S571 - George Floyds Friend Now ADMITS He May Be Charged In Floyd Death, Refuses To Testify In Chauvin Case
George Floyds Friend Now ADMITS He May Be Charged In Floyd Death, Refuses To Testify In Chauvin Case. Under Minnesota law Morries Lester Hall could be charged and is refusing to testify citing the fifth amendment.
The trial for Derek Chauvin continues and it seems that reasonable doubt has been achieved at every level. The burden of proof is on the state and time and time again the defense has just enough to question the charges.
Black lives matter activists are warning that if Chauvin is not sentenced there will be riots and chaos.
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
The friend of George Floyd who was set to testify for the state has now stated through his lawyer he is pleading the fifth because he may be charged with third-degree murder in the death of George Floyd and that his testimony may be self-incriminating under third-degree murder in Minnesota.
You can be charged in the death of an individual if you've provided them with drugs, which calls into question whether or not George Floyd actually died due to the actions of Derek Chauvin.
In our next story, Major League Baseball leaves Atlanta, effectively herding Democrats in blue counties to spite Republicans moving to Colorado over the new Georgia voter reform bill.
However, Colorado has basically the same laws, so what was the point of this other than hurting themselves to spite Republicans?
And our last story, in a new Captain America comic, Jordan Peterson is used as the villain where the Red Skull adopts some of the statements of Jordan Peterson to make it seem like, I guess they view Jordan Peterson as the Red Skull or a Nazi.
The whole thing is quite weird.
Before we get started, leave the show a positive review if you really like it.
Five stars really helps.
Leave us a good comment.
If you really do want to help the show, then just share the show.
Now, let's get into that first story.
We recently heard the shocking news pertaining to the murder trial of Derek Chauvin, that the friend of George Floyd, who is there in the vehicle with him during this infamous incident, a man named Maurice Lester Hall, was all of a sudden refusing to testify.
He was supposed to be a key witness for the prosecution, and just before he was set to testify, he said that he would plead the fifth.
He did not want to incriminate himself.
Now, there's a lot of speculation as to why that would be the case.
I thought it may be due to the fact that George Floyd's girlfriend testified that Maurice Lester Hall was in fact the drug dealer who was selling opioids to her and to George Floyd.
Now, this is just speculation.
I give the benefit of the doubt.
Someone who pleads the fifth should not be presumed to be guilty just because they're saying, look, I don't want to talk in court because I could get charged myself.
Personally, I and probably many other people would still say I'm not testifying because you don't necessarily know what the police are looking for and what they plan to do next.
So even to a certain degree at this point, I would say I'll give the benefit of the doubt.
But now we have a statement from Maurice Lester Hall's attorney stating in simple terms, he will not testify because he could incriminate himself in an upcoming third-degree murder charge Because it's already been testified that he was selling drugs to George Floyd.
This, my friends, is what I call reasonable doubt.
What you need to understand in the trial of Derek Chauvin is that the defense need not prove absolute innocence.
They need only prove reasonable doubt.
Based on these statements, and I don't know if the jury can actually take into consideration the fact the guy's saying I plead the fifth, but from an outside perspective as a media personality giving his opinion, to me, I absolutely see reasonable doubt.
Second-degree and third-degree murder for Chauvin would require intent to cause harm.
If he was simply doing his job, albeit poorly, I don't think you're going to get him on second or third degree murder.
Now, manslaughter, perhaps.
But based on this, I still don't think so.
Manslaughter would require just gross negligence on the part of Chauvin.
And while there have been some pretty powerful statements by the prosecution, again, we need only find reasonable doubt in order to end up seeing Chauvin get acquitted.
To clarify, I'm not saying he should or shouldn't be.
I'm saying we should go where the evidence takes us.
While the state is trying to prove that Chauvin was acting with intent, I mean, that's a bold accusation to make.
Meaning he intended to cause death or bodily harm.
At the very least, he was negligent.
Well, I think we've seen enough to know that there is real fear Floyd actually died due to drugs.
We've heard about the claim from the doctor.
Hypoxia was the cause of death for George Floyd, and it very well could have come from methamphetamine or from fentanyl, which was found in George Floyd's system.
We're now hearing a bit more from the defense.
In several photos, stills from a body camera that's up close next to Derek Chauvin, you can see that Chauvin's knee is in fact on George Floyd's shoulder blades, not his neck.
The prosecution countered, saying, well, in this other photo, it does look like his knee is on the neck.
Again.
The prosecution is trying to prove that Chauvin did something, but already we've seen multiple instances now.
In the event where the defense said, they asked one of the key witnesses, does it look like the knee is on the shoulder?
Yes.
When asked, are the police trained to put the knee on the neck?
Yes.
Now, this is where things get interesting.
The media is showing only one narrative, for the most part.
They tend to show you that the prosecution is, well, they're getting some points here, saying that Chauvin was in violation of policy, that the amount of time he spent on George Floyd in any capacity was too long, and those are important.
But it's strange to me that we need to be talking about reasonable doubt in this instance.
And the media just keeps trying to make it seem like Chauvin is going to be found guilty.
They keep telling you all of the things the prosecution has said.
There's a big difference between the police department saying that's not policy and the defense saying, doesn't it seem doubtful?
That's where everything changes.
Now, I worry if they keep telling people all of this news about what the prosecution is earning points on and ignores what the defense is earning points on, people will have an expectation that George Floyd will, in their view, have justice and see Derek Chauvin go to prison.
They have now, one activist even said, that all hell will break loose unless they get what they want and Chauvin is sentenced.
The media is setting up a dangerous expectation.
So let's read the news.
Before we get started, head over to TimCast.com and become a member in order to get access to exclusive members-only segments from the TimCast IRL podcast.
We set this up because the purge is real.
People are getting banned and in the event that We get banned, I will still have content somewhere where you can go and get it.
By becoming a member at TimCast.com, you're helping to support the work that I'm doing and we got a bunch of really amazing stuff coming up.
We may be just about to sign a deal to fund a comedy entertainment show.
That's right, building culture.
And it's all thanks to you who are members at TimCast.com.
So become a member, but don't forget to like, share, subscribe, hit the notification bell.
Let's read the story from the Daily Mail.
George Floyd's friend, accused of giving him the fake $20 note and feeding his opiate addiction, refuses to testify because he could incriminate himself in drug dealing and potential third-degree murder charges.
That is, in quotes.
The Daily Mail reports, Maurice Lester Hall, who was in the car along with Floyd the day of his death and is accused of giving him the alleged fake $20 note police were called over, appeared in court via video link to hear the court's decision on whether or not to grant his motion to quash the subpoena calling for him to give testimony.
Maurice Huster Hall's 42.
He had last week filed a shock notice with Hennepin County District Court stating his intention to plead the fifth should he be called to testify by either side.
His bid to avoid testifying was filed the night before Floyd's girlfriend Courtney Ross took the stand and told jurors that she and Floyd had bought opioids and drugs believed to be speed balls, a mix of methamphetamine and fentanyl from Hall.
According to Ross, on one occasion, when she took the pills believed to be bought from Hall, she felt like she was going to die.
Ross also revealed that Floyd has been hospitalized twice in March, on one occasion due to a drug overdose that saw him hospitalized for five days.
On Tuesday, Hall appeared via MediaLink from Hennepin County Public Safety Facility, where he has been held since his arrest on March 16th, on charges of violating a no-contact order, domestic assault by strangulation, and another felony warrant.
His bail was set at $10,000.
Hall had requested to be allowed to wear civilian clothes rather than jail scrubs during an appearance, and appeared in a suit Tuesday.
Judge Peter Cahill told Chauvin's defense team to drop a list of questions they would like to ask Hall by Thursday, when he will make a final decision on the matter.
Former Minneapolis police officer Chauvin, 45, is charged with murder and manslaughter after being accused of pinning his knee on Floyd's neck for 9 minutes and 29 seconds last May 25th.
He has pleaded not guilty, arguing that he only did what he was trained to do in his 19 years as a cop.
We can see this is the video of Maurice Lester Hall.
He appeared on the video link in this photo.
They say, the legal document filed by Hennepin County Public Defender last week states, quote, Mr. Maurice Lester Hall hereby provides notice to all parties in this matter that if called to testify, he will invoke his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination.
This morning, his attorney, Adrian Cousins, stated that, with no immunity or protection, he risked incriminating himself in a future third-degree murder investigation for any matters relating to controlled substances consumed by Floyd and potentially provided by Hall.
The Daily Mail states, In Minnesota law, third-degree murder charges can be brought against someone directly or indirectly involved in providing, selling, or bartering controlled substances to a person who subsequently succumbs to their consumption.
This is what I was speculating.
When Courtney Ross, the girlfriend of George Floyd, stated that Maurice Lester Hall had provided them the drugs, it seemed obvious to me that he was scared.
The judge brought Murder 3 back on the table.
For those that aren't familiar, Derek Chauvin was charged with second-degree murder and I believe manslaughter.
The third-degree murder charge was, I guess, removed.
There was a point in the trial where the judge allowed third-degree to be brought back to the table.
This was interesting because many people felt that second-degree murder would not stick.
Second-degree murder is when you intend to kill somebody.
It's called, many call it passion murder.
This is my understanding, I could be getting it wrong, I did go over the charges.
First degree murder is premeditation.
Second degree murder is intent to kill without premeditation.
Third degree is intent to cause bodily harm that results in death.
Manslaughter is negligent actions that result in someone's death.
In this instance, bringing back murder three may have scared Maurice Lester-Hall because Well, Murder 3 also includes, as they note, providing someone with a controlled substance, and then they die.
With a testimony now, under oath, from Courtney Ross, that she said this guy's effectively their dealer, stands to reason he knows.
He could be getting in trouble over this.
But now, outside of any speculation, we have the official statement from his lawyer that this is what he fears.
I stated earlier, I don't know if the jury is allowed to take this into consideration, but as far as I can tell, I don't see a strong enough case.
I'm not a lawyer, I'm not a criminal justice expert or anything like that, but it really does seem like you could convince a reasonable person that Derek Chauvin may be a bad cop like in terms of not being good at his job not like evil or anything like he could just be not good at his job but whether or not he acted negligently is an entirely different story.
I mean you have a guy who may have been in the middle of a drug deal with a guy who's now saying he thinks he might get charged with murder and so he doesn't want to he doesn't want to testify.
Sounds to me like Derek Chauvin wasn't He wasn't the supervillain, but it may be more of a banality of evil situation.
I stated on Twitter that I'm sad for George Floyd.
I'm sad the man lost his life.
I don't think that we should be imprisoning people who have addictions.
We should be helping them.
And I don't like the cops who blindly enforce these laws.
We need to end the war on drugs.
Right.
Some people pointed out then, well, it's not Chauvin's fault, you know.
Well, hold on.
Within reason.
I get it.
That's why I say it's more of a banality of evil.
It's not that Chauvin had a depraved mind or wanted to cause harm or kill somebody.
It's that he's part of a system that says, just do these things.
And he did.
And someone lost their life.
Which is why I say, the state is at fault.
The war on drugs is at fault.
Now, I get it.
Chauvin wasn't... He arrived later, and George Floyd wasn't being stopped over drugs.
He was being stopped over a counterfeit bill.
Regardless of the drugs, this still may have happened in some capacity.
But, George Floyd appears to have, at least it looked like, and according to a statement from the judge, ingested a large quantity of drugs once the police arrived.
So, it's a complicated situation.
In the end, I think we may see some pretty severe mass rioting.
They're going to say, Hall's lawyer cousin said, I cannot envision any topics that Mr. Hall would be called to testify upon that would be relevant to the case that would not incriminate him, and whoa!
Right there, from Hall's own lawyer, I cannot envision any topics, any topics, that Mr. Hall would be called to testify upon that would not be relevant to the case that would not incriminate him.
That's amazing.
I mean, that's a very, very serious statement.
Nothing?
How many cops did you see?
It would all be incriminating.
You have a right against self-incrimination.
So I don't want to hold this against Maurice Lester Hall, but outside of the court of law, we are allowed to have our opinions, and, well, that's mine.
Hall, like Floyd, is a Houston native, and the two men connect with each other in Minneapolis through a pastor.
According to an interview with the New York Times, he and Floyd have been in touch every day since 2016, and he considered the older man a confident and mentor.
In the same interview, Hall himself boasted, Yet despite his claims, Hall was far from cooperative at the outset of the investigation into Floyd's death.
Agents of the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension attempted to contact Mr. Hall numerous times to no avail, and he initially provided police with a false name at the scene of Floyd's arrest.
Chauvin is standing trial on three counts, second and third degree murder and second degree manslaughter.
If convicted on the most serious count, he could face up to 40 years in prison.
Lesser charges could have him free in as little as five years.
Hall was next to Floyd in the blue Mercedes SUV.
When Cup Food staff tried to get Floyd to return, the cigarettes he had just purchased using a fake $20 bill, or allegedly a fake $20 bill.
Or come back and pay with a genuine one.
He was next to Floyd when officers Lane and Kung arrived at the scene, and he was next to him when Lane pulled his weapon and instructed him to get out of the car.
In numerous clips, Hall can be seen interacting with both officers on the sidewalk.
During testimony last week, jurors heard Cup Foods clerk Christopher Martin explain that one of the reasons he knew the $20 bill which Floyd tried to pay was fake was because of its blue pigment.
He went on to reveal That his suspicions were also roused because the note was so similar to one Hall had attempted to pass off as a real earlier that same day, and which the clerk had refused to accept.
It sounds like, to me, Maurice Lester Hall had a counterfeit bill, tried to use it, didn't work, went to Floyd, said, you try it, I just tried it.
Floyd tried it and it worked, and then they refused to cooperate.
But I want to show you how the media is playing this.
And I want to show you... Look, there's a reason to think Chauvin could get convicted.
Absolutely.
I don't know how the jury will view all of this.
But I also think it's very likely that Chauvin is acquitted.
So, he may get convicted.
He may also get acquitted.
I'm leaning towards acquittal for several reasons.
As I mentioned probably 50 billion times at this point, reasonable doubt, but let me show you how the media is reporting things.
This is Hayley Miller.
Hayley Miller is doing a pretty good job reporting on this, and I don't mean to be disrespectful.
She's a reporter with Huffington Post, but I just want to talk to you about framing and bias.
For the most part, I've been following this reporter's Twitter threads on the Trial of Derek Chauvin because she does a pretty good job.
But there are framing issues that I think are relevant.
What the reporter chooses to highlight does have an impact, and that's true for me as well.
I try to make sure you're getting an honest view of things, but even I have my bias.
In this instance, I think there's good arguments made from both sides, but because the burden is on the state, it's a net positive for the defense.
Hayley Miller says, Nelson, who is the defense, shows Mersel a pic of Chauvin kneeling on Floyd's neck.
Nelson says Mersel said it wasn't an MPD-trained neck restraint, but perhaps part of a different training.
Mersel says kneeling across the neck could be part of training on how to use body weight to control a suspect.
However, I will add that we tell officers to stay away from the neck when possible, Mercil testifies.
Nelson shows a photo from quote, ground control training.
Quote, we caution officers to be mindful of the neck area and look to the shoulder for placement, Mercil says.
In an image provided by the defense, you can see an officer placing his knee on the neck of a suspect.
Miller goes on with another tweet.
Mersell testifies that Chauvin's knee in this image appears to be in Floyd's shoulder blades.
Asked if this image shows a neck restraint, Mersell says no.
Asked if it shows a prone hold that an officer may apply with his knee, Mersell says yes.
Nelson asks if he's trained.
Again, Miller doing a pretty good job.
weight to continue holding a person until EMS arrives, Mersel says yes.
As long as needed to control them, yes.
Now I think there's some interesting framing.
Again, Miller doing a pretty good job.
Let's take a look at someone, say Jack Posobiec, in what they will highlight.
Jack Posobiec tweets.
Breaking.
Sergeant who is trained in Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu and trains officers in those tactics testifying.
Defense asks.
Officers are trained to put a knee in the shoulder blade to the base of the neck.
Answers.
Yes, for ground control.
Jack then goes on to say.
Prone control technique to maintain control of a subject by using body weight over the subject.
It's a more direct statement presented by Jack Posobiec.
I'm not saying this to disparage either Jack or Haley, but to point out there will be gaps in the perspective of some of the reporting you get.
I think Jack's takes a position that will show you there's grounds for reasonable doubt on the part of Derek Chauvin.
That you have a sergeant who trains these tactics straight up saying, a knee in the shoulder blade to the base of the neck.
Yes, they're trained to do it.
So, what do we then see?
Well, as we already learned from Miller, They asked, if the officer was looking at one image, the defense showed an image, is this knee in the shoulder blade?
Yes.
Could it have been that Derek Chauvin was trained to put the knee from the shoulder blade to the neck and was just not that good at it?
People assume that every single one of these cops is gonna be a marksman.
They're gonna pull out their gun and be able to hit every target perfectly like in the movies.
It's not true.
Their aim is bad, typically.
We learn about what happens in New York when the cops try shooting at one suspect and they miss and hit seven bystanders or something crazy like that.
So Chauvin is shown a slide.
Here's how you do it.
Are we to assume he's going to be proficient at it from one training course or from even a few?
No.
Someone who's going to be doing Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu or ground control tactics, and they're going to be good at it, they've probably been doing it for a very long time.
For your run-of-the-mill cop, all they know is, I saw this thing in a PowerPoint where they told me this is what I'm supposed to do.
If he did it wrong, well, is it negligence?
I don't think so.
Which is why this says to me that even manslaughter may be off the table.
Now, check this out.
Sean Dilley, this is just a correspondent for the BBC News, says, at the Chauvin trial, Sergeant Mersell asked if he can see the placement of Chauvin's head.
Yes.
Another photo, 10-46.
You can see Mr. Chauvin's knee between the shoulder blade of Mr. Floyd.
Yes, sir.
Then he then asks, does this appear to be a neck restraint?
No, sir.
These are very important things the media is highlighting.
But when they're having to choose what their headline is going to be, they're typically going to go for the confirmation bias that will get them the most clicks.
Defending Derek Chauvin likely won't do that.
So they'll say, the cop said Chauvin bad.
But there's more.
Xavier Walton, a reporter with KHOU, tweets, Eric Nelson, referencing still images from Minneapolis PD body cam showing Chauvin knee placement on the shoulder blade of George Floyd as opposed to Floyd's neck.
This is a reporter outright saying, no, the video shows the knee is on the shoulder blade.
My friends, it's not so clear-cut.
Many activists have said we have seen the video of a cop killing George Floyd.
That is not true.
We've seen a video of a cop with his knee positioned on the back or neck of George Floyd.
Most of us jumped to conclusions.
It's what people do.
The point of a trial and a legitimate defense is that we now go through the available evidence to determine if Derek Chauvin actually had the intent to murder, the intent to cause harm, or was negligent.
There's still a question about the time Derek Chauvin kneeling on George Floyd, be it the neck or the shoulder blades, for 9 minutes and 29 seconds could be deemed excessive.
That will be up for the jury to decide.
But many people in the media, they'll give you a framed view of things, myself included, as I noted.
Katie S. Fang says, on cross-examination of Chief Arendando, this is from yesterday, Chauvin's defense counsel got him to agree that one of the body camera videos appeared to show that Chauvin's knee was on George Floyd's shoulder blade, not just his neck.
Katie then says, the prosecution on redirect made it clear that the other videos show Chauvin's knee on Floyd's neck, and that Chauvin moved his knee once the paramedics arrived.
That doesn't change anything.
If we're hearing that there is a ground control technique that requires them to have the knee on the base of the neck or the shoulder blades, how do you even prove negligence?
Do they train them on how long they're supposed to have their knee there?
It doesn't seem all that likely.
Look, I'm not convinced that these trainings are gonna be good.
You know what I mean?
They'll tell the cops, here's what you do, and that's probably it.
When we take a look over to The Guardian, this is what you'll see.
Derek Chauvin trial.
Police trainer says restraint used on Floyd not authorized.
But to me, this probably isn't good enough.
Again, not a lawyer, not involved in the trial.
But the police saying it's not authorized doesn't change whether or not they actually said this is a legitimate technique.
And we do train on it.
If they train someone to use a technique, and then later say it's not authorized, don't they still have some responsibility?
If they change the rules, don't they still have some responsibility?
The question then is, did they provide notice to Derek Chauvin that the training that they've actually given for ground control techniques is no longer authorized or was never authorized?
It seems like what we're looking at is the police department saying, this is not allowed, we have no responsibility here.
The challenge?
Well, as I've stated, reasonable doubt.
The police department can say everything that they want to say, but the state has to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Chauvin intended to cause murder, harm, or was negligent.
If this is a run-of-the-mill, you know, derpy cop, who is just told like, oh yeah, you gotta put your knee here, and he's like, okay, and then he doesn't know what he's doing, was it a depraved state of mind, or was he just like, I don't know, that's what I'm supposed to do?
This is what the left doesn't seem to understand.
That when you're trying to imprison someone, there's a strong requirement that we know this individual did something wrong.
Now we have this tweet from Omar Jimenez.
He says, worth noting, we've now had multiple senior level officers from within the Minneapolis Police Department testify in one way or another that Derek Chauvin's actions do not line up with what they believe should have happened.
That now includes the chief of police.
I want to make sure I'm highlighting that the police are coming out against Chauvin, saying he did things wrong.
This is absolutely reason to believe that Chauvin is responsible, at the very least, for manslaughter.
I don't think the state at this point has any possible way of proving murder.
I really don't.
So here's what might happen.
We have this article from WBNG.
Police official.
Chauvin was trained to diffuse situations.
They say that he was trained to de-escalate when things got too excited.
Well, if Derek Chauvin gets convicted of manslaughter, which I'm kind of leaning against, but it's entirely possible.
I'm not a psychic, okay?
Well, there'll be riots.
I don't see how he can get charged with murder.
It's entirely possible that... I don't see how he can get convicted of murder.
It's entirely possible he does.
But we know it's coming.
BLM activist Maya Echols warns all hell will break loose if Derek Chauvin is not given the maximum sentence.
They say, Echols is hardly the only Black Lives Matter activist who has supported the destruction of cities after Ashley Grant said last year that she didn't care if the whole city burned down.
Maya Eccles' internet presence is booming as she dons many hats.
TikToker, model, Black Lives Matter activist.
Recently, however, Eccles made headlines when a TikTok video she posted saw her warning her audience about the consequences of former Minneapolis cop Derek Chauvin not getting the maximum sentence for the death of George Floyd.
I don't know if she said maximum sentence.
But, quote, she said, if George Floyd's murder is not sentenced, just know that all hell is going to break loose, Echo said in a since-deleted TikTok video.
Don't be surprised when buildings are on fire, just saying.
She's right, though.
She's absolutely right.
I don't think she should have deleted the post because I don't think it's incitement.
I think it's an obvious point we've all made and even I've made.
She is correct.
It's not about her.
It's about people in general.
They're being fed this line from the media over and over again.
These headlines.
Chauvin was trained to de-escalate, to defuse.
Chauvin, the police say he was not authorized to do this.
The defense counters.
Here's a photo saying do it.
Here's someone saying do it.
Here's a doctor saying fentanyl causes hypoxia.
Here's all of these instances where the defense has presented reasonable doubt.
And the media doesn't run with these.
Those are secondary.
To the damning headline against Chauvin.
People have already made up their minds.
The court of public opinion says he did it.
Leftists are saying, we don't need a trial, we saw the video.
But in court, there's a bigger burden.
Look, it is better that ten guilty persons escape than one innocent suffer.
And that means there's a high burden for the state.
But now everyone expects Chauvin to be convicted, because we all know he did it, so they say.
But we don't.
We know that acting as a police officer, he restrained George Floyd.
We know that in that capacity, in some instance, somehow George Floyd lost his life.
We're now being told by the left that we don't need a trial because of it.
But in the trial we're learning there's reasons to believe that Chauvin was trained to do this, whether improperly or otherwise, that he wasn't acting with malintent, malice, or reckless disregard, or a depraved mind.
In fact, I should say, We don't have... I don't believe the state has proven it.
I really don't.
I think they've just given us reason to consider it.
We need... Look, it's really hard to read someone's mind and know what their true intent was.
If George Floyd is saying, I can't breathe, before he's even been restrained.
If the judge even acknowledges that George Floyd appeared to have put something in his mouth while he was in the car.
If the tox screen showed a lethal dose of two different drugs, fentanyl and methamphetamine combined.
Then if George Floyd resists, kicks his way out of the car and says, put me on the ground, put me on the ground, put me on the ground, as we saw from the body camera footage, you show all of that to a jury, and then have the cops coming out saying Derek Chauvin did something wrong, and it's like, yeah, but like, using an improper training technique is not negligence.
You know, holding someone down is not negligence.
The murder thing, to me, is out the window.
But think about this.
You want to say he was negligent.
Negligent, in my opinion, would be like if he was explicitly told, do not do this.
And he said, well, I'm gonna do it anyway.
If they said, we banned the neck restraint.
It would even be an argument if they were like, we never told him to do this, and he did it anyway.
It's not even that.
It's that they quite literally said he was trained to do it.
That it was a violation of policy, that it wasn't in line with their expectations, that he was trained to defuse the situation.
But yes, they are trained to use the ground control technique.
How do you even convict someone of negligence manslaughter if that's the case?
Which brings me back to the original story.
How do you convict a man of any of these charges when the other man who was there says he fears Conviction on third-degree murder in the future if he testifies because he would incriminate himself.
Again, he has a Fifth Amendment right.
I don't want to hold it against him.
The court should not.
But I can as an individual.
I understand and respect the Fifth Amendment and I try to remain true to the core of that principle to the best of my ability.
But I have to recognize the statements made as they are.
In terms of whether or not he should go to prison, if the state can't make their case against Maurice Lester Hall because they don't have his statements, then he should not go to prison.
But if he's telling me he thinks he might get charged for, you know, being responsible for the death of George Floyd, I'm like, dude.
Like, you seriously opened the door for Chauvin to get acquitted.
You know that, right?
I'll tell you this.
No matter what happens, I think the riots are a-coming.
Derek Chauvin might get convicted of manslaughter.
The murder seems just outrageous at this point.
I just really don't see that happening.
He's a cop.
He's expected to do certain things.
He's told to do certain things.
He's told to use physical force on people.
How can you convict him of murder if part of his job is using force against people?
Second degree would mean he wanted George Floyd dead.
That's absurd.
How do you prove that?
Third degree would mean he was trying to hurt George Floyd, but he's a cop who's told to use force against people.
Manslaughter would be negligence.
I'm not seeing it, man.
I am really not.
Because I'll tell you what I am seeing.
I'm seeing riots.
Here's AZ Central.
Will America riot once the Derek Chauvin trial ends?
It's responsible to consider the potential for riots at the end of the Derek Chauvin trial, but only if the same questions are asked for both sides.
The right isn't going to riot if Chauvin is convicted.
Conservatives were outraged along with the left, but many conservatives are now approaching the evidence to the best of their ability, objectively.
When I see the media report, police say Chauvin was not authorized to do this, I think, I mean, yeah, we already are biased against Chauvin, so we need to see what the defense is saying to better understand if Chauvin has a chance at getting acquitted.
The media is less inclined to show that narrative.
In which case, riots are to come in, my friends.
Can we expect riots?
Yes.
In my opinion, no matter what.
We'll see.
It may not be the worst thing in the world.
It may not be the same as the George Floyd riots when they first started.
And the issue, I think, is that if George Floyd, if Derek Chauvin is not convicted, then Democrats will absolutely see an opportunity to raise money.
And that means they've got to rile people up.
That means cities will burn and people will suffer.
And that's a scary prospect, isn't it?
The Democrats know that this is an opportunity to make a ton of money.
And they're probably in my... Look, I think many of them are looking forward to Chauvin getting acquitted because then they have a cause.
Then they can say, oh no, look, you need our help.
We have to fight for you.
Give us money, quick, please.
That's what scares me.
And I think innocent people will suffer in the end.
When people riot, It in no way affects the rich negatively.
They don't care.
Building burns down, they get insurance to the best of their abilities.
To their best of their resources.
They'll be able to cover the cost of this damage.
Not completely.
However...
When the city burns and the property value collapses, rich people can come in and buy up property for pennies on the dollar.
It benefits them in the long run.
That's what I think will happen.
And it will just hurt everybody.
I guess we'll see as this case continues, so stick around.
Next segment's coming up tonight at youtube.com slash timcast IRL.
It will be live at 8 p.m.
and we'll take your comments live on the show, so come hang out and we'll see you all then.
Georgia recently passed a voter reform bill.
I'm sure many of you have heard about this.
It takes many of the temporary provisions from the pandemic, like early voting and mail-in voting, and it makes them permanent, though it does kind of pull back on them a little bit.
Early voting time is reduced.
Vote by mail.
You'll need your ID.
It does seem to be, for the most part, a compromise between Democrats and Republicans.
Now, if you listen to only mainstream or Democrat news sources, they'll tell you that it's voter restrictions, Republicans are trying to cheat, and that you can't give people water if they're waiting in line.
Okay.
These things are opinion.
Some of them are kind of extreme.
You can't, my understanding, you can give people water and food.
You just can't campaign while doing it.
Well, because of these restrictions, many major corporations announced that they are furious with Georgia.
unidentified
In fact, some are even saying they plan on leaving.
Now, this may be a get-woke-go-broke type situation, but it's a really weird one because the people going broke are the black residents of Cobb County.
It's a blue county in Georgia that is going to be losing, I think, nearly $100 million.
We'll go through the numbers.
With Major League Baseball pulling out of this All-Star game, A lot of tourism dollars and a lot of money that would go to marginalized communities is being pulled out.
But here's the best part.
They're moving to Colorado, which has almost the exact same laws already.
So I wonder...
Is this actually a get woke situation?
Or is Major League Baseball using this as a pretext to break contracts and move to a more favorable location that they think might make them more money?
Think about this before we read into this.
A lot of businesses have morality clauses.
So when you're doing a contract with, let's say you're hiring somebody, you want a personality, you want an actor, and you say, I would like to have you act on my show.
Well, most contracts have a morality clause saying that if you violate, you know, public decency or offend people, we can terminate the contract.
So what do they do?
I'm not saying this is true of Major League Baseball in Georgia, but I wouldn't be surprised if there was a long-term contract that Major League Baseball had with Georgia for these stadiums they would need to, and that it had some kind of morality clause that if something was done by the Georgia government that was offensive and could harm the business, they could pull out.
Oh heavens!
Oh, the voting laws!
Oh, we're so angry and offended!
Now we have to move to a majority white area!
I wonder what their real motivations are.
I don't know.
I'm not going to tell you what they're thinking because I can't read their minds, but here's what they said, and here's what's happening.
In a release from April 2nd, Major League Baseball's statement regarding the 2021 All-Star Game.
Commissioner of Baseball Robert D. Manfred Jr.
issued the following statement today regarding the 2021 All-Star Game.
Over the last week, we've engaged in thoughtful conversation with clubs, former and current players, the Players' Association, the Players' Alliance, among others to listen to their views.
I've decided the best way to demonstrate our values as a sport is by relocating this year's All-Star Game and MLB Draft.
Major League Baseball fundamentally supports voting rights for all Americans and opposes restrictions to the ballot box.
In 2020, MLB became the first professional sports league to join the Nonpartisan Civic Alliance to help build a future in which everyone participates in shaping the United States.
We proudly used our platform to encourage baseball fans and communities throughout our country to perform their civic duty and actively participate in the voting process.
Fair access to voting continues to have our game's unwavering support.
We will continue with our plans to celebrate the memory of Hank Aaron during the season's all-star festivities.
In addition, MLB's planned investments to support local communities in Atlanta As part of our All-Star Legacy projects we'll move forward, we are finalizing a new host city and details about the events will be announced shortly.
In response, Georgia's Governor Kemp and State House Speaker Ralston responded to MLB's decision to withdraw the All-Star game from Atlanta after passage of the new elections law, saying, Today, Major League Baseball caved to fear, political opportunism, and liberal lies, said Governor Kemp.
Georgians and all Americans should fully understand what the MLB's knee-jerk decision means.
Cancel culture and woke political activists are coming for every aspect of your life, sports included.
If the left doesn't agree with you, facts and the truth do not matter.
I will stop and say this.
I read CNN breaking down what the Georgia vote reform bill did on this channel, and it is very much a compromise.
Oh, they get voter ID, but they've also extended early voting and mail-in voting.
You see, what they did was a big ask.
The pandemic hits, and they say, we need all of these things.
And everybody agrees, right?
We're in a pandemic, so let's do extended early voting.
Let's do mail-in voting.
And we did, among other things.
And then we decided that once the pandemic is over, okay, well, now these things go away, right?
No.
Georgia said we're going to keep some of them, which is a huge gain for Democrats in terms of what they wanted for voting.
And it acts as though the pandemic shouldn't, is not a factor.
No, no, no.
These things were temporary.
We all agreed to change the rules temporarily.
Now, Georgia's agreeing to keep some of these in a limited fashion, which is a gain for Democrats.
They're acting like they're being slighted.
You see what they did?
Big ask.
Hey, you give me a million dollars for that car.
Whoa, a million dollars is too much.
Okay, fine.
How about half a million?
Now, that sounds more reasonable.
Give me half off.
The big ask is when you ask for something that is way more than you actually want, so when you walk it back it sounds reasonable.
The Democrats got that.
They're going to say, quote, this is an attack on our state.
This attack on our state is a direct result of repeated lies from Joe Biden and Stacey Abrams about a bill that expands access to the ballot box and ensures the integrity of our elections.
I'm sorry, I gotta say, I agree with that statement.
Giving more early voting and mail-in voting options?
That's more than we had before the pandemic.
It does expand.
It doesn't give the Democrats everything they want, though, so they're acting like they're being slighted.
He says, I will not back down.
Georgians will not be bullied.
We will continue to stand up for secure, accessible, fair elections.
Earlier today, I spoke with the leadership of the Atlanta Braves, who informed me they do not support the MLB's decision.
Stacey Abrams' leftist lies have stolen the all-star game from Georgia, said Speaker David Ralston.
This decision is not only economically harmful, it also robs Georgians of a special celebration of our national pastime free of politics.
But Georgia will not be bullied by socialists and their sympathizers.
We will continue to stand for accessible, secure elections that are free and fair.
And we will continue to speak truth despite extortion and intimidation.
Alright, well first, before we get into the get-woke-go-broke kind of stuff, let's talk about what they're actually doing and why what they're saying makes no sense.
From the Daily Caller, MLB All-Star Game reportedly moved to Colorado, a state with voter ID laws similar to Georgia.
The Daily Caller reports, Major League Baseball is reportedly moving the All-Star Game to Colorado, a state that has similar voting ID laws to Georgia.
ESPN reported that the MLB moved the All-Star Game to Coors Field in Denver, Colorado after Major League Baseball ditched Georgia over a series of new voting laws.
But Colorado's election laws aren't all that different from Georgia's.
One main point of contention, for some, is that Georgia voters will be deprived of water, food, and other items while standing in line.
But Georgia's law simply mandates that volunteers can't hand out water, food, or other items.
The law, however, explicitly states that voters can still have access to water and polling places by having self-service water stations available.
Basically, what Georgia wants to do is stop people from showing up, giving out water, and saying, vote for my person.
You know, vote for this person, vote for that person.
Self-service stations will be available.
And I'm sure if you're waiting in line, you're like, hey, I'm going to go grab a water bucket.
All right, I got you.
And you're fine.
No one's going to be like, nope, you're out of line.
You lose your spot.
Grab your water.
It's fine.
They say, under Colorado law, campaign workers are allowed outside of polling places to offer water, snacks, and other items to voters who are waiting to vote.
Campaign workers, however, are not allowed to offer the aforementioned items if they wear apparel or bear any of the candidate's image, political party, or ballot measures within 100 feet.
Like Georgia's new set of election laws, Colorado also requires voters present identification for both in-person and Absentee voting.
The same as Georgia.
All voters who vote at the polls must provide ID.
Colorado law states.
If you are voting by mail for the first time, you may also need to provide a photocopy of your ID when you return your mail ballot.
Acceptable forms of ID include a Colorado's driver's license, a passport, a military ID, a copy of your birth certificate for the uh...
for the elector or a valid student ID with a picture among other options.
And student IDs aren't that hard to get.
I mean, it's not like a student ID is comparable, in many circumstances, to a legitimate government ID.
Georgia residents will also have to show ID just like the Colorado voters.
Georgia residents can receive a free ID card from the state, which can be obtained simply by getting the appropriate documentation.
Voters who choose to vote absentee will be required to submit an ID as well, just like Colorado voters.
At least 35 states require this.
Okay, alright, you get it.
Hypocrisy at its finest.
I'm gonna throw it out there again.
I wonder if this is something to do with they saw an opportunity to make more money and they're like, hey, hey, hey, whoa, morality clause.
I don't know they actually have that.
But it's something I think people should consider when they see stories like this.
When some woke actor is like, oh no, you know, I can't do this movie.
Maybe they didn't want to do it in the first place.
Well, I'd imagine if they signed on for it, they probably did.
But maybe things have changed and, you know, they didn't want to.
Let's say there's a movie that's cast an actor, and they know it's an exorbitant fee, and they're thinking like, man, can we get out of this contract?
We're not even gonna do this.
Oh, no!
Oh, the actor was seen!
Oh, they were watching a documentary about Jordan Peterson!
Oof, you know, we condemn bigotry, so we're gonna have to terminate that contract.
So who gets hurt by Major League Baseball and these companies deciding to leave?
It's quite simple.
Black-owned businesses bound to take major hit from Biden's support of MLB's Georgia boycott.
That's right.
Georgia has a large black population.
When the riots erupted and people were going around smashing up businesses, they were smashing up many black-owned businesses.
There was this famous rapper.
I think it was Big Mike, I'm not sure.
He was like, why are you coming here and smashing up black-owned businesses in the name of Black Lives Matter?
Yeah.
Why is Major League Baseball saying, oh, oh, the people who run the state have passed a bad law.
Let's make everyone else suffer.
Yeah, well, here you go.
The Daily Caller reports, MLB's decision to move the 2021 All-Star game out of Atlanta in response to Georgia's voter integrity law could greatly cost the city's black-owned businesses, numerous sources report.
The estimated lost economic impact Georgia will face without the Major League Baseball game is more than $100 million.
Holly Quinlan, President and CEO of Cobb Travel and Tourism told CNN on Friday.
100 million dollars.
For what?
For what?
Seriously.
This law isn't that crazy.
It's similar to many other states.
Yeah.
Major League Baseball saw an opportunity, they took it.
I can't imagine.
They would make a move like this if it would substantially hurt them.
I'm willing to bet that, you know, they moved to Colorado because Colorado was like, how much does it cost for you to be in Georgia?
Think about it this way.
Let's say they have a deal with, you know, Georgia, with the city or the county or whatever, and it's like, the county says, you want to use the stadium, it's going to cost you 10 million bucks, something like that.
Let's say then Colorado's like, we want $100 million in economic impact, so how about we just charge you $5 million, we'll eat some of the costs because the economic boom to our city will be worth it.
And then, you know, Major League Baseball says, but we can't move Because we have a contract with them, and then their lawyer's like, actually, we have this morality clause thing.
I'm not saying that's legitimately what happened.
I'm just speculating.
I'm telling you these things may happen in some circumstances.
I don't see Major League Baseball losing money for no reason.
That makes no sense to me.
They had a choice.
No one called on them to ban the state.
No one called on them to leave and change the state, as far as I know.
And my understanding is that even the leftists in Georgia are like, don't leave!
Don't leave!
Like, we're mad about this too, but don't hurt us!
Now, I think MLB saw an opportunity to make money.
That's my opinion.
Black-owned businesses in Atlanta could acutely feel the revenue loss.
Nearly 30% of Atlanta's businesses are Black-owned, landing it the 5th place spot on Career Resource's website, overheard on conference calls ranking the best cities for Black-owned businesses in 2021.
Savannah, where 23% of businesses are Black-owned, was the 20th best city in the ranking, Atlantic Journal-Constitution reported in February.
MLB intended to play the exhibition game at the Atlanta Braves Troost Park, but moved location due to the new voter laws which are aimed to curb alleged voter fraud.
Among other things, the laws require voters to provide a photo ID when they submit an absentee ballot.
Ladies and gentlemen, I give you one of the greatest exchanges we've seen so far on Twitter.
First, we have this tweet from Steven Eisenberg, who said, Delta and American, if I ever fly with you again, I will not show ID.
Why?
Well, I know Delta issued this statement.
I'm assuming this is because American Airlines also issued a similar statement saying, these laws are racist and we denounce them.
American Air, verified Twitter account responded, adults 18 and over are required to show identification at the airport.
Well, isn't that something?
Really?
They're not required to show ID to vote?
Well, I tweeted, I am told this is racist.
Yes.
We've all been told it's racist.
We've been told over and over again that it's racist to require IDs.
It's the stupidest thing ever and it's only these uninitiated liberals well-to-do who don't pay attention who fall for this stuff.
You mean to tell me that these liberals think people in the black community haven't gone to see an R-rated movie before?
You need an ID for that?
They don't buy alcohol?
You need an ID for that?
Regular people do regular people things.
How stupid and racist.
It's remarkable to me.
Who believes this stuff?
What if we require people to have an ID to vote?
That would be racist.
You saying these people don't have jobs?
You need an ID to get a job.
You need an ID for basically everything.
And apparently some of these states issue IDs for free.
But apparently, among the progressive left and the liberal establishment left, No, they think that the poor minorities just aren't smart enough, I guess, or don't know where the DMV is.
You really gotta watch that Ami Horowitz thing.
It's a classic.
It's a classic video.
He goes to Berkeley, and he asks Berkeley students, white progressives, what they think about voter ID laws, and they're like, oh, they're racist.
And they say things like how they think black people, in their opinion, don't know how to find the DMV or whatever.
My favorite interaction, my favorite so much, is Ami then goes to like Harlem or the Bronx and he goes up to black people.
My favorite interaction, he goes, do you know where the DMV is?
And the guy goes, oh yeah, it's over on 25th street.
Like as if he was just helping the guy with directions, not realizing the political ramifications of what the video was about.
You see Ami go to this neighborhood, and these people are confused when they hear what he's saying.
He's like, do you have an ID?
And they're like, yeah, I got a driver's license.
Do you have the internet?
They're like, yeah.
One kid's like, even a 12-year-old kid's got the internet.
What are you talking about?
It's amazing that people really believe this.
How...
How is that?
If you want to fly in an airplane, you need an ID.
Okay?
If you want to leave the country, you need a passport.
That's an annoying thing to get, right?
Yet, for some reason, they say this stuff and people just eat it up.
It's some of the stupidest... It's just... Some people are just stupid.
I don't know what to tell you, man.
CEOs condemn Georgia voter ID law, while their own companies require valid photo ID, which brings us to the racism of Coca-Cola.
That's right.
Coca-Cola is a white supremacist organization.
That's another thing I noticed, too.
Like, why do people say white supremacist instead of white supremacist?
Bill Maher said white supremacist recently on his show.
And I'm like, is that a different thing?
And you hear it from a lot of the Black Lives Matter people.
They don't say white supremacist.
They say white supremacist.
I guess.
I don't know.
White supremacy probably makes more sense.
Supreme?
Supremacy?
I don't know.
Whatever.
Coca-Cola.
I'm gonna outright say it.
It has long been known that voter ID is racist.
So sayeth the Democrats.
And Coca-Cola requires ID to come to their meetings.
That's my understanding.
Which proves that Coca-Cola is literally a white supremacist organization.
Okay.
Just the news reports.
Leaders of major corporations have come out swinging against Georgia's election reform.
Democratic messaging against the law centers around the allegedly racially discriminatory implications of requiring valid voter ID in order to vote by mail.
Joe Biden blasted the law as an atrocity, likening it to Jim Crow in the 21st century.
72 black executives, meanwhile, signed an open letter calling on their corporate brethren to stand up to the Georgia voting laws on American.
Are they gonna write a letter about Colorado or the 35 states, 34 other states, I guess, where you need an ID to vote?
It's just ridiculous nonsense.
But in an echo of the politicians who got caught flouting their own COVID mitigation restrictions, several of the same corporate giants embraced the Democrats' heated partisan rhetoric, alleging voter suppression themselves require ID to access their services.
On March 11th, Ed Bastian, the CEO of Delta Airlines, dedicated a building At the company's Atlanta headquarters to Andrew Young, the former Democratic mayor of the city, Carter administration U.S.
ambassador to the U.N., and civil rights leader.
At the dedication ceremony, Young addressed the election reform bill then making its way through the Georgia State House and Senate, and Young's daughter, Andrea, approached Bastian to emphasize how important it was to oppose the law.
Last week after being lobbied, former CEO of American Express Kenneth Chennault, one of the signers of the open letter, Bastian sent a memo to Delta employees alleging that the GOP voting laws are a Republican attempt to make it harder for many underrepresented voters to exercise their constitutional right to elect their representatives.
But if you want to stop, but if you want to hop a Delta flight to Atlanta or anywhere else, you'll need an ID.
Coca-Cola CEO James Quincy told CNBC that the new law is unacceptable.
However, Coca-Cola requires a valid photo ID for admission to its annual shareholders meeting last year.
We will verify your registration and request to see your admission ticket in a valid form of photo identification, such as a driver's license or passport, said the company in reference to its early 2020 annual meeting of shareholders.
And let's not forget the good old vaccine passports.
The epitome Of white supremacy.
That's right.
Because in order to get the vaccine passport certified, you need to get a vaccine.
In order to get a vaccine, you need to prove your identification.
In order to prove your identification, you probably gotta go to the DMV and provide some specific resources.
Which means, it is in many ways easier to get your ID than it is to get the vaccine.
Because the vaccine requires ID.
So it's an extra step.
There you go.
So it's double racist.
The vaccine passport requires all of these things.
And if they want to come out and say that poor people or that certain racial minorities don't have the ability to do these things, that's racist.
How about at the same time that they're claiming this, they're also talking about giving out vaccines based on race.
They genuinely are racist people.
It's not, you know, it's not surprising to anybody, but the left is, in this country, I believe that they have been racist for a long time, and I wonder what really happened with the parties switching, so they say.
I don't think they did.
I know a lot of people say this, they switched in some capacities, but they switched on like, Actually, I don't even know if that's true at all.
Their strategy just changed, and anybody who is discerning and looks at the policies they implement, they're not helping minorities.
They're not at all.
Opposing these laws It's an attack on election integrity.
Everybody can get an ID.
We need to have some security in our elections, not none.
I think people should have an ID to vote.
And I don't think it's racist.
Why?
Because I grew up in a mixed-race neighborhood.
We had people of all different types on the south side of Chicago.
Everybody had an ID.
It wasn't a complicated thing to get.
You come to me and tell me that me and my non-white friends Wouldn't be able to do it.
I'm gonna call you a racist and a white supremacist because you certainly think that you're better than everyone else.
I think not requiring ID is racist because it takes away security from our elections while also telling racial minorities that they're too stupid to figure out how to do it and that's not true.
They certainly know how to do it.
They function like regular people.
But these well-to-do progressive types, these Berkeley kids, are overtly racist.
So there you go, man.
MLB didn't necessarily get broke on this one.
They're probably gonna make money.
The people of Atlanta, the people of Savannah, they're gonna lose tons of money.
So I'll tell you this.
For all the people in Georgia who are complaining about this, and all the woke, they're hurting themselves to insult Republicans?
How dumb.
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.
Comic books have long gotten woke and then gone broke.
We know that readership is way down and has been for some time.
And many people have suggested it's because the comic books got woke and went broke.
People don't want to read this stuff.
I'm not entirely convinced, though.
Maybe.
We'll see how things play out with the Marvel Cinematic Universe.
Reports are that the MCU is getting woke and that many more superhero movies are going to be woke and written by very prominent critical race theorists.
But these movies, the ones that haven't incorporated some wokeness into them, Still have done well.
I mean, Captain Marvel was ragged on by everybody.
I criticized it.
And they still made a ton of money.
So I don't know if it's about getting woke and going broke.
Sometimes companies get broke and then go woke in a desperate attempt to pander to someone, to anybody, who would buy their stuff.
But it's a get woke, go broke kind of week because I really do think that the movie industry and the comics industry is gonna be in for some bad news and bad numbers because what they're making is trash.
I'm sorry, it's just true.
Jordan Peterson tweeted the other day, what the hell?
This was in response to an image from a comic book from Captain America that was sent to him.
In it, we can see the red skull.
For those who aren't familiar with Captain America, The Red Skull is the Nazi villain, and they're apparently now modeling the new Red Skull off of Jordan Peterson, and trying to make Peterson's ideas seem like he's a villain.
Hey man, they're going for kids.
But, I'll tell you this, who reads comic books?
I know a lot of people probably do.
But the numbers are going down, and I have to imagine that kids aren't reading comic books in brick-and-mortar shops anymore, so maybe they're getting them online, I suppose, but I think it's just an old medium.
I think they were going broke, so they got woke in a desperate attempt to try and fluff their numbers and be like, hey, look, we agree with your ideology, buy our stuff!
In this image, it says on the right-hand side, Chaos and Order, Karl Luger's Genius, and the Feminist Trap.
Then you see, I guess it's like a video of the Red Skull, and it says, Ten Rules for Life.
Incredible.
Jordan Peterson was apparently shocked to discover that, uh, he lives in a universe where Ta-Nehisi Coates has written a Captain America comic featuring a parody of his ideas as part of the philosophy of the arch-villain, the Red Skull.
That's right.
Jordan Peterson is the Nazi villain in Captain America now, apparently.
Now, I have a question about this.
I'll read you the gist of the story.
We'll go through what's going on with this comic book industry and how it's suffering, and all this weird stuff's happening with critical theory.
Let me ask you.
Why are they trying to soften Nazism?
This is the weird thing to me.
And we've long seen this and we've long talked about it.
The Red Skull was an authoritarian, ethno-nationalist, literal Nazi in the comics.
He was the villain.
Captain America punches him in the face.
He punches Nazis.
Jordan Peterson is a classical liberal who believes in individual liberties and opposes authoritarianism.
Why are they trying to make it seem like the Red Skull is not that bad of a guy?
Isn't that really creepy?
Why are these woke leftists producing content where they're trying to actually liken rational individualist ideas that are good with Nazis.
Why is Ta-Nehisi Coates trying to make the Red Skull palatable?
Listen.
When you see these things from the Red Skull, I guess the assumption is you must automatically assume the villain is bad and everything they do is bad.
When you see some villains, like Mr. Freeze, is it Mr. Freeze?
In Batman, the animated series origin for Mr. Freeze was incredible.
My understanding is that, oh gee, Mr. Freeze was just your run-of-the-mill garbage villain who was like, I'll freeze you with an ice ray!
And then the animated series for Batman came out and they made his story incredible.
I think it was like the first animated show to win an Emmy or something like that.
The story for Mr. Freeze was that, or is it Dr. Freeze?
I don't know, Mr. Freeze, whatever.
He was trying to save his wife who was terminally ill and she was cryogenically frozen.
But he was essentially siphoning away grant money from the company he worked for.
When they found out, they pulled the plug.
And in a panic to save his wife, he attacks the company owner, chemicals get spilled on him, and he becomes Mr. Freeze.
His whole motivation is, he will stop at nothing to save the life of his wife, who is terminally ill.
It's an incredible villain.
I mean, it's somebody who you're like, you're almost sympathetic for, but you know it's wrong.
The Red Skull is literally a Nazi scientist.
You don't root for these people.
There's not supposed to be redeeming qualities to this.
Taking a self-help guru, doctor, psychologist like Dr. Peterson, and then trying to make it seem like that's what the Red Skull is into, softens Nazism.
I've always been saying, these people, they share the same ideology.
Look at the Farrakhan supporter who rammed the barricade in DC.
They believe almost the exact same things.
The difference?
The color of their skin.
It's no surprise to me then.
They actually want to soften what this villain really is.
Here's a story from KnowYourMeme.
Jordan Peterson thinks the new Red Skull is based on him.
Okay, that's a pretty crummy headline.
It's not that he thinks the new Red Skull is based on him.
It literally says chaos and order and ten rules for life.
As you know, Jordan Peterson has a very similar book and talks about very similar things.
They write.
Controversial philosopher Jordan Peterson is currently processing the idea that the Red Skull, a villain in the Captain America universe, may be based on him in a recent Captain America issue written by author and Atlantic contributor Ta-Nehisi Coates.
He may very well be right in the issue.
Captain America talks about a young boy disappearing into the internet and coming out with a new theory of the world, fed to him by the Red Skull.
The next panel shows a still of what the Red Skull's internet content looks like.
It shows him offering ten rules for life, Peterson's book is called The Twelve Rules for Life, with sections Chaos and Order, Karl's Luger's Genius, and the Feminist Trap.
Skull tells them that they've always longed to hear, says Captain America, that they are secretly great, that the whole world's against them, that if they're truly men, they'll fight back and bingo.
That's their purpose.
That's what they live for.
That's what they'll die for.
Although I'm not entirely sure that's what Jordan Peterson is telling people to do.
He's telling young men to be responsible and clean your room.
I don't see that as anywhere near Nazi ideology.
Sorry.
In the panel.
This is also where it gets really funny.
The seriousness of the internet to these people is laughable.
I don't take the internet all that seriously for the most part.
I understand it's where we're entering this internet world and internet economy.
Captain America says, so let me guess, your brother, he disappeared into the internet.
And when he comes back out, he can't stop talking about his new theory of the world.
And that theory comes from one man, the Red Skull.
And then you can see it 10 rolls for life.
And the guy goes, yeah, he did.
It's the same for all of them.
Young men.
Weak.
Looking for purpose.
I found the flag.
You found the badge.
They found the skull.
He tells them what they've always longed to hear.
That they are secretly great.
That the whole world is against them.
That if they're truly men, they'll fight back.
And bingo, that's their purpose.
That's what they live for.
And that's what they'll die for.
It's really funny.
Replace the skull with Ta-Nehisi Coates.
That these young men and women, they go online and they find this content, looking for purpose.
I found the flag, you found the badge, they found Coates.
They tell them what they've always wanted to hear.
That they are secretly great.
That the whole world is against them.
And if they're truly men and women, they'll fight back.
You know what's funny?
I think about critical theory and what they tell young people.
That you could be a doctor, but the whole world's against you.
That doesn't sound like something Jordan Peterson says.
Jordan Peterson says, life is not fair, life is tough, work hard and you can succeed.
And it's the critical theorists who say, the whole world hates you.
I had one of these lunatic white supremacists, critical theorists left, you guys, tell me that China's culture, which literally invented the compass a thousand years before Europe, Was built by colonialists and white Europeans.
And I'm like, bro, I understand Hong Kong, Macau, etc.
I get all that stuff.
But you mean to tell me that the thousand-year-plus history of China and East Asia was made by white Europeans before they even knew each other existed?
It's the stupidest thing I've ever heard.
And that's why I often say these leftists are white supremacists.
That's why I was so heavy on their trying to soften what the Red Skull represents.
There was a viral post a while ago.
Talking about why the left was so adamant about changing the definition of words and changing the definition of racist.
It's because they are literally white supremacists and racists.
Not all of them, some of them are black supremacists or black nationalists.
But that's why they try to change the definition of words.
Otherwise, people would start to realize, hey, wait a minute, that thing that you're talking about, that's you!
And that's true.
So now what's happening is, whereas the Nazis are actual historical villains with crazy ideologies and we defeated them, the comic is changing it.
So the Red Skull represents classical liberalism, like Jordan Peterson, but they paint it in a very villainous way.
I'm not entirely convinced young people are reading these comics anymore, and I'm not sure anybody wants to read this trash, so I don't know if it'll have that big of an impact.
But what's happening now is Captain America represents the fascistic ideology.
There is no truth but power was a core tenet of Nazism, at least according to the late David Graeber.
He tweeted about this and it is an interesting thread.
He said he was the famous anthropologist who was also known for being an anarchist, one of the originators of Occupy Wall Street.
And he said there's a sect of the left that believes there is no truth but power and is adopting fascistic tendencies and strategies.
And they are.
So when you have these writers, flip the script.
Captain America was supposed to represent classical liberalism, freedom and individuality, stopping the authoritarianism.
Now he represents the cult ideology.
And the skull is now representing someone online telling you to think for yourself and be responsible?
Well, we know the Red Skull is literally a Nazi.
Jordan Peterson isn't.
Mixing these things together is an attempt, I suppose, to taint what Jordan Peterson represents.
The outcome, however, is that if on a scale of 1 to 10, 1 being good and 10 being pure evil, and Jordan Peterson is literally just a good guy, a 1, let's say everyone's got their falsities at 2, and the Red Skull is a villain who represents a 10, mixing them together lightens what the Red Skull is.
And it's because, in my opinion, these leftists are akin to... They're very similar, in many ways, to the fascists in their belief structure.
They say, after the panel was brought to Peterson's attention by a fan, he posted several tweets, bewildered at the implied analogy between himself and the Red Skull.
Others, less sympathetic to Peterson, found the comparison and Peterson's confusion more humorous.
Parker Malloy says, LOL, Jordan Peterson is upset that Red Skull seems to have been modeled after him in a Captain America comic.
That's because Parker, I guess, if they like that modeling, defends Nazis.
It's pretty funny that Jordan Peterson is complaining that Nazi supervillain Red Skull sounds like him.
Yes, it's not like someone wrote this randomly.
They're doing it on purpose.
Jordan Peterson is an internationally renowned, best-selling author and psychologist.
You might not like him, but he is mainstream.
He appears on mainstream TV shows.
He does guest segments on mainstream talk shows, guest panels.
Some of them aren't even overly political.
He has millions of fans and followers, and he sells books.
He's got a new one coming out.
It's a mainstream position.
They're now trying to take something that most people probably agree with, and many people overtly do, and make it seem like that's the bad guy.
So let me ask you this.
If a world-renowned self-help psychologist with a book, 12 Rules for Life, tells you to be responsible and get your life together, is the villain, what do they represent?
Gluttony?
Sloth?
Pride?
Envy?
Wrath?
You get the point.
They represent anger and pestilence.
One person said, Jordan Peterson apparently thinks the Red Skull is being used as a parody of him.
You know, maybe if your whole persona can seamlessly be applied to the Red Skull, you might be the problem.
The only problem is, it can't.
Jordan Peterson's persona can't be applied to the Red Skull.
That's why it's stupid and makes no sense.
Could you imagine if the Nazis were going around saying, like, defend individual liberties and civil rights and respect all people around the world?
Yeah, sorry, that's not what they did.
Quite the opposite, mind you.
So, what are these people doing?
Quite the opposite of what they claim.
Well, my friends, rest assured, it will only get worse.
From The Guardian, Marvel's next wave of heroes will tear up tradition in the name of progress.
Boundaries are being raised, with Natalie Portman cast as Thor, and Ta-Nehisi Coates set to write a black Superman film.
You know, I'll tell you why I take issue with Natalie Portman as Thor.
I like Natalie Portman.
I like her in the Thor movies.
I think she is good at what she does.
She's awesome, actually.
She was in Star Wars.
That was fun.
And I'd love to see her gain superpowers and be a superhero.
She could be in the MCU.
That'd be rad.
The issue I take is that Thor is literally the dude.
Like, it's a guy in the movie.
So, I guess they'll come up with some way of, like, claiming Thor is just his title, but Thor is literally Thor's name!
Like... You're Thor now!
Does, like, Thor get turned into a woman or something?
And all of a sudden it's... Because it's Thor's identity.
Does he get... Does he switch bodies with Natalie Portman?
And you're like, no, I'm Thor!
Or is it Natalie Portman getting the hammer and then being worthy to wield it?
Which would also, in my opinion, kind of be stupid!
Because we waited a decade for the great reveal in Endgame, when you see the hammer lift off the ground, and it flies, and then, boom!
Captain America catches it, and you're like, oh!
unidentified
And everyone in the audience is cheering, the theaters, they're going like, yes, we knew it!
In Age of Ultron, they're all trying to lift the hammer, and Steve moves it a little bit, and then Thor gets nervous.
But Steve Rogers proves himself to be worthy to wield Mjolnir.
In fact, in Endgame, Captain America actually catches, what is it, Stormbreaker?
The axe?
And then he throws it to Thor and catches Mjolnir, proving that he also had the strength to wield a weapon that was supposed to make his brain explode.
At least that's what Thor said in Infinity War.
That was the payoff.
The problem with what's going on now with Wokeness is that they always make it that the Woke character must be the most powerful for no reason.
There's a thing in gaming, in card games particularly, in a lot of games, called power creep.
For those that aren't familiar with, say, Magic the Gathering, it's a card game where you have cards that have a certain cost.
You need resources to use them to win the game.
Over time, to make the game more interesting, they increase the power level of cards so they do more for less resources.
Eventually, the game moves too fast, it's crazy, someone gets a card and you're like, that's nuts, it's too powerful.
I lost, it's ridiculous.
This is called power creep.
And eventually, they have to wind it all back and weaken everything, and it typically is a boring period for a lot of people because they're like, aw.
This is what's happening now in these movies.
We had Captain America.
Scrawny little nobody, but he was willing to jump on a grenade.
One of the most powerful moments in the MCU.
Steve Rogers in the movie.
Why people look up to him?
He was a little guy.
He was weak and scrawny with tons of ailments.
But he stood up to that dude in the alley holding the garbage can lid saying, I can do this all day.
He's getting beat.
And Bucky Barnes comes in and saves him.
This is in the Captain America movie.
Steve then proves himself to be of great moral character, so he's given the super soldier serum.
There's a point in the movie where, I think it's Jack, no, no, no, who is it?
It's not Jack Nicholson, it's Tommy Lee.
He's like, we want good soldiers, not these scrawny weaklings, and then he pulls the grenade, it's a dummy, and throws it, and then they yell grenade, and Steve Rogers, scrawny and weak, jumps on it and yells, get back.
Jumps on it to save everybody else.
It's a powerful moment from a great character who was willing to risk everything and sacrifice it all to save everyone else.
And then, after a decade, we finally come to the point in Endgame where fighting to save the universe from Thanos, he can wield Mjolnir, because he was worthy.
It was an incredible story arc, from this small kid in Brooklyn who was too weak, to one of the most powerful individuals in the universe being able to wield Mjolnir.
That's, well, a very high-level individual wielding that powerful weapon.
What we see now, with all the wokeness, is that, what, Natalie Portman has no great story arc, sacrifices nothing, and then, what, just gets Mjolnir, and she's like, I'm Thor now!
Captain Marvel The reason why people didn't like this is that she was literally a villain.
She starts off as a villain, and a lot of people pointed this out.
She's supposed to.
She's supposed to realize that she's been brainwashed.
But when it comes to wokeness in movies, they don't give you... There's nothing earned.
I think this is why they don't like Jordan Peterson.
And this is where it all starts to come together.
With Jordan Peterson, he tells you to find the heaviest thing you can carry and carry it.
That's not easy.
You first must find it, and then you must carry it, and it's heavy!
That's life.
That's responsibility.
And it's good advice.
It makes you stronger.
Learning to work hard to earn your keep makes you stronger.
On the left, however, many individuals don't believe in hard work, although claim they do, but they don't.
We saw with Ocasio-Cortez's Green New Deal where she said people unwilling to work would be given money.
Their idea is that you should just receive.
Then we see it with Captain Marvel.
She wasn't chosen for anything.
She had some guy making fun of her.
She is doing a test flight.
Ship crashes, and an energy blast gives her ridiculous superpowers.
She becomes the most powerful entity, more powerful than Thanos.
In Endgame, he bonks her, he headbutts her, and she's unfazed, and then she grabs him and he's going, Are you kidding me, dude?
Some random Earth woman gets hit by an explosion and she's stronger than Thanos?
We were waiting 10 years for the villain that was Thanos because he was so powerful, we all had to come together to defeat him, and this lady is just stronger than he is?
This is wokeness.
There's nothing earned.
It's just yours.
You deserve it.
So you look at these, it's no surprise that you see in Captain America, the ideas of working hard to earn your keep are considered villainous and even Nazi-like.
And that, for some reason, I guess Natalie Portman will be Thor.
I'm willing to bet.
I'll tell you this.
I'm willing to bet.
What's gonna happen is that, in the movie, there will be no great arc.
There will be no earned anything.
There will be no unlocked potential.
She'll literally just be given the hammer and go, Wow!
I can use it now!
Or Thor will whisper to it, You are now being given to the new Thor.
And then she's just worthy.
She didn't fight.
She didn't sacrifice.
She didn't die.
Sorry.
Maybe they'll try and make something.
Maybe it'll be alright.
I don't know.
I'll probably go see it anyway.
Well, I can say this.
The woke stuff in media doesn't fly.
Have you noticed that since Endgame, there's not been a whole lot of talk about Captain Marvel while she was supposed to take over?
I'm a big fan of the MCU, I love it.
And they were saying before Captain Marvel that she was going to replace Tony Stark as the centerpiece of the MCU in the next phase.
Tony Stark was a major centerpiece for the MCU, appearing in many, many films.
Or at least being referenced in them as well, because Iron Man kind of kicked it off.
They were like, okay, Captain Marvel will be this, you know, our version of Superman.
Also kind of think it's a bad idea.
Superman's way too OP in the DC movies.
Yeah, they're not really going after that all that much.
There were a bunch of snafus with Brie Larson, who played Captain Marvel, just being a really nasty person and texting really nasty things, and it went public and people did not like it.
People want to hear stories where the underdog, the good guy, attains power to fight for justice because it makes us feel good.
When we see bullies oppressing people, and you see the big strong Goliath just beating that small David, you wish that David would just have the power to strike back and put an end to the villains.
And then you see it in Steve Roger.
Rogers.
You see him become powerful.
And even though he's not nearly as strong as Thor, or any of these other god-tier entities, he wields the hammer of Thor, Mjolnir, and fights back.
Because he's willing to do whatever it takes to win.
Excellent character.
And Chris Evans is fairly leftist and woke, too.
It's not about the person, the actor.
It's about the character as it was written.
You then get these woke characters that strive for nothing, are arrogant, and demanding.
In the Captain Marvel movie, there's a guy on a motorcycle and he's like, hey, why don't you smile more?
And then she looks at him, and then she beats and robs the guy and steals his clothes.
That's not something I want to cheer for.
Like, when I see a villain, like Loki, and he has a redemption arc, I'm like, that's cool.
He's still kind of a bad guy, though.
Like, even in the end, you finally get this character arc with Loki, where he redeems himself, and stands by, and then you get Thor, at the end of Ragnarok, throwing the thing, and then Loki catches it, proving he stayed there, and he's gonna be with him.
You even get the great end of Loki.
Infinity War when Thanos is on board the refugee ship and Loki risks his life to try and kill Thanos
He hides the tesseract then he bows before him and then draws his blade, but then Thanos stops him
Loki risked everything now that is a character arc Captain Marvel's just a know-it-all who thinks she deserves
it gets blasted gaining superpowers and then comes back to earth and kind of just
that is a dick to people, steals guys clothes, very villainous, and then we're supposed to
They did the same thing with WandaVision.
She tortured, in WandaVision, 3,000 people for, like, months, I guess, and then we're supposed to be happy about that?
At the end, they're like, they'll never know what you sacrificed for them.
Nothing!
She tortured them for years!
They were begging for death!
It's amazing how this stuff plays out.
Anyway, I don't make this one too long, but I'll tell you this.
It's not all bad news.
There may be a return to this idea of merit.
Meritocracy is powerful for people because we want to earn things.
It feels good to work hard and earn something.
We want purpose.
These people don't.
They just want power.
That's creepy.
Well, now we're seeing first New data shows that comic readers are leaving superheroes behind, and Ava DuVernay and Tom King's New Gods film dead at Warner Bros.
So we'll see how things play out.
There may still be a bunch of new woke movies.
Marvel MCU may be getting woke.
We'll see.
I'll tell you what I'm absolutely excited for and fine with.
If Marvel puts out a series of movies with non-white, non-male leads, fantastic.
If they want to do Monica Rambeau, a black woman with superpowers, I think that would be rad.
Black Panther?
Great.
They're doing, was it Shang-Shi or whatever?
I don't know what the comic is, but it's an Asian superhero.
That's great.
I like Spider-Man Into the Spider-Verse, and I'm not even a big fan of hand-me-down heroes, but Miles Morales is pretty cool.
So if they do a movie where the characters are not white or not men, that's literally no issue, I think for the most part, to literally anyone.
People in our generation, my generation, huge fans of Static Shock.
Young black male gains superpowers, becomes a hero, proves what it means to be a good person and fight against villains.
Awesome.
What matters is the story, earning that right, standing up for honor and integrity.
The problem now is the people who are claiming to be the good guys are actually the bullies and the villains.
When they claim that Jordan Peterson, who tells you to be responsible for yourself, to protect others and be a good person, when they're saying that's the villain, I think you know who the real bad guys are.
