretary of State's number of voters in the precinct township, and 25% of those 47 precinct townships show 100% turnout.
You know why 100% turnout is typically impossible?
Because people move and people die.
That's it.
I was reading about this in Australia, where they have compulsory voting and you can vote online or by mail.
They still only get to around 90-95% turnout because people move and people die.
Yet here, we have seen major red flags in many of these districts.
The reason I'm showing you this, and the reason Powerline asked, do Trump's lawyers know what they're doing?
Is that these are in Minnesota, not Michigan.
They say perhaps someone confused MI for Minnesota instead of Michigan.
Like, someone on the Trump legal team was looking at this, saw MI, and thought it meant Michigan.
I don't know how that would play out.
Somebody made a mistake.
Maybe they meant to say, look at Minnesota.
Instead, they said, look at Michigan.
Regardless, this is being called out from everyone on the left and many people on the right.
Many people on the right who are Trump supporters saying, look, we want him to win, but this is ridiculous.
Here's my position.
I don't know who's right, Tucker, Sidney, whatever.
I don't care!
I really don't.
You know what I care about?
Show me the evidence, and until then, I will not impugn the honor of Sidney Powell.
She can do her thing, and she can say what she wants, and I'm chillin', man!
The media's freaking out, saying, this is dangerous to our democracy!
She needs to stop!
And I'm like, who cares?
If it turns out she's saying wingnut crackpot nonsense, then we just carry on with our lives.
And if it turns out she has the evidence, then we...
Move forward with some kind of criminal prosecution, I guess.
I'll tell you what is interesting.
She says Dominion did this thing, right?
Apparently Dominion was supposed to testify before some group of politicians, I guess, a Republican GOP in Pennsylvania said they pulled out at the last minute.
Why would they do that?
And they're lawyering up.
So a lot of people think there may actually be impropriety on the part of Dominion.
But to be honest, because they're being accused, so they're gonna lawyer up.
Dominion, I guess, is a Canadian company.
Why are we using foreign companies with proprietary software for our election systems anyway?
That's ridiculous.
And when you get someone like Justin Trudeau talking about some reset, you know, the Great Reset, come on, man.
We should not be listening to this.
But I'll tell you what.
Republicans say there's no way in hell Trump lost.
Brett Fryer is a middle-class Republican, a 50-year-old chiropractor in this West Texas town, Sundown.
He owns a small business.
He has two undergraduate degrees and a master's degree in organic chemistry.
He attends South Crest Baptist Church in nearby Lubbock.
Friar didn't much like Donald Trump at first.
He voted for Ted Cruz in the primaries.
Now, Friar says he would go to war for Trump.
He has joined the newly formed South Plains Patriots, a group of a few hundred members that includes a reactionary force of about three dozen, including Friar and his son.
This guy wasn't a fan of Trump in 2016.
He didn't like him in the 2016.
He voted for Ted Cruz in the primary.
There are a lot of people who switch for Trump.
And they straight up say, check this out, Quote, if President Trump comes out and says, guys, I have irrefutable proof of fraud, the courts won't listen, and now I'm calling on Americans to take up arms, we would go, said Fryer, wearing a button-down shirt, press slacks, and a paisley tie.
I show you this to leave you with one thought as we wrap this segment.
It doesn't matter what you think is true.
Now I think when it comes to saving the planet, you know, in terms of environmental destruction or humanity, in terms of energy technologies and the economy, truth is very important.
Understanding the science and the facts are very important.
When it comes to political power, it isn't.
And when you have the left demanding that they get power because they're the saviors and the right demanding power because they think there's, you know, nefarious elements trying to steal things, steal the election or hurt people, It doesn't matter what is true.
It matters what people believe.
It's an unfortunate reality.
Not that I'm a fan, I think it's horrifying.
But if these people say, I trust Trump more than I trust the media, and that's a lot of people, if Trump comes out and says, the fraud is irrefutable, and they release proof but the courts don't care, you're gonna find a lot of people are gonna be very much Trump loyalists.
So we're in a very pressing moment in our history.
The fact that people would immediately turn on Tucker and not hear him out and say, You know what?
Maybe Tucker's wrong.
Maybe Sidney shouldn't release evidence.
I like his show.
I think he's honest.
No, they're straight up saying he's abandoned them to join the Deep State or whatever.
Or he's turned his back on them.
Or he was always a shill, controlled opposition, whatever.
Because people...
They have their tribes, and there are diehards in their tribes.
But I'll tell you all, left or right, the biggest tribe is the leave-me-alone tribe, and that presents a really serious problem for the right.
The left controls cultural institutions, which means they don't have to do anything, for the most part, to seize power, because people want to be left alone, and they won't fight back.
That means the left can harass, censor, demonetize, all of these things to conservatives, and the leave-me-alone faction just says, leave me alone.
So conservatives are getting crushed in many ways and that'll be the future.
Then eventually the leave me alone people will be the conservatives and they'll beg and they'll cry and then they'll get crushed too.
I mean that figuratively, by the way.
Look, I don't know if Sidney Powell did or didn't send evidence.
She says she did.
I have no reason to think she's lying.
I wonder why Tucker said she didn't.
Pick one, right?
In the end, you're gonna have the left saying Trump is cheating and trying to overthrow the results of the election and you're gonna have the right saying Trump is fighting back against the coup who did steal the election.
Where that leads us?
I don't know.
Probably chaos.
But 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.
My friends, I must issue a trigger warning.
I know I don't often do.
Sometimes I do, seriously, if it's like a graphic or gross kind of thing I need to talk about for some reason.
But typically, no trigger warnings.
But this time, you all may be triggered by what you're about to hear.
Now, who am I kidding?
Y'all are gonna laugh when you hear this, but it's not going to be pleasant to hear.
It's just funny.
I am now going to play for you the noise that the media made when VP Pence walked away from the podium.
I believe this was just the other day, but I hope you are prepared to hear this.
So, let me make sure I turn the volume down a little bit.
Why did a man yell, you're all undermining democracy, you're undermining our elections?
My friends, here's what I said.
As Trump nears his presidential exit, the media is in full panic because the golden goose is going away.
This noise you hear is their death rattle.
The sounds made when the media beast realizes it's about to die.
They were yelling at no one.
No one was there.
They were just randomly yelling things.
You're undermining democracy!
Why won't you answer questions?
They weren't asking anybody a question.
Nobody was in the room but them.
It was actually just a distressed whale from like a dying creature laying on its side going, I know it's sad.
It's sad to watch.
Now, I don't know if Trump is going to truly be out, but it's looking that way.
I went on to say, they aren't asking anyone questions.
Pence already left.
They are yelling out at no one for no reason.
It is the sound of a dying animal scared and alone.
The TDS-addled media will begin to hunger, and they will turn to anything that allows them to feed.
Perhaps it will be Biden.
Perhaps it will be Trumpism.
But the writing is on the wall for all of these people.
They spent the last four, almost more than that, because there was the campaign, they spent these past several years screaming at Donald Trump that he was the evil orange man, but now he's gone.
Mike Pence walked away.
Reminds me of that saying, you know, they say, um... How does it go?
It's like, uh, one day you picked up your child for the last time and didn't realize it.
It's sad, isn't it?
You know, you've got your little kid, and you're carrying him, and then one day you don't, and then you never pick him up again.
And I heard that story once, and someone posted on Reddit, when his dad read it on his computer, he walked over and grabbed his, like, 25-year-old son, who was like, what are you doing?
And he's like, here, he showed him, like, there you go, I picked you up.
It's funny.
But it's basically them saying, this could be the last time you spout your garbage nonsense to the Trump administration.
And they know it.
Ladies and gentlemen, I now give you the glorious collapse of media.
You see, in fear that the Trump bump will be gone and they will revert back to the way things used to be when their ratings were in the gutter, Shane Smith, the former CEO of Vice Media, said several years ago there was going to be a bloodbath in digital media.
But then something happened to stave off the end.
The Orange Man showed up and they couldn't stop talking about him.
But, as many of these people now believe, Donald Trump on the way out means no more money.
None.
Here it is.
AT&T reportedly looking to sell CNN after hit from halting Trump.
AT&T is reportedly $150 billion in debt.
Now, yeah, you're probably saying, I heard this.
You did, but I gotta bring it up.
Why wouldn't AT&T sell CNN before?
Their debt didn't just appear one day.
It's because they know CNN is worthless without Trump.
If there's no Orange Man, how is the Orange Man bad network going to survive?
In fact, their best bet would be to hire Trump and have him say random things, and then it would be 24 hours all-apprentice all the time.
I mean, it almost basically is.
My friends, there's more.
I hope you're ready for this.
Ezra Klein and Lauren Williams are leaving Vox.
Ezra Klein founded Vox.
He's leaving?
Why?
Because they see the writing on the wall.
Now that the election is winding down and they've milked Trump for all that they can get.
They're jumping ship.
Over at Vox, guess what?
It's not just Ezra Klein.
Why Matthew Iglesias left Vox?
He is the latest high-profile writer to abandon traditional media.
Matthew Iglesias, also a founder of Vox, has jumped ship.
Why is the leadership of a progressive news outlet abandoning their very successful platform?
Could it be that they know the ship is going to sink?
You see, here's what happened.
The ship was sinking the whole time.
Like I mentioned with Shane Smith saying a bloodbath.
As all of these boats erupted with massive leaks, they ran down and they grabbed a giant Donald Trump and shoved him in the hole to stop the sinking.
And the boat stayed afloat as an angry Donald Trump wiggled and writhed saying, let me out of here!
I know, it's a funny analogy, right?
Well, now Trump has finally wiggled his way out of the ship, and the water is coming on board again, and their boat is sinking.
Before the boat completely sinks, they're getting off.
Because, look.
Nobody, if you want to get a job, if you want to launch a career, so Matthew Iglesias is going to do a private sub-stack thing where he can write whatever he wants.
Ezra Klein is going to the New York Times.
Well, you want to be a hot commodity.
Just before the end hits and you still have some personal brand equity, you go to the New York Times and say, don't you know who I am?
They say, okay, we'll offer you X amount of dollars.
You say, awesome.
And then you're actually sweating bullets because you're like, if I waited one more month, I'd be worth nothing.
If they wait two more months and Trump ends up out of the White House, They're worthless.
Like their salaries are worth nothing.
New York Times is gonna be like, eh, like, you guys, nobody reads your stuff.
Why should we hire you?
Right now!
Hey, hot commodity, orange man bad.
But wait!
Did I say I was done?
BuzzFeed to acquire Huffington Post in stock deal with Verizon Media.
New media companies have been exploring mergers as they try to jumpstart growth.
Why do they need to jumpstart growth?
Is there something coming that they're worried about?
Ah, maybe Trump won't be president anymore and they'll have nothing to write about.
And then what are they gonna do?
Here's my favorite example of, like, the worst being yet to come.
Ivanka Trump farted.
You see this story?
It's from a couple days ago.
But it's a whole bunch of different outlets.
Metro, Daily News, Daily Mail, Mary Sue.
Ivanka Trump farts and blames someone else.
Breaking news!
That's the death rattle.
You know what a death rattle is?
It's like when someone or something is dying and then like their muscles give out and so they just gargle because like the gases are escaping and it's bubbling all the water or whatever.
That's what we're hearing.
It's the end.
The end is nigh.
This was all, well, I don't want to say it was predicted.
They tried, they tried, okay, to defend that they would survive without Trump.
Poynter wrote, this is, when did they write this?
August 11th.
Would a Trump loss in November be bad for the media business?
The New York Times is not going anywhere.
Fox News will motor along.
The news will carry on regardless of who lives in the White House.
Uh-uh.
Not true.
My favorite part is that they mention that, like, Fox News is fine.
But what of some of the national political outlets?
What about CNN and MSNBC and Fox News?
Would a Joe Biden victory be bad for business?
They say, In a story by Digiday's Steven Pearlberg, former CNN
president Jonathan Klein said, what would go away is the bad guy in the story. There's no
antagonist, so what are we tuning in for? Grandpa's a nice guy, everybody might be relieved to
not watch as much cable news anymore, and go find a book to read, a garden to plant, or a
socially-distant...
distance walk to take. I'm not sure that is true. For starters, Fox News will continue to motor along.
Ah, back in August, if only they had known that Fox News viewers are abandoning them in droves
for Newsmax. It's already the most watched cable station with Trump in the White House.
Without Trump, you'll have a target to criticize nightly in Biden.
Meantime, the other networks won't be obsessing over Trump, but there will still be news.
That's not an answer to the problem.
They were suffering before Trump.
What replaces him?
Plus, there's a chance that viewers currently suffering Trump fatigue might be more engaged in the news again.
There's also a good possibility that if Biden does become president, there won't be nightly conversations about the president's last tweet.
There might not be a daily question of, did you see what the president did today?
One reporter who currently has a TV deal with one of the networks told Pearlberg, there isn't going to be an arms race for Joe Biden TV analysts.
A senior producer told Barr, I don't know anybody who wants to do another four years of this news cycle.
That doesn't necessarily mean the media is rooting against Trump because of politics.
Quote, as journalists, I don't think anybody cares about what party the President of the United States is.
What they care about is being able to live their lives normally again.
I think there's mental exhaustion around the presidency, and I don't know anybody who is enjoying it.
Could the same be said of his audience?
Of the audience?
Either way, the news will carry on regardless of who lives in the White House.
Ha ha ha ha ha ha!
Wrong.
Wrong.
Look, I run a business.
I got employees.
I know what it means to be coming off of an election.
When you have a salaried job and you have a contract, you're like, I get paid X dollars per year.
No matter what happens, you're getting X dollars per year if you have a contract.
Now maybe you're a salaried employee, you make 50 to 70K.
You're gonna get that no matter what happens.
Whether you make money or not, the name of the game for most media businesses is, if you produce slightly more than you cost, then you stay.
Period.
Because we can sustain this.
But here's what's going to happen.
A bunch of these outlets, Vox for instance, CNN, they increased their staff as their ratings grew around the Trump bump.
Now that the election is over, everybody knows ad revenue is being cut in half, and ratings are going to drop dramatically.
The month before the election was glorious, because every political campaign and super PAC were dumping money like crazy into the race.
And you had an attentive audience desperately trying to watch what's happening to know what's going to go on, know what may occur.
But then the election ends, and we're still in a period where people kind of want to know, but it's sort of fading.
Viewership is going down across the board, it always does after elections, this is a fact, and there's no more political campaigns spending money.
It's not going to be another, it's going to be another year and a half or so before we get into a full swing election cycle, so we'll see how 2022 plays out, and that means these companies have to shave costs.
Because they're artificially enlarged by an election.
So you know what's gonna happen?
They's gonna fire a ton of people.
They are going to purge these outlets.
Bye-bye.
And that noise you heard in the very beginning was them knowing what was going to come.
How insane was that video?
Like, I think it's Caitlin Collins.
I don't know who was the last person yelling.
Just like, no one's in the room anymore.
They're gone and you're going, wait, where are you going?
Your clout on social media will become meaningless.
Nobody wants to follow Jim Acosta.
Come on!
They follow him because he yells at Trump.
What's he gonna do after Trump?
Nothing!
Me, on the other hand, I make stupid jokes all the time.
And I sometimes talk about Sonic the Hedgehog, like I did earlier this year.
And ultimately, I just don't care.
I'm one person.
If all this goes belly up or whatever, whatever.
I'm a dude sitting in his room complaining on the internet.
I'll have at it.
The rest of these companies, though, not so much.
But I do have some... I do want to talk about a specific incident with Kayleigh McEnany, so stick around.
I got a couple more segments coming up in a few minutes, and I will see you all shortly.
In my last segment, I talked about the last dying gasp of an angry anti-Trump media apparatus.
You see, in this country, they milked the Trump for four years to make money.
The Trump bump, as it were.
And now that there are fears that Trump is on the way out, and the Trump campaign is fighting tooth and nail to win in this legal battle, the media has become shocked, desperate, and scared.
Which brings me to this one particular moment of great merit.
Now normally I don't like doing segments just about things like this, but it must be said, it must be said, because we need to talk about what the media really is.
From the Daily Beast, CNN reporter fires back at Kayleigh McEnany's activist snipe.
You're not doing your job!
What's funnier, Kayleigh McEnany was wrapping up a press event, a conference, and Caitlin Collins of CNN said, you know, tried to ask a question.
Kayleigh McEnany says, I don't call on activists.
So, CNN reporter says, you're not doing your job.
Oh, because she won't call on you?
It's her job to call on you?
Oh, poor baby.
Now, I have to say, Kayleigh, I hope you're listening, because I am offended!
I am deeply triggered and offended by you calling Caitlin Collins an activist!
How dare you, madam.
You see, Caitlin Collins isn't an activist.
That's an insult to activists.
Activists believe in a cause.
Sometimes they're misguided and sometimes they're not, but they're people who truly believe in fighting for something they believe in.
I'm kidding, by the way.
I'm not really offended.
That was a joke.
The point is, Caitlin Collins isn't an activist.
She's something much worse.
Caitlin Collins, like many other CNN personalities and other media personalities, only do what they do for shock value to get followers.
Here's what she tweeted.
Appearing in her professional capacity, Press Secretary takes only a handful of questions in her first briefing since October 1st.
Asked why can't call on all reporters, given it's been so long and there are not many of us due to social distancing, she called me an activist.
It's understandable why someone who hasn't done their job, taking questions from reporters, in weeks would confuse someone else doing theirs with activism.
Do you know what Caitlin Collins is?
It's not media reporting.
Her tweet, with 5.4 thousand retweets, is clapback.
That's all it is.
It's what these people have become, and it's what many of these progressive personalities have become, and even some conservatives.
It's all about clapback.
When they do those tweets with all the little claps, I am doing my job.
You're not doing your job.
That's not journalism.
Journalism would be raising your hand and saying, I have a question about the campaign's efforts in their legal battles, and if they don't call on you, you say, you know, sometimes they don't call on you.
It's not even activism to do what she's doing.
You see, if Caitlin Collins said, you are trying to undermine democracy and your campaign, and you working with Trump is bad for this country, and she has said things like that, then I'd be like, that's you as an activist blurting out and interrupting this, you know, press briefing.
But that's not what Caitlin Collins does for the most part.
This tweet is not designed to push a cause.
This tweet, and what she says, is not designed to inform her audience.
What Caitlin Collins is doing is trying to clap back to get followers on Twitter.
Essentially, our political landscape has become that of influencers, and boy do I loathe what's to come in the future, if this is all we have left.
Kayleigh McEnany refuses to answer when Donald Trump will concede, arguing President's meeting with Michigan Republicans is not an advocacy meeting.
White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany refused to say on Friday when Trump will concede to Joe Biden, arguing there's an ongoing litigation the campaign is pursuing first.
There is ongoing litigation.
We know that 74 million Americans have voted for this president, and more votes than any president has gotten in history, she said at her first press briefing since October 1st.
Any president, not candidate.
So Trump did receive the most of any president.
There are very real claims the campaign are pursuing, she said of the campaign's ongoing litigation.
We are taking it day by day.
We will wait for that litigation as it plays out.
Biden received nearly 80 million, this we know.
They say, Daily Mail says 290 votes.
That's interesting.
McEnany argued the large number of mail-in ballots—more than 65 million Americans use the system for voting—raised questions about the results.
This is a system that has never been tried in American history—mass mail-out voting.
It's one we have identified as being prone to fraud.
That's a fact.
Multiple studies have shown that there is very little voter fraud in mail-in voting, and there have been no reports of major fraud this year.
I'm going to stop right there and say, Daily Mail, you're not citing anything.
The Daily Mail says, without evidence, that there are studies.
What studies?
Where?
Because I can talk about a study that came out from Jimmy Carter that said absentee and mail-in voting resulted in a higher likelihood of fraud.
Open the door.
I can cite the New York Times 2012 piece that said increase in absentee voting is resulting in an increase in potential fraud.
That's me citing things.
You can't just say that.
But anyway, I know, I know.
That's the gist of what the meeting was about, okay?
Here is the Daily Beast's take.
CNN White House correspondent Caitlin Collins was in no mood for White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany's anti-media snark on Friday afternoon, telling the former pundit-turned-Trump flak, no, Trump flak, no, that she's failing to uphold her taxpayer-funded duties.
At the end of her first White House press briefing since October 1st, McEnany refused to take questions.
Only a handful.
Ending her remarks with a pre-written rant about how Democrats and the intelligence community have been unfair to President Trump during the presidency, McEnany started to walk away as reporters shouted at her to take more questions.
I don't call on activists, she sniped.
I'm not an activist, and you haven't taken questions since October 1st, the CNN reporter shouted back as McEnany fled.
And you just took about five, Kayleigh.
That's not doing your job, your taxpayer-funded job.
Oh, no.
She's not giving you the opportunity to do your clap-back-finger-snap.
That's too bad.
You're not a journalist.
Neither is Jim Acosta.
CNN is the Orange Man Bad Network, and I am so looking forward to them selling the network, and I hope Trump buys it.
They probably wouldn't sell it to him.
They'd probably block the sale on the grounds that Trump would gut the company, but I would love to see.
A Trump supporter buy CNN and just change the whole thing.
It's a worthless network.
AT&T knows it and they're in debt and it was sold in the first place because it's a worthless network.
Did you know that CNN pays something like six or seven million dollars to appear in airports?
You ever wonder why that is?
They pay for that.
That's their value.
Their ratings are not particularly good in the first place.
But this is where we're at so far, and this is where things are going.
Good on you, Kaley McEnany, for giving some pushback to the media.
And to be fair, I don't think it's necessarily that necessary.
I've never been a big fan of, you know, sniping at people or whatever, whatever they want to call it.
And I do want to make sure I'm absolutely clear that Katelyn Collins is not an activist.
These people in media Their whole shtick over the past several years has been, how can I maximize personal brand?
Jim Acosta, for instance, would stand up and just ramble.
He wouldn't even ask a question, oh, President Trump, you said in a recent meeting that you wanted to build a wall, but we know the wall.
And then you're like, okay, dude, what's the question?
Well, hold on, you know the wall.
And then you have that woman who tried to take the mic from him, and then a whole thing happened where nobody knew who shoved who, and it was like, I think this... You get the point.
Jim Acosta then went on to write a book called The Enemy... I think it was called The Enemy of the People.
There you go.
I'm promoting you, Jim.
How about that?
That's what you want, right?
This is what they want.
They want the Sass to generate press for their brand.
You know what the funny thing about Caitlin Collins is?
I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure she used to work for the Daily Caller, Tucker Carlson's news outlet.
Yeah.
And Oliver Darcy of CNN, he used to work for Business Insider and before that, he was a conservative.
He tried doing these videos where he'd walk around doing the gotcha videos where he'd walk up to people and be like, you're a dumb lib!
And then answer the question.
You know, there's a period where Oliver Darcy of CNN, he interviewed me because I defended free speech.
I said it's bad that Twitter is banning the alt-right, the slippery slope.
And so he interviewed me, actually published a piece talking about why the alt-right should be allowed to speak.
Now Oliver Darcy claims everything that I don't like is fake news.
They're not activists.
They're something worse.
They're pretending to care about a cause.
They feign interest in any of this stuff.
Meanwhile, they're just checking their tweet numbers, their retweet numbers, their likes, and trying to drum up some kind of attention.
That's it.
Look, I'll tell you what I am.
I'm a dude who complains about his feelings on the internet.
You're never gonna see me go to a press briefing and just yell.
Mike Cernovich did it.
Mike Cernovich went to a press briefing and yelled, why aren't you doing your jobs at them?
But guess what?
Mike Cernovich isn't going around pretending to be a journalist, nor is he working for CNN.
In fact, the dude is a Trump supporter, at least as far as I can tell.
I mean, I don't know where he currently stands.
But he was one of the most prominent Trump supporters, one of the most prominent conservatives, and his whole bit was being politically active.
So when he yelled at the press, that was a legitimate complaint.
The only problem is, he was kind of yelling at political commentators, and pundits, and clap-back sass artists.
That's all they really were, and it's all they really are.
And so you know what?
There's one thing that I would look forward to, assuming that Trump does end up leaving the White House.
The media's Sad, grotesque, and brutal demise.
They're not going to get the ratings.
People like Jim Acosta won't be able to get the clicks anymore.
Okay, maybe some people wanted to vote for Joe Biden.
But most people just voted against Donald Trump.
And so that's the reality of what's about to happen.
The media is burning down.
They... I've been saying it for a while, they secretly love Trump.
They love all the attention they get, they love the fight, but the fight is going away, for the most part.
They're still talking about going after Trumpism, and the culture war's not gonna stop.
But maybe Trump isn't gonna leave.
So I don't know exactly what we can expect.
But it'll be really weird if Trump somehow finds a way to stay in the White House.
And I mean, it'll be weird with the media.
Trump finding a way to stay in the White House, we know what's going on with that.
But, uh, I'm sure they have their fingers crossed right now.
Oh, I can't say it publicly, but I hope Trump wins!
Because, you know, the alternative is, you're fired!
Nobody needs you if you can't generate revenue for their company.
And all you do is complain about Trump, so good luck with that.
I'll leave it there.
I got one more segment coming up in just a few minutes.
Stick around, and I will see you all shortly.
All right, this one is really, really weird.
Joe Biden is fundraising for the transition.
Joe Biden is trying to raise money through you and his supporters, I guess, for the transition, and he's blaming Trump for it.
This is really, really weird.
It's really weird.
There is a fear that we may end up with two presidents somehow.
You see, the media has called it for Joe Biden saying he's been declared the winner.
Sorry, media, you don't get to declare that!
But over on the legal side of things, there's a potential that Trump wins, be it a very, very long shot, and it's through a legal victory, and to be honest, it's very little to do with proving fraud or anything like that.
It's about delaying certification.
So, um, this is weird.
You see, there could be an instance where Donald Trump ends up winning in the courts, and then the Supreme Court says, you won.
But then the media says, no, he didn't!
We already called it!
It's Joe Biden!
And I think it would add to that idea being possible by the fact that Joe Biden is asking regular people to pitch in through ActBlue, a fundraising website, to fund his transition team.
This is weird.
Kamala Harris also hasn't resigned from her Senate seat.
Because President Trump refuses to concede and is delaying the transition, we have to fund it ourselves and need your help.
If you're able, chip in to help fund the Biden-Harris transition.
And here we go, baby.
Thank you for your generosity and continued support as we prepared to build our nation back better.
This is just one of the weirdest things I've ever seen.
Uh, dude, they didn't declare you the winner yet.
Think about what this means.
If Trump really does have a path to victory, and he does win in the courts, and it is possible, how weird would it be that people donated money to a guy who is not the president-elect?
I wonder.
They don't say here, President-elect, do they?
I don't think so.
They just say, they say, PT funding is established and maintained under Section 501c4 of the Internal Revenue Code and the Presidential Transition Act of 1963 to assist with and prepare for the presidential transition.
Okay, there we go.
Pursuant to the Presidential Transition Act of 1963, contributions are limited to $5,000 per individual.
You know what?
I'll be fair.
Maybe I'm just ignorant, and people often donate so that a president can transition fine.
I've not seen this before, probably because we've not had the internet function at a time where it was ever necessary.
But I will say, what happens if you donate 5 grand or 50 bucks or whatever, and then Trump ends up winning?
Or what happens if there's just a large quantity of people who don't back down?
Where does that money go?
What do they do with it?
I don't know.
My buddy Adam says, the comments on this piece of crap post.
Yeah, people are laughing.
How about this?
Think on this.
What if Obama refused to concede and leave office?
What if Obama was courting Michigan legislators to the White House to overturn an election?
What would Mitch, Lindsay, and Republicans do?
Dems reach across the aisle, but gut-punch corruption first.
What would happen?
Uh, yes, that's a really good point.
What would happen if Trump meets with Michigan legislators and then Biden doesn't win and you paid for him?
Well, 61% think Trump should concede to Biden, and this is from Rasmussen.
So I do find it very interesting.
And this is why I kind of think we are inching towards Joe Biden being president.
Rasputin says most voters now believe President Trump should admit that he lost the election, although they're less certain their friends and neighbors would agree.
They're more closely divided, however, over whether the Democrats stole the election, as Trump contends.
There's actually a decent amount of Democrats, like, it's not a big portion, we don't know the hard numbers, that think the Democrats may have actually cheated.
They say the latest Rasmussen Report's national telephone and online survey finds that 61% of likely U.S.
voters think Trump should concede the presidential election to Democrat Joe Biden.
Just 33% disagree.
84% of Democrats, 37% of Republicans, and 59% of voters not affiliated with either party believe Trump should concede.
57% of Republicans and 59% of voters not affiliated with either party believe Trump should concede.
57% of Republicans disagree.
Among all voters, though, only 51% think their friends and neighbors believe Trump should
30% suspect they would disagree.
I don't know if the wisdom of the crowds is going to play off here because they also said that Trump was going to win and then he didn't.
Maybe people are just, their brains are broken and the polls don't make sense anymore.
They say 47% say it's likely that Democrats stole votes or destroyed pro-Trump ballots in several states to ensure that Biden would win.
But 50% disagree.
This includes 36% who say it's very likely and 41% who say it's not likely at all.
They say looking back at the presidential election, Trump voters overwhelmingly say they voted for the president, while a sizable number of Biden supporters admit they were voting against Trump rather than for the former vice president.
The older the voter, the less supportive they are of Trump conceding the election to Biden.
Whites oppose concession more strongly than blacks and other minorities do.
Even among those who strongly approve of Trump's job performance, nearly one in four believe he should admit he lost.
Of course, that compares to 93% of those who strongly disapprove of the job he's doing.
61% of Republicans say it's very likely the Democrats stole the election.
But just as many Democrats, 61% say it's not likely at all.
Among unaffiliateds, 29% feel it's a stolen election, 45% do not.
So let me try to extrapolate from this.
They say 61% of Democrats say it's not at all likely that they stole the election.
That leaves 39% in the other bracket.
Now, that doesn't mean that they think they stole the election.
It could be that a large percentage think it's maybe likely or somewhat likely.
But isn't that enough?
That 39% think it's possible the Democrats cheated here?
We are truly living in the weirdest of weird times.
My friends, I am just so tired of this.
This is the worst period of any period ever because we've got COVID lockdown, which is absurd and ridiculous.
We've got endless news cycles.
We've got a disparate reality, disparate realities forming.
And it's tiring.
It's oh so tiring.
Can we trust the polls?
Honestly, I don't know.
Trump supporters won't back down.
Joe Biden needs your money for his transition.
I think the system already broke a long time ago, to be completely honest.
And I'm not sure we're going to pick up the pieces.
Some people might be saying that, no, no, no, this is a normal thing.
It's not normal.
It's abnormal.
And I can't predict what's going to happen, but I tell you, boy, is it tiring.
It's absolutely tiring, huh?
Republicans say there's no way in hell Trump lost.
The polls don't make sense, do they?
I don't know.
This story from Reuters I cited earlier is really interesting.
Because, uh, look at this quote.
If President Trump comes out and says, guys, I have irrefutable proof of fraud, the courts won't listen, and now I'm calling on Americans to take up arms, we would go, said Fryer wearing a button-down shirt.
The unshakable trust in Trump in this town of about 1,400 residents reflects a national phenomenon among many Republicans.
Despite the absence of evidence in a barrage of post-election lawsuits by the president and his allies, let me stop you right there.
Yes, despite the absence of evidence in the lawsuits, but not in general.
You see what they do?
They say in the lawsuits.
About half of Republicans polled believe Trump rightfully won, but it was stolen from him in systemic fraud favoring Biden, according to a survey conducted November 13th and 17th.
Just 29% of Republicans said Biden rightfully won.
I don't know if the polls matter at this point.
And if that's the case, it's hard to know what's true anymore.
Was there widespread fraud?
How do you prove fraud?
You need to catch a person and prove their intent.
Was there human error?
You see?
If we can prove widespread human error, then you could allude to fraud in a certain sense, but you can't prove it, because fraud is about intent.
If people just, oopsie, forgot to port over Trump's votes, then it's just human error.
The left will call it human error and the right will call it fraud.
The polls are meaningless, we have no idea what's going on, but Joe Biden needs you to give him money.
Okay, that's one thing I can tell you that's happening.
I have no way to make predictions about what we can expect to come next.
I know a lot of people might want to, they're going to claim Trump is going to win, and that's because they have to say it.
The mainstream media and the left are saying Trump is lost, and it's because they have to say it.
The fact that Joe Biden needs your money proves that Joe Biden has not won anything.
That's the reality.
We're still waiting for the certification process of the states at the national level, the electoral college, and I'm sure by now you all know it.
But the tiring thing about all of this is it seems like this culture warship that everybody was milking for quite some time, not just the media, It's going under.
The Titanic has been hit by the iceberg.
That is, Orange Man is going bye-bye.
Maybe he won't, I don't know, we'll see.
But it's making everyone kind of go nuts.
You know, there's this desperation in the air and panic.
You've got the media fracturing, both sides are pointing fingers at each other, and we may be heading towards some kind of legitimate and absolute economic collapse.
But I think the system broke a long time ago.
I do.
I think the polls are untrustworthy.
So, without people knowing what to read to know what is true, what can you do?
It's demoralization.
The American people are confused, scared, angry, hungry.
The economy is being shut down.
All while this is going on, it seems almost on purpose to put all the Americans in a potter keg, light it up, and watch it go.
So that's where it really feels like what's about to happen.
All of this insanity, and these weird goings-on with media, and these lawsuits, it just feels like the system is shaking violently more and more every day, until a month from now when... it just breaks.
I don't know, maybe I'm wrong!
Maybe I'm just overworked.
I kind of don't feel like it, because I'd be bored if I wasn't doing this.
I sit around, what do I do?
I play Spelunky, and then I'm like, I want to talk about stuff.
I want to get it off my chest, right?
But I don't know.
What I should say is maybe I just read too much into it.
