S542 - Project Veritas Video Leak PROVES Tech Execs Plan Censoring Conservatives, Even Threaten Republicans
Project Veritas Video Leak PROVES Tech Execs Plan Censoring Conservatives, Even Threaten Republicans. Salesforce, one of the biggest tech companies in the world is seen on video discussing the prohibition of messages that could incite political conflict.The executives even reference telling the Republican National Committee that they would not tolerate certain speech.The chilling nature of this is only expressed when you recognize the year of Antifa and BLM riots and the billions of dollars in damage that was completely overlooked. Much of this was fueled by fake news and media manipulation.If Salesforce only targets conservative ideas then people on the right will be economy restricted to such a degree they will struggle to ever resist far left ideology.
Support the show (http://timcast.com/donate)
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Project Veritas has published a leaked video showing executives from one of the biggest tech companies in the world, Salesforce, saying that messages with the potential to incite violence will not be allowed on their platform, and they will be severing business ties with anyone who does this, singling out the RNC, saying that they would not be supporting certain messages from President Donald Trump.
This may be one of the biggest instances of political censorship from big tech we have seen. We also
have many leftists who are furious at Joe Biden after he reopened child detention facilities
that Trump himself had shut down or even created new ones. And Donald Trump is now filing an
appeal with Facebook begging to get his social media accounts back. It's about time some of
these billionaires, be it Elon Musk or Trump, actually put their money where their mouth is and
start their own platforms or news organizations.
Before we get started, go over to TimCast.com, become a member and get access to exclusive members-only content.
We have a really amazing episode with Mike Cernovich talking about the Epstein files.
Again, TimCast.com, but let's get into the news.
Today Project Veritas published leaked whistleblower footage of an internal meeting at one of the biggest tech firms in the world, Salesforce.
In the meeting, several high-level executives are talking about how they can't allow messages that have the potential to incite political violence.
Around the same time as this meeting, Project Veritas notes that they received a notification from Salesforce saying that they were terminating services to Project Veritas.
I'm not entirely sure what Veritas may have said that has the potential to incite political violence.
And what's really being said here is that the ideas that we have, that you have, that may run contrary or contradict the mainstream narrative have the potential to incite violence.
Therefore, you will be severed from a massive customer relations management service.
Salesforce, I guess the easiest way to explain it, it's customer relationship management software.
Basically a database of all your customers, and it's kind of like how Patreon is.
If you have customers who are purchasing from you on a subscription basis, or you want to know their information, when they buy from you, you have this software to do it.
For someone like Project Veritas, they're probably getting monthly or yearly contributions.
They need this customer information.
Getting this cut off would be like Patreon, in a sense, banning someone, which we've seen in the past.
Now, a couple years ago, Patreon banned Sargon of Akkad, also known as Carl Benjamin, of the Lotus Eaters podcast.
Outright, with no warning, overnight, his income was gone.
But at the same time, they allow many left-wing accounts to remain up.
When this happened, it was considered to be a blip in the culture war because, look, one guy on YouTube losing his revenue, not the biggest deal in the world, it was interesting.
But Salesforce, with 150,000 clients, so they say, saying outright that they're going to shut down conversations that they feel have the potential to incite violence.
Not that directly incite, but the potential to means one very simple thing.
What we're going to be seeing with this move is that one of the biggest tech companies in the world is basically saying, if you like Project Veritas, if you would say the things that Veritas says, which are not over the top, then you will be removed from their services.
This means that all of the leftist information, all of the misinformation from the Democrats about Russia or the Black Lives Matter lies that incited extremism and violence in the streets, resulting in over a billion dollars in damages, was overlooked and will be allowed to continue.
This is possibly one of the most consequential bits of evidence proving censorship against conservatives.
I mean, we know Twitter is doing similar things as well.
But this is going to have dramatic economic ramifications for anyone who tries to communicate with their customers certain ideas.
In the end, conservative ideas will end up crippled and removed and economically restricted, while left-wing lies will be allowed to persist.
I'm not going to just stop there.
I've got the receipts.
I'm going to show you.
There is a poll and data showing the left believes outright lies.
about Black Lives Matter and police and brutality and things like that, and that contributed to a wave of mass violence across this country that was never addressed by any of these firms.
They're only taking action against Trump supporters and conservatives.
Now, by all means, feel free to hate Trump and all of his supporters, but I am simply pointing out there is a political bias and disparity in all of this.
So let's read about what Project Veritas released and I'll show you some more data about what's going on, explain to you Salesforce.
But before we do, head over to TimCast.com and become a member because, well, we're all facing the purge.
Many accounts are getting suspended.
Steven Crowder was recently suspended.
As I mentioned, Carl Benjamin, he recently got a strike on his YouTube channel.
So we have set up TimCast.com.
We do not use Salesforce because we are trying to insulate ourselves from this purge.
But we also have some very amazing bonus full podcast episodes that you can only get at TimCast.com.
Seriously, go there, become a member.
It's how we are trying to create the safety net.
In the event that we do get banned.
But don't forget to like, share, subscribe, tell people about what's going on with this.
Seriously, share this, because let me break it down for you.
Why this is so dangerous.
Here's a story from Project Veritas.
Mind you, Veritas is considered by NewsGuard to be failing to adhere to basic standards.
But they do say Veritas does not repeatedly publish false content.
That's a very important rating.
I also think that the assessment of Veritas is unfair and incorrect.
Project Veritas publishes undercover video and leaked footage or undercover video showing people saying things.
The complaints on the left are that it's out of context.
But most news organizations do similar things.
We have Channel, I believe it was Channel 4 in the UK, or there was a UK-British, uh, British channel.
That published undercover video as well, and that's deemed credible.
Sorry.
If they put out footage, then I'll comment on that footage as it is, and you can clearly see what these people are saying, and it's backed up by the fact that they actually banned Veritas as well.
Here's the story.
Leaked insider tape reveals Salesforce's plan to deplatform, quote, broader range of customers who have, quote, the potential to incite politically motivated violence.
Salesforce inexplicably severs ties with Project Veritas.
Now, you may be saying, Tim, okay, look, banning this stuff, this potential for violence, it has to be done.
We can't allow people to, you know, engage in incitement of violence.
Let me show you a tweet.
In a story from Endgadget, they've highlighted a tweet from me.
I said, I don't think this even matters at this point.
Time Magazine just came out and said a cabal of elites rigged the election.
Time Magazine said that.
I'm sorry, they said they didn't rig the election, they fortified it by changing the rules and laws as well as manipulating the flow of information.
This story is real, most of you have seen it.
Twitter said, this claim of election fraud is disputed, and this tweet can't be replied to, retweeted, or liked due to a risk of violence.
What violence?
I literally just mocked Time Magazine who wrote this story.
The secret history of the shadow campaign that saved the 2020 election.
In it, they literally say, cabal, elites, conspiracy, all that stuff.
I was mocking them.
What risk of violence is there?
We've long heard.
The left has said, words are violence.
You know what that means.
It was only a matter of time before they would try and use their manipulation of language to take down political ideas they don't like.
That's been the game.
We have been warning about this.
You need to understand this may be the most serious confirmation of censorship coming our way that we've seen.
This may be, in my opinion, one of the biggest stories Project Veritas has ever published.
Who cares if Twitter says you can't say dumb words?
Fine.
Whatever.
I think it's a problem, right?
Because we need to have political discourse.
But what happens when Salesforce, one of the biggest companies in the world, mind you, not just tech companies, who is in between a business and its customers, says, we will remove your ability to interact with your customers if you say things that we think could potentially Insight.
Or lead to incitement of violence.
Or lead to politically motivated violence.
Yet they ignored all of the riots of last year.
The right is going to be hobbled.
They're going to lose resources and revenue.
I'm warning you all.
It is only going to get worse if this kind of thing continues.
But let me read the story for you.
They say Project Veritas released a new video today, leaked by a Salesforce insider exposing company executives adhering to cancel culture mentality following the events at the US Capitol on January 6th.
Salesforce executives were recorded on January 13th.
On their website, Salesforce states they are the world's top customer relationship management platform with over 150,000 clients.
Salesforce alleges they bring companies and customers together.
That allegation is now worthy of some serious questioning.
I appreciate the snark, Veritas.
Brett Taylor, Salesforce's President and Chief Operating Officer, said that what happened in Washington, D.C.
on January 6th has forced the company to rethink how they do business.
Quote, Since the events of the 6th of January, I think one of the things that really impacts Salesforce is the national conversation about the role of technology in inciting that mob, disseminating misinformation, and fomenting extremism.
What we've done in light of the events of January 6th is recognize a much broader range of messages have the potential to incite politically motivated violence, he said.
Taylor specifically mentioned Salesforce's contract with the Republican National Committee when he explained some of the changes.
We've engaged with the RNC, to communicate that no messages on behalf of President
Trump and no messages questioning the validity or integrity of the election are allowed on
our platform under the guidelines that they may incite violence given the escalated
conditions in the U.S. right now.
We're looking across our customer base to make sure our technology is not being used
by businesses or platforms that are inciting political violence.
Did Donald Trump incite political violence?
No, but they'll tell you he did.
Trump said peacefully and patriotically marched to the Capitol.
Some people befuddled and bewildered walked in, but a lot of people did engage in abhorrent behavior and fight with cops.
It was nasty stuff.
What are they saying?
They are taking a leftist view of what it means to incite violence.
They are ignoring a year and a billion plus dollars in damage from all of the riots from the left.
Do you think, in the future, they are going to consider language that might incite the left to extremism?
I would say no.
Because we already know that these... Look, here's what happens.
These people probably believe the same lies as everybody else.
In fact, even conservatives, according to new data, believe lies from the mainstream media about the police.
No joke.
And I got the receipts to prove it, but let's read more.
They say.
Taylor's statements leave room for questions about whether or not journalists who expose incontrovertible evidence of voter fraud in 2020 will now be deplatformed by Salesforce.
In the same internal meeting, Salesforce Executive Vice President of Government Affairs Eric Loeb said the platform would specifically target politicians that objected to Biden's certification.
We are pausing all PAC contributions.
The pause or suspension certainly includes the suspension of any contributions to members of Congress that voted to object to the presidential certification.
I want to stop and address that previous statement as well.
There is proof of... well, I shouldn't say that.
There is strong evidence of voter fraud.
Notably, the AG in Texas arrested a woman.
That does not mean that the election was cheated or stolen or anything like that.
It does not.
I want to make sure that's clear because I think a lot of people jumped the gun.
Even Matthew Brainerd, who I've had on the IRL podcast, has been very precise in his language, saying potential illegal ballots.
Now, this woman who was arrested is innocent until proven guilty, so we'll see.
But Project Veritas, who reported on that, saw themselves get notification that they were being severed from Salesforce.
Take a look at this.
James O'Keefe's tweeted, Listen, Salesforce has the right to do business with whoever they want.
us a reason behind their business decision to sever ties with us.
We've been a Salesforce customer since 2014."
And then he says, hashtag, sales farce.
Listen, Salesforce has the right to do business with whoever they want.
The problem is they tell you, these companies say, don't worry, you're allowed to do these
things.
You know, it's fine.
Political speech is fine.
And then abruptly they change the rules on you.
What this means is that now conservative groups, those on the right, are going to be scrambling to find an alternative before they get terminated from Salesforce, meaning it could potentially destroy all of these businesses.
I mentioned that thing about Sargon Carl Benjamin.
Overnight, Patreon banned him, and all of the people who were his customers, subscribing to his exclusive content, all of a sudden were outraged.
They lost their connection to someone they wanted to support.
Karl lost his income.
Overnight without warning.
Salesforce has 150,000 business customers.
This isn't just one guy on YouTube.
So sure, they're allowed to do it.
But this is a major, massive escalation in the bifurcation, the hyperpolarization in this country, and around the world probably.
The funny thing about what Salesforce is saying in this video Is that they're trying to avoid the potential for violence, but all they're doing is guaranteeing that it gets substantially worse.
Because these people aren't smart enough, or they're doing it on purpose.
But let me explain.
If you target only conservatives, and they are forced to create their own parallel economy, there is nothing keeping people together.
I like that show from Penn & Teller.
It's called BS.
They use the full word.
There's an episode where Pendulet says that what ended war between France and Britain after hundreds of years, mind you, was trade and economics.
The opportunity to, well, make money, put it simply.
Many interests, business interests in the UK were like, we've got powerful ways to make money by being allied with France, so we might as well do that.
Economic ties brought them together because there was a benefit for everybody and they're like, hey, actually, when we're not fighting, we're We're actually thriving!
What happens when the inverse occurs?
Not the forming of economic ties, but the separation of them?
If Salesforce says they're only going to service, you know, they're not going to service those who might hold opinions they don't like because of the potential for violence, then you'll see conservatives do what they're doing now.
GoFundMe bans basically anybody who's conservative or anti-woke, so people create their own versions of GoFundMe.
Financial institutions are doing the same thing.
People are going to start building their own financial institutions.
Gab builds their own infrastructure.
Over the past couple of years, conservatives have been building out a parallel economy, and I warned about this several years ago.
What Salesforce is doing now may be the most extreme iteration of it.
I am seriously worried about this.
Let me read a little bit more and then I'll explain to you the big problem.
They say, Salesforce recently informed Veritas they will end the current working relationship, stating that it was a business decision.
Veritas asks Salesforce for clarification on this matter, but it has not been provided.
I don't understand what Salesforce's business decision is based on.
Technology Officer, Michael Schaefer, consistently attempted to work collaboratively with Salesforce,
but was ignored up until the moment that Salesforce sent the email announcing the end of its relationship.
Quote, I don't understand what Salesforce's business decision is based on.
We are a customer that pays like clockwork and has required very little in return for
our loyalty.
We have to wonder if we were cut off because we caught some big tech executives telling
the truth recently and exposed that truth to the public.
According to The Street, Salesforce is expected to report its Q4 2020 earnings on Thursday, February 25th.
Shareholders will have the ability to question executives on the company's recent policies.
Okay.
Look, I can respect you not wanting an escalation of hyperpolarization.
I can respect saying, yo, we need to bring people together.
But Salesforce is not doing that.
Now, I want to make sure I'm being reasonable and fair.
They said based on what they saw on the 6th, they're taking this action.
So they very well may be honest, and may look to the lies that are disseminated in media that result in left-wing extremism, but why should I believe that?
More importantly, I'm going to hold them to, you know, figuratively, the fire, to make sure that they do what they say they're going to do.
Let me show you some data.
We talked about this last night on the IRL podcast, but I think it needs to be brought up in this context.
Zach Goldberg says, In a recent nationally representative survey commissioned by SkepticMag, asked respondents to estimate the number of unarmed black people killed by police in 2019.
Overall, 44% of liberals guessed a thousand or more as compared to 20% of conservatives.
This calculation is based on crosstabs shared with me by the researcher.
Okay.
Conservatives are wrong.
20% of conservatives believe it's about a thousand.
So we have very conservative, and we have conservatives.
And then we can see that among moderate individuals, they believe it's about 140%, a plurality.
Among liberals, a plurality says about 100.
And among very liberals, a plurality says about 1,000.
That is absolutely incorrect.
Take a look at this.
In another graph, we see, in 2019, what percentage of people killed by police were black?
Conservative said 37.8.
Very liberal said 60.4.
So let me simplify.
60% of very liberal individuals believe... I'm sorry, I'm sorry, that's incorrect.
Among very liberals, they believe that 60% of the people killed by police are black.
The real number is 23.4%.
We talked about this.
Listen, if I believed that the police were killing, you know, minorities at that disproportionate level, I would be out screaming and protesting as well.
So I understand why Black Lives Matter protesters are out.
And to be honest, I understand the anger of Antifa and Black Lives Matter when they engage in these riots.
But don't you see it?
It's misinformation.
It is not true.
The media keeps pushing out these lies that is not, that's just not true.
They hyper-focus on certain stories and it results in a distorted worldview that leads to violence and riots.
Politically motivated.
Will Salesforce ban all of their customers that say this?
I think the answer is probably not for one reason.
The people who work at Salesforce, Silicon Valley types, probably believe the exact same lies.
The only reason they're going after Veritas is because they believe Veritas is lying.
I consider myself to be fairly moderate and centrist.
I look at Veritas the exact same way I'd look at any other news organization.
If they put out bad information, I'll question them.
And there were some things I recently questioned James.
I had him on the show and asked him some questions about a story they did on Mark Zuckerberg.
But Jack Dorsey, Mark Zuckerberg, the people at Salesforce, they're surrounded by a hyper-polarized far-left.
What they hear in their circle does not represent most of this country.
So when they say, we have to ban this extremist information, they're not talking about themselves and what they believe.
They're talking about you and what you believe.
Axios reported this, September 16th, 2020.
Exclusive, $1 billion plus riot damage is the most expensive in insurance history.
Between one and two billion dollars, to be honest.
Here's the problem.
That's actually not the full amount.
That's what the insurance paid out.
The insurance didn't cover everything.
In Minneapolis, for instance, there was a building that was destroyed, and to remove the rubble cost more than the cap of the insurance they had.
So what one business said was it's more than $25,000 to clear the rubble.
Therefore, the insurance companies only offering $25,000 are not covering the full costs.
These numbers are not correct.
Many said, I can't afford to remove the rubble on my own.
The insurance won't cover it.
Business is gone forever.
It was lies.
A big lie.
And I would dare say, I would dare call it THE big lie.
Why?
The riots we saw from the left were the most expensive in insurance history, possibly the most expensive in history.
Nineteen-plus people lost their lives, and many others in the periphery of these riots also lost their lives.
What happened to the Capitol was extremely bad as well, but for different reasons.
I mean, people trying to disrupt the Electoral College vote count is really, really bad for our institutions, and that I get.
But come on, in a different way, they're different circumstances.
A billion plus dollars in damage and 19 deaths directly attributed to the riots is really, really bad.
Why did this not prompt a reaction from any of these companies to ban any of this stuff?
Why did they wait until January 6th, until after the 6th?
So let me explain to you what we're going to see.
If these companies only ever react against the right, that means people on the right, people who watch videos like this, are watching these big companies do these things.
They know Salesforce is biased.
It drives people crazy, feeling like they have no path forward, no path to redemption.
That they're being discriminated against, that they're second-class citizens, their businesses are getting purged and destroyed and they have no way to fight back.
Meanwhile, leftist politicians are violating their own rules and doing whatever they want.
I shouldn't say leftist, I should say Democrat.
This makes people go crazy.
And then in response to that anger, they double down and say, see, this proves it.
Which is why it's one of the stupidest things in the world for conservatives and people on the right to actually engage in any kind of violence or protest or riot.
One of the dumbest things anyone could have done is storm the Capitol.
Completely delegitimized what little legitimacy the media gave to them, and gave evidence to the establishment, media, and these companies.
It gave them the evidence that they were looking for.
Very rarely do these media companies call out Antifa.
These institutions are dominated by the left.
And the escalation against the right is going to get worse.
Matt Taibbi wrote this.
I can't stand Fox News, but censoring it might be the dumbest idea ever.
How will the latest campaign against misinformation backfire for the country?
Let's count the ways.
Now, I'm not going to read the whole article.
You should definitely check out what Matt Taibbi has to write.
But he's pointing out how insane it is that Democrats are actually trying to get Fox News banned.
It's not just Salesforce, but this... I mean, you've got to understand how big Salesforce is, my friends.
150,000 clients.
How many businesses is that?
How many small, mid, to large companies is that?
How many of these companies who are conservative are going to say, please, everybody, just stop talking about what you care about.
Stop fighting for what you believe in.
Don't say anything that might be considered not left.
This is the dramatic escalation.
It just keeps happening.
Manhattan prosecutors expand their investigation into Donald Trump, now looking into Donald Trump Jr.
and Chief Financial Officer Allen Weisselberg.
They're not stopping.
They're not.
Republicans aren't doing anything, but the left just keeps beating people down.
And I am telling you, they need to stop this.
They won't.
What they think they're doing is not what's really happening.
Salesforce thinks they're going to stop the escalation.
It's what I refer to as the Chinese finger trap problem.
You've got your fingers, and you want to pull your fingers out, and the more you pull, the harder and worse it becomes.
What they need to do is the opposite.
It's counterintuitive, but it's the only way to bring people together.
What Salesforce needs to do is actually make an announcement about far-left lies and right-wing lies, or more importantly, just say, dude, you're entitled to your opinions.
It is not the business of Salesforce to intervene in customer relations for their clients.
They provide customer relationship management software.
Why are they now policing speech?
Well, so be it.
I'll tell you what happens.
Someone's gonna make a conservative version of Salesforce.
People are making conservative versions of social media and conservative creative agencies and production studios.
Eventually you will have two equal and opposite political tribes with different You know, uh, worldviews.
We already have that, but I mean, like, with massive industry resources.
And that's when the serious conflict starts.
Because they're not gonna, they don't care.
The people who are on the right tribe, people on the left tribe, there's very little overlap.
And neither will agree with either's politician.
Eventually it will lead to just, I don't care what you think, I'm not, you know, people are gonna say that they're not going to abide by the rules of that politician.
We already heard from the Oath Keepers.
It was the founder who said, half the country will not view Biden as a legitimate president.
What happens then?
I'm already hearing that there are jurisdictions that are defying their governors over these lockdowns.
Several jurisdictions, many around the country, are declaring Second Amendment sanctuaries, basically saying, ain't no gun laws here.
What happens when legitimacy and confidence breaks down?
People are going to snap.
And what do you think happens in the next couple of years?
Do you think this goes away?
Do you think it just stops?
From Politico, Mitt Romney says Trump will win the 2024 GOP nomination if he runs.
The Utah senator pointed to public opinion surveys that show Republican voters still overwhelmingly favor the former president.
Mitt Romney is correct?
I think it's funny that he points that out and says, I know most of the Republicans like Trump, but I'm gonna defy it.
So what are you, a Democrat?
He says, well, I'm gonna fight for the tiny wing of my party.
Bro, it's tiny wing?
It's like 5%.
What do you represent at all?
I guess just not Democrats.
But I bring this up because what we're seeing in all of this The split is here.
It's not getting better, it's getting worse.
Salesforce just enacted one of the most deranged and dangerous actions we've ever seen.
Twitter continues to do it every single day.
The most insane, the stupidest and most moronic thing these people can do is force conservatives off their platforms.
With conservatives on Twitter, these platforms have the ability to negotiate and leverage that platform against them.
They could very easily push the Overton window further and further left without risking any destabilization by simply saying, hey, we're going to suspend you if you say this.
And then what happens is conservatives all start self-censoring.
What's happening now with the hard excising of conservatives is that many just don't care anymore.
Steven Crowder got suspended the other day.
He comes back to Twitter and says, I don't care.
I'm just going to say it.
You're not going to silence me.
He's got his own platform.
Eventually, there will be no opportunity to influence, compromise, or de-radicalize.
These platforms will harden, will grow, and that's it.
I started my own website.
TimCast.com.
I promoted it early on.
And it's because I think it's very likely that we get banned as well.
And then where will all of you go?
Well, many people have already left YouTube, for that matter.
And YouTube isn't the worst.
They're pretty bad.
They're trying to get people to self-censor and to guide people into other conversations.
In the end, though, I think the problem that kicked this off started a long time ago, and we're well past the point of mending it.
The Democrats in New York are going after the Trump family.
What do you think happens if they arrest Don Jr.
or Trump?
I mean, people are going to lose their minds.
We're already seeing Democrats try to get Fox News banned.
We're seeing the FBI investigating members of Congress for their role in the January 6th insurrection, so they say.
What do you think happens if a sitting member of Congress or Republican gets arrested?
The establishment Republican Party is seemingly worthless, as noted by Mitt Romney.
But the larger faction of individuals in this country, the working class people, they do not care for the Republican Party as a whole.
There are a few Republicans who are populists, who represent the Trump faction.
They're still there.
Those are the ones being threatened.
I think it's going to get bad, man.
When Patreon banned Carl, it led to this massive intellectual dark web backlash.
Sam Harris left the platform.
I think Jordan Peterson did.
Dave Rubin ultimately left.
I left.
Well, I should say I left.
I still have the Patreon.
I just said I'm never going to update it again, but I'm going to leave it functioning.
Many created their own platforms.
They went to Subscribestar notably, and then the media and many big tech firms attacked Subscribestar and got them banned from various financial institutions.
Salesforce is bigger and more powerful.
And this is, man, this has me more worried than ever.
This is really big.
This is really big.
Some conservative will launch their own version.
And then we will see the financial firms, we will see the media smear them, call them far right and evil and all that.
And then what happens is Google and Amazon step in and strip the core services from these platforms as well.
There needs to be, well actually some conservatives have called for a new internet.
Because the infrastructure is privately owned for the most part, and it's owned by leftists of this cult dogma who don't know what they're talking about, who don't read the news, and who believe insane things because the media just lies all the time.
And it's really scary because some of these people are really powerful.
And this is something I brought up in my 1 p.m.
segment.
Why won't Elon Musk or Peter Thiel put money into building out this infrastructure and calling out these individuals or... Well, I guess they do call them out, but Peter Thiel especially.
But putting money into news organizations to compete, complaining is one thing.
To be fair, Elon Musk does have Starlink, which is an internet service provider that's coming out soon, hopefully.
And that may offset some of the censorship.
But we need domain hosting services, we need, you know, Amazon web hosting services.
We need bigger and better infrastructure.
Otherwise, what's happening is this dogmatic cult is taking over.
They're inflaming far-left extremism, they're refusing to do anything about it, and they're banning you for challenging them over it.
I'm worried.
But we'll see.
Good work, Project Veritas.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up tonight at 8 p.m.
over at youtube.com slash TimCastIRL.
Well thanks for hanging out and I will see you all then.
And I mean that literally.
Trump wasn't putting kids in cages.
Joe Biden isn't putting kids in cages, okay?
But at least the progressives are being consistent in this regard because they're complaining about Joe Biden's new child migrant overflow facility that happened to be boxes with bars on the windows.
I guess that was the reason why they were saying Trump was putting kids in cages because holding cells are fenced in, and so they called them cages, but that's just a framing device.
Look, I can at least give credit to the progressive left for being consistent, and I think we can all come together and join hands with AOC and smack talk the establishment Democrats who cried and vomited all over themselves because Donald Trump was putting kids in cages when he really wasn't, but now they're saying literally nothing when Joe Biden is once again detaining children and taking them Well, I'll say they're families, but there is a bigger question about why this is happening.
And I'll tell you this right up.
First of all, I'm not going to outright defend what Donald Trump or Joe Biden was doing.
I can at least say Donald Trump inherited the homestead facility for detaining these migrant children.
It was from the Obama administration.
Well, surprise, surprise that Joe Biden brought it back.
It was his administration.
Well, it was Obama's, but he was in it when these things were put together.
So let me just say very, very simply, the reason they do this, the simple reason, just because some guy has got some little girl by the hand does not mean they're related.
And so the big challenge is what do you do?
Do you let these people come in and just assume the guy who might be a child trafficker is related to this child?
It's very difficult.
The challenge here is that it may be 99% of people who come in with children are the family, But what about that 1%?
Do we say, well, you know what?
We don't want to hurt potential families, so we'd rather let this child go with this potential trafficker, or legit trafficker if there actually is, like 1 in 100.
I don't know what the exact number is.
It may be more than that.
I'll tell you what's really, really hilarious about what Biden is doing.
You see, it's not all bad progressives.
Let me just let me just hold your horses.
AOC slams Biden's administration for reopening Texas migrant facility for children who crossed the Mexican border alone and Miami shelter Kamala Harris that that protested outside of in 2019.
OK, so let me just.
It's not all bad, okay?
Joe Biden is ending one of Trump's draconian deportation migrant policies.
And I know AOC and many other progressives can come out and celebrate this.
Because Joe Biden is ending Operation Talon to deport child offenders.
I'm not kidding.
So you mean to tell me that Joe Biden has opened up migrant detention centers And then he ended the program to stop those who are trafficking these kids or abusing them?
You know what?
I don't even know what's going on with this guy, okay?
There's a way to frame it for the progressives to make it seem like a victory.
Operation Talon, they called it.
They could say, well, it was unjustly targeting people for deportation.
But these are, like, the worst possible criminal offenders you can think of.
I mean, why is Biden doing that?
So that's the issue I have, because I can be like, look, the kids are being held because they don't got parents in this circumstance, especially, and because they don't know their parents are.
But if Biden was going to be if Biden was taking these kids out of a fear that they were being trafficked, like that's the assumption, then why would he shut down Operation Talon?
So I can only say, um, I agree with AOC on this one.
I agree.
Like, when Donald Trump had the whole thing going on, I was like, look, we have to stop, you know, the traffickers.
And then Trump started Operation Talon.
I'm like, you see?
We got problems, man.
I'm not gonna pretend to be the expert.
But if Joe Biden's gonna end Operation Talon and then still detain these kids in these facilities, I'm like, okay, now I don't know why he's doing it.
Because he's just cruel, I guess?
No, probably not.
I don't know.
Or callousness?
Whatever.
Here's a story from the Daily Mail.
They say AOC blasted the Biden administration Tuesday for reopening a temporary influx center for unaccompanied minors in Carrizo Springs and a shelter in Miami, Florida, where now-Vice President Kamala Harris protested outside of in June 2019.
You know what?
My respect to AOC on this one.
I'll criticize her when she should be criticized, and I think that's often.
But here we go.
I fully expected AOC and many leftists to stand by what they believed in in this regard.
And if that's your opinion, so long as it's a legitimate opinion, I respect it.
And like I said, I agree.
Now, normally, I didn't agree with their protesting of Trump's, you know, homestead facility.
That's what it is in the Miami area.
Because it was Biden and Obama's.
But at least you knew why Trump and the administration were doing this.
They wanted to end trafficking.
Kamala Harris?
She protested Trump.
Now she's literally part of the administration bringing it back.
These people are evil.
They lie to you.
So I can tell you one thing.
When I look at some of these progressives, many of them, I'll tell you this, I think they genuinely believe what they believe.
Not all of them, there's a lot of grifters, but the right's got their grifters too, I suppose.
So, there's a lot I've criticized AOC for, I really do think she's disingenuous, but if she's being true to her principles right now, then whatever, great, fantastic.
Quote, this is not okay, never has been okay, never will be okay, no matter the administration or party.
That's what AOC tweeted in reference to the Washington Post.
She said, our immigration system is built on a carceral framework.
It's no accident that challenging how we approach both these issues are considered controversial stances.
They require reimagining our relationship to each other and challenging common assumptions we take for granted.
I actually agree with that.
No matter what stance you take, it's considered controversial.
Lock the kids up, let the kids go, either way we've got a serious problem.
I don't know, I'm not gonna say that AOC has the answer, but I can respect at least, you know, she's coming on saying, hey, you notice that's an issue, right?
I'm not necessarily sure what she's saying on both these issues or what the approach is, but I'll tell you, Whatever her intent was, it is true.
That if you come out and say, these kids should not be detained, period.
It's like, you want to wander through the desert?
Walk into the, nowhere to go?
Okay.
And then if you say, these kids should be detained in these facilities, you're like, then, these facilities are like, bare bones, in car, like she said, carceral, and, you know, so I can respect it.
I'm not gonna pretend I know the answers.
But I understand why both issues are controversial.
She says it's only two months into this administration, and our fraught, unjust immigration system will not transform it in that time.
That's why bold reimagination is so important.
DHS- Now, here's where we disagree.
She says DHS shouldn't exist, agencies should be reorganized, ICE gotta go, ban for-profit detention, create climate refugee status, and more.
Alright, let's break this down, AOC.
First and foremost, DHS should exist.
I'm not a fan of DHS.
I'm not a fan of federal law enforcement agencies.
I understand why they exist.
They need reform and we need better accountability.
But I think we do need law enforcement agencies.
And I think the whole abolish DHS or whatever is... Look, it was created under George W. Bush.
It brought a bunch of agencies under one roof and allows for more centralized planning.
And I think that makes sense.
I don't like the overarching abuse of power that we've seen.
I don't like the, you know, Supreme Court, I'm sorry, federal court rulings before.
Allowing collection of metadata and illegal spying and all that stuff.
So don't get me wrong, I'm not a big fan of these federal law enforcement agencies that abuse their power.
But I think the whole abolish DHS or ICE is a meaningless statement that's just a tribal signifier.
I don't think it means anything.
Right?
Agencies should be reorganized.
Yes, I think so.
Probably not in the same way as AOC.
ICE gotta go.
Why?
Why does ICE gotta go?
What are you gonna replace it with?
What happens when you have these kids... Well, I guess it's CBP for the most part.
No, I'm sorry.
Immigrations and Customs Enforcement, I believe that's what it is.
They don't gotta go.
That makes no sense.
Ban for-profit detention?
I agree with that one.
I do.
I don't think there should be a profit incentive driving businesses to detain migrants or anybody for that matter.
I'm not a fan of private prisons.
I know a lot of people have said private prisons are usually better or whatever.
Listen.
In Michigan, there were judges that were basically selling children to juvenile detention centers because they were for-profit.
These judges are criminals, I know, and it's hard to say that, you know, look, crime is a crime.
You're not supposed to do it.
If people break the law, simply saying, get rid of the whole system because some people broke the law doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
But the point I'm making is that These private facilities are incentivized to get kids in jail.
They'll lobby for worse laws.
We don't want that.
I'm very much on the libertarian spectrum on this one.
Innocent until proven guilty.
I'm not a fan of cash bail for that reason.
I don't think I have all the answers.
I understand there are criminals.
It's tough.
It is.
But I agree with AOC.
Ban for profit detention.
I'm not a fan.
Now the problem I have with the climate refugee status thing is that these people that are pushing this, proponents of this, They live, you know, doesn't AOC have like an infinity pool on her roof?
It tends to be these people who live in these luxury buildings.
They fly private jets.
Not AOC, mind you.
But you've got these high-profile individuals buying beachfront property.
As far as AOC is concerned.
I'm pretty sure she lives in like a luxury condo in DC.
Far be it from me, because I got this massive production facility, to tell anybody they should be sacrificing, you know, for whatever reason, but we still do try.
We do.
Like, we use biodegradable products, we recycle as much as we can, not that it's a perfect solution, but we do try.
I think the challenge is everyone's got to do a little bit.
So I don't know about this climate refugee status.
I can say I don't know what the solution to this is.
I know no matter what you do, people are going to be screaming and fighting over it.
And I can respect progressives who are coming out and basically slinging mud at Joe Biden where he deserves it.
Biden and Kamala Harris screamed about Trump, blamed Trump.
Many of these establishment media types and Democrats were posting photos from the Obama administration and blaming Trump for it.
Like they mentioned, Kamala Harris was out in front of the Miami facility protesting, and now they reopened it!
Talk about a duplicitous, nasty person.
Oh, just the worst possible liar.
It's amazing.
Sure.
Well, here we are now.
said it needed to expand its facilities because of the coronavirus pandemic. Officials told The Post
that their capacity had been cut in half because of the space needed to adhere to proper social
distancing protocols. Sure. Well, here we are now. Biden's Joe Biden's child detention centers are
now bursting at the seams. I don't know what you want, man.
I don't know what anybody wants.
Look, I'm not a fan of this, but I understand that you can't just... I would probably lean towards the controversial position that we gotta have these kids in some kind of holding facility.
Maybe we could make them better and more comfortable, but it costs money, and then the problem is incentives.
Yo, the solutions to human problems are not so easy.
The resources don't exist to give everybody a luxury room at the Hyatt.
So what happens is they mass-produce these facilities that look like, you know, shipping containers, and they say, this is where you have to wait because we don't know what we're going to do with you.
But I'll tell you one thing.
To AOC, and to the progressives, Have you seen the news stories about what happens to these kids when they are not taken in by CBP or ICE?
There are too many stories of children wandering through like 90 square miles of desert and then dropping dead.
These are the stories that I think people don't want to hear, and that's the real challenge.
But I'll tell you this.
I understand why they do it.
I do.
America is amazing and you all know it.
These leftists who want to complain about this country, you got to recognize that people, especially kids and families, would risk their lives and the lives of their children, which I do not respect, wandering through desert with no supplies because they know the American dream is real.
Now that's a problem for us.
We cannot allow people to just be dropping dead in our deserts.
For that matter, I don't like the idea of letting people drop dead in the streets because they can't afford healthcare or they're being bankrupted by medical bills.
Of course, these positions don't matter to those who claim that I'm, you know, right-wing or whatever.
The problem is simple.
If you want to complain about what Biden or Trump was doing or Obama was doing, I can respect calling out the problem.
Like AOC is saying that no matter which side you pick, it's controversial.
Saying we need reform, I respect that, but that's not a solution, that's a call to have a brainstorming session on what to do about the problem.
Saying get rid of DHS and ICE also is not a solution to the problem and would only make it worse.
I'm not going to pretend to have the answers.
That's why I'm kind of a milk toast fence-sitter on a lot of these things.
I'm like, man, I don't know, I at least think we can't have the kids starving in the desert.
There was that story from a year or so ago, or a couple years ago, where some kid was picked up by CBP and then died in their custody.
And everyone blamed CBP, saying, oh no, this child died.
It's like, dude, the kid was sick before they picked... If that kid didn't get picked up, they would have just dropped dead in the desert.
Like, I'm not a fan of that.
I'm sorry, I would rather have CBP pick up kids in a pickup truck, bring them to a facility, and give them what little care they possibly can.
The world is not perfect.
It is not candy canes and rainbows everywhere.
I really would love to just... And I mean this.
Maybe we do a mini-doc.
I'll say it right now.
I would absolutely love to hire a DP, a predator.
Predator, probably not good context.
Predator means producer, editor.
To take a camera and bring one of these leftists down to any one of these countries and do a legit investigation into what's going on, and then go down to these areas, go down to the border, go down to, you know, some of these cities in the Mexican border.
It's dangerous stuff.
It's really dangerous stuff.
I think the most dangerous cities in Mexico actually are on the border with the US.
A lot of cartel stuff, gang stuff.
It's dangerous.
Now I understand why these people want to, you know, get out of these situations.
And so I think many of these progressives need to understand, and I'm not saying they don't, I'm saying they should go down their experience, talk to these people, but then they should also, with a crew and safety and everything, wander through that 90 miles of desert.
And I think it would be a good idea because if we had a production crew, we could actually maybe save some lives from people who might actually drop dead in that desert.
The problem then is, and the reason why it's really difficult to do this stuff, let me ask you a question.
You're driving in a pickup truck.
You got a camera crew.
And you see some, you know, migrants, you know, coming in, and they're in the desert and by themselves.
They look sick.
Do you give them food and supplies?
That actually might be illegal.
Do you call CBP?
Well, now you're snitching on people.
You see the problem?
There's nothing you can really do other than just watch them, what, collapse?
No, I think you'd have to call CBP to save their lives.
You know, a lot of people say that there was one story about people who left food and water in the desert for migrants.
I think they got in trouble.
They may have gotten, you know, the charges dropped or something.
But, they say it was illegal, probably because you're littering.
You know, not because you're providing people with resources.
But I gotta tell you this.
If I saw somebody in the desert, I don't care who you are, I don't care if you're a migrant, illegal immigrant, whatever you want to call it.
If I got a jug of water, and you're dehydrated, you're getting that jug of water.
Sorry.
You know, I don't know if that's a crime.
I don't necessarily think it is.
I think the people who got in trouble is because they were littering or something.
Because they just left it there.
And that's a bad idea because they're wild animals and stuff.
But I'm gonna try to preserve life at whatever cost, you know what I mean?
Like, that comes first.
You know, people... Listen, if you don't value the lives of people, then I don't know what the point of living is, you know what I mean?
I think that comes first and foremost.
I know people will often criticize me on the choice in life thing.
By all means, please do.
I don't have all the moral and ethical questions answered, and I probably never will.
And so, it's just tough.
It is.
Back to the political issue at hand though.
Joe Biden, his facilities are bursting at the seams.
And you can see the establishment Democrats are offering up nothing.
And then to make things worse, Joe Biden, and I want to make sure I talk about Operation Talon.
Now I just want to make sure I clarify.
It is a production documentary term, Predator, and I have to make sure I make this clear because it's probably not the appropriate context considering we're talking about legit evil predators.
Predator is a portmanteau of producer, editor, and it's a production term.
In this capacity, now I'm reading the story, Predator is specifically about people targeting children in disgusting ways.
Vern Buchanan wants to know why DHS and ICE ended Operation Talon targeting predators in the country illegally.
I would like to know this as well.
He sent a letter to Homeland Security asking why Operation Talon was cancelled just weeks after it was launched by the Trump administration.
He said the operation should be reinstated immediately, and any illegal immigrants with a criminal record of assault against women or children should be prosecuted or deported.
The congressman noted that 18 state attorneys general, including Florida's, have also requested that Biden reinstate the program.
Why did Biden do this?
I don't know, man.
It is creepy stuff.
I know a lot of people are already lighting up the comments saying, I know why Biden did it.
Yeah, because Biden is a sicko, I guess, because Biden got all those videos about inappropriate touching of women and children, maybe.
There's no answer.
I gotta be honest.
There's no answer.
Biden has ended A bunch of programs or suspended them from the Trump administration.
And the excuse from the establishment is always, well, we've got to review these things.
We've got to review the Trump, you know, orders and make sure they make sense.
No, hold on, hold on.
You don't shut them down, okay?
You review them.
And then if you find them to be bad, then you shut them down.
Coming out right and just be like, yeah, we're going to end this tracking down these child abusers.
Like, why?
Why are you doing that?
I got no answer, man.
I can only assume the worst.
To be completely honest, that Biden, well, I guess, I suppose the worst is Biden doesn't care about these kids and these victims.
And that makes sense.
I mean, Biden himself seems to be an abuser.
I'm not going to pretend like he's, you know, there's a grand conspiracy involving Biden Democrats and like death cults.
No, I'm just talking about the videos where he gropes women and stuff.
We know what happens.
Democrats have called him out for it.
I don't know how that would relate to this, though.
But I'm sorry, there's no legitimate reason why this would be shut down, so... If you think you got the answer, by all means, tell me, because I ain't seeing it.
As for what's going to happen now with illegal immigration, I imagine with the ending of this program, with Joe Biden's lax stances towards illegal immigration, I think it's going to get worse.
Well, Joe Biden wants to provide a path to citizenship for, I think, 11 million non-legal, what are they?
Unauthorized immigrants.
We'll use that one.
Because the media keeps having to change the phrase to not offend anybody.
Because at first, you know, the right would say illegal immigrant.
The left would just say immigrant.
And so there's a clear difference.
And then, so the AP is like, unauthorized immigrant.
Sure, whatever.
That's the funny thing.
I think the left has routinely tried to conflate illegal immigration with immigration because they're open borders.
And they'll lie to you and say, they're not for open borders, but all they try and do is redefine what open borders means.
What the democratic establishment is for is the freedom and ability to cross the border and become a serf in the United States.
That's the easiest way I can explain it.
You have, you have, like Joe Biden, a moratorium on deportations.
You have Bernie Sanders saying, you know, decriminalize border crossings.
You had a bunch of Democrats saying the same thing.
What that means is these people could just walk into the country.
They walk in, they put their lives at risk, many will die, and that's psychotic in my opinion, that's why we do apprehend them, it's one of the reasons.
But then they'll come into major cities where they can't legally work and they get paid under-the-table trash wages.
Thus, the Democrats are advocating for the creation of a serf class.
I'm not a fan of this.
I think the reason you have immigration controls, to make sure people don't die in the desert, and to make sure that when we place people, we say, we've got an opportunity for you and your family, we can set you up in a certain location.
The problem is everybody wants to come, I understand it.
The line is massive.
Jumping the line doesn't help anybody.
It makes it worse.
We need to make sure that when people come to this country, especially refugees, we know where we can send them, that they will flourish and be safe.
Having people come in and wander through the desert and then go live in the gutter in a city is not helping anybody.
A lot of these people were lied to.
When the migrant caravans were coming, some of these people, many of them were interviewed, saying they were told they would be let in and given a job.
And that wasn't true.
So who's doing the lying and why?
I don't know.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 1pm on this channel.
Thanks for hanging out and I will see you all then.
And I was correct.
It's now two and a half or so years later.
The Republicans are reeling because they have no base of support as users who do support Republicans are eroding off of these big tech platforms, and too bad!
But I gotta tell you something.
I'm also angry with Donald Trump.
Donald Trump had and still has every single opportunity to sign up for Parler, Gab, or Minds, or even BitChute.
Any one of these platforms.
I say BitChute because it's a video platform.
He could put out videos.
He doesn't do it.
If he did, it would cause a massive migration by many people, forcing competition on these big tech companies, shattering the oligopoly and their monopoly, not destroying it, but causing damage at the very least.
And Trump will not do it.
And here's today's news.
Trump wants back on Facebook and Instagram.
Appeal suspension to Facebook Oversight Board.
I'm sorry, man.
After all of these years, Trump still has not figured out to use something different?
He doesn't care, or he's too stupid to be completely honest.
It was a couple years ago, I think it was a couple years now, maybe a year and a half ago, that I went to the White House, invited to the social media summit being held by Trump and Republicans.
Well, mostly the Trump administration.
In that meeting, of all of these prominent individuals listening to Trump do his bit, and it was funny, he's a funny guy, someone asked, will you sign up for a different platform?
And Trump said, which one?
It was reported that Trump did not sign up for these other platforms because of Jared Kushner.
And that may be true, I'm not entirely sure, but I gotta tell you.
Trump, at some point, needs to figure out that other websites exist.
At this point, I can only assume Trump's... I don't think Trump is a stupid guy.
I think Trump is... what's the right word?
A bit sporadic, you know?
He's headstrong, but I think ultimately he may move sporadically.
It's probably the best way to put it, but I don't think he's dumb.
I think he's very successful because he knows how to make certain things work.
He's also fairly powerful and power attracts power, so that helps out too.
But he's certainly listening to really dumb people.
And that's a shame.
And because of that, he is being led astray.
Trump's voice was silenced by this censorship.
And the best thing he can do is ask Facebook to bring him back?
Are you kidding me?
Right now, Facebook... I shouldn't say Facebook, but Twitter and YouTube are engaging in censorship.
Of anybody trying to talk about what was going on with the election and with January 6th.
Recently, Steven Crowder was suspended.
You may have heard this last night.
He was temporarily suspended on Twitter after he put out a video where he sent people to voter addresses and found empty parking lots.
I've not independently verified any of his claims, so you can go check out what he has to say about what's going on with him.
I'm more focused on the censorship aspect.
But we also have more news pertaining to Ford Fisher.
Matt Taibbi tweets, here we go again, more true raw footage shot by independent journalists removed by YouTube.
Ford Fisher, a journalist, had his video from January 6th that was licensed by the New York Times taken down as deceptive.
He says, Ford responded to Matt Taibbi as if they're trying to make the same talking point available every time they do this.
The New York Times licensed and published from me the exact footage that YouTube says is spam, deceptive practices, and scams when I filmed it.
He says the New York Times used the exact same clips that YouTube removed in their piece.
But YouTube removed it as spam, deceptive practices, and scams.
We also have this video from the Lotus Eaters podcast, the podcast of the Lotus Eaters, which is Carl Benjamin.
You may know him as Sargon of Akkad.
He had this video from February 10th taken down because he referenced the Time Magazine shadow campaign article.
I believe that's why.
The censorship on these big tech platforms is only getting worse.
Many of you may know that recently I was smeared By the Pointer Institute, because they tried claiming they used weasel words to make it seem like I claimed the election was rigged because I also referenced the Time Magazine article.
Well, other outlets have corrected the record and pointed out I didn't.
I was just snarkily referencing Time Magazine.
But the big tech companies, Twitter specifically, locked my tweet, put a claim saying that my claim was disputed.
It's literally not disputed.
Even the bird watch users, Twitter's own platform responding, are saying it's not misleading.
So who is disputing my tweet about Time Magazine?
Nobody.
It's a false statement of fact.
These big tech companies are getting away with it.
And I gotta tell you, I am upset with Donald Trump specifically because if there's one person who can drop the hammer like Thor charging up in the sky and slamming on the ground, it
would be Donald Trump.
He need only sign up for Gab and then post I'm back, baby.
And then boom, like a nuclear bomb.
Figuratively, people would leave many of these platforms and go straight to Gab.
And not only that, all of these big tech companies, I'm sorry, all these media companies and all
of these whiny activist journalists who are obsessed with writing about Trump, they have
nothing else to write about, would be forced to cover and follow him on Gab.
But he doesn't do it.
He just goes crawling back to Facebook and says, can I please have my platform back?
You're Donald effing Trump, bro.
Go on Gab already.
Go on Parler.
Go on Minds.
Create a Bitchute account and upload a video.
He won't do it.
Makes me think he just doesn't care.
Because anybody who is sufficiently concerned about being censored would simply Google search, where can I post a message?
Trump could literally make his own platform right now.
Do that!
Get rich off it.
Call it Trumpster.
Do that.
He won't do it.
He does nothing.
The other day, actually I think I might have a tweet.
Let me see if I have a tweet.
Here we go.
From Matthew Iglesias.
Hater's gonna hate, but Elon Musk should go buy some other big city newspaper and run it.
Would be great for society for, quote, I own a daily newspaper, to be the new conspicuous consumption.
Matthew Iglesias is referencing this snippet from the Washington Post.
They say, Tesla did not respond to repeated requests for comment.
In response to email seeking comment, Musk replied only, quote, give my regards to your puppet master.
But how are you going to be the second richest guy on the planet and you don't just put a million bucks into a news outlet to start producing and countering the fake news?
How are you going to sit back and not put five million bucks into a decentralized social network platform or open source software?
Why is it incumbent upon us to have to keep having these conversations?
Why is it befalling upon me, some dude who complains on the internet, to be thinking about and focusing on these problems?
Now mind you, let me tell you something.
I'm actually in conversations with developers about what we can do to create decentralized, open-source social networking software.
You'll have your own website, but they'll all link with each other, so this will create a pseudo-Twitter.
It's not one platform, it's just when someone posts, it appears somewhere on everyone else's website so you can see the feed and you can follow people.
That's the kind of idea I'm working on.
Because then it's a database.
Nobody can be banned from it.
Maybe, you know what, put it on the blockchain.
I don't know.
I kind of don't like that idea because you should be able to delete past posts you don't like.
Here's my point with all of this.
Matthew Iglesias goes on to say, I don't like that last part.
If you're like a single billion billionaire, you might need to economize with a small paper.
But Musk has Chicago Tribune money.
90% of the work can be good journalism to build an audience.
Then 10% can be used to puff your ego or torment your enemies.
I don't like that last part.
I get the point he's making.
Let me just ask y'all something.
Donald Trump is a billionaire.
I think his net worth is like, it's like, was it 3.2 or 2.3 billion?
It went down quite a bit.
It was like 7 before he became president, and now he's facing serious setbacks.
I gotta mention too, I think Mike Lindell is also a millionaire.
Come on.
Elon, how much money do you really need to combat the lies from the media?
To combat the manipulation from these big tech platforms?
Now I get it.
Going up against big tech?
That's expensive.
That's where Donald Trump can come in.
He can snap his fingers and sign up for Gab or Parler or Mines or whatever and boom.
I say Gab because they're building their own infrastructure.
They'll probably need an investment if Trump did sign up because The influx of users will probably crash their servers.
Why won't Trump do it?
Why won't Trump do it?
Why won't Elon Musk?
Why won't Peter Thiel?
I am sick and tired of hearing about these people like Elon, like Peter Thiel, like Donald Trump, who have more power than 99.9% of the people on this planet who are not solving these problems.
It's like they don't really care about it.
I do.
That's why I keep talking about this decentralized, open-source software.
It's why I've advocated for open-source, public, decentralized social networks.
It's why, over the past several years, I've repeatedly praised the Fediverse.
Now let me tell you something.
I don't have the power of Elon Musk.
I don't have the wealth of these individuals to snap my fingers and make this stuff happen.
Then they won't do it, but I'll tell you what I will.
Because I'll have to do it.
Because no one else will, right?
It's frustrating to see Donald Trump once again begging Facebook to be back on their platform after all the abuse they've sent his way.
After the flagging he got from Twitter where they called him a liar and manipulator.
And these flags were complete BS pushed on by a crony media.
Bro, Elon, I am begging you, dude.
You got a couple million bucks lying around?
I bet you do.
Just be like, yo, who wants to start a news company?
There are a lot of good journalists who are out of work.
Why?
Because they don't produce rage bait trash.
It's not an easy thing to find these people.
Don't get me wrong.
You've got to mess it.
You've got to vet a lot of these people.
Make sure they're good journalists.
And I've fallen victim to this stuff.
Same as anybody else.
Absolutely.
So it is tough.
But I'm not giving up.
I'm going to keep doing what I have to do.
What we're doing right here.
This conversation on YouTube.
This stuff I'm talking about.
This is just like my... It's just something I started doing.
And as more and more people sign up for TimCast.com and we have a ton of members who are getting exclusive podcasts and conversations, my thought isn't, which infinity pool am I going to install?
I don't want an infinity pool.
I don't want a flying car.
What I want is functioning, honest news.
I want a news website that tells the truth.
I want social media that allows for legitimate conversations to occur, but more importantly, can't be shut down at any point, anywhere.
That's why blockchain technology might be the most important, but that's why decentralized, node-style social media is so important.
With all due respect to Minds, to Parler, to Gab, They still have weaknesses.
And Gab, however, I believe, is on the Fediverse, which means whatever we end up making, we can link into the Fediverse.
For those that aren't familiar, it is a, it's almost like reverse, it's like RSS.
It's basically, you can follow someone at, you know, like, I think that's how it works.
Maybe there's someone like john at gab.com.
So you go into your app, which is the Fediverse, and type in, you want to follow this guy, john at gab.com, and then you'll see all their posts.
There are some limitations.
But that means that you can't ban the network.
There's no point at which you can ban an app.
Gab tried putting an app on the Play Store and they banned it, but it didn't matter because it was a clone of the Fediverse app.
There's tons of them!
That's the smart way to get things done.
So here's what's gonna happen.
You're a member at TimCast.com, you're watching our exclusive podcast.
Your membership, I'll tell you what it's going towards.
For one, it's helping to run what we do.
But I am heavily focused now, I'm having the conversations around several new technologies to deal with this.
We want to create our own super chat system that... I'll tell you the basis of it, okay?
You like YouTube, you like super chat, that's fine.
You like Twitter, that's fine.
Facebook, great.
You like uploading videos, great.
Here's what we want to do.
We want to create an open source code that you can drop onto your website that does these things that you control.
Then no one can ban you.
Now sure, your server hosting company might ban you, fine.
So we're doing our best.
But it needs to be done.
I'm just so, I'm just, I'm tired of, you know, with all due respect to Elon Musk, because I am a fan.
Bro, he's not going to just do something?
So I turn to you guys.
Why is it that we're not seeing Trump?
I legitimately ask this.
Why won't he just get on any one of these platforms?
Why don't any of these ultra-wealthy individuals do it?
I suppose the Mercers are doing it, the billionaires who are funding apps like Parler.
You know, it's not like nobody's doing anything, and they get smeared heavily, but so what?
If Parler works, it works, and Parler is back.
A lot of people are complaining about it now.
I don't care.
They're like, Parler is, you know, Parler got banned, they come back, they got rid of their CEO, and now they're saying, oh, Parler is bad, and they're caving in.
I don't care, dude.
Look, complain about it, that's fine.
I want alternatives.
I want platforms that are not going to be Twitter and YouTube.
So I'm building my own website.
Why?
I think that's the solution.
I think y'all should have your own websites.
And I think then what we do is we decentralize everything.
Instead we get this.
Trump's not only appealing to Facebook, but he's appealing to their oversight board, which grants them legitimacy.
Here's the story.
I should have read it, but you got me on a rant.
The Facebook Oversight Board, which would decide whether Trump's indefinite suspension should be lifted, received an appeal on behalf of the former president arguing for his Facebook and Instagram accounts to be restored.
Quote, We can confirm that a user statement has been received in the case before the Oversight Board concerning Trump's Facebook and Instagram accounts.
The spokesperson declined to comment further.
They say the Oversight Board has received about 9,000 comments from the public on the hotly contested question of whether to allow Trump access to his Facebook and Instagram accounts.
Facebook announced in January that it asked the Oversight Board to review its decision to suspend Trump on January 7th, the day after a group of the President's supporters stormed the Capitol.
Trump's accounts on Facebook and Instagram remain suspended pending the decision.
Trump's appeal was first reported by Channel 4 News in the UK.
The Trump ban is the most consequential case yet for the Oversight Board, carrying far-reaching political implications for the nation.
Facebook's Oversight Board launched last year, blah blah blah.
My friends, the right, they have no organizational strength.
Okay, they have some.
Let me show you this story.
From Recode.
From, uh, just yesterday.
Yesterday evening.
Inside the new $65 million push from progressives to compete with conservative media.
It's called the Project for Good Information.
And it raises big questions about the future of the information wars.
What do we have on conservative media?
What do we got?
We got Daily Wire.
They do really well on Facebook for sure.
What does the left have?
I don't know.
Like the entire mainstream media apparatus?
Now, of course, leftist progressives will be like, that's not the real left, Tim.
Sure, but they're the institutional left, okay?
And often these progressives line up giddily behind them to give in to whatever they want.
Voting for Joe Biden, then complaining that the migrant camps are back for kids.
Well, Trump shut those down.
Congratulations.
You voted for the guy who brought them back.
Bravo.
Progressives are putting $65 million into competing with conservative media.
And we can't get any one of these individuals who wants to complain about the fake news and censorship to put in $65 million to push back.
Okay, I know.
Parler, I guess?
Gab?
They're working on it.
The issue is Elon, bro.
Sign up for a different social media platform.
If Elon Musk went to parlor, they would be forced to cover it.
Now I know, I know, I know all of you're saying, bro, Tim, you got millions of followers, you got 800,000 or whatever on Twitter, and several million on YouTube, why aren't you doing it?
I auto-sync my content from YouTube to these other platforms.
And to be completely honest, we are moving and trying to focus on building up TimCast.com, so trust me when I say I'm in the process.
As for Twitter, I'll say, actually, you know what, you're right.
Which is why I no longer say Twitter directly on the IRL podcast.
When I say follow me, I say follow me on either Parler, Minds, or other social media.
And I do use Twitter, and I do tweet.
The issue here is, you're right, and it's true.
I should absolutely be focusing on using other platforms.
The challenge for me, though, the media doesn't care what I have to say.
I don't have tweets of consequence.
Elon Musk does.
Donald Trump especially.
The one person who has Mjolnir, the hammer they can slam into the ground, is Donald Trump.
Make it easier for everybody, Trump.
And just go over to Parler or Gab and say, hey, I'm here.
Just do that.
And then you know what?
We can start using it more.
I've posted a little bit to Parler.
I'm trying to post more.
I auto-sync my content on a ton of other platforms outside of YouTube.
So it's not so much that I'm focused on YouTube as a platform.
No, I'm focused on all of the different outlets.
So my videos sync on BitChute, on Mines, and on Odyssey, which is basically library.
And a ton of people watch me on those platforms as well.
And the IRL podcast bonus segments, or members-only segments, appear on TimCast.com.
And you can go to TimCast.com to watch the latest podcast episodes.
We are trying to build this.
And let me just stress, Had, have I, had I, a billion dollars, this would be a lot easier.
I would snap my fingers and say, we're just going to do it.
Ideally, we want to exist on all platforms.
I'm not advocating for the end of Twitter, I'm advocating for competition, so that there are other platforms, and what will happen is Twitter will be forced to stop the mass censorship, and the false statements defaming people, because people can choose to go to other places.
Here's the problem.
I've long said Twitter is the L.A.
Coliseum, this big stadium.
I always say L.A.
Coliseum because I've actually been there on the field.
It was fun.
And parlor and gab are like high school football fields.
Now, by all means, go play football at, you know, Parks and Community High or whatever.
You can.
But the president isn't there.
And the people who are there are a bunch of, you know, young people and locals.
And while you may have a good time and have good conversations, you're not going to be listening to the president.
Over at the L.A.
Coliseum, Donald Trump is in this stadium talking to everybody in this massive arena.
They kicked Trump out, and now everyone's standing around talking to each other, and there's still a lot of people there.
If Trump walks over to the community high school and starts talking, people are going to leave the Coliseum and start jamming into the community high school.
You get the point I'm trying to make?
Trump really is the one that holds the big, the main key, but so does Elon Musk.
So do many of these high-profile individuals the media can't help but cover when they tweet.
Musk doesn't have the same power as Trump.
Trump really does have that power, and he just need do it.
Many Republicans have joined Parler, so my respect.
But I'll tell you this.
The more people watch my content, the more they become members at TimCast.com, the more I am going to be focusing on dealing with these problems for two reasons.
First, let me be real with y'all.
I don't want to get banned.
I don't want to get censored or lied or smeared by these outlets.
And so we need a robust infrastructure to counter this.
When Poynter wrote fake news misleading people about what I said, I'll show you.
Pointer writes, wrote this, they said, Twitter flagged a post from controversial YouTuber Tim Pool that said the US election was rigged.
No, it didn't.
In fact, the tweet literally said it wasn't rigged, it was fortified.
But they don't tell you that.
They just manipulate.
They're lying.
The reason I can say they're lying is because another outlet corrected this, saying Tim Pool did not say this.
He was referencing Time Magazine.
That's right, I was.
And I was being pretty, I don't know, condescending of Time Magazine for what they said.
I'm sick of it.
Poynter is the one who grants people, well, the IFCN, which is basically Poynter.
They determine who's allowed to fact-check on Facebook.
Great.
I want to start my own fact-checking organization so I can fact-check Poynter and give them a big ol' red X for false.
And I would, because it is.
Misleading content.
But so long as Poynter holds the keys determining who is allowed to fact-check on Facebook, no one will go after them, so who watches the Watchmen?
Here's what we need.
Decentralized social media.
Gab has that.
Trump, get on Gab already.
We also need fair and honest media.
Elon, dump some money into it.
Who's gonna do it?
Nobody, I guess.
Not even those with massive power.
I want to make something very, very clear.
I don't expect Elon Musk to try and focus on doing something like this.
And I can understand that, you know, how do you vet someone to do good journalism?
It's almost impossible.
So maybe all he really can do is say, I don't know, man.
Because if Elon funded something like my operation, which I would not accept to be honest, then people would complain that he was funding, you know, partisan media or something like that.
But maybe that's the only real answer, is that while I may have my biases, and of course I'm not perfect, you just need more.
More powerful institutions to challenge the mainstream media and their lies.
Jeff Bezos bought the Washington Post.
Elon Musk criticized them saying, give my regards to your puppet master.
Bro, you and Elon Musk are competing for the richest people in the world.
Why don't you do the same thing like what Matthew Iglesias said?
Get on it, brother.
I hope he's watching something like this, Elon, because I think you're rad and I'm super excited for Starlink.
So I mean no disrespect when I say I don't know what your situation is, but presumably it may be simplistic to say you have the ability or the power to do so, but if Jeff Bezos is doing it and you're not, and you're upset with what his outlet is saying to you, let me tell you something.
When Elon Musk told Washington Post to give his regards to their puppet master, he was talking about Jeff Bezos.
