FBI Has FINALLY Begun Investigating Voter Fraud, Democrats Underestimating Trump Is Their Undoing
Democrats and liberal media keep saying there is no evidence but the evidence is starting to pile up.Trump recently appeared on Maria Bartiromo's show on Fox news to discuss allegation of voter fraud, for which there is ample evidence.Media and Democrats keep insisting there is no evidence and Trump has lost.Yet now according to Matt Braynard of the Voter Integrity Project the FBI has requested hard data on illegal ballotsWhether this is a formal investigation or a preliminary one is yet to be seen but either way its huge news for Republicans and DOnald Trump.
Support the show (http://timcast.com/donate)
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
My friends, prepare your cautious optimism because it would seem the FBI is proactively pursuing some kind of investigation into evidence of widespread voter fraud.
I'm very careful with my words.
Maybe you've noticed.
This morning Donald Trump appeared on Fox News Maria Bartiromo's show talking about allegations of voter fraud.
At one point he said maybe the FBI was involved.
Many on the left took that to mean that Trump was accusing them of being co-conspirators in a grand scheme.
I just took it as to mean maybe the FBI was actually going to do something.
But Trump has been very critical of the FBI, the DOJ in general, for not pursuing these allegations.
Well, now Matt Brainerd of the Voter Integrity Project, who has found hard evidence of widespread irregularity and widespread voter fraud, has said.
The FBI has reached out proactively, directly requesting their findings that indicate illegal ballots.
Another group that has been filing a wave of lawsuits in this election also says they're eager to get this data to the FBI, and I'm sure Trump supporters are going to be Well, clapping and cheering for this news.
But at the same time, my friends, Donald Trump, after giving his interview on Fox News, was ridiculed and mocked by a mainstream media apparatus that said, there's no fraud.
Give up.
Why do you keep lying and saying there is?
Well, at the same time, the FBI apparently is requesting evidence on illegal ballots.
The media in this country, the likes of CNN and MSNBC and most of these large news outlets, care only for telling you the narrative.
They don't care to actually do any journalistic work, and therein lies the very serious problems we face as a country.
Regular people in this country are not journalists.
I don't expect them to know everything, and it's very difficult to tell a guy who's got a family and who works every day, you need to read news 24-7.
Well, I do that, and I try to break it down to the best of my ability to make sure that you're not being lied to, and I'm giving you some nuance, whether it be lies from the right or the left.
It just so happens that right now, the mainstream media is rather aligned with the left.
But I will remind you, remember, it was the mainstream media that claimed their weapons of mass destruction in 2001 when they were helping the conservatives, George W. Bush, the Republicans, start their wars.
The mainstream media is an apparatus of the establishment politics in this country, of which Donald Trump is not.
So for the time being, the media is doing everything in their power to hurt Donald Trump's chances at winning.
But this is huge news.
And there's a lot more going on.
In his interview, Trump talked about a variety of actions he wanted to take.
And there's a story that suggests, in my opinion, Donald Trump should not give up.
A GOP candidate in Iowa demanded a recount and is now projected to win by just six votes.
The Republicans also took many House seats at the state level.
This just goes to show you should never give up.
And now, with the FBI requesting these files, imagine what would have happened if Donald Trump did concede and said, OK, you know what?
I'm going to concede right away.
We wouldn't have learned about this stuff, and we need to know about it.
This could change the game.
I still think it's an astronomical long shot that Trump wins, but this is huge news.
So let's take a look at this.
We've also got an expert mathematician talking about statistical anomalies in swing states that suggest Donald Trump didn't actually lose, and it's from a credible news source.
Yes, I only use what is certified by NewsGuard, who is funded by Microsoft.
That's right.
I wonder how many people on the left are going to claim this is all bunk and fake news, or just outright ignore it.
And I'm going to show you exactly how they do it.
Before we get started, make sure you subscribe to my other YouTube channel, YouTube.com slash TimCastIRL.
We do a live show Monday through Friday at 8 p.m., and we'll be live tomorrow.
We're going to have some big shows coming up with a lot of people who are going to be talking about what's going on at the election.
You can see that just three days ago, or actually a little bit longer, we had Sean Parnell.
Sean Parnell is one of the plaintiffs, or he currently is, in a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of mail-in ballots in Pennsylvania.
So you definitely want to check that out.
Make sure you subscribe, and also subscribe to this channel.
Hit that like button, hit that notification bell, and share if you would.
Let's read the news from the Washington Examiner.
They say...
FBI requests files of people voting in multiple states.
The FBI apparently, and finally, eyeing voter fraud claims, has requested the files from an independent investigation of people who allegedly voted in several states.
The attorney conducting a voter integrity project investigation for the conservative Amistad project of the Thomas More Society that has called into question hundreds of thousands of potentially problem ballots said the FBI asked for his key files.
The FBI has proactively and directly requested from me the Voter Integrity Project findings that indicate illegal ballots.
By Tuesday, we will have delivered to the agency all of our data including names, addresses, phone numbers, etc.
My friends!
Evidence of widespread voter fraud.
These are people who moved, changed their addresses, and then still voted absentee.
Now, you may be saying, how do you know these individuals cast those ballots?
You are correct, good sir, I don't.
But that would imply someone else did, and it still makes it fraud.
Widespread evidence of fraud, no matter which way you look at it.
Now the bigger question, does this prove Donald Trump lost due to widespread voter fraud?
No, it does not.
And that's a big issue, but maybe not big enough.
Because if enough questions are raised in key states like Georgia, for instance, where some of these findings come from, then Georgia might actually just say, we are in dispute and we cannot send electors.
That is what Donald Trump is hoping for.
When it came to the Wisconsin recount, the Democrats on the left were laughing, saying Trump paid $3 million for a recount and it actually increased Joe Biden's lead.
They started mocking Trump supporters saying they paid for this, they donated to Trump, he's taking them for a ride.
No, Trump is trying to win.
Trump responded, the goal of the recount was to find fraudulent votes.
Man, these leftists and Democrats don't understand the plays Trump is making.
While they laugh and cheer that Trump is getting chased out of court, they're ignoring this, these big stories.
Donald Trump needs only a few illegal ballots to prove there is fraud and call the election into question for millions of votes.
Now, maybe that's not enough.
to actually overturn an election. But is it enough to convince a Republican that we can't tell right
now because how many more could be fraudulent? We got no choice but to call our election in dispute.
And then Trump wins. Again, I think it's an astronaut astronomical long shot that Trump wins,
but let's read more. He said of the agency brainer. While there has been a legit criticism
of the actions of leaders of the agency over the last several years, I can personally attest to the
many patriots within the rank and file who are fighting on the side of the Constitution and law
and order. He.
He has tweeted recently that his investigation has uncovered evidence of people voting in multiple states and also bunk addresses using commercial property addresses with like apartment numbers attached to them to make it seem like it was a real place when they weren't.
From a tweet from Crossroads, quote, I can show you the names of people on the record having voted in multiple states in the raw data the states make available.
So this isn't speculative.
This is just what the data shows from Matt Brainerd and CNN.
And all these pundits keep saying, there's no evidence, there's no evidence, there's no evidence, over and over again.
Ignoring outright that, why in fact, there is evidence, and the FBI proactively requested it.
That's right.
Matt Brainerd didn't call them up and say, would you like this?
He said they proactively reached out, implying they've begun investigating.
Now, is it a formal investigation?
I don't know, but they're certainly investigating something, at least in the colloquial sense.
Philip Klein, who heads the Amistad Project, said the group is eager to help the agency.
Quote, This data has been used to identify hundreds of thousands of potentially fraudulent ballots in the states where we find litigation.
More about this data will be made available in Matt Brainerd's appearance before a meeting with legislators in Arizona tomorrow.
He says, After learning that hundreds of thousands of ballots are potentially fraudulent, the FBI has now requested to look at our data.
Amazing.
The Department of Justice and the FBI have come under fire from Trump and others for not being more aggressive in investigating allegations of massive voter fraud, improper voter registration, ballot harvesting, and bribery.
The group has filed suits in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan, Georgia.
One is planned in Arizona.
A tweet from Philip Klein says, With over 150,000 potentially fraudulent ballots, this is more than enough to call into question the validity of Wisconsin's reported election results.
Yet the left and the Democrats and the media keep saying, no evidence, no evidence.
It's almost like they want to make sure all of the people who follow them and trust them have no idea what is really going on.
So I'll say it again.
You should share this with the people who are doubters or naysayers.
And tell them by all means, they don't gotta believe me, but I'm not making this up.
We have legit statements here.
This is from the Washington Examiner.
I know you might say, but they're a conservative source.
Yes, but they are NewsGuard certified.
And it's a 92.5 out of 100.
One of the best scores you can get.
The only concern NewsGuard has is website isn't disclosing their ownership and financing.
You can tell them, you can say they're conservative and they're biased, and by all means, yes.
But you cannot deny the fact they are reporting the FBI is seeking out evidence of fraud.
It exists!
Now, if anybody wants to claim there's no evidence of fraud, send them this.
I mean, you can send them any one of the videos where I've listed all of the evidence of fraud.
Again, evidence of fraud is not proof the election was rigged or stolen or anything like that.
That's what we need the FBI for.
And that's probably why a lot of Trump supporters are upset with me saying Tim should just come out and say, I'm taking it light.
I want to see the evidence.
I want to see where the evidence leads us.
And that's what you should encourage, because I tell you this, You go to someone, and you tell them.
Let's see, you go to someone who's like a regular person, not really paying attention, you say, the election was rigged, Joe Biden cheated, they're gonna be like, what are you talking about?
That's ridiculous.
You go to them and say, hey, did you hear that the FBI is actually pulling some, like, documents about, like, fraud or something?
And they'll say, wait, what?
Yeah, yeah, check out this story.
Check out this one story where the FBI said, you know, they want evidence on this stuff.
Oh, that's crazy.
Yeah, I don't know, weird, huh?
Open the door for them, let them walk through.
It's like they say, you can lead a horse to water, you can't make him drink, right?
Open the door, show people the evidence is real and the media is lying to them.
They want to say on Thursday in Michigan, for example, the group asked the Michigan Supreme Court to take custody of all polling data from the presidential election to give the state legislature time to probe fraud claims before picking electors.
The effort has made headlines recently for claiming that Facebook chief Mark Zuckerberg spent millions to influence elections.
I believe that's the case, but, you know, they're going to argue it was just about getting more voter turnout or something like that.
My friends, Matt Brainard, here's what he did.
Publicly available data, call centers, called people and asked, did you request an absentee ballot?
Did you send one in?
That's the gist of it.
There's other things they're doing, but these are call centers, calling up people, and tons of people are saying, I received one, no, I didn't send one in.
Oh, but you were recorded as having done so.
In one instance, they called a guy named Nayshan Garrett, I believe his name is.
He's a famous athlete training to be in the Olympics.
I don't know, maybe famous isn't the right word.
He's got his own Wikipedia page, right?
That makes him notable.
He's a notable athlete training for the Olympics.
Who received a phone call from Matt Brainerd, from the call center, asking if he requested an absentee ballot in Arizona.
He now lives in Tennessee, training for the Olympics.
He said no.
They said, so you did not send one in?
He said no.
They said, well someone sent one in, in your name.
And this guy is not some random nobody.
He is training for the Olympics.
I trust the dude.
I do.
Maybe he's lying.
Maybe he really didn't.
He just loves Trump.
I doubt it.
He doesn't seem very political.
But he seems like someone who works very hard, trains very hard, and he seems like an upstanding citizen.
I have no reason to doubt.
That's the kind of evidence we're getting from Matt Brainerd.
But my friends, what do we get from the likes of CNN?
Fox News' Maria Bartiromo gave Trump his first TV interview since the election.
It was filled with lies.
Alright, well, look, to be fair, I'm willing to bet Trump said a bunch of stuff that wasn't true, no doubt.
But I wouldn't necessarily call all of it lies.
First and foremost, does Trump lie?
Yes!
Yes, he does!
Dude, come on.
You want to come to me and claim that there's someone running for office, someone in politics, and they're not lying?
I'm going to call you a liar or dumb.
That doesn't mean everything Trump says is a lie.
Sometimes Trump just gets things wrong.
And in fact, I think it's fair to say that Trump is more likely to get something wrong than a lie.
You know why?
Because Trump blurts out some of the most ridiculous, honest things ever.
I said this several times, my favorite was when he was like, you know, by the helicopter leaving the White House and they're like, what's what's going on with, you know, this deal with Saudi Arabia?
And Trump's like, oh, it's really, really great.
We're doing this big weapons deal with Saudi Arabia.
They love it.
We're going to make billions of dollars.
And everyone, like all the progressive anti-war leftists, just like facepalmed, like he just came out and said it.
Like Trump is saying the quiet part loud and the loud part quiet.
You're not going to convince me that even The Intercept, who hates Trump, called him the most honest and dishonest president, that he lies all the time.
No, I think he's wrong a lot.
I think he sees something in the news, he gets it wrong.
Here's an example.
You may have seen, you may have heard of the YouTube channel, Don't Walk Run Productions.
It's a guy named Andrew, runs the channel.
We've had him on the IRL podcast before.
And he put out a tweet criticizing Joe Biden for a Periscope livestream, his Twitter account, only getting 1,000 concurrent viewers at one time.
The account has a million followers and could only get 1,000 people.
Long story short, after tweeting it, it made its way to Trump, and then Trump tweeted, they only got a thousand views.
No.
That was a corruption of the original idea.
Trump wasn't lying.
Trump was just wrong, because it was a game of telephone.
That's what I think really happens.
Let's see what CNN has to say.
President Donald Trump on Sunday spoke with Fox News anchor Maria Bartiromo.
In his first interview, the conversation was riddled with lies and conspiracy theories.
Quote, This election was a fraud.
It was a rigged election, Trump told Bartiromo.
In response, the Fox anchor reflected the president's anger, saying, This is disgusting, and we cannot allow America's elections to be corrupted.
The interview highlighted that Trump is unable or unwilling to accept reality, says Brian Stelter.
Brian!
Care to run on your show at all that the Examiner is reporting the FBI is seeking evidence on widespread voter fraud?
Oh, I didn't think so.
They say in addition to Trump's unwillingness to acknowledge Joe Biden won the election, Bartiromo's unchallenged acceptance of Trump's false narrative also presents a danger to American democracy, said Oliver Darcy on Reliable Sources.
Quote, News organizations, and I think Fox claims to be one, have a responsibility.
The President of the United States is trying to overturn the election.
Frankly, there is not much daylight between Maria and Alex Jones.
Trump's disinformation campaign about the election is less cohesive strategy and more about throwing spaghetti at the wall in the hope that something sticks, said Jonathan Rauch, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution.
What he's running right now is a classic Russian-style disinformation campaign.
He added that Trump's intention is to flood the zone and confuse people by pushing out conspiracy theories, lies, and half-truths.
Now, I'll tell you this.
Donald Trump believes it.
Donald Trump is entitled to his opinion.
I think Donald Trump is jumping the gun because he lost, he doesn't like that he lost, and there is evidence of fraud.
I think that's something that human beings do.
That's it.
It's not unique to Trump.
If someone breaks into your house, and then you find out your PlayStation, your new PlayStation 5 is gone, you're gonna say, somebody robbed me and stole my PlayStation 5.
And the cops are gonna be like, seems likely.
But we need evidence that the broken window was actually a burglary, and then it might turn out, you know, it was the kid threw a baseball, broke the window, and then someone stole your PlayStation 5, right?
The point is, you advocate for yourself based on what you believe.
Trump lost, there's evidence of fraud, so Trump is going all the way.
I get it!
Joe Biden is projected to win, so the media's doing the exact same thing in the other direction.
The problem, I guess, is that I have no problem with Trump advocating for himself and his supporters saying the same thing.
Well, I'm going to say I don't agree and I disagree here, here, in this area, in that area, but I understand why you're fighting tooth and nail for this.
Trump feels like he lost.
The media, however, is trying to convince you there's no evidence.
Over and over again, they call it lies and conspiracy theories.
I opened this segment by showing.
The FBI is requesting this evidence.
Matt Brainerd has even published images from his databases showing the names.
You can look this stuff up.
Showing addresses that are all like a gym or something, where people claim to live there for the residential address to be able to vote.
There's evidence.
It exists, my friends.
From Just the News.
Again, I know a lot of people are like, Tim mentions NewsGuard quite often.
I tell you why.
NewsGuard certifies various news outlets.
I think they're biased.
I do.
And they have funding, I believe, from Microsoft.
Just the News is given a credible rating, they say.
The website generally maintains basic standards of credibility and transparency with significant exceptions.
However, it is given a green checkmark.
They say it's a right-leaning political website founded by John Solomon that has published unsubstantiated and misleading claims.
However, its score is 62 out of 100 and it is deemed credible.
They say they do not repeatedly publish false content.
It's the way I've described it.
Vote tabulation feeds in Pennsylvania and Georgia show anomalies suggesting Trump missing votes.
Quote, there's a lot of anomalies in that data. When you go look at it, for example,
the training videos on Dominion, you realize how quickly all this can go south.
These are stories that present us with a smoke alarm going off. It's the way I've described it.
You've probably heard me say it, but for those that haven't, imagine you're walking on the street.
Smoke alarm is going off in a building.
You call 911 and say a smoke alarm is going off.
What do you think the operator says to you?
Do they say, uh, well, is there evidence of widespread fire?
Well, if there's no evidence of widespread fire, we won't come out.
No, that's ridiculous.
When a smoke alarm goes off, the fire department comes out.
If there's no fire, they come out and say, false alarm everybody, but they investigate.
That's where we're at right now.
In fact, it's not just a smoke alarm going off, it's smoke coming out of the building.
The fact that Matt Brainerd found like 20 plus thousand people who change their address and still vote absentee, no matter how you spin it, Fraud.
So listen.
Maybe they fraudulently changed their address for some reason, but they still secretly live in Georgia.
Fraud.
Maybe they didn't do it.
It was someone else who took out their absentee ballots in their name.
Then that person committed fraud.
Maybe they moved, changed their address, and then decided, I'm going to vote absentee where I used to live.
Fraud.
There's no way you can spin it.
Maybe people accidentally did it.
They didn't realize.
They moved, changed their address, and said, but I'm still registered, so I'm going to vote somewhere else, not realizing they were disqualified from voting.
The FBI is going to come after these people.
It might not flip the results, but it will cast enough doubt.
You can't ignore this stuff.
Just to give you the quick gist from Just the News, they say, Vote tabulation data in various battleground states contain anomalies with massive swings toward Joe Biden that suggest missing ballots for President Trump, according to data expert Justin Hart, who helped raise millions of dollars for Mitt Romney's 2012 presidential campaign.
Trump has retweeted charts from Hart questioning vote tabulations, including retweeting Hart's calculations showing that Trump Justin Hart tweets.
This chart, the 25 data dumps where Trump lost votes from the Dominion feeds.
97,676 votes lost and Biden gained 160,000.
from the New York Times were accurate.
Justin Hart tweets, you know what's even more suspicious than big vote dumps?
Giving Biden the lead in Wisconsin and Michigan, taking away votes from Trump in Pennsylvania.
This chart, the 25 data dumps where Trump lost votes from the Dominion feeds.
97,676 votes lost and Biden gained 160,000.
How does Trump go negative?
Okay, maybe you'll tell me they accidentally entered some votes for Biden as Trump votes.
There have been instances where they accidentally gave votes to the wrong person.
You mean to tell me that happens several times in every single state?
Sorry, I don't buy it.
At the very least, I can tell you, OK, fine, we don't know what it is, but the smoke alarm is going off.
Please send in a neutral arbiter, be it the fire department, to investigate.
For some reason, I tell you this.
Imagine it this way.
Imagine you're walking down the street.
You hear a smoke alarm going off and you're like, whoa!
And you call 9-1-1.
All of a sudden, someone walks up in front of you and says, why are you calling 9-1-1?
There's a smoke alarm going off.
There's no fire.
I hear the alarm.
There's no fire.
You have no evidence of fire.
Why are you arguing with me?
I want this investigated.
Shouldn't you want it investigated too?
You've got strange anomalies in this.
Why are Democrats okay with this?
Oh, because it helps them.
Turns out the guy arguing with you, saying, don't call 911, has an insurance policy on the building right next to that building, and he's hoping, you know, things go up.
I'm giving you a hypothetical.
You get the point.
Or analogy?
I don't know.
Whatever.
The point is, It is strange to me that we have all of these mathematical anomalies, evidence of fraud.
I'm not saying proof, I'm saying evidence, signs or indications it happened.
And the Democrats are saying, stop!
Stop investigating!
We don't want to know if someone tainted the results.
I tell you this, if Trump won, it'd be the same thing in the other direction, no doubt.
You'd have the Democrats saying, we demand investigations, Trump would be saying, oh, this is ridiculous, I won, accept it, this is the name of the game.
I don't care.
When the Democrats were screaming in 2016 that Russia did everything, I entertained it.
I sat through, I did the videos, I said, wow, look at these.
I even concluded in one video that Comey was telling the truth!
Now we know he wasn't!
For the most part.
And here we are with more accusations, and again, I entertain them because any honest person would say, okay, let's investigate.
This is why I find myself often being called conservative.
Well, I have center-left policy positions on most things, rather moderate, but leaning left on certain cultural issues and even economic and tax issues.
I don't care about what my opinion, you know, I don't care about winning by any means necessary.
I care about being honest and understanding what's really going on.
And if the people of this country want to vote for Donald Trump, well then so be it.
Who am I to lie, cheat, or steal to get my way?
That's what the left is doing.
Let me show you this.
The reason why Donald Trump must not give up.
GOP Iowa Congressional Challenger Miller Meeks expected to win by 6 votes after recount.
Rita Hart moves into the lead in District 2 race for U.S.
House as Jasper County corrects its vote total.
That's right.
They say after the auditor corrected, Hart moved ahead of Republican Marionette Miller-Meeks by 162 in the district's unofficial vote total.
On Tuesday night, the Iowa Secretary of State's office had Miller-Meeks winning by 282 votes.
Then they corrected the total.
Meeks was losing.
Then they did a recount, and now Miller-Meeks will win—expected to win—by six votes.
Six!
That's crazy.
Just six votes.
This is why I always tell people, you gotta vote, man!
Because they often say, like, what's one vote gonna do?
Dude, sometimes a lot.
Sometimes.
Could you imagine if six people who didn't vote voted?
Well, you'd have a tie, I guess.
But if seven people who didn't vote voted, they could have switched this.
They could have flipped this.
The point is...
Miller Meeks fought, and now won.
And there was a state-level politician, a lower, I believe it was a county-level position, who didn't fight.
And then a Republican, thought he lost, received a phone call saying, actually, someone found a glitch.
You actually are up by 1,300 votes.
You won.
He said, I wasn't even gonna call for a recount.
I was like, that's it?
No, you can't do that.
We gotta stop this game where we do elections based on perception in the media.
The media should not be dictating who wins.
And right now, that's what CNN is doing.
President-elect Joe Biden.
Shut up.
We needed to go through a formal certification process.
Once we all agree, and we've legally concluded the election, then the media should be reporting it.
For the time being, the media can just keep saying who they think won and why, and that is completely irresponsible.
The other day, Candace Owens—conservative, you probably know who she is—tweeted how she posted on Facebook saying Joe Biden is literally and legally not president-elect.
She got fact-checked.
They said she was wrong.
She said she got her lawyers involved, and then PolitiFact had to apologize and issue a correction, because the truth is, Joe Biden is not the president-elect.
Not until December 14th.
Period.
And I gotta be honest.
Not until January 6th.
It really does work this way.
On December 14th, the Electoral College will vote.
We can then say that in the Electoral College, Joe Biden is projected to win.
But it's not until they count the ballots on January 6th that we know that Joe Biden is literally the president-elect.
Isn't it crazy?
And they're demanding that months before this process, Trump concede, give up, stop fighting, and just give everything over to them.
Trump ain't gonna do it.
I don't think Trump's... Look, I gotta be honest with you.
I don't think Trump's gonna win.
I don't.
Get mad at me, fine, whatever.
But I am telling you, Trump is on track and things are moving in his direction.
This latest story on the FBI reaching out may be more than enough for several states to stop and go, whoa, whoa, whoa.
If the FBI is investigating, we're not going to send forth a slate of electors.
The Republican legislatures, eight swing states are Republican legislatures, they could just straight up say, we will challenge, dispute the electoral college, the electoral votes who go, because there's an active investigation going on.
It's all Trump needs.
And then, that's it.
The investigation could find out in March.
Nope, no fraud.
But if it's enough to call everything into question now, Trump could still win.
The Democrats sitting back, ignoring this play, ignoring this strategy, well, y'all are gonna lose.
We'll see how this plays out.
Big development.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 6 p.m.
over at youtube.com slash timcastnews.
It is a different channel.
Thanks for hanging out.
And I will see you all then.
Two days ago, Republicans in Pennsylvania scored a major legal victory when a judge ordered the certification process of Pennsylvania to be halted and said, in an opinion, it is very likely the Republicans will win on the merits if the case is actually tried.
The case is about Act 77 in Pennsylvania, which expanded absentee voting to no-excuse mail voting.
According to the lawsuit, and apparently the judge, it does violate the Constitution.
To put it simply, the Republicans who passed this law, the state legislature in Pennsylvania,
knew they needed a constitutional amendment in Pennsylvania in order to pass this law.
The Pennsylvania Constitution lays out exactly how voting by mail or absentee voting is supposed
to work.
They started the process to amend the Constitution and then abandoned it.
And the reason, in my opinion, because according to the Constitution, in order to change the
rules, it has to actually go on the ballot, which means there wouldn't have been mail-in
It would have been like an amendment proposal on the November 3rd ballot.
Well, it was all very, very good news for the Republicans, but something that is not too unexpected occurred.
The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania just shot it down, dismissing it on the narrowest of grounds, arguing, y'all were too late.
That's it.
You just didn't file soon enough.
And I said this was going to happen.
If you've been following my content, I mentioned it.
There's something called latches.
I'm not a lawyer or a legal expert.
I just read this in the Atlantic.
They said that in court, you have to file within a reasonable amount of time, and if you wait too long for many of these lawsuits, the courts are going to say you should have sued on mail-in voting before it happened.
Here's the issue, though.
Other lawyers are arguing That the Republicans who filed the lawsuit didn't even have standing until after the election anyway, because there was no injury.
Thus, the courts would have said, nothing's happened, we can't do anything for you.
In fact, we saw something similar to that.
When the Supreme Court was deadlocked 4-4, they basically said, when it comes to ballots that come in after the deadline, we're gonna reserve judgment, I guess, kick it back to the lower court, because nothing's happened yet.
So this is bad news for Republicans, but it's not unexpected.
I mean, they all thought it was gonna happen.
I'm fairly sure it's, you know, Sean Parnell and Mike Kelly.
Sean Parnell, I'm pretty sure he said on my show, like, probably go to the Supreme Court, they'll probably kick it back, and then we'll see what happens.
Now many believe that this is on its way to the Supreme Court.
Some have said the Supreme Court won't rule on, you know, internal state matters.
Apparently that's probably not true.
Because this case will affect the outcome of the presidential election, so we'll see how it plays out.
But the bigger picture here, let me tell you something, based on the title of this video.
Democrats cheering for violating the Constitution, yeah.
I wonder to myself, who's right?
Who's wrong?
Who's the good guys?
Who the bad guys?
All the time.
Sometimes I wonder about what Trump is doing.
Absolutely.
I've never been an overt hardcore MAGA supporter.
I just looked at what was happening with the economy and with the wars and all that stuff.
And I was like, it's pretty good.
It is.
And school choice is pretty good.
And the left is critical race theorist, moral authoritarian.
So, okay, fine.
Okay, fine.
I'd vote for Trump, right?
But sometimes I wonder.
Because I don't think everybody is pure goodness.
Everybody thinks they're the good guys.
But I'll tell you this.
I got this tweet right here from Josh Shapiro.
I can tell you who the bad guys are very, very easily.
Josh Shapiro tweeted.
Now, this is the, I believe he's the AG, Attorney General for Pennsylvania.
He's the guy who tweeted that when all the votes are counted, Donald Trump will lose before the election, leaving a lot of people to wonder, what was that supposed to mean?
And then sure enough, it happened.
But here's what he tweeted, breaking.
We just notched another win for democracy.
Oh, for democracy, huh?
The PA Supreme Court has dismissed the suit that was attempting to throw out the votes of 2.5 million Pennsylvanians and halt certification.
You want to know how I know that this guy is the bad guy?
Because he just lied.
Because he's lying to people.
The suit did not seek to throw out the votes of 2.5 million Pennsylvanians.
I had Sean Parnell, one of the plaintiffs in the case, on the IRL podcast and I asked him, aren't you just trying to throw out ballots?
He said, no, not at all.
It might happen if the judges rule that way.
But he said, maybe it just means the next election will not use these procedures or they'll have to get their constitutional amendment.
They asked the court to advise on potential relief because they didn't want to disenfranchise people.
He said that everybody assumed the law was constitutional, and so did he.
And they only just found out.
Now the PA Supreme Court is saying you should have filed sooner.
Well, if you didn't know, then what do you mean you filed sooner?
That's why the PA Supreme Court ruling is trash, in my opinion.
But why would Josh Shapiro say they wanted to throw out votes and halt certification?
Because he's trying to trick you into thinking the case was about getting Donald Trump a victory.
Now, at some level, I'm sure it was.
I'm sure there are people who are like, this could help Trump win.
I'm sure there are some people who knew the law was unconstitutional and they waited.
I don't trust politicians, man.
I do trust Sean Parnell.
Absolutely.
When he says he just found out about this and he didn't realize the law was unconstitutional, I absolutely believe him.
I really do.
Because this dude's not a politician.
This dude served in the military, and now he writes books, and he was called upon to run in this district, and he ran.
And I trust him when he says, you know, he just found out about this.
And also, other lawyers saying he didn't have standing to sue until there was injury, until something happened in the election.
Maybe that's true, maybe it's not.
But Mike Kelly actually won his election, which means if they did halt certification, whatever the judge determined, he would have been irreparably harmed.
And the initial judge recognized this.
They're lying to you.
The Democrats are lying.
And the Republicans in the state legislature are the ones who passed the unconstitutional law, and it was signed off by the Democrat governor.
Why?
They all hate Trump.
They do, okay?
And there are Republicans pretending to like him, but the elites of this country and the political establishment have always loved being the keys-to-the-castle politicians.
Let me in, I don't want to do any work.
Trump comes along and they're like, ugh.
Now what do we do?
Tons of Republicans retired.
Tons of Republicans formed things like the Lincoln Project.
And then many others just pretend to like Trump because they know that's what the voters want.
Take, for instance, the governor of Georgia, Brian Kemp.
No, no, no, not Kemp.
I believe it's the AG or Secretary of State.
I don't know.
Brian Raffensperger.
He's the guy who ran the elections.
He's like, I've always been a big Trump supporter.
Oh no, what's happening?
No, shut up.
No, they weren't.
These people just pretended it.
They don't really care about Trump.
They don't like Trump.
Trump is not part of the political establishment.
That's why the Trump supporters use the lion symbol and not the elephant.
Well, here's the news.
Let me break it down for you, and then I'll show you what Sean Parnell says.
PA Supreme Court dismisses request for Mike Kelly and Sean Parnell to declare mail-in voting unconstitutional in state, deny results from 2020 election mail-in ballots.
So this is incorrect.
Based on what I've read from the suit and what they've said, they were asking the court to determine what remedy or relief is available to them.
Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa.
the state Supreme Court in a unanimous decision threw out the three day old order saying the
underlying suit was filed months after the law allowed for challenges to Pennsylvania's
expansive year old mail-in voting law. The state's attorney general, Democrat Josh Shapiro,
called the court's decision another win for democracy. Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa.
Year old. Year old mail-in voting.
Why did the Republicans in Pennsylvania introduce no-excuse mail-in voting before COVID?
That doesn't seem to make any sense.
Why would they change a fundamental aspect of their elections in violation of their own constitution according to the judge in the initial case?
Let me tell you.
The PA Supreme Court just said it.
They didn't rule on the merits.
So as far as we know right now, the judge has said they will likely win on merits.
Meaning?
The Pennsylvania Constitution is clear as to what can be allowed for an absentee ballot.
Why did they do this before COVID?
I don't know.
Your guess is as good as mine.
Although I'm sure many people have some pretty specific guesses as to why.
It's funny, I have a lot of people commenting, saying like, Tim, you'll say all of these weird things are happening, but then stop short of declaring what you think it is.
And I'm like, yes, because it's for you to decide.
When the media says there's no evidence, and I say, actually, here's the evidence.
I'm not going to come out and tell you what the evidence points to, because I can't connect those dots.
And you're not going to get me to come out and say, this proves that they faked everything.
No, I don't know.
I just think it's weird, isn't it?
That's it.
What was their reason for expanding mail-in voting?
I don't know.
They say, the State's Attorney General Josh Shapiro called the court's decision another win for democracy.
A win for democracy that you change the Constitution without letting the people decide.
That's not a win for democracy.
These people are lying.
This is creepy, dangerous stuff.
I don't like Republicans either.
I like Sean Parnell, he's a cool dude.
He's clearly not one of these establishment politicians.
I say, the weak old lawsuit led by Rep.
Kelly of Butler had challenged the state's mail-in voting law as unconstitutional.
As a remedy, Kelly and other Republican plaintiffs had sought to either throw out the 2.5 million mail-in ballots submitted under the law, most of them by Democrats, or to wipe the election results and direct the state's Republican-controlled legislature to pick Pennsylvania's presidential electors.
Perhaps, in the hard filing, what I can say is that on my show, Sean Parnell said, That wasn't what they were trying to do, and that they even asked for, like I mentioned, advice from the court as to what the relief could be, and suggested that maybe this time around everything stays, but next time around we do it differently.
Which would still be a problem in my opinion.
I think they would have had to have thrown these things out.
Commonwealth Court Judge Patricia McCullough, elected as a Republican in 2009—oh, thanks for letting us know—had issued the order Wednesday to halt certification of any remaining contests, including apparently contests for Congress.
A day earlier, Governor Tom Wolfe, a Democrat, said he had certified Democrat Joe Biden as the winner of the presidential election in Pennsylvania.
Biden beat President Donald Trump by more than 80,000 votes in Pennsylvania, this we know.
Wolfe has also appealed McCullough's decision to the state Supreme Court, saying there was no conceivable justification for it.
McCullough filed an opinion after the fact saying, no, here's the real reason they're likely going to win on the merits.
And then the PA Supreme Court did not rule on the merits.
They just said, no, no, you're too late.
I call BS.
I call absolute BS.
How can you be too late if you didn't know it was unconstitutional?
My understanding was that you have a certain amount of time to file suit upon being made aware of something.
How unreasonable would it be if someone defamed you or whatever?
And maybe this is the case.
And you didn't know until the video they defamed you with went viral a year later.
Let's say I put out a video saying, you know, uh, so-and-so is a bad person for this reason.
And then no one sees the video, a year later it goes viral, so they sue me.
Oh, nope, nope, too late!
Yeah, you should have sued me a long time ago.
I'm pretty sure it wouldn't work that way.
A judge is gonna be like, nah, like, nobody knew you did this, the video went viral, and now it's become an issue and everyone's, you know, been made aware.
So anyway, Sean Parnell says it's not over.
This was not unexpected.
Stay tuned.
And everybody believes we are headed to the Supreme Court, baby.
Maybe.
Some are arguing the Supreme Court's gonna say this is a state constitutional matter and we have nothing to do with it.
I don't think it matters.
I don't think it matters if the Supreme Court gets involved or not.
Right now, it doesn't matter what the state Supreme Court said or what the federal Supreme Court will say.
You know why?
When it comes to the slate of electors, the federal government recognizes the state legislature and no one else.
If the governor or the secretary of state or the AG or whoever sends a slate of electors, I don't think the AG can, I think it's the governor or the secretary of state, the federal government would just be like, nah, sorry.
If the state legislature said, these are our actual electors, the federal government, the Constitution of the United States recognizes the state legislature as appointees.
So they could just do it.
I mean, Fareed Zakaria said this.
I'm not just making it up.
It was in my segment yesterday.
Fareed Zakaria of CNN did this whole thing in September about how Trump could lose and still win.
And I've been talking about it time and time again.
If the Republicans just say it, then the results are disputed.
Period.
Check this out.
From the Washington Post, I love how the media lies to you.
That's the name of the game.
20 days of fantasy and failure inside Trump's quest to overturn the election.
My friends, let me tell you what's going on.
Take a trip over to thedonald.win and what will you find?
Post after post after post that Donald Trump won the election, that Joe Biden cheated, that widespread voter fraud cost Trump the election, and that Trump will be victorious and is on path to victory.
Much of this is hyperbole.
We don't have evidence to suggest that, or I should say, we don't have evidence to prove that widespread voter fraud cost Trump the election and Joe Biden cheated.
We do have evidence of widespread fraud, as from the Voter Integrity Fund.
Yes, I'm saying it literally exists, okay?
And he's in litigation now.
These are thousands of individuals who used bunk addresses or moved, changed their address, and then voted in the state by absentee anyway.
That is evidence of widespread fraud because I think it totals something like 20,000 votes.
There's also widespread irregularity.
These things all exist.
Now, whether or not that means Trump won or Trump is going to win, the Donald.Win people are going to tell you that because they're leading the charge to fight on behalf of Trump to get him his victory, and so they're, you know, morale boosting.
They want it.
They believe it.
They're not going to back down.
Of course, they'll rag on me because I'm not on board with it.
Sure, fine.
On the left, they're saying, nope, nope, it's all a fantasy.
Trump's wrong.
But let me tell you this.
While the Trump supporters over the Donaldot win may be very overzealous and hyperbolic, they're not wrong in much of their facts.
Donald Trump is on track for what's Fareed Zakaria called Trump losing but staying in power.
Being on track doesn't mean that Trump is guaranteed to win.
It means that if he was going for a victory, he is on track to get there, but there are ridiculous obstacles in the way that make it, in my opinion, impossible.
One of them is that the Republicans in Pennsylvania have to come in tomorrow and appoint electors in defiance of their own state laws.
Now, the federal government, like I mentioned, will recognize, my understanding, according to Freed Zakaria, they'll recognize the state legislatures over anybody else.
That means these people These Republicans would have to make that bold move.
So far, there's 26 Republicans on board.
They've got to get 100 or so to get the majority, and I just don't think it's likely.
I really, really don't.
But Trump is on track.
Tomorrow's the next big hurdle.
We'll see.
However, over on the left, here's what you're going to get.
Lies.
20 days of fantasy.
The Washington Post basically says people—you know what I love?
When they say things like this, a person familiar with their thinking What?
What is it supposed to mean?
I'm familiar with Trump's thinking.
He wants two scoops of ice cream.
Remember that segment CNN ran?
It was supposed to be kind of jokey.
What does it mean to be familiar with someone's thinking?
That's how you know you're reading garbage.
Basically, the story outlines all of Trump's efforts to get Republicans to flip their electors to him.
It might happen.
We are months away.
January 6th is when Congress holds a joint session to count the electoral votes, and disputes and challenges can arise.
But the media is saying this stuff probably, in my opinion, to demoralize Trump supporters, convince them Trump can't possibly win, and then just lie about what's really going on.
I don't think... I think Trump can win.
I think it is, like I said, not impossible.
I'm probably going to be wrong again, because I'm always wrong.
I was like, Trump's going to win on election night, and then he loses, and I'm like, all right, well, there you go.
No, to be fair, in the months leading up to the election, I said, in the months, Biden could win, man, he really could.
What people needed to understand about Trump is that he narrowly won.
It was 88, I believe it was like 80,000 votes across three states, got him narrow victories, giving him the Electoral College edge.
He lost the popular vote.
You add a whole bunch of Trump haters and constant media, you know, insanity, And then Trump ends up losing re-election.
That's actually what I've been saying.
I told Trump supporters not to underestimate Joe Biden because you mock and you belittle him.
And sure, I understand why.
But Trump could still lose.
We'll see how things play out.
I believe Trump does have a chance to win.
He really does.
The left won't tell you that, though.
They're going to lie to you.
I bring you now.
First of all, they say the Republicans met with Trump and then shot down any chance that they would overturn the results of the election or whatever.
You don't know that.
You don't know what they're going to do.
They could absolutely appoint their own electors at the last minute and say, well, too bad.
Check this out.
At the very end, they talk about Pennsylvania and they say Trump was demanding, you know, that they do this.
They were holding a hearing on voter fraud.
They say.
That afternoon, Trump called into the meeting of GOP state senators at the Wyndham, where Giuliani and Ellis were addressing attendees.
He spoke via a scratchy connection to Ellis' cell phone, which she played on speaker.
At one point, the line beeped to signal another caller.
Quote, If you were a Republican poll watcher, you were treated like a dog, Trump complained, using one of his favorite put-downs.
Even though many people treat dogs well, like members of their own families.
What is this Washington Post?
What did I just read?
Quote, the election was lost by the Democrats, he said falsely.
They cheated.
Trump demanded the state officials overturn the results, but the count had already been certified.
Pennsylvania's 20 electoral votes will be awarded to Joe Biden.
This article was published yesterday night at 7 p.m.
And you want to know why this is a bald-faced lie?
That's why I say these people are not good people.
These journalists are lying to you.
And you know Trump's been saying it over and over again with fake news.
It is political propaganda.
They're trying to convince you that Trump is lost.
They're showing you a sullen photo of Trump.
And it's bad news because Trump supporters don't read the Washington Post.
Okay.
Normies do, I guess.
And they're being convinced Trump lost.
What's going to happen if Trump wins?
My friends, I give you facts.
Pennsylvania House of Representatives House co-sponsorship memoranda.
On November 27th at 1250 p.m., a full day before they published that article, they say, in the immediate future, we will be introducing the following resolution, which likely will come tomorrow.
It might not, but for the time being, for you to assert Joe Biden will get these electoral votes, you are wrong.
They say, As part of their resolution, they urge the U.S.
Congress to declare the selection of electors in the Commonwealth to be in dispute.
There is a serious chance that Joe Biden does not get Pennsylvania.
That doesn't mean Trump wins.
Trump needs to pull it off in three states.
I'm not sure it's possible.
I'm not sure.
I think he has a chance to win.
I do.
But like I said, he's on a train track, right?
And trees keep falling down and, you know, tsunamis coming in.
So yeah, if the train keeps going straight and makes it past all these obstacles, Trump wins.
But I just think, I just don't see it.
I mean, look, I get it.
Trump supporters want to be hopeful.
They refuse to give up.
I respect it.
But I'm going to give you my real thoughts on this.
I'm not going to lie and just be like, Trump's going to win.
I'm not going to do it.
I won't.
All right?
But I'm not going to be like the mainstream media and lie to you.
The House says they plan to put this resolution forward, calling for the election to be in dispute.
If it is, then there will be rival electors or a challenge on January 6th.
If Pennsylvania sends 20 electors, they count it for Biden, they vote on the 14th, Joe Biden wins.
We then have to wait to January 6th, where one Republican could be like, I object.
The state legislature, as recognized by the Constitution, disputes the electors sent forward.
Therefore, we can't count this.
And then you're going to hear rabble, rabble, rabble from everybody.
It doesn't mean Trump wins.
But it certainly means there's so much more to go through before this is actually over.
The media just wants everyone to submit and give up.
You know why?
That's the only way, I should say, that's the only guarantee they have of a clean victory.
I mean, think about it.
You can box someone, or they can concede, which is easier.
Right.
You want your opponent to forfeit, so you get a win by default.
They know that there is a chance Trump could pull this off.
So the best thing they can do is convince every Trump supporter it's over, give up, submit, you lose.
Because then there's no fight.
But the door is still open.
Albeit, it's closing.
And Trump is on track to make it through that door, but many, many obstacles.
And, like, it's not just obstacles.
Like, if the Republicans get the majority of the state legislature in Pennsylvania to agree with this resolution, which is already a challenge, and then they file tomorrow and it works, that's like Trump's running, you know, on this road and then he jumps like a 20-foot gorge.
It is just a huge obstacle.
If the news comes down, I mean, tomorrow really is going to be the big day.
This is their last chance, I believe, because they go out of session after tomorrow.
If they don't get it done, that's it.
Like, tomorrow really is the final move.
You know what?
I'll put it this way.
Maybe not.
Because maybe there's other states, I guess.
I don't know, man.
Trump's not going to stop.
He ain't giving up.
And it's absurd that I don't know.
The media lies the way they do.
Look, I'll tell you this.
I think it's a 99.9% chance Joe Biden's gonna win.
I know a lot of people don't want to hear it, but Trump could pull it off.
They said it was a 99% chance Hillary Clinton won.
Remember that?
If I tell you there's a 99.9% chance Trump loses this fight, I just think back to 2016.
And that's why there's something in my gut that says, Nah.
Nah.
I don't know though.
I don't know though, man.
Maybe it is wishful thinking, but we'll see.
Next segment's coming up at 1pm on this channel.
Thanks for hanging out, and I will see you all then.
This morning, Donald Trump gave his first post-election interview on Fox News, discussing allegations of widespread voter fraud, his legal strategy, and all around what he thought happened, what he plans to do.
Now, I'll get into that in a later segment, but the Democrats, in my opinion, better hope and pray that Donald Trump actually wins.
And I know you're probably saying, wait, wait, wait, wait, what, Tim?
No, the Democrats are hoping and praying that he loses.
Yeah, some of them.
The low-information voters, perhaps.
Regular people who don't really pay attention to news and were just told over and over again the orange man was bad.
I'm sure they were praying for Trump to lose.
But the priests of the cathedral, the media and political establishment better hope and pray that Trump actually wins.
You know why?
The Democrats are falling apart.
This is the end, in my opinion.
Well, actually, not even my opinion.
The New Republic says the Popular Front can't hold.
The only thing that is keeping the Democrats together is Donald Trump.
Right now, data is coming out showing the Democratic Party has become the party of the wealthy and managerial elites.
In fact, let me just show you a tweet I put out.
I said, This is part of what drives the realignment in politics.
Democrats are the party of the wealthy managerial elites and the moral authoritarians.
Citing a tweet from Ben Weingard, who is an assistant professor of psychology at Hillsdale, he says, Part of this, of course, was due to Trump's unique character flaws, but it is also part of a long-term party reversal.
In 2020, Biden won over 50 percent of the highest income counties. Part of this, of course, was due
to Trump's unique character flaws, but it is also part of a long-term party reversal. And that's
where we're going. Take a look at.
I'm showing a graph here.
The graph says presidential vote in 100 counties with the highest 2019 median income.
In 1980, Republicans had 91% of the wealthy counties.
Right now, here's what I hear from AOC and other Democrats, that these Republicans and their corporate donors, the billionaires, Yeah, Bernie Sanders, the billionaires in this country are supporting you!
Tom Steyer and Michael Bloomberg dumped tons of money into your side!
There's a realignment happening.
Traditional liberals, many are defecting, are disaffected people like me, and there are many liberals who just call themselves liberals for Trump.
Why?
Because Trump has become the party of the working class.
Take a look at this long-term party switch that's been going on.
1980, Republicans had 91% of the top counties.
In 2020, they had only 43%, and the Democrats took 57%.
In 2016, Republicans had 51%.
Now, going back to 2008, the Democrats did have the lead, but that was an anomaly under Barack Obama, probably because Barack Obama was extremely popular.
But now we can see where we're at today.
The Democratic Party does not represent working class people.
It does not represent social justice.
In fact, it would seem the only thing they represent is orange man bad.
That's it.
AOC doesn't like Nancy Pelosi.
I mean, to be fair, I don't know what Ocasio-Cortez actually likes, because I think her whole thing is basically just Instagram celebrity, and she's not really all that interested or knows what she's talking about.
Because, a lot of people don't know this, because it's been some time now since she won her primary, but she started off as a pretty far-left individual.
She still is far left relative to the rest of the Democrats, but she's definitely adopted more corporate positions and been heavily criticized for it.
But I bring you now, my friends, to the new republic.
See, don't take my word for it.
The left is gonna say, Tim Pool is biased, he hates the Democrats, and yeah, for the most part.
And that means you can't trust his word or whatever.
Okay, I'll tell you this.
Perhaps I do hyper focus on Democrats and their problems, sure, but I'm not wrong.
The New Republic says the Biden Popular Front is doomed to unravel.
It may turn out that Donald Trump was the one force keeping the Democratic Party together.
You know what?
If Donald Trump can't pull this off, and I think it's extremely likely Joe Biden becomes president, I've been saying it over and over again, but Trump does have a path to victory, whether anyone on the left or in the media wants to admit it, he does.
But I think it's going to be nigh impossible for Trump to pull this off, but he could.
He's done it before.
But that being said, there's some good to consider.
I know a lot of the Trump supporters are already saying, no, you can't say it, Donald Trump must win.
Hear me out.
Two things are going to happen if Donald Trump does lose this.
Progressives are immediately going to turn on the establishment because they were doing it earlier in the year during the primary saying Joe Biden had dementia.
They rallied behind Joe Biden after the fact because they don't like Donald Trump.
Now that Trump is on the ropes, let's see if Trump loses.
Republicans hate Biden.
And guess what?
Progressives do too.
So then what happens?
The largest voting bloc will become the Republicans and the Democratic Party will be split in half.
No joke.
And even the left recognizes this.
Now, this article from the New Republic is very much left-biased, but let's read this and see what they're saying, because I'll tell you this.
They may have a biased perspective on a lot of this stuff, but I tell you, I think they're right about a lot of it.
The likes of AOC, the Squad, and the progressive Democrats, they do not like the democratic establishment.
And you know what's going to be funny?
I'll tell you this.
In four or five months, assuming that Joe Biden is inaugurated, becomes president, and Trump leaves, progressives are going to start watching my videos.
You know why?
Well, first of all, I'll say, a lot of progressives do watch my content, but for the most part, they don't, because it's moderate, I guess.
But I'll tell you what's going to happen.
You see, I'm going to continue ragging on Joe Biden the same as I ragged on Barack Obama.
And then, they're going to come in, Watching the content and saying yes to all of it because I'm going to be hypercritical of a lot of things he's doing and so are they.
So, they're going to end up watching.
I mean, I can only assume they're going to start saying things like, you know, Tim's right about Biden and stuff like that.
I can't understand why they voted for the guy.
I guess a lot of them were too young to remember the Obama administration.
But let's read this from the New Republic and see what they have to say.
Mind you, the New Republic is the outlet that previously published an op-ed calling for abolishing the Constitution.
They say, It's lucky that votes usually don't get counted till late at night.
Victorious presidential candidates have two audiences to speak to.
Their zealous volunteers generally get little reward other than the sense, inculated over months of battle, that they are fighting to vanquish the forces of evil.
On election night, they expect someone to extol their bravery and ruthlessness, and to hold aloft the head of the vanquished foe.
It's preferable if this can be done while the rest of the country is either sleeping or weepily watching its own candidate concede.
When days later, the president-elect pivots to flatter the whole country and extend an olive branch to his rivals, his loyal followers can feel jilted.
Because of late-arriving mail-in ballots, huge turnout, and the sheer closeness of November's election in swing states, Joe Biden and Kamala Harris had to rile up supporters and reassure neutrals at the same primetime event.
It was four days after the election, at one of those outdoor parking lot rallies that became a staple of Biden's COVID-era campaign.
Harris was triumphal.
Our very democracy was on the ballot in this election, with the very soul of America at stake, she said.
You chose hope and unity, decency, science, and yes, truth.
Biden was conciliatory, quoting the Bible and promising to work as hard for those who didn't vote for me as those who did.
Perhaps that will be a viable division of labor in the indefinite future.
Let me stop right there and tell you this.
Nobody voted for Biden.
And that was one of the biggest mistakes Democrats made.
No joke.
They had some party unity.
They had some ability to get things done.
And with a Donald Trump foe and an allegiant media, they had an opportunity to take the Senate.
Think about what it would have meant if Donald Trump won the presidency.
Come this runoff election in Georgia, what would end up happening is the Democrats would surge.
They would have the House and the Senate, and Trump would have what?
The presidency?
It's still good for Trump in some capacity, but terrible for Republicans.
The greatest hope right now for Democrats is that Donald Trump wins.
I'm telling you, there's gonna be leftists saying, you're crazy.
Think about it.
If Donald Trump finds a path to victory right now, before the runoff election in Georgia, the Democrats will shock the state of Georgia.
It will be a surge unlike any other.
Trump stole the election.
Our only hope now is to take the Senate.
Right now, Democrats are losing bigly, I think that's a real word, I'm pretty sure it is, in the House.
But they still control it.
They may take the Senate if they win Georgia, but in order to take the Senate in Georgia, they would have to win both races and the presidency, in which case, There's not a whole lot they can do, but the point is, if Donald Trump wins the presidency, they take Georgia and the party remains unified on a single front, Orange Man bad.
That will allow them several years to rebuild and find some kind of common ground within the Democratic Party.
If Joe Biden wins, the progressive Democrats will revolt.
They're already starting to do it.
A lot of the orange man bad Twitter accounts that I follow are already coming for Joe Biden.
And I'm not exaggerating.
High profile reply guys from Donald Trump are now targeting Joe Biden because he's appointing lobbyists and bankers and warmongers.
So it's coming.
You will have a united front against Joe Biden if he wins.
Trump supporters angry saying he stole the election, and progressives saying he's a corporate crony capitalist.
The Democrats can remain united if Trump wins.
And then they can carry on and maybe split the Senate 50-50, forcing a tie onto Donald Trump.
Or onto Mike Pence, I'm sorry.
But let's read a little bit more about what they say at the New Republic because, hey look, don't take it from me, they're the leftists.
They say, Biden and Harris have a problem.
The vision of ousting Donald Trump has been widely attractive, drawing 79 million votes.
More Americans than ever have voted for anything.
As Michelle Obama put it, they voted against lies, hate, chaos, and division.
If by this she means Trump, then lies, hate, chaos, division, and division, turnout, have quite a constituency themselves, commanding 73 million votes, more than her husband won in either of his races.
Trump's House delegation has been bolstered by the elections and radicalized.
Judging by the arrival in Washington of Georgia QAnon habituee Marjorie Taylor Greene and Colorado gun enthusiast Lauren Boebert, his Senate majority has held, barring a Democratic sweep of January's pair of runoff Senate contests in Georgia.
As long as the Trump coalition remains the center force in America's politics, reconciling the country to a Biden presidency will be difficult, but reorienting the Democratic Party may be harder.
With Trump himself gone, Biden's historic purpose is achieved.
His work is done.
If he doesn't secure a base within his own party, he risks radicalizing Republicans and Democrats alike.
I'm a center-left independent, meaning I'm a centrist.
The left wants to call me right-wing.
I'm a centrist.
The issue is, my center is rooted in, like, literally this country, where the people are in their opinions, not far-left fringe politics.
Joe Biden is not for Medicare for All.
Neither am I. I don't like him because he's establishment crony corporate politics.
But I align more with some of the things put forward by moderate Democrats than I do the far left.
The only problem is the moderate Democrats we have are like the worst politicians.
What we need is a moderate populist who's going to say, let's all come together for the working class.
Let's figure these things out together.
Because look, man, the populist left and right have more in common than they don't.
However, many of the populist left fell for the narrative.
Man, I could only imagine.
If the left, the far left, actually accepted a populist right-wing president.
They don't.
They view it as fascism.
Instead, they opted for literal fascism.
Major corporations colluding with the state revolving door policies.
Politicians who would sell us out for foreign war.
Indefinite lockdowns.
I guess they all believe in it.
Because they just listen to the mainstream media and they don't do investigations of their own.
I don't think... Excuse me.
I don't think we're going to be better off with Joe Biden.
And too many Democrats fell for it.
Well, now they're all going to come out and hate Joe Biden.
And yep, it's going to rally Republicans and Democrats, populists united in their hatred against Joe Biden, which is going to be another really weird realignment.
It's going to keep going back and forth.
Maybe Trump wasn't the right candidate.
He was better than Biden, in a lot of ways.
Maybe we need a real populist moderate who can speak to everybody.
We don't have that.
We have establishment garbage.
Here's what they say. The coming weeks may see the reemergence in back rooms and boardrooms of
tensions that loomed over the 2020 Democratic primaries.
Let us review the three power centers in the party as they existed then. The new economy. Two titans
of the finance world, Michael Bloomberg and Tom Steyer, sought to win the
Democratic nomination by funding their own various down-ballot candidacies. Both would eventually back
Biden. There was also one impecunious primary candidate who had some original ideas
about the tech world, Andrew Yang.
The new economy provides wealth for so few people that it can never command the party's rank and
file.
But it exercises a dizzying gravitational pull on its leaders.
Socialism.
Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren were its candidates.
And Warren's.
She denounced it, anyway.
She said she was a capitalist, whether or not that matters.
The former, in a doctrinal way, unions, benefits, income, redistribution.
The latter, in a way, adapted to strike more precisely at modern power relations.
And civil rights.
The party's glue is civil rights, broadly understood.
Civil rights long meant looking out for the practical and principled interests of black people, naturally a commitment of which cooperation with socialists is possible.
But over the decades, civil rights has also become a regulatory and judicial system for advocating the interests of other groups, including immigrants, elite, and mass, women executives, two-income gay couples, and lawyers?
Commitments more consistent with those of the Democrats' plutocratic wing.
The role of civil rights as reconciler of contradictions can be compared to that of anti-communism in the tripartite Reagan coalition of the 1980s, which appealed in one way to the Christians who thought the country ought to be more fraternal, and in another to businessmen who thought it ought to be more rapacious.
All the candidates were candidates of civil rights, but in varying ways.
Harris was constrained to progressivism by the politics of her state.
Julian Castro of Texas was closer to Sanders and Warren, but most were drawn to or from the Democrats' powerful 1% wing, with such a pallid ideological profile that it seemed the whole point of their candidacy was the chance to elect, say, Pete Buttigieg as the first gay president, or Amy Klobuchar as the first woman.
I'm going to stop there.
And let me just say, Pete Buttigieg was attacked by the social justice wing of the party.
Now, you've got the bread tube types.
These are the socialists and the dirtbag socialist types.
They're not necessarily all for... I would say, for the most part, they're not necessarily all for social justice, though some of them kind of are.
There's an overlap between them, and they kind of just tacitly agree and allow it to happen.
I don't.
I don't like it.
Why?
I'm not an upper-class white suburbanite.
I'm a lower-class, high-school, dropout, mixed-race kid from the South Side of Chicago.
Well, now I'm a man, mind you.
That's the point.
I didn't grow up in that world.
I don't subscribe to their ridiculous views on race, and so I reject it outright.
Outright!
I've seen what their racism brings, and I will have no part in it.
And thus, even though I lean left on many economic policy issues, I'm never going to support them.
The Democratic Party embraced all of this.
Critical race theory.
Joe Biden says he's going to bring it back.
Well, that might please some people on the left, but it's not going to please many of the anti-war progressives who call these people the neoliberal social justice types.
They say they come out in defense of the war machine because a woman now is in charge of, I don't know, like Booz Allen Hamilton or something.
I don't care if it's a woman or a man running these big intelligence firms, security contractors, and the military-industrial complex.
I'll just leave it at that.
I don't care what their race, gender, sex is.
I think it's bad, on principle.
You have anti-war leftists who are for left-wing economic policy and reject that, but they call it neoliberal.
They point the finger at Joe Biden.
And you know what?
Maybe that's fair.
Because Joe Biden is, he's going to reverse Trump's executive order on critical race theory.
They love this stuff.
They're going to bring it all about.
I think what we may see, the anti-war left and Trump supporters, in the event that Joe Biden is inaugurated and wins, you're going to see a lot of agreement, a lot of support.
Absolutely.
Because they're all populists.
What does that mean?
They want what's right for this country.
The progressive, the populist left, the ones that oppose the critical race theory stuff, and I mean, I guess to a certain extent, some of them who support it.
They're not pro-war.
It's the default liberals who have become pro-war and are blindly supporting team politics.
It's creepy.
But I know many anti-war leftists, and there's even people like Glenn Greenwald.
Glenn Greenwald is not a conservative, but he's ragging on the machine same as everybody else, and he said in a tweet recently, And he's right.
Democrats who only pop their heads into politics every so often are going to get a rude awakening
when they realize that the Democrats really are.
And he's right.
Right now, the Democratic Party has a, I guess, forced coalition because of Trump.
Trump is not a fascist.
Trump is not a dictator.
And most of what Trump has tried to do has been constrained.
It's been a gift to the Democrats in many ways.
They've just basically done, like, I'll put it this way, when I had Hotep Jesus on the IRL podcast, I don't know if you saw it, check it out, subscribe to youtube.com slash TimCastIRL, it's the podcast show.
He was ragging on Democrats, I laughed, I said, I rag on Democrats, and I said, but what do you think about Republicans?
He said, I don't know if the Republicans are doing anything that I even, like, Talk about?
And I'm like, exactly.
The Republicans have literally just been sitting there confused, standing around Trump and not even supporting him at the time.
To the point where some people have called for boycotting the Georgia Senate race because they don't, the right populists don't like the Republican Party to a varying degree.
They're rhinos.
Even Trump calls them rhinos.
Right now, Trump is ragging on Brian Kemp of Georgia saying, I regret endorsing the guy.
They support Trump and populism.
But they're not socialists.
There are socialists, who are also populists, don't like Trump.
What happens with Trump gone?
Everybody hates Joe Biden.
Joe Biden was a serious mistake and will be one of the most disastrous things for this country, mark my words.
You cannot have a country run by a person hated by everyone.
Donald Trump at least has support just shy of 50%, and that's still pretty bad.
Now, I can blame the media for a lot of it.
Trump got around 73, 74 million votes.
Joe Biden got about 80, so they say.
I know a lot of people dispute that.
But at least Trump has near half the country.
Joe Biden got a lot of support.
At least Donald Trump has about half the country.
Joe Biden got a lot of support from people who hate him.
They hated Trump more.
What happens?
Add every one of those Trump voters, 74 million, to about half of those who voted for Biden, and you are going to end up with over 100 million people who hate Joe Biden.
I'm not making these numbers up.
A Gallup poll showed the Democratic Party is just over 40% progressive, outshining traditional liberals and conservative Democrats.
They're now the plurality of the party.
And that means about 40% fine.
You take about just shy of 30 million, around 30 million, or I guess you could say about 35 million votes.
You add it to Donald Trump's 74, and you've got nearly 110 million people who hate Joe Biden.
And they will be unified in that.
Maybe that's a good thing for this country.
Maybe it'll result in a candidate that people will actually agree on, the 110 million, and then we'll really see some kind of massive 49-state landslide.
But it wouldn't be with Trump.
Anyway, I saw this story from the New Republic.
The Biden Popular Front is doomed to unravel.
That's right.
The progressive left will not rally behind the party of the managerial elites.
Well, let me clarify that.
The anti-war progressives, the anti-war left, and the more dirtbag leftists aren't going to rally around the rich people.
The rich people were convenient to them, I suppose, in that they opposed Donald Trump.
What happens next?
Donald Trump appeared on Fox News and talked about voter fraud.
So, we'll see.
I'm going to do a segment on this and talk about why Donald Trump needs to keep fighting.
Real results showing that Trump must continue the fight.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 4pm.
If you want to watch it, type into the address bar.
YouTube.com slash TimCast.
Just bear with me.
Type that in.
Okay?
And as soon as you press enter, you will see my other channel.
Check it out, subscribe.
Thanks for hanging out, and I will see you all then.
Not a day goes by where there's some story that makes me eternally grateful for the Constitution.
The Founding Fathers understood what was going on in Europe and said, we must have a written document that says, y'all can't do certain things, government.
The people can do certain things.
My friends, I give you one of the most horrifying stories I've seen yet in the whole COVID lockdown, but it's happening in Europe.
Video of racist police beating puts Macron under the cosh.
The footage was shocking in its brutality, as Michael Zeckler, a black music producer, Cowered in the entrance of his building that houses his recording studio in an upmarket district of Paris, he was beaten by three policemen who allegedly called him Dirty N-Word.
His crime?
He was not wearing a mask.
Wow.
It's not the first time we've seen a story like this.
You may have seen the viral video, I think it was from Australia, of a woman who had a medical exemption for not having to wear a mask for breathing issues, and a cop just brutally assaulted her.
This is the kind of thing you can expect when you get authoritarian lockdowns.
You see, the police in Europe, they haven't sworn an oath to anything, really.
I mean, maybe they swear an oath to something.
In the United States, we swear an oath to the Constitution.
My understanding is that cops do.
Maybe they don't.
I know service personnel, armed service personnel, do.
But most of us should have an oath to the Constitution.
That is the document that guarantees the rights of the citizens.
The government shall not infringe upon them.
I would... Look.
There are leftists who are calling for abolishing the Constitution.
No joke.
In the New Republic.
It's a prominent leftist publication.
That's scary.
Because then you'll get this.
They can't do it to us right now.
They can try.
They've done it in some places.
No.
We won't stand for it.
They say, from the Sunday Times, the incident, viewed by more than 13 million people on a social media outlet called Loopsider, reverberated through France this weekend, adding to concerns about the behavior of a police force that appears out of control and the apparent unwillingness of President Emmanuel Macron's government to rein it in.
I don't see this as an issue of police brutality.
I mean, it is, but first and foremost, it's an issue of fascistic authoritarianism.
What did these leftists think was going to happen as they called for more and more of this?
In the U.S., we are having lockdowns.
And they're a violation of our constitutional rights.
The Supreme Court recently ruled in favor of religious services in New York City, saying, Cuomo, you can't lock down churches.
The Constitution does not allow you to do so.
It was really funny, actually.
I think it was Gorsuch, or however you pronounce his name, who issued an opinion.
That said, there's no world in which the Constitution blocks religious services from being open, but allows salons and, you know, banks and stores from being open.
It's a really, really good point.
Here's what the Sunday Times says.
As the outcry continued this weekend, Macron described the images as shameful for all of us, and said his government would have to find a way of restoring public confidence in the police.
His comments, posted on Facebook, came as up to half a million people held protests in Paris and dozens of others across France yesterday.
Although most passed off peacefully, police in the capital used tear gas and water cannon to disperse crowds near the Place de la Bastille.
The harrowing video of the seven-minute beating emerged during an uncomfortable week for the government that had been expected to be dominated by Macron's announcement of the relaxation of France's month-long COVID-19 lockdown, including the long-awaited reopening yesterday of non-essential shops.
Well, over in London, 150 people have been arrested.
Is this what people want?
With the lockdowns?
Just to be locked in your home and the government can beat and arrest people and you can't protest anymore?
This is what Europe gets with no constitution.
The Hill says, More than 150 people were arrested on Saturday during an anti-lockdown protest in London, the Metropolitan Police announced.
The Met said the arrests were made for breaching coronavirus regulations, assaulting a police officer, and possessing of drugs.
Law enforcement added that officers made several attempts to prevent people from gathering and to urge people to go home.
The Met warned on Friday that the protests break the law, adding that it has had a robust policing plan in place for the weekend.
That's right.
In London, you're not legally allowed to protest.
In the U.S., we have a constitution and a First Amendment.
But I said this the other day and I'll say it again.
The First Amendment says you have a right to peaceably assemble.
That's it.
You have a right to peaceably assemble.
Well, I choose to peaceably assemble to, uh, I don't know, mow my lawn with friends or to have a drink.
It doesn't matter what I'm talking about.
The government can't stop it.
They'll try, and they're losing in many cases.
The Hill goes on to say, quote, Today's enforcement action is a direct result of those individuals
deliberately breaking the law and at times targeting our officers with aggression and
causing disruption to the road network, Chief Superintendent Stuart Bell said in a statement.
The arrests come as many countries in Europe have seen spikes in covid cases with the approach
of the cold with the approach of the colder months.
Countries such as Germany and Italy have clamped down on restrictions in recent weeks ahead of Christmas.
England is currently in a month-long lockdown that began November 5th with closed non-essential businesses and allowed people to leave their homes only for work and other necessities.
Officials plan to lift those restrictions on December 2nd and enforce restrictions specific to certain regions.
However, more than 55 million people would still remain under tighter restrictions, the BBC reported this week, with London and the Liverpool City region being in the second highest tier.
More than 1.6 million coronavirus infections have been reported in the UK since the pandemic began.
According to data from John Hopkins University, more than 58,000 people have died.
You know, it's funny.
Johns Hopkins University newsletter put out a story saying that COVID deaths were being exaggerated, and then within about four or five days they retracted it, claiming it was incorrect.
But the doctor who put the study together said, no, it's not.
I did my research, and it's correct.
I wonder if this faulty data, or disputed data, is the sole reason why they're doing all this.
John Hopkins has been the one tracking the principal COVID numbers.
So now what happens?
Well, let me tell you something sad.
I saw a post from Carl Benjamin, aka Sargon of Akkad.
If you have not followed his new show, you can check out his Lotus Eaters podcast.
Shout out to Sargon.
But he posted something on Parler.
It was a couple guys with a wheelbarrow yelling, bring out your dead.
And what they had was pub signs.
They were destroying the businesses.
And they were saying, and what the meme said was that some of these pubs are hundreds of years old.
You see, we don't really have that all that much in the US.
We do have old establishments, but they're really rare.
In Europe and the UK, there are bars that have been open for like a thousand years.
Isn't that crazy?
I went to one where it was like, you could actually see the old, like, brick and hay mud that they used to build it.
And then they reinforced it and built over it.
It's kind of crazy.
Like super old.
I don't know how old it was, but there's like buildings there from like the 1300s or even earlier.
They're being destroyed.
The buildings will still exist, I guess.
But these businesses are being destroyed, and for what?
This is the wrong, the wrong, wrong move.
Well, I don't want to get too much in the business, though, because I might do another segment on that.
The main issue is, we're seeing the V for Vendetta-esque authoritarian lockdowns, where they're going on TV saying, here's why you need us.
And people just fall in line and believe it.
I'm not one to normally do videos about police brutality.
I'm not a big proponent of Black Lives Matter in the sense that the organization is rather communist, self-described, and they want to disrupt the nuclear family.
I'm not a fan.
But I don't like police brutality, and I'm willing to call it out where I can.
And what we're seeing right now is draconian lockdowns.
I've said this before, but I want you to take this to heart and tell people, remind them of this.
When we read those novels, when we watched those movies about a nightmare dystopia, There's no reality in which the authoritarian government just exists.
Just one day poofs into existence.
They say Donald Trump is a fascist and all that, but he's not doing any fascistic things.
They are.
And they have an excuse.
COVID.
COVID is their excuse.
Any authoritarian would always have an excuse.
Maybe Trump will use the excuse of widespread voter fraud to overturn the results of the election and take the White House for another four years.
Possible.
We'll see how it plays out.
But what we're seeing with COVID?
Beating of people for not wearing masks.
It's gonna get worse.
I don't think it'll get better.
They're saying that they're gonna be lifting these restrictions.
Okay, so maybe.
But Joe Biden said we're gonna have a dark winter.
Joe Biden said that he's gonna follow the science.
And Joe Biden's advisor says six-week national lockdown.
I think most people, regardless of who you voted for, should be crossing your fingers and hoping Donald Trump somehow finds a way to win, lest we find ourselves in these positions.
In Pennsylvania, When an unconstitutional law, and a judge said it was likely unconstitutional, but they didn't rule on the merits yet, when this law was struck down by the Supreme Court, Democrats cheered.
The law obviously flies in the face of the Constitution.
Over time, our norms and rules have been eroded.
And what I'm worried about is that the Constitution has become Swiss cheese as of late, with these lockdowns especially, and especially with laws around 2A.
At what point do we just forget the Constitution exists, and it becomes more of a formality?
That's what worries me.
I hope that people start reasserting their rights, uphold the Constitution, and guarantee that we never get anything like this.
But it's already starting to happen, and worse still.
Regular people who believe this stuff and are paranoid and delusional wearing masks, like, screaming at people.
I'm not saying it's wrong to wear a mask, I'm saying, just describing these people who are nuts.
These people are beating other, you know, they're beating people and they're enforcing these social policies just because they're drone-like and insane.
Scary stuff, man.
Oh, whatever.
I'll leave it there.
I got a couple more segments coming up in a few minutes.
Stick around and I will see you all shortly.
You know, New Jersey was already bad enough.
The state seems to just be like the suburb of two other states.
So, I live in South Jersey, which is the suburbs of Philadelphia.
But we're across the river, so in New Jersey—we're in New Jersey, we're not in Pennsylvania.
And then if you're up north in, say, like, Union City or Jersey City or Bayonne, you're in the New York City metro, like, actually part of the metropolitan area.
It's only a couple minutes to, like, hop on a train and go into Manhattan, but you're still not in New York.
Now, I guess they have Newark and they have Trenton and stuff like that, but New Jersey, it was already really bad.
And then COVID hit.
And the governor of New Jersey, who is one of the most spineless, pathetic, and stupid human beings In this country, maybe on the planet, started shutting things down and it made no sense.
There was no rhyme or reason.
I'll tell you what it is.
The governor of New Jersey, he's a Democrat, and he's a coward.
He has no spine.
He is an absolute coward.
And I'll tell you what I mean by this.
These Democratic governors like Wolf, like Cuomo, they don't want to take responsibility.
They don't want to take responsibility for the fact that a pandemic is happening, and they're in charge, so they just go to the 10th degree, they crank it up to 10, destroying everything, and then say, it's COVID's fault.
That way they can claim, we were doing better than that state, we have less deaths per capita than that state.
While people suffer and go hungry.
Here's the story.
Almost one-third of small businesses in New Jersey have been closed.
Wow.
One-third.
Why?
For what reason?
Because they don't want to accept responsibility.
They don't.
They would rather destroy everyone's lives and contribute to the largest transfer of wealth to large businesses.
The Hill reports.
A third of small businesses in New Jersey have closed down, according to a report from Star Ledger newspaper.
Quote, It's really bad.
And without federal dollars coming into New Jersey, the Main Street stores and other establishments are not going to make it through the winter, said Eileen Keene, the state director of the National Federation of Independent Business.
Harvard-based data project TrackTheRecovery.org estimated that 31% of businesses have closed down so far as of November 9th.
This number is just above the national average estimated by the website.
The New Jersey Business and Industry Association reported similar numbers, estimating 28% of businesses had closed down by October.
The newspaper notes that despite the holiday shopping season, business leaders are still concerned that the trend could get worse as stimulus talks stall on Capitol Hill.
New Jersey, like most of the U.S., is currently experiencing a surge of new COVID cases.
Over 329,000 cases and nearly 17,000 deaths have been reported.
On November 21st, New Jersey recorded 4,669 cases, the most it has ever reported in a single day.
Last week, New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy was harassed by hecklers.
who shouted at him while he and his family ate at an outdoor restaurant.
Speaking to CBS this morning, Murphy said he understood the overwhelming amount of stress.
Quote, The stress levels are exceptionally high.
You've lost a job.
You've lost a business.
You've lost a loved one.
I can't blame folks for being stressful, said Murphy.
Many experts have warned that action must be made soon, as benefits related to the CARES Act are expected to expire at the end of the year.
This includes expanded unemployment benefits, as well as the moratorium on evictions.
I'm not entirely convinced it's going to get done.
You see, Trump and the Republicans are dealing with the election.
And so I don't know what's going to happen with the stimulus.
Some have said we shouldn't have it.
The vaccine should be the stimulus and everyone should get back to work.
But here's basically the point I'm trying to make.
If one person dies, and there's no lockdown, then everyone's going to blame the governor.
So he says, I don't know, lock it down then.
Well, people are still going to die, but he's going to say, hey, but I locked it down.
You can point out the World Health Organization said it's a last resort.
You shouldn't do it.
Oh, well, Joe, I don't want people to die.
Even if it saves, what do they say?
They say, even if it saves one person, right?
Okay.
They're cowards.
They don't want to look the people in the eye and say, we cannot destroy our economy because people will suffer and starve.
We cannot tell people they can't have their lives or their businesses or their ownership anymore.
Just because there's a pandemic.
Because pandemics will happen.
Be safe, wear a mask, use hand sanitizer.
And you might still get sick.
And others will as well.
But we need to recognize the world is not candy canes, Skittles, and rainbows.
It's not gonna be always perfect all the time.
Sometimes a bear can wander into your neighborhood.
What do you do?
You deal with it.
Sometimes people get bit by sharks.
We're not gonna go and put up shark nets everywhere because sometimes it happens.
Now we have a pandemic.
Guess what?
Pandemics happen.
And you can't control nature.
You can try.
I'll tell you how absurd everything's gotten.
Here's a story from Vice.
When does outside become inside?
We ask the experts.
As rules around dining shift rapidly, it's unclear if restaurants can reach a comfortable and COVID-safe definition of outdoors.
Take a look at this photo.
This appears to be... I'm not sure if it's New York.
Maybe it's not.
But there is a structure built in the street with wood, and it's got windows, and that's their outdoor dining.
No joke.
You are allowed to eat inside so long as you are inside a building that's outside of the business's actual primary inside.
Yeah.
That's where we're at.
You see, the lockdowns make no sense.
It just destroys the businesses for those who can't do something absurd like build a new location that's still indoors.
What's the point of calling it outdoors if you're in a confined space with people who are probably coughing?
They say, months ago, the movers and shakers at the CDC told us it was safe, to an extent, at least, to gather outdoors in a distant mask-wearing fashion.
Drive-in movies, picnics, park karaoke, long walks, bike rides, porch hangouts, and nature-centric vacations ensued.
And restaurants across the country took note and opened up their outdoor capacity too.
But as winter creeps up everywhere in the U.S.
that experiences seasons, outdoor dining has started to look a little bit different, a little more enclosed.
Gone are the days when all restaurants needed to set up diners, set diners up for the alfresco experience was a few beer-branded umbrellas and a stand-up team of servers.
Now, outdoor diners behold the great COVID-19-compliant outdoors.
Canopy tents and vinyl cabins bloom.
Makeshift wood and plexiglass huts dot the horizon.
And quasi-colored beroofed patios hurriedly outfitted with space heaters and crinkly astronaut blankets emit a soft glow from their hanging LED lights.
Isn't nature beautiful?
Here's a tweet from James Hamblin.
He says, Outdoor dining has gradually escalated into what might be reasonably called buildings.
Look at these photos.
This is some of the most ridiculous trash I have ever seen.
They're just building buildings!
They're putting windows up!
They're putting up walls and seats and lights and heat.
They're just building new buildings.
So what's the point of all of this?
What's the point of the lockdown if this is acceptable?
To destroy the businesses that can't afford to do this?
Yep, perhaps.
The rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer.
And perhaps these wealthy governors like it.
They're wealthy, they're not poor, and they don't care about you.
So what do we do?
Well, in my opinion, this just shows you how absurd the whole thing is.
Perhaps we should just reopen, and if you're scared, you can stay home.
And if I want to go out, I will.
I see leftists saying things like, when you go out and spread this, you're infringing my rights.
No, no, no, no.
It is my right to get sick and die if I so choose.
Why, we had a woman in Canada who was scared of the COVID lockdown, so she asked a doctor to literally kill her.
And he did, while people stood around singing.
Why?
Well, medically-assisted suicide is her choice.
If someone wants to go outside and they could get sick, guess what?
That's their choice.
Now, if you're scared you might get sick, you stay home.
Think about how crazy it would be if we functioned this way on every single issue.
I'm worried that I might get hit by your car so you're not allowed to drive anymore.
Okay, ban all the cars!
Because car accidents happen all the time.
And they kill tons of people every single year.
And we can stop it if we just stop allowing people to go out with their cars.
How simple is that?
Now, when you get hit by a car, guess what?
It's not your fault.
Well, it could be your fault, but usually, it's the fault of the driver.
But we know it happens, and you still cross the road.
They say that the pandemic is worse and all that stuff.
Fine, fine, but listen.
I'm pretty sure If you get hit by a car, you have a greater chance of dying than if you get COVID.
Now, some might be saying, yes, but your chance of getting hit by a car is less.
We're not talking about the likelihood you get sick.
We're talking about the fear people have about going outside.
So if you fear getting hit by a car, well, you can't make me stop driving.
And if you fear COVID, it's up to you to stay away from people and stay safe.
I think wearing a mask is fine.
I think there's an easy middle ground where we say here's what we're willing to do to mitigate the spread, wearing a mask for instance, socially distancing, but locking everything down so that people just build new buildings makes literally no sense and this is all the proof you need that we are wasting our time on something that makes no sense and will not work.
So go ahead, make all those claims, say we should lock everything down.
New Jersey already has very poor areas that are suffering.
Why make it worse?
It's creepy, I tell you that.
It's super, super creepy.
You know, there's never gonna be an easy way to solve issues, you know, through the law.
It just doesn't make sense.
I remember when they banned smoking in bars.
I was in Arizona with my friend.
They cut like a one square foot hole in the roof because that qualified them to be outdoors.
No kidding.
They were like, yeah, we put a hole in the corner of the room.
Now everyone can smoke.
I'm like, but we're inside.
Yeah, except for that hole in the ceiling, which makes it outside.
Just one square foot.
I'm like, what?
What if it rains?
They're like, it doesn't rain in Arizona.
I was like, okay, good point.
How dumb.
How absolutely absurd.
So I look, man.
At a certain point, I'm getting tired of talking about it.
Because what's the point?
They're going to keep doing it.
That's it.
We need more lawsuits, I guess.
But until then, people are going to find ways to bypass this stuff.
I'll leave it there.
I got one more segment coming up in a few minutes.
Stick around.
And I will see you all shortly.
It should go without saying that giving your money to wealthy celebrities probably won't end well for whatever it is you think you want.
But you give money for these really expensive products, and what do you get?
Probably overpriced garbage.
But what about non-profits?
What about when celebrities come out and say, we are feminists and we are going to fight for people who have been abused?
Please give us money.
Uh, do you think that they're going to use that money in such a way that will actually help people?
Well, my friends, I believe you would be incorrect.
Well, some of the money in this instance did go to helping victims of harassment.
Time's Up Charities, set up by celebrities as part of the Me Too movement, spent $1.4 million on salaries, $157,000 on conferences at luxury resorts, and just $312,000 helping victims of harassment.
Absolutely stunning and brave!
Thank you.
Daily Mail says, Times Up, the organization set up to fight sexual harassment in the workplace, in the wake of the Me Too movement, spent the bulk of its donations on executive salaries and only a fraction on legal costs to help victims in its first year, records show.
Text filings show that the organization, which was founded by Hollywood celebrities and is made up from the Times Up Foundation and Times Up Now Inc., Raised $3.6 million in 2018 in its first year of operation.
However, less than 10% was spent on helping those women who have experienced harassment.
Filings show $312,001 was spent on the Legal Defense Fund, while $1.4 million was spent on salaries, and more than $157,000 was spent on conferences at luxury resorts, and a further $58,000 was spent on travel.
The organization brought in Hollywood heavyweights during the early days of its operation, with Reese Witherspoon, Amy Schumer, and Brie Larson holding positions on its board.
Bravo!
You know, listen, listen, my friends.
They're celebrities!
We're gonna have to pay them a lot of money to get them on board.
And that means we're not really gonna be a good help to people who are really victims of harassment and need legal defense.
But, listen, you know?
Gotta hire those celebrities!
So, uh, yeah.
We wanna put the names on the books, I guess.
So they show you a bunch of photos.
They say the tax filings details the mission of Time's Up now as being to promote safe, fair, and dignified work for women of all kinds.
We work to make sure that women are free from harassment and other forms of discrimination on the job, have equal opportunity for economic security, and can achieve the highest positions of power wherever they work.
But huge amounts were spent on executive salaries instead of legal support.
Many of you may know this because I've talked about this issue before.
I used to work for several non-profits doing fundraising.
Let me tell you the clever wordplay they use to justify taking your money and spending it on whatever they want.
You might see someone say, hello good sir, we are trying to save starving children.
We're trying to save them.
And you're going to be like, wow, okay, what am I going to do?
Please give us your money.
In order to save the kids, they say, people need to know.
This is one of the most common things they do to take your money.
How can we help the kids if no one knows that they need saving?
And you're like, save them from what?
That's not the point!
We're saving them.
So here's what happens.
They take your money, they pay themselves, and say, the fact that I'm talking to you right now is the outreach.
Congratulations.
By you giving me money, I'll keep talking to people.
Now, look, to be reasonable, there is some merit in that.
You know, if people don't know a problem exists, they can't solve it.
And if people are directly funding the salaries of those who are doing the fundraising, by, like, people going out and talking to people, you are evangelizing and spreading that idea.
But when people think they're donating to a cause that's going to fight specifically for something, like helping women who have been victims of harassment, and you barely do that, that's when you get one of these, well, it's a typical charity.
It's what most of them do.
They'll say, we're here to fight for the environment.
Well, what that means is the fight is on multiple fronts.
The first step is telling people.
That's always their excuse.
They're paying themselves salaries and saying, it's all a part of the cause.
Because if we weren't doing this, no one would know about it, right?
They say, Lisa Borders was recruited to head Time's Up, but only spent four months at the organization after her 36-year-old son was accused of misconduct himself.
Nevertheless, the CEO managed to pull in $342,000 for her salary.
She was there for four months.
They were going to pay her a million dollars.
No joke.
The Chief Marketing Officer, Rachel Terrace, drew a salary of $295,000 for her efforts during the organization's first year.
And Treasurer Rebecca Goldman drew a salary of $255,000.
Listen, I'm not convinced anybody who donated actually cares.
I really don't.
They're probably like, I'm more than happy to donate to empower strong women's.
So, there you go.
They complain about Trump's charities and all that stuff.
If people want to give money to Trump, I don't care.
If people want to give money to Time's Up, fine, whatever, I don't care.
They say, tax filings detail how 3,000 individuals were helped by the Time's Up legal defense fund between January and June 18th at a cost of $1.7 million.
But most of the defense fund money came from grants that had been made to the Women's Law Center, according to the New York Post.
Only a small proportion came from the Time's Up organization, with Time's Up Foundation donating $132,000 to the fund, and Time's Up Now, the lobbying end of the charity, handing over $179,000.
And that brings me to the next point.
Lobbying!
We are gonna help these women by lobbying for social justice law.
They'll tell you they're fighting for one thing, but they're fighting for a broad cause.
I'll give you an example.
Refuse fascism.
It's been a while since I covered Refuse Fascism.
It's an organization, but my understanding is they were founded by the revolutionary communists.
That's the game.
They're going to say, we're refusing fascism by promoting communism.
Great.
Two bad authoritarian systems that I don't want.
I guess the commies like it, though.
That's what happens.
People donate thinking that they're going to oppose fascism, when in reality they're supporting authoritarian communism.
That's what you get from all of this.
You think you're donating to the salary of some woman who's gonna be like, we must stop harassment?
What they'll do is they'll say, listen, women's struggles is really just everyone's struggles and therefore we must fight for, you know, insert critical race theory cause or, you know, far leftist identitarian cause.
It's all interconnected, they will say.
Or they'll say something like, we're fighting for the rights of, you know, BIPOC women or BAME women or whatever.
It allows them to use your money as they see fit while using a strong cause to create a sense of urgency, as they call it, so they can raise money.
One of the key elements of fundraising is what they call the sense of urgency.
It's in sales, too.
You gotta tell people, if you don't buy it now, someone else will.
What they do here is they say, cause is getting bad, and if you don't fight it now, it's gonna get worse.
That's why they need something like Time's Up.
That's why they need something like Me Too.
So they can say, remember in the news, you heard about that woman and that guy?
That's right!
Donate!
If they came out and said, we wanna fight for a cause to like, you know, pass some diversity and inclusivity law or whatever for businesses, you'll be like, eh, I'll do it later.
But if you come out now and say, these women need your help, they're suing, they're going after these guys, they're gonna get them locked up, then people donate, but then they go ahead and use that money as they see fit.
They said the conferences, where they spent a ton of money, included a retreat to a luxury resort and spa in Ojai in June 2018, where a room for the night costs upwards of $400.
Well, to be fair, $400 is a lot in general, but there's more expensive resorts than that.
It is hefty, though, to be fair.
Despite having been in existence six months, those at the conference struggled to decide what the organization's mission statement should be, according to one attendee who spoke to the New York Post.
It later changed from, let's clean up Hollywood to, we're going to help all workers.
Aside from the pricey conferences at country retreats, the organization details in its tax filings how it spent $288,000 on advertising And 940,000 on legal costs.
A huge chunk of that, 719,000, went to Arnold and Porter K. Scholar, a law firm that frequently lobbies on Capitol Hill.
Amazing.
Listen, look, I want to be fair.
Maybe they raised a bunch of money, and they just didn't know what they're doing.
That's fine, I guess.
And like I said, I'm sure there's a lot of feminists who don't care they gave the money to them and, you know, and that's it.
If they're doing lobbying, it's not going to be tax-deductible.
But I think, look, here's the main point.
Almost all charities do this.
They claim to be fighting for a cause, but they're really just paying themselves.
And a lot of people just feel good giving money because it's their excuse, where they're like, well, I'm doing the right thing, I guess.
If you want to give to a charity, if you want to give to a candidate, by all means do it.
People are donating to Trump because they like Trump, and they don't care.
They don't.
But right now, you know, Steve Bannon is going through this court case where they claim that he, you know, he and this other guy took money and then paid this guy a salary when they weren't supposed to, but I doubt anyone who donated to that project cares that the guy decided to pay himself.
Truth be told, dude said he wouldn't take a salary.
And then he did.
And they were like, don't tell anybody.
That's at least the evidence we've seen so far.
Does anybody care though?
Are there any victims?
I'd say no.
None.
So listen.
It's not the first time I've seen a story like this.
Would I donate to Time's Up?
No, because I can tell you, man, a bunch of these big non-profits do exactly this.
Many are more overt about it.
I can say that maybe Time's Up, they're just inexperienced, have no idea what they're doing.
Okay, fine, that's fair, I suppose.
Or, they knew they were setting up a non-profit, they were gonna funnel all the money into salaries for themselves, and then go, eh, there you go, we're done.
We saw what Joe Biden's charity on cancer, right?
It's one of the most common ways to clean money.
You start a non-profit, you take donations from somewhere, from someone, and you pay yourself a salary, and now the money is legal and taxed and all that stuff.
If Time's Up is gonna do whatever it does, like, they can do it, it's legal.
