All Episodes
Previous Next
April 28, 2021 - Tim Pool Daily Show
01:15:58
S588 - Feds Had Secret Plan To Arrest Chauvin If He Was ACQUITTED, Democrat Corruption On Full Display
Participants
Main voices
t
tim pool
01:15:10
| Copy link to current segment

Speaker Time Text
tim pool ▲ ● ▼
Today is April 29th, 2021, and our first story.
In a stunning development, the Star Tribune is reporting that the Feds had a secret plan to arrest Derek Chauvin in the event he was acquitted by the jury or there was a mistrial.
Many people are saying this shows, under the Democrats, the DOJ has been terrifyingly politicized.
In our next story, Joe Biden gave his first address to a joint session of Congress, and it is flopping on social media.
He is getting ratioed with massive thumbs down, and even CNN says that Donald Trump polled more favorably in his first speech.
And our last story, a cop who mocked LeBron James was suspended without pay according to a friend, but now has raised over $80,000.
Before we get started, leave us a good review if you like the show, give us 5 stars, and if you really like the show, please share it with your friends.
Now, let's get into that first story.
In a shocking development in the Derek Chauvin case, the Star Tribune is reporting that the Feds had a secret plan.
In the event that Derek Chauvin was acquitted or if there was a mistrial, the Feds would have filed a criminal complaint against Chauvin to make sure he remained locked up.
Only because he was found guilty on all counts did the feds back off and not file the criminal complaint.
Now they're passing it off to a grand jury who may just say no charges.
This is shocking and it strikes at the heart of our criminal justice system.
The trial was effectively pointless.
They were going to lock this guy up no matter what.
Over the past year, we have seen widespread riots across the country.
In reporting from Michael Tracy, we learned that even in small towns, riots were sweeping across the country.
Where have those indictments been?
Where are the criminal charges that are sticking?
District attorneys are releasing these people back onto the street, and they are continuing to riot.
Meanwhile, police officers are resigning en masse, retiring en masse.
They are being suspended for TikTok videos.
Or, we are now learning, the feds intend on charging these people no matter what.
The system is being attacked.
And many thought that electing Joe Biden would change this.
You were warned.
We all knew.
I shouldn't say we all knew.
Those of us who are watching, you know, those of you who watch videos like mine and commentators in this space, whatever it may be, warned that voting for Joe Biden would be a vote to make everything worse.
Under Donald Trump, Police in Portland were deputized so the feds could actually start prosecuting these extremists, and they did.
However, once Joe Biden got into office, the federal prosecutor in the Pacific Northwest, in the Portland area, dropped the charges of many of these extremists.
This is being used as evidence by the far left that the charges are not justified, even
when we have videos of these people engaging in overt acts of terror, firebombing federal
buildings, attacking people in the street, destroying government property.
That was useful, I suppose, for Joe Biden to win, telling people that this was Trump's
America and that with Joe Biden, things would return to normal.
Now it's still a useful tool for whatever it is they really want.
I genuinely believe at this point the feds want the police departments to be dissolved.
And maybe many of the commentators on Timcast IRL are correct when they say the goal is to federalize police so that all police operate under the federal government.
I don't know if that's true, if that makes sense, but I can tell you authoritarianism is on the rise to an extreme degree in this story, in the story about the curfew in Elizabeth City.
It's a rock and a hard place.
I've warned that with the escalation of violence from the far left, you will see, in turn, an escalation of authoritarianism from law enforcement, from the federal government, and it's exactly what we're seeing.
Now, we saw the story yesterday.
Rudy Giuliani's place of work and his home raided by the FBI and electronic devices seized.
All the while, more stories coming out about police departments crumbling.
It's interesting that we're simultaneously seeing local police departments facing tough odds, unable to recruit new officers, yet still the federal government and local police are engaging in more and more authoritarian tactics.
I don't know what the solution to any of this is, but I can tell you this story should shock you to your core, should rock you to your core.
No matter what happened with Derek Chauvin, he was going to prison.
It's terrifying to think that you could be a police officer just doing your job, and I'm not talking about someone who's overtly breaking the law, but they will lock you up anyway no matter what actually happens.
Let's read the story, but before we do, head over to TimCast.com and become a member.
Just click on the Members Only button on the top right, and then go to the Members area, and you can see a bunch of really awesome exclusive segments from the TimCast IRL podcast.
We got a massive library.
You'll really want to see this one we have with Michael Knowles, a big discussion about
religion, especially the segment we have with Charlie LaDuff talking about corrupt journalists
and the horrifying things they did on 9-11.
Check it out over at TimCast.com and support my work because it's possible these kinds
of conversations will result in me getting banned.
I know a lot of people say, oh, Tim's never going to get banned.
He's a milk toast fence sitter.
My main page on Facebook was already booted, effectively shut down by Facebook.
It's possible.
So don't forget to like, share, subscribe, hit the notification bell.
Check out this story from the Star Tribune.
Feds plan to indict Chauvin.
Other three ex-officers on civil rights charges.
Ex-cop would face federal charges in two cases, three others just in Floyd case.
Now, I want to point out, framing is extremely important in this story.
The Star Tribune is, in my opinion, burying the lead.
Now, there's another story from, well, there's many other stories from other outlets.
The Daily Mail's framing is a bit too sensationalist, in my opinion.
The way they frame it is that there was a secret plan to indict Chauvin should he have been acquitted, and that's it, full stop.
The federal government is still moving forward with an indictment on civil rights charges, but they're now going to leave it up to a grand jury.
I think this is very serious, but it's important to understand the context.
The framing from the Daily Mail and from many people on social media is that they were only planning on indicting him if he was acquitted.
They still are moving forward with an indictment, but I do believe it's fair to say that's closer to the truth than the framing we get from the Star Tribune.
They're saying they plan to indict Chauvin, but they're burying the lead.
They were going to use a criminal complaint against Chauvin, a direct executive action to lock him up if he was acquitted, meaning without a grand jury at all, they wanted this man in prison no matter what.
The grand jury could say no.
Let's read the story.
Star Tribune reports, leading up to Derek Chauvin's murder trial, Justice Department officials had spent months gathering evidence to indict the ex-Minneapolis police officer on federal police brutality charges, but they feared the publicity could disrupt the state's case.
So they came up with a contingency plan.
If Chauvin were found not guilty on all counts, or the case ended in a mistrial, they would arrest him at the courthouse.
According to sources familiar with the planning discussions.
Well, I'll tell you first.
You know how I feel about unnamed sources or those familiar.
I don't know if it's true or not.
We can trust the Star Tribune.
Maybe.
But think about that.
If he was found not guilty on all counts, they'd arrest him at the courthouse.
If the man's found not guilty on all counts, let the man go home.
This is freaky stuff.
The backup plan would not be necessary.
Why?
On April 20th, a jury found Chauvin guilty on all three murder and manslaughter counts, sending him to the state's most secure lockdown facility to await sentencing and avoiding the riots many feared could engulf the city once again.
You don't need to arrest him because he was convicted?
What do you mean?
Do you mean you don't need to arrest him because you fear he might flee?
Or he's already going to jail so you don't have to worry about it?
You see what's going on here?
They say now with Chauvin's state trial out of the way, federal prosecutors are moving forward with their case.
They plan to ask a grand jury to indict Chauvin and the three ex-officers involved in George Floyd's killing.
J. Alexander Kung, Thomas Lane, and Thao Tho.
Tao Thao.
Hope I'm pronouncing that properly.
On charges of civil rights violations, a source said, if the grand jury voted to indict, the former officers would face the new civil rights charges on top of the state's cases, meaning all four could be headed toward yet another criminal trial in federal court.
The backup arrest strategy and meticulous planning over the timing of charges illustrates the complicated synchronicity of two parallel investigations into the most high-profile case of police brutality in decades.
Over the better part of the last year, as Special Prosecutor Keith Ellison's team pursued murder and manslaughter charges, federal authorities have been mounting their own case in private before a grand jury, a group of 23 citizens who meet in secret to hear evidence and ultimately decide if there is probable cause to charge.
Proving how delicate outside publicity was, Judge Peter Cahill repeatedly expressed frustration during jury selection in Chauvin's murder trial about the announcement of a $27 million payout from the city of Minneapolis to Floyd's family.
As a result, two seated jurors had to be dismissed because they said it affected their ability to be impartial.
I'd like to highlight a very important point.
The grand jury is meeting in secret.
They don't have the same fears the public jury had in the actual criminal trial of Derek Chauvin.
Which means, maybe they'll come out and just say, there's no criminal charges to be made here.
Or maybe they too will be scared and pressured by the federal government.
Now, in the event the grand jury does indict, they're not saying he's guilty of a crime.
They're just saying there's probable cause a crime was committed.
So it will be a bold and very serious event if the grand jury comes out and says, no charges to be filed.
Because that means the federal prosecutors couldn't even get probable cause, and it's also terrifying because of their plan to use a criminal complaint instead of a grand jury.
If the grand jury says no, then it proves the feds were planning on using an authoritarian and despotic tactic to lock up An innocent man.
Now, of course, the left is already saying he's not innocent because he was found guilty.
I'm saying in the event he was found innocent, they would have moved to arrest an innocent man.
Although many legal analysts, notably Andrew Branca, who we had on the TimCast IRL show, said there was reasonable doubt in this case.
And in my opinion, as well as many others, it was the fear of violence, the terror, that resulted in conviction.
They say, under the contingency arrest plan, the Minnesota U.S.
Attorney's Office would have charged Chauvin by criminal complaint, a quicker alternative for a federal charge that doesn't require a grand jury, so they could arrest him immediately and then ask a grand jury for an indictment, according to sources who were not authorized to speak publicly.
Prosecutors want to indict Chauvin in connection to two cases for pinning down Floyd by his neck for more than nine and a half minutes in May of 2020.
Full stop!
Anybody who watched that trial knows that's not true.
He did pin down Floyd by his neck, periodically, but it was not for nine and a half minutes.
He moved his knee intermittently between the back and the neck.
Not saying it was good, not saying he was innocent, I'm saying that's a very important distinction.
They say, and for the violent arrest of a 14-year-old boy in 2017.
In the latter case, Chauvin struck the teen on the head with his flashlight, then grabbed him by the throat and hit him again, according to court documents.
Considering what we've learned over the course of the Chauvin trial, I'm going to reserve judgment.
But I will say, at the very least, if we can actually get accountability for bad cops, it's a good thing.
Though Andrew Branca, a legal analyst and use of force expert, a lawyer, said every single case
he's seen where there has been unjustified use of force, the officer was held accountable.
And I think it's fair to point out that there are many instances where officers are held
accountable when they when they shouldn't have been. But I do personally believe we can see
I do believe there's a problem where officers will back up false claims of other officers.
Let me give you an example.
If you're a fan of the show and you've watched every episode, you'll know this, but for those that missed it.
During the Occupy Wall Street protest, this was early 2012, I believe in January, a photographer was standing on the sidewalk photographing the police when an officer was instructed to illegally arrest this man.
I filmed the whole thing.
I had been live streaming.
The officers arrested this individual who had been standing on the sidewalk breaking no laws.
The officer who was instructed to arrest the man did not know why the man was being arrested and then lied under oath that the man was obstructing a roadway.
My video proved that to be false and the officer was never held accountable for committing perjury.
Lying on official documents and in court.
And I want to know why.
This should not happen.
Those are dirty cops.
Hey, but that's New York City.
Democrat run.
I can't speak for Republican controlled areas because I've not filmed Republican area police doing things of this nature.
But these things do happen, and I want to see accountability.
This ain't it.
What they're talking about in this story was straight up them saying, if he was found not guilty, we'd lock him up anyway.
And then we'll see if a grand jury would indict him.
We don't even know if the grand jury would right now.
This should not be how the justice system functions.
Many people thought that voting for Joe Biden would change the system, but you made it worse.
Meanwhile, as Rudy Giuliani has his office, an apartment raided by the Feds, I see the supposed Antifa left cheering on the FBI.
Because it was never about liberty.
It was never about challenging authoritarians.
It was about ideological domination.
And when I bring this up to them, when they say things like, the FBI is raiding Giuliani, haha, that's awesome.
I'm like, yeah, it's really great.
We love the FBI, don't we?
We love what they do.
Now, I don't think the FBI is all bad.
I think the far-left extremists are extremists.
But I do think the DOJ is being politicized, and Trump didn't do this.
You want to talk about fascism and authoritarianism?
Let's talk about Merrick Garland coming in and greenlighting the DOJ to go after Rudy Giuliani, the lawyer for the previous administration's president, for our former president.
Now look, it's tough.
If somebody breaks the law, they must be held accountable.
I'd love to see an answer as to why only one faction is being held to the grindstone.
What about Hillary Clinton and the destroying of emails?
Nothing.
Nothing.
Because Trump wasn't a fascist.
Because the establishment protects itself.
And now, they've got a new ideology.
They're eroding and destroying this country, and this story, it really should make the hairs on the back of your neck stand up.
You look at this, you look at what happened with Giuliani.
Now look, Giuliani, not a perfect guy, by any stretch of the imagination.
But it's really scary what we're seeing in this country.
Political retribution.
Authoritarianism.
And I'll tell you, it's not gonna stop.
It's not going to change.
Newsweek reports, videos show arrests made as Andrew Brown Jr.
protesters defy curfew in Elizabeth City.
The left is too cheered on the state as they prosecuted Chauvin.
Unfortunately are too blind to realize they were cheering for the state.
Derek Chauvin being found guilty was not a victory for the people.
It was the state.
And it's funny.
I had people tweet at me, it was the people versus Derek Chauvin.
It's the state of Minnesota versus Derek Chauvin.
It was the state that created the laws that were being enforced against George Floyd.
Now you don't have to like the fact that police are willing to enforce these laws.
But the individual being punished for the system put in place by the state.
You can argue it's by the people in the end, fine.
The ignorant people who support the power of the state to do these things.
Well now it's going to be wielded against you.
In Elizabeth City, there was a shooting.
A man named Andrew Brown Jr.
The typical individual showing up, the lawyer Ben Crump coming up saying the man was executed, the family is outraged.
That may be the case, I don't know.
But we're already seeing protests.
In this instance, the protests have been peaceful.
Many people have commented from Elizabeth City over at Timcast IRL, I've received emails, and they say that for the most part the protests have been peaceful marches.
I respect that 100%.
That's the way it should be.
And I'm grateful these people are remaining peaceful and getting this message out and speaking up.
Violence and looting doesn't, that's not what we want.
The First Amendment says peaceably assemble.
So the city enacts a state of emergency and a curfew.
And here we go.
Did you think that they would not use these powers against you?
Did you think that it would not be weaponized against you once the Democrats got what they wanted?
Oh, they'll placate you to whatever degree they have to.
So you vote for them, so you think they're the lesser of the two evils.
And then they'll enact a curfew.
But who does the curfew really hurt?
The protesters defy the curfew.
Some get arrested.
Law-abiding citizens adhere to the curfew and then can't go outside.
It is just getting worse.
I don't care who you think is right.
We don't want an escalation in force from cops, from feds, from the DOJ.
But here we go.
Newsweek reports.
Videos captured on Wednesday night show numerous arrests being made in Elizabeth City, North Carolina during protests following the fatal police shooting of Andrew Brown Jr.
In one video shown above, several police officers with the Elizabeth City Police Department can be seen arresting a man in what appears to be a parking lot.
Two others can be seen on top of a man who was laying on the ground while others attempt to move a crowd of protesters away from the situation.
Police place the man on the ground in handcuffs while he can be heard repeatedly asking, what are y'all arresting me for?
Three officers eventually bring the man to his feet as he continues to ask what he's being arrested for.
The person filming the video asks the man who is being arrested for his name and date of birth.
A typical protest strategy.
The video of the arrest came during protests in Elizabeth City after a Pasquotank County Superior Court judge ordered the release of body camera footage of the fatal police shooting of Brown v. Delayed.
They go on to mention a little bit about the case.
They say Brown's family and lawyer have contended that he was sitting in his car with his hands firmly on the wheel when he was shot by police.
But Pasquotank County District Attorney Andrew Wamble said on Wednesday that the video showed Brown hitting police officers with his car before they shot him.
Then released the footage.
Why not?
I understand that they're worried about riots, so they enact a curfew.
But I don't think that is going to solve anything.
It's just an escalation in authoritarianism.
Clearly these people are still coming out.
Clearly they weren't rioting and they're not rioting.
So why restrict law-abiding citizens?
This is what I warned of several years ago.
The escalation from the far left would result in people begging law enforcement to escalate their tactics and continue locking us down.
And I am NOT a fan of this.
It's already illegal.
Arrest them and charge them.
The problem?
The district attorneys aren't doing it.
When I was talking to Andrew Branca, Smart guy.
He mentioned that Darren Wilson in Ferguson was not indicted because he left it up to a grand jury and the grand jury looked at the evidence and said, there's nothing here.
And because of that, a new prosecutor got elected.
Pointing out, why wouldn't he indict Darren Wilson?
You must vote for me.
So they voted for him.
The good prosecutor lost his job.
The corrupt prosecutor who comes in immediately says, I'm going to review the Darren Wilson case and then throws it away because there was no grounds for an indictment.
It was a lie.
A manipulation to gain political power.
And it's going to keep happening.
Now we're seeing the moves the DOJ is making not just against Minneapolis, Chauvin, and his other cops.
We're seeing similar things across the country.
On April 26th, it was reported Attorney General announces a civil investigation into the Louisville Police Department.
Merrick Garland has confirmed the Justice Department is opening a civil investigation into the Louisville Police Department and the Louisville-Jefferson County Metro Governments to determine if they violated the Constitution and federal law.
They say, according to a video transcript, according to Merrick Garland today,
the Justice Department is opening a civil investigation into the Louisville Metro
government. I read all that. Today's announcement is based on an extensive review of publicly
available information about LMPD conducted by the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division.
The investigation will assess whether LMPD engages in a pattern or practice of using unreasonable
force, including with respect to people involved in peaceful, expressive activities.
The reason why I find this alarming?
What does peaceful mean?
Well, if you follow the mainstream media and the Democrats, peaceful means burning down buildings.
You know there are people in this country who genuinely do not believe that there were riots last year?
I find it curious.
Joe Biden gives a State of the Union address or something similar to it.
Everyone's spaced apart.
They can only have 200 people.
They can't have a full joint session like they normally do, even though they could with impeachment.
But then we see the mass protests across the country.
We're told that we're worried about a second wave and everyone's got to get the vaccine.
But again, we see the peaceful protests with no masks on.
It's a lie.
They don't enforce the mask policies.
The media won't criticize the people who refuse to wear masks when they go out and protest, but...
At the State of the Union?
Oh, you can't have people there.
This is freaky stuff, man.
We are in genuinely dark times.
The Golden Age is over.
The winter season is upon us.
And, they say, good times make weak men, weak men make hard times.
I suppose we can just hope that the hard times will make strong men.
From Fox News, Louisville Police Department staffing in dire straits amid high crime rates, recruitment woes according to the union.
LMPD has made headlines since March 2020, the death of Breonna Taylor.
And now we can see from the Daily Mail, crisis at Louisville Police Department.
They're struggling to recruit as murders rise by 75% and shootings rocket 84% in the wake of Breonna Taylor's killing.
It's gonna get bad.
If you think it was bad last year, you ain't seen nothing yet.
The Democrats control the Senate only by the election of Kamala Harris and Joe Biden.
They control the House by a thin margin.
And they're talking about packing the courts.
Maybe it won't happen.
Maybe Manchin would intervene.
Interestingly, Manchin is a Democrat, but he's from West Virginia, which is the second most Trump-supporting state in the country, which I find just weird that people would do that, but I guess people in the state like Manchin, although many don't, and I don't see him—many—many—they liked him before.
I don't see him winning in the next election, but we'll see.
Tucker Carlson spoke up recently.
He branded Joe Biden a tyrant over the Rudy Giuliani raid and claims anti-Trump Lincoln project had advanced tip-off after it was touted on Twitter something big was going to happen.
They're informing their allies, they're wielding political power in a way Republicans never will because Republicans are pathetic, because Lindsey Graham and Mitch McConnell are milquetoast fence-sitters.
I find it funny, and I mentioned this recently, that the joke is Tim Pool is the milquetoast fence-sitter.
I'm the one who basically started mentioning that because I found it funny.
But of course I'm principled and I take very strong stances on free speech, on Riots?
What's going on with Antifa?
As well as Second Amendment.
Constitution, for the most part.
But what does Mitch McConnell and Lindsey Graham do?
What do they do?
What is the Republican Party doing?
Nothing.
They're giving in to the Democrats.
They're actually trying to compromise with Democrats who just squeeze and squeeze and wield political power like a sledgehammer against anyone who opposes them.
And what do you get?
Passive milquetoast sentiment from a publican leadership?
It's worthless.
And I'll tell you where we go from here.
First, as I mentioned, we're going to see more riots.
We're going to see more unrest.
We're going to see more authoritarianism.
We're going to see the DOJ go after anyone who dare oppose them.
From Axios, coalition calls on Biden to form a disinformation task force.
This is going to be real interesting.
Axios reports, a coalition of groups is calling on President Biden to create a task force that can explore ways to crack down on deliberate disinformation campaigns in ways that don't unduly limit free expression.
Now let me ask you, what do you think that means?
Well, the New York Times said that Project Veritas was a coordinated disinformation campaign, or engaging in one.
We now know that's not true because James O'Keefe of Project Veritas sued the New York Times, and I guess the war isn't over just yet.
They may have won the establishment in many areas.
They may be gaining ground, but the fight is not over.
We have not yet begun to fight, as the saying goes, as we're taking broadside cannon fire from all directions.
James O'Keefe's lawsuit against the New York Times shows there's still some hope.
Hopefully.
They say, why it matters.
The spread of false information around elections, health, climate, and other pivotal issues has had a huge impact on American institutions.
But civil liberties groups say it is critical to find solutions that maintain free speech protections.
The prevalence of deceptions, propaganda, and conspiracy theories related to the 2020 election, COVID, and the recent Capitol insurrection illustrates the clear and present threat that disinformation poses to our democracy and national security.
The group says in a letter to Biden being sent today and provided first to Axios.
There was a—there's clever ways they launder lies.
So, as you may know, my Twitter is riddled with garbled nonsense, jokes, and mention of chickens.
Yet there's a group called—I think it's called the—I forgot what it's called.
There's an election integrity group.
They claimed that there's, I think, Lin Wood, Sidney Powell, James O'Keefe, and me.
We're the largest purveyors of election misinformation.
I find that quite hilarious because I only use NewsGuard-certified sources when I post things, so I don't know what they think.
But the problem is, you can't maintain an absolute control of the narrative, even among sources that are certified by NewsGuard follow the mainstream narrative.
News gets out.
So what they'll try to do is claim disinformation campaigns and networks.
I'll tell you this.
You can see in every source I use, Save, Project Veritas, we got this beautiful little green checkmark.
If you've got a problem with my opinion and the news being presented, Take it up with NewsGuard.
I only use their sources.
Star Tribune is certified, right here.
100 out of 100.
Newsweek.
Do they get a 100?
A 100 out of 100.
Amazing!
Yahoo News.
Even they get a 100.
Fox News.
They don't get a 100, I don't think.
They get a 69.5.
They're not responsible.
unidentified
Okay.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼
Daily Mail?
They're certified 77 out of 100.
You got a problem with what I'm reporting?
You think it's fake news?
Sorry.
I don't even use conservative websites because of this.
It has to be certified by the Microsoft-funded News Guard.
But they do want to maintain lies, and it's very difficult.
So after we see the crackdown from authoritarians and the DOJ, from Biden's administration and Democrats, how do you prevent unrest in the future from the undesirables, the people you don't like?
And I'm not talking about Black Lives Matter.
You shut down the lines of communication, make sure they can't talk, accuse them of being liars, and then try and get them banned on those grounds.
CNN is also being sued by Project Veritas because they claimed that banning Veritas was part of a crackdown on misinformation.
That's a lie.
That's not true.
Even the woman being sued by Veritas stated on Twitter herself, under her own profile I should say, we don't know who posted it but it was her name, verified, That it was part of, that Veritas was banned for posting private information.
So how could it be both?
No.
You see, CNN is lying.
They're trying to get actual news outlets banned.
And people, man, you gotta understand.
James O'Keefe is one of the most important figures right now in the culture war, suing Twitter, CNN, and the New York Times.
One of the very few people willing to stand up and fight and not back down.
Now there are still rules.
It's like watching The Matrix, right?
They mention that the agents in the Matrix can move really fast, dodge bullets, but they still must abide by the same rules.
They just play to the rules better than anyone else.
The establishment still has to follow certain rules, because if they cross the line it can destabilize everything and disrupt what they're trying to do in terms of gaining political power.
That means, though, as long as the rules exist, you will have people like James O'Keefe winning legal battles.
They've not yet dominated the entire system, but they are gaining massive power.
This is scary, man.
The more power they gain, the easier it will be.
Like dominoes falling over, eventually the tides will turn and they will have so much momentum they can just sweep up anyone who's dissenting.
Giuliani first.
But according to the report from the Wall Street Journal, they're also going after journalist John Solomon.
They're trying to get communications from Giuliani to John Solomon.
That is a journalist.
I can only imagine they're going after James O'Keefe as well.
These are dark times, and if you think it's gonna get better, I'm sorry.
The night is always darkest before the dawn, but we have not yet reached midnight.
Is midnight even the darkest point?
Let's say 2 a.m.
We'll call it 2 a.m.
That's dark, right?
We've not reached that point.
So we can't give up.
We must be peaceful, persuasive, and resourceful.
We must understand the rules.
Violence will not get anyone anything.
The left can get away with it because they control the cultural institutions.
But it's wrong regardless.
The ends do not justify the means, because we will never meet the ends.
We must build the world today that we want to live in.
And that means fighting with integrity, Resourcefulness, persuasion, and it also means it's very, very difficult.
I'm not sure we can win, and that individual liberties and freedom will persist, or that we will reach that beautiful Star Trek future of classical liberalism, but we must try.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up tonight at 8 p.m.
over at youtube.com slash TimCastIRL.
Thanks for hanging out, and we'll see you all then.
Joe Biden has broken a 43-year record waiting this long to give an address to a joint session of Congress.
While some outlets are calling it a State of the Union address, it's not really.
And I don't even think it's fair to call it an address to a joint session of Congress because, like, nobody was there, which is weird because, like, during impeachment they have everybody.
But it's always so interesting how sometimes COVID matters and sometimes it doesn't.
But anyway, I digress.
Joe Biden gave a speech, fairly typical Joe Biden talking points, nothing particularly remarkable in my opinion.
He said a lot of the things we've already known his administration wants to do, made stupid jokes about gun control, talked about raising taxes, which honestly I don't care all that much about.
But, the interesting thing is the massive dividing lines, the massive partisan dividing lines.
Following the speech by Joe Biden, Tim Scott, a Republican, a black man, gave a rebuttal speech, and there were some pretty good points being made.
And then, on Twitter, the left trended a racial slur against this man, because they care about racism, apparently.
They don't.
Now, here's what's funny.
All of these, you know, Democrat, Twitter, Twitterati types are posting the CBS poll where they're like, 85% of Americans liked what Joe Biden had to say!
Or something to that effect.
No, no, no, no, no, no, no, stop there.
85% of the people who watched it.
So, CBS says.
I then have to question how that could possibly be true when you look at this image compiled by our good friends over at patriots.win.
You can see that on every major YouTube channel, on CNN, the White House's own YouTube channel, Fox News, The Guardian, ABC, NBC, C-SPAN, CBS.
I guess they have the White House twice.
You can see.
Oh, I guess there's two different streams in the White House.
Oh, the Spanish version.
Joe Biden got ratioed into oblivion.
Most people were giving a thumbs down.
They don't like this.
And so when I see this poll from from CBS News, 85% of viewers approve of Biden's address to Congress.
CBS News polling says, I kind of think y'all are lying.
Certainly the people who are on YouTube are watching as well, and they're saying they don't like it.
I don't like how people abuse the thumbs down button, because the thumbs down button doesn't do what you think it does, I guess.
Like, Crowder was talking about this.
He said, like, they'll do a segment where they accuse it.
They'll say, like, a Democrat did this, and people will be like, I don't like the Democrat did this, and they'll hit a thumbs down.
And you're saying you don't like the video, not... Okay, anyway, I digress.
No, people now were saying, we don't like Joe Biden's speech.
We don't like Joe Biden.
So how are you going to come and tell me 85% of viewers liked his address?
I don't know.
We'll talk a bit about what he said a little bit because he made this really dumb comment about gun control and deers wearing vests, like stole a Robin Williams joke.
And look, actually, you know what?
I want to show you the CNN polling because the CNN polling shows that Donald Trump did better.
I kid you not.
And they phrase it really weird, but yes, Donald Trump's first address to a joint session of Congress polled more favorably than Joe Biden did.
But I want to exemplify.
I want to show you exactly why I think Joe Biden's speech was just pandering and not bipartisan.
He's not mending the divide.
He's making it worse.
Market Watch says, quote, what do you think deer wearing Kevlar vests?
Biden gets colorful and calling for gun control.
President's line on deer and DuPont's invention was not in his prepared remarks.
So Joe Biden was talking about why would someone need 100 rounds or whatever?
And he says, what do you think deer wearing Kevlar vests?
Okay, first of all, if we're talking about, okay, I'm not a gun expert by any stretch of the imagination, but if you're talking about an AR-15 with 5.56, what do you think Kevlar is gonna do?
These people have no idea what they're talking about.
First of all, the Second Amendment never mentions Deere at all.
It literally says securing a free state.
And even the conservatives who are like, it's about stopping tyrannical government.
Let me stop you right there.
It is.
And more!
The Second Amendment is about defending this country from enemies both foreign and domestic.
Not just domestic, also foreign.
If somebody invaded this country, everybody's got guns.
Be really hard to take over, wouldn't it?
Kevlar, now moving forward, Kevlar doesn't stop rifle rounds.
So, uh, there's a really great video I watched, like, how many Kevlar vests to stop, like a 5-5-6, and it's like eight.
Like, eight vests lined up, and we're not just talking, like, when you wear a vest, you've got, you've got Kevlar on the front, you've got Kevlar on the back.
When they put this on the wall, you've got both, you've got both right next to each other, so it's actually like 16 layers of Kevlar to stop one rifle bullet.
Sorry, dude, you need plate armor, Or there's something called Dragon Scale or FRAS, Flexible Rifle Armor Systems.
Those are ceramic plates, can stop... I don't even think they can stop 5.56.
I think they can stop 2.23.
Okay, I'm not gonna get into guns.
The point is, you get my point.
Biden's throwing out nonsense because he's pandering to one side, not trying to communicate with conservatives.
Not even just conservatives, but libertarians and liberals who own guns, because there are many.
And leftists, because leftists like guns too.
It's Karl Marx who said, under no pretext shall arms and ammunition be surrendered.
The workers must frustrate this by force if necessary.
On the right, of course, everyone loves Constitution, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
So clearly, Joe Biden is just pandering to urban liberals, corporate neolib types, which don't even make up a strong portion of the country, to be completely honest, because you've got a large portion of progressives that have been growing and taking over the Democratic Party.
I think now they're the plurality, not the majority, but like 40, the high 40%.
Conservative and liberal Democrats do not make up the majority.
They make up the majority together, but individually, they are not.
So who is Biden talking to?
I think he's just talking to the authoritarians who want to take away our guns.
Of course, however, you've got people who are concerned that Joe Biden wasn't actually speaking to America, as I've stated, and we can see in the CNN poll, 7 in 10 who watched Biden say speech left them feeling optimistic.
It's an excellent bit of framing.
Framing.
They can always choose how to frame the title of these stories to make it seem like Joe Biden is viewed favorably.
As I already showed you, well, you know, the image compiled by our friends over at patriots.win, you see all of these thumbs down.
Okay, how is it 7 in 10 who watched it are feeling optimistic or supported what Joe Biden said when you go on social media and it's completely inverted?
It's because they don't consider what I do, they don't consider YouTube or social media to be legitimate.
They never have.
It's gonna be funny though when ratings flip, nobody watches the Oscars, and you live in this weird world of archaic media where you're talking to a wall because no one's listening to you.
But here's what I love about the framing device they use in the CNN poll.
7 in 10 who watched Biden left him feeling optimistic.
Sure, I can hate what Biden said, but at least feel optimistic that he's too weak and feckless to do anything, right?
So if someone asked me, are you optimistic following Biden's speech?
Yeah, I am.
You know why?
Because people gave it a thumbs down.
So, well, okay, fine.
His speech didn't leave me feeling optimistic.
You get the point.
But let me show you where it gets real funny, and then we'll move on to a little bit about, you know, things he was saying.
They say, the 51% who had a very positive reaction to Biden's speech is a bit more muted Then reaction to the first address from other recent presidents.
Barack Obama had the strongest first outing of the last four presidents, with 68% saying they had a very positive reaction to his speech.
And George W. Bush in 2001 earned a similar 66% very positive.
Fewer, 57%, had a very positive reaction to Donald Trump's 2017 address.
Fewer?
What do you mean fewer?
Why did you put the word fewer in there, CNN?
57% is higher than 51%.
57% of the people who watched Donald Trump's first speech had a very positive reaction.
51% Joe Biden.
You want to tell me that Joe Biden is the most popular president in history or whatever, and Donald Trump had higher approval ratings in his speech?
Get out of here with your stupid polling garbage.
You know, because here's my point.
You want to come out and tell me 85% liked it.
You then want CNN to come out and tell me 51% were very positive.
Which poll am I supposed to trust?
Y'all are insane.
I'm sorry.
I think Joe Biden is...
He's like a placeholder president.
It's the best they could do.
People really did not like Donald Trump, and some people really loved Donald Trump.
You want to come out now this garbage polling?
I'm sorry, I'm not buying it.
I go on social media.
The people who are paying attention, who are politically active, are saying, y'all, we don't like this Joe Biden guy.
The people who might be blindly just having the TV on in the background are like, yeah, sure, whatever, I guess.
These people, just please stop acting like Joe Biden is some glorious hero.
Take a look at this.
Robert Reich, or however you pronounce his name.
Biden could be as transformative as president as FDR.
Could he?
Or it could be as factless as, I don't know, Buchanan.
He says, but FDR didn't have to contend with a paranoid, xenophobic, racist opposition drenched in lies and extremist propaganda from right-wing media.
Let me give a shout out to our good friend, Suraj Hashmi, with the list.
For those that aren't familiar, Suraj has a list of people who should have their phones taken away for the tweets they put out.
And so he posted a meme, and it's him.
Trade offer.
I receive your phone, you receive the list.
Why?
Who did FDR have to contend with when he... It was pre-civil rights, dude.
These people acting like Joe Biden is a saint sent from heaven are insane.
51% were very positive according to CNN.
CNN's own polling.
And more people viewed Trump positively.
Alright.
Or we could say 85% liked him.
The polls?
It's trash, okay?
I can't give you determination.
But you combine that with the YouTube thumbs down, I think generally people just don't care about Joe Biden.
And you know what?
You wanna know who really doesn't care about Joe Biden?
Was Ted Cruz really sleeping during Joe Biden's speech?
Twitter has some thoughts.
My friends, I am going to say yes.
In my expert opinion, as a guy on the internet, I believe Ted Cruz fell asleep during Joe Biden's speech.
And I don't think that's anything bad about Ted Cruz.
I think that's something really bad about Joe Biden.
Apparently, Ted Cruz said it was because Joe Biden was boring.
They say, more than an hour after talking at the podium, Biden was discussing his administration's plan for immigration reform when cameras cut to Ted Cruz, who appeared to be fighting sleep.
Talk about a rousing speech from the president.
If you actually want to solve a problem, I've sent a bill to take a closer look at it.
Biden is saying, as the camera focused on Cruz, whose eyes were shut for a brief moment before snapping open.
Twitter users quickly pointed out the sleepy-eyed Cruz.
When you're dreaming about Cancun, tweeted Aaron Ruppar, a Vox reporter, referencing Cruz's trip to Mexico.
Bro, you really shouldn't be highlighting the fact that Joe Biden is putting people to sleep, especially his critics.
Ted Cruz is not someone who should be sleeping because he's supposed to be the person who's going to be standing up and pushing back on Joe Biden and his lies.
He's not in the same political party.
However, it's like I was saying, do you need me to tell you what Joe Biden said for the most part?
No, I mean, talk about the gun thing, because Joe Biden's clearly pandering to like urban neolibs.
But everything he said, we've already heard before.
He's like, yo, I'm gonna raise taxes!
You gotta pay your fair share!
Like, we heard this, dude, we get it.
And maybe that's true of most State of the Union addresses, but typically, When a president gets elected, they give a speech within like a month.
Joe Biden waited until April 28th.
Jimmy Carter gave his on April, I think it was April 20th, but there was one historical record from the Library of Congress saying April 18th, so I don't know the exact date.
But come on, even Jimmy Carter.
No, people really didn't like that guy.
I guess they kind of like him now, whatever.
He waited until April, which was kind of weird.
Joe Biden, in my opinion, is going to be another Carter.
He's going to be a one-term president.
I mean, I could be wrong, so whatever.
I won't make predictions, but I don't think Biden is going to be some grand hero of the republic or whatever.
They say Democratic Rep.
Joaquin Castro also shared the clip on Twitter with Ted Snooze.
Bro, that's a self-own.
You have a muttering, mumbling president who's not saying anything substantive.
Most people on YouTube are saying, we don't like this.
And even CNN is telling us that people like Donald Trump more?
Don't highlight that your president is putting people to sleep!
Truly, truly amazing.
But I'll tell you what I find the most amazing.
Following the speech from Joe Biden, Tim Scott gave a rebuttal.
And on Twitter, the left trended a racial slur.
Okay.
Fox News reports.
Uncle Tim slur against Tim Scott trends on Twitter after his Biden rebuttal.
Critics erupt on social media site for allowing racist attack from the left to trend.
Can I just point something out?
Uncle Tim.
Literally a slur.
It's a play on another phrase I'm not going to say.
Why?
Because it's a slur.
Because it is designed to target a person based on their race and disparage them.
Effectively calling them submissive, weak, demure, whatever.
As opposed to defiant, strong leadership qualities.
Uncle Tim is a racial slur directed at Tim Scott because he is a black man standing up for individual rights and pushing back on critical race theory, wokeness, racism, and the Biden administration.
You can disagree with Tim Scott.
That's fine.
I'm sure I disagree with him on a lot of things.
There's some things I like that Joe Biden has, you know, put well.
I'm gonna hold off on giving Joe Biden praise for the time being because I feel like whatever I do, you know, kind of backfires.
But I'll tell you this, you know, okay, how about Joe Biden says he wants to tax the rich.
Don't care.
I'm sorry, guys.
You're not gonna convince me on this one.
I know a lot of people are like, no, we shouldn't tax the rich.
I'm like, why?
I don't care.
I don't care about Jeff Bezos and Mackenzie Bezos and George Soros and Tom Steyer and Michael Bloomberg.
Tax them all, I don't care.
Now I think wealth taxes are dumb because they don't make sense, but they want to raise the tax bracket, fine.
Force these individuals to take less income and reinvest it, sure.
They'll have high net worth, that's why the wealth tax makes no sense.
But putting their investments back into the community, they'll still be rich, they'll still have the net worth, they can still sell the stuff.
But what happens is when you raise the taxes, a lot of rich people are gonna be like, okay, if I keep this, I gotta spend 40% in taxes.
How about I reinvest it into something so I maintain my net worth?
And it's not so easy.
Like, you still gotta pay taxes on objects you buy.
But I'm saying, like, invest in companies that can grow and build wealth for you instead of just putting money in the bank.
So I really, look, I don't care about the tax stuff that Joe Biden is doing.
I'm not necessarily gonna praise it.
But in the long run, it curtails the billionaires dumping money to get our guns banned or whatever, sure, I guess.
But anyway, I digress.
Tim Scott doesn't deserve this.
He's a good dude.
There's a lot of people I don't like on the Democratic, you know, party.
It's like, okay, well, you know, I think there's good progressives, although I do find them to be few and far between.
And I think there are good Republicans, a little bit more than there are on the Democrat side, but for the most part, the Republican Party I find to be pretty much trash.
Fox News reports, Uncle Tim trended on Twitter Wednesday night as left-wing users flooded the site with the racial slur on Senator Tim Scott, a Republican from South Carolina, following his rebuttal to President Biden's address.
Scott, who is black, declared the United States is not a racist country, while noting he had encountered racism in his life.
Some of it, he said, came from the left in the form of being called an Uncle Tom, a derogatory phrase for blacks who are viewed as too deferential to whites.
His rhetoric infuriated some progressives, as Twitter placed Uncle Tim on its trending topics as more tweets relayed the insulting, racially-charged play on his name.
Among them was from former MSNBC host Ture Neblet.
Bravo, Twitter!
It's amazing.
Conservatives erupted as it became clear Twitter was allowing a racial slur to trend.
Quote, this is from Molly Hemingway.
Twitter is choosing to trend a racist attack from the left on Senator Tim Scott, the black Republican senator from South Carolina.
Twitter is still out here going out of its way to make a racist attack against a GOP senator go viral.
Apparently, they want him to suffer for the crime of upstaging Biden via a highly effective speech.
Disgusting.
Okay, I'm not gonna play any dumb games.
I'm not gonna pretend like Tim Scott is some noble hero and Joe Biden was an evil villain.
And I'm not gonna pretend like Joe Biden is some great hero and Tim Scott was just wagging the finger or anything dumb like that.
Obviously, on party lines, partisan lines, people are going to cheer on Tim Scott and appreciate the things he said, and the Democrats are going to act like Joe Biden's some hero on par with FDR.
Come on.
Tim Scott said some good things.
I think he's a good dude.
It's okay.
I'm not going to sit here and pretend like it was some great and amazing speech rousing the republic to fight back and defend its freedoms, but he said some things I liked.
You know, America's not a racist country.
He's also experienced racism.
Guess what?
I have as well.
Yes, I have.
And I still think America is the best country on the planet.
But I think the identitarian left is sort of destroying everything.
But anyway, I digress.
It is what it is.
I don't want to play these stupid games acting like my side, your side, his, whatever, okay?
Just be real about it and say, you know, Tim Scott is alright.
I think we need more defiance.
We need stronger speeches.
I don't think it was as strong as it could have been.
And it's just more run-of-the-mill politics, some tit-for-tat back and forth.
The issue for me is, you know, I wonder, If the woke left has already won.
I mean, they have the cultural institutions, they have the judiciary.
We're learning some really horrifying things about what's going on with the Chauvin trial and plans from feds, and I'm just like...
It doesn't even really matter.
They won.
With control of the cultural institutions.
I shouldn't say they've won the war.
They've won major battles and they control the ground.
So, you know, if you're opposing the establishment, the cathedral, you are la resistance.
It's funny though that they called themselves the resistance when they controlled all the cultural institutions.
Right now.
They can say what they want.
They can do what they want.
They can put up racial slurs.
It's fine.
They can engage in violence.
It's fine.
They get away with it.
In fact, it works for them.
Because regular people don't care.
Regular people won't stand up.
When you see on YouTube how people really feel about Joe Biden, it makes you wonder.
Online, they can't control the narrative because the like and the dislike button exists.
Well, this is funny.
YouTube's talking about getting rid of the dislike button.
Why?
I think it's bad for the narrative.
How are they supposed to control a government when people can go online and say, I do not like you, I do not believe in you, and I don't want you to be president?
Well, the dislike button shows that.
It's hard for them to claim that 85% of people actually supported his speech or had a positive view of it when YouTube is just spattered with thumbs down.
Now consider, maybe the people who watch TV are not the people on YouTube.
The people watching on YouTube are paying attention to politics, they're seeking out politics, and they don't like what's happening.
And the people who are watching TV are mindlessly droning along and not paying attention.
And then you can see what's happening.
The establishment wants you to sit down, shut up, and stop paying attention and go back to watching football or whatever.
Those of us online on channels like mine and people like you clearly want others to pay attention to defend freedom, individuality, and our rights.
Well, they don't want that.
A well-informed population is a hard population to control.
So there you go.
I'm disgusted with Twitter.
But is anyone really surprised this is what happened?
They allow a racial slur to trend.
Maybe social media shows them for what they really are because we can speak out and we can see what they support.
But I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 1 p.m.
on this channel.
Thanks for hanging out and I will see you all then.
I'm sure by now many of you are familiar with the story of LeBron James tweeting out the photo of the cop saying, you're next.
A young woman wielding a knife, winding up ready to stab another woman got shot and killed by a cop.
The cop saved another woman's life and LeBron James doesn't care about facts and because of the political power wielded by those who scream racism, this becomes the narrative.
Well, LeBron James deleted the tweet and said, okay, maybe I shouldn't have done it, but I'm just sick and tired.
of black people being killed, not realizing the greater context, probably not caring about the greater context.
Well, following this, you've also may have seen the viral video from Nate Sylvester.
It's actually a really funny video.
So this cop is sitting in his car.
And he makes a joke, he posts it on TikTok, where he pretends to look out his window and he says, oh no, there's a guy, he's gonna stab someone.
Better call LeBron.
And then he goes, yeah, can I talk to LeBron?
He's like, just a minute, everybody, just a minute.
And then he's jokingly talking to LeBron James, and LeBron basically jokingly says, don't intervene, let them have a knife fight, I guess.
Well, here's the breaking news.
This cop, according to a friend, has been suspended without pay for making the joke.
Why anyone would want to be a cop at this point?
Sure, whatever, it's a paycheck.
The good news is though, a GoFundMe was launched, and this dude has now raised something like, they say $60,000 in the article from MEAWW, but if you look at GoFundMe, It's $80,566.
I would just like to point out, my friends, that we live in the stupidest possible timeline where people make money off of the culture war and grievances and just... What?
First of all, the cops shouldn't have been fired for making a dumb joke on the internet.
And I just think it's really dumb that...
People in the culture, where I don't care if you're on the left or the right, we get into fights with each other, and then everyone just gives money to the person.
It's just a perverse incentivization of what's going on.
Now, I don't think it's the rule for the right, it's the exception, but it is the rule for the left, not the exception.
Leftists launch GoFundMes all the time, and GoFundMe deletes right-wing fundraisers.
So yes, the rule for the left, the exception for the right.
I just think it's increasingly dumb That someone will do something dumb.
Not this guy, this joke was funny, should have been fired.
I just think it's ridiculous.
It's like something happens in the culture where everyone's like, quick, throw money at the person!
Okay, sure, fine, whatever.
Look, there's a lot of people I like who have been saved by fundraisers, so don't get me wrong, I get it.
It's a good thing that people who are having their lives destroyed can have support from a community.
It's actually extremely important.
I just think it's so dumb that this is the current state of the Cold Civil War.
It's like, Say something!
Oh no, they're mad!
Quick, throw money at them!
Okay, I guess that's the way it works.
But good, I guess.
Look, this story I think is kind of dumb because the cop, like I said, should not have been suspended.
He's not fired.
Okay, he's suspended.
So maybe he'll get his job back.
But there are a lot of stories about, you know, people speaking up, fighting back against the woke mob, and having their lives destroyed.
So I think it does make sense, and it is a good thing that people are willing to support that.
Let's read the story, and then I'll talk to you about where all of this goes.
We have this story from the New York Post.
University of Minnesota student urges... University of Minnesota student leader urges peers to make life hell for cops, encouraging people to commit crimes.
So we'll see how bad things get, but first let's read this story from MEAWW.
They say.
A GoFundMe page claims that a police officer whose TikTok video on LeBron James went viral has been suspended without pay.
While the campaign, created by a person called Gannon Ward, says that his friend Nate Sylvester, the police officer in the marshal's office in Bellevue, Idaho, has been suspended, his office said the matter is being dealt internally.
Los Angeles Lakers James LeBron was accused of threatening the life of Ohio police officer Nicholas Reardon who fatally shot Micaiah Bryant.
James shared on Twitter and later deleted a photo of the officer and declared, you're next.
So we know all this.
Following that, police officers began mocking James with videos posted on social media in which they pretended to call and ask him how to defuse different situations they encounter when responding to 911 calls.
Sylvester's video was one of the more popular ones in that genre.
I'd like to tell you how to respond.
Officer, you may find yourself sitting in a car when you get, when you get a, you know, there's a, the radio comes in or whatever, however it works for you guys.
You get a phone call, whatever.
And they say, we got a, we got a priority one.
What's happening?
It's two young women in, in, in, in, and they're having a knife fight.
You do?
I'm good.
You are under no obligation, as per the Supreme Court, to actually intervene to save anybody.
And why would you go into a place where they don't want you anyway?
Hey, that's what I'll tell you to do.
Anyway, let's read more.
The GoFundMe reads, He's still got his job for now, but apparently the town where he polices didn't find his TikTok as amazingly comical and accurate as the 4.5 million viewers did, including some major news networks.
The future is uncertain.
I just don't want to see my friend lose out on any money for this when it was meant to be satirical and to point at an obvious flaw in LeBron's logic.
Please donate what you can contribute.
Every dollar helps.
Thanks.
According to a report in the Idaho Mountain Express, a formal complaint has been filed by a citizen against Sylvester.
Bellevue Mayor Net Burns said on Tuesday, April 27th, Burns did not reportedly expand on the nature of the complaint and said that he could not say whether Sylvester had been suspended while the complaint is under investigation.
The same day, the Marshal's Office issued a statement that said, So what does the Bellevue Marshal's Office think?
Am I supposed to believe now if I live in this town, if someone comes out and there's a knife fight, y'all ain't gonna respond?
The statements made do not represent the Bellevue Marshal's office.
So what does the Bellevue Marshal's office think? Am I supposed to believe now if I live in this
town if someone comes out and there's a knife fight y'all ain't gonna respond? That's confidence
building I guess. They're going to say the Bellevue Marshal's office always demands that
our deputies engage with our citizens in a friendly and professional manner.
This is not how we expect our deputies to act on duty or use city time.
This is a personnel issue that is being dealt with internally.
The statement added, We would like to thank everyone that took the time to reach out to us.
We greatly value our relationship with our wonderful community.
The video in question shows Sylvester arriving at a scene and calling dispatch.
Dispatch, I've arrived at that disturbance.
Will you have LeBron call my cell phone right away, please?
Thank you.
The officer from inside his car speaks to unseen people outside his window and asks a person to put down a knife.
He then tells him to hold on as LeBron was calling his phone.
LeBron, hey, yeah, it's me again.
Listen, I'm out here at this disturbance call and there's a guy trying to stab another guy with a knife.
What do you think I should do?
Sylvester then asks, why does that matter?
Adding after a bit, okay, well, they're both black.
One guy is trying to stab the other guy with a knife.
Deadly force is completely justified.
Sylvester pauses and then says, so you don't care if a black person kills another black person, but you do care if a white cop kills a black person, even if he's doing it to save the life of another black person?
I mean, that doesn't make a whole lot of sense, but then again, you're really good at basketball, so I guess I'll take your word for it.
Absolutely amazing.
Now, MEAWW says that the campaign has raised $54,000.
But if you actually go over to GoFundMe, as of right now, it is at $80,566.
And there are a bunch of updates.
So they say, another goal reached.
Thank you all so much for helping out.
Nate, reached another goal.
And there you go.
We have some comments here.
Matthew Ramil donated.
He says, police are the backbone of our community.
They don't deserve what's going on against them.
We back the blue.
Stay strong.
Here's my question about all of this stuff.
What I don't get is that conservatives don't live in these major urban metros.
And I guess you have a small town local police department, you want to support them.
Maybe that makes sense.
But most of the problems we're seeing from, you know, the police, I guess that Black Lives Matter brings up, They're happening in New York and Chicago and I don't know.
I don't know what the point is of bringing it up other than I guess it's a good thing that this cop is getting support.
There are people who just want to make life miserable and it's working.
The problem is when your own politicians and your own population vote against you, I don't know what you do other than just leave.
And I don't understand why there are cops who want to sit around and keep doing something that people are telling them not to do.
Which brings me to this story here.
This one may actually be illegal. University of Minnesota student leader urges peers to make life
hell for cops. They say, Lauren Myers, a member of the Minnesota Student Association Executive Board,
allegedly directed students to use up campus cops resources in an effort to pressure the
department's police chief to resign, make their lives hell, annoy the ish out of them.
Myers said in a video, said in video of a footage of a video conference, like use up their resources,
make their officers show up to do something.
Dimension, this person is telling people to call in fake reports.
Myers had been addressing a letter, sent this week from students to school president Joan Gable, calling on University of Minnesota Police Department Chief Matt Clark to resign for allegedly failing to properly protect students of color.
The letter claims that Clark has refused to increase campus safety and wellness for students of color and allowed the utilization of UMPD as a physical arm of the oppressive state to subjugate and silence community members.
It went on to threaten direct actions if our demands are not met.
During the video conference, which has since been deleted from Reddit, Myers has asked what action students should take according to the outlet.
When you say disrupt UMPD, what exactly do you mean by that?
One student asked.
One student asked her, prompting Myers to instruct students to make their lives hell.
The comment outraged police union groups, including the Minnesota Police and Peace Officers Association and Law Enforcement Labor Services, which demanded an investigation into whether Myers violated the college's code of conduct.
I'm sorry.
Telling people to break the law and to call in fake reports?
I'm pretty sure that's a crime.
Quote, We are frustrated that elected student leaders would purposefully choose to stir further division to make the campus less safe, said Minnesota Police and Peace Officers Association Executive Director Brian Peters.
Actively planning to thwart UMPD by generating false calls for help is insulting to the overwhelming majority of the campus community that rely on public safety services.
MSA leaders should be ashamed and apologize to the campus community and victims of crime on campus.
He added that state law prohibits calling in false emergencies or crimes.
Rep for the school also spoke out against Meyer's call to disrupt police officers.
The university respects the autonomy of the Minnesota Student Association as an independent governance organization for undergraduate students, including the autonomy of its membership to speak freely, a school spokesman told Alpha News.
However, in this instance, the university unequivocally disagrees with the ideas expressed about disrupting UMPD's daily work.
These ideas are illegal and would directly conflict with ongoing efforts to keep our campus community safe.
A rep for the Minnesota Student Association did not respond to the outlet's request for comment.
Well, there you go.
These people don't want campus safety.
They like to pretend they do.
They say things like, what's the point of going to campus if it's not safe?
What does safe mean?
Well, it means someone won't punch you in the face, I guess, but that's not true because we already saw what happened at Evergreen where they marched around with baseball bats, apparently hit a guy.
Now they want to use up police resources so that they won't be able to respond to actual crimes in progress.
And this is my, this is the problem I have with, you know, look.
The cops are sitting there being abused by whiny, spoiled brats, who yell, call the cops the moment they get attacked.
There's a video where, like, some Antifa people are, like, walking down the street.
They throw something at a car, and they had literally just come from an anti-police protest, and then the car stops, and the guy gets out with a weapon or something, and they scream, call 911!
It is a bunch of spoiled, whiny children, Who are playing make-believe.
Stop entertaining these people.
Stop answering these calls.
I am sick of the cops at this point.
It's like, you know, imagine this.
You're at an ice cream shop, right?
And there's a lady with her kid.
And the kid's screaming about how he wants two scoops of cookies and cream.
And the mom's like, but you just had a scoop.
You already had one.
Shut up, mom!
unidentified
I would!
tim pool ▲ ● ▼
I'm like, you ever see something like that?
Where the parent just won't tell the kid to shut up?
You're not getting more ice cream?
The more you cry, the worse you make it.
If you won't shut up, you're not getting any ice cream at all.
But I want two scoops.
Now you're not getting any.
Discipline.
Instead, what we have are cops who are sitting there as the children are screaming at the top of their lungs and they're like, okay, you know, I'll just keep, I'll keep giving them what they want.
I get it.
It would be like if the kid was screaming so you didn't buy ice cream for anybody.
But right now you have these people who are actively disrupting and there is no one doing anything about it.
Where are the parents to tell their kids to shut their mouths?
Apparently nowhere in sight.
So how about this?
If there is a mother in an ice cream shop, and her kid is screaming and stomping his feet and banging on the glass, demanding two scoops instead of one, and the mom won't do anything about it, don't help the mom.
She has made her own bed.
She can lie in it.
Instead, the police still come out when the mom calls for help.
unidentified
My son!
tim pool ▲ ● ▼
He won't stop screaming!
Please send someone to help!
And the cops show up and they're like, we're sorry ma'am.
We'll help deal with your problem.
You're a bad parent and can't take responsibility for how awful your kids are.
But don't worry, we'll make sure to be there so that the system can be maintained and slowly crumble.
Imagine if people would take responsibility for themselves.
You know, it's basically what's happening.
That the cops who remain in these awful places like Minnesota are helping, are making sure That the people who won't stand up for themselves and won't vote for, you know, for the people who support the police, they're making sure they don't have to.
You are enablers.
You are enabling these spineless, lazy layabouts who don't care about community.
You are enabling them to completely disregard their responsibility.
Just stop doing it.
They're gonna keep doing it though.
So look, this cop who got suspended, I think it's dumb, I do.
But let me say it again for those in the back who didn't hear me the last 800 times I said this.
If you remain a cop right now, knowing what's going on, literally making a video critiquing what's going on, Do you expect me to donate to you when you get suspended?
I am not going to do it.
Now, if you resign in protest and say, I will not, you know, be shut down, I will not stand for this, I'll definitely donate to that.
You see, standing up for yourself is worthy, in my opinion, of support.
God helps those who help themselves.
Instead, what happened was you made a video, you get suspended from your job, and now people are giving you money.
You know what, I guess to be fair, that's still worthy of some contribution because you stood up for yourself by making the video.
So with respect, okay, I'll walk that one back a little bit.
But for these other cops that would pull someone over and then get in trouble for it, I'm not gonna help you.
If you resign in protest, sure, I got your back to the best of my abilities.
But these cops that enable the system, nah, nah, you have to take responsibility for yourself.
Now let's see what's going on in New York City.
This is where, this is crazy.
New York lawmakers look to ban cops who resign or fired for misconduct from being rehired elsewhere.
You know what?
It's one more step in totally destroying our local police.
And once we don't have police, I don't see how you enforce the law.
I don't think the National Guard can do it.
Some people have said the National Guard will come out, but they can't police.
They can maybe lock down a city street, but they're not going to go to people's homes.
That's much more difficult.
I don't think there's enough.
But maybe, maybe.
Now, what they're saying is, if a cop is forced to resign for misconduct or fired for misconduct, they can't get rehired.
Sounds like a good thing, I guess.
Until you stop and pause and realize... I'll give you a specific example.
People are saying Chauvin was a bad cop because he had 18 formal complaints.
However, I think he was a cop for like 19 years, which means he was only getting one complaint per year.
You have to realize when you're arresting someone, they're gonna complain about you.
And that's why often these complaints are just bunk and don't go anywhere.
Someone gets arrested and says, what's your badge number?
What's your badge number?
And they're like, the cop didn't do anything wrong.
So was Chauvin really this monster?
Or was he a run-of-the-mill cop doing run-of-the-mill stuff?
And they sacrificed him, threw him under the bus.
Now in New York, you could have a cop.
Formal complaint arises.
Some Black Lives Matter person says he was racist.
He then says, I can't deal with the political pressure.
And they say, we don't want this in the department.
So he resigns.
Can't be a cop ever again.
Maybe it's a good thing.
I don't know.
A cop who resigned, in my opinion, though?
You know, that's someone worthy of support.
But don't get me wrong.
If there's a cop who resigns because they legitimately were engaging in misconduct, then good.
If they can't get rehired, then good.
The problem is, people hate cops.
Now, there's a funny tweet where some guy said, maybe if the police actually did their job and were trustworthy, people wouldn't be trying to abolish them.
Ain't nobody writing a song saying, F the fire department.
I'm like, yeah, but, uh, the fire department aren't enforcing laws.
I mean, I guess you have fire inspectors, but they pass it off as the DA and the cops.
The cops aren't supposed to always have positive interactions with you.
unidentified
Cops stop you when you break the law.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼
Sometimes it's really dumb.
And you get annoyed.
Sometimes you're going three, four miles over the speed limit, and you get singled out.
And you get annoyed.
Sometimes your headlight goes out, you don't realize it, you get pulled over.
It's annoying.
Most interactions with cops are going to be negative.
That's why people don't like it.
But if you're doing things that are illegal, what do you think's gonna happen?
I do think the criminal justice system in this country has become too rigid and we're supposed to have judges and a criminal justice system that should interpret the law properly and fairly and justly.
For example, Uh, if somebody's, you know, speeding for the first time or something and they have a reasonable reason, sure, maybe they'll get a ticket, maybe they go to court, they explain, your honor, I was rushing to the hospital for this reason, here's proof, and then the judge could be like, okay.
Now, I understand that does exist in many circumstances.
Judges will do that.
But then you have the inverse where some judges just don't care.
And I guess that's the limitations of our system.
There will be judges and there will be cops who literally just don't care.
I once got arrested for skateboarding.
Cops didn't care.
It was a stupid bunk charge, and the judge got really pissed off and said, why are you wasting my time?
They actually showed up, too.
Like, the cops and the security guards show up to court, and I'm sitting in court by myself, no lawyer, and the judge goes, what is this?
And they're like, he was skateboarding on the sidewalk, your honor.
And the judge was like, excuse me?
And they're like, yes, your honor.
He was downtown, you know, skating down the sidewalk.
I kid you not.
I was skating with friends.
We were skating downtown.
We were doing normal skate stuff, grinding and all that.
And they were trying to claim it was vandalism.
Now look.
I get it.
People don't like skateboards and what it does to property.
There were no signs saying we couldn't skate.
We were just skating down the street.
A bunch of kids skating through the city.
And the judge looked at him and said, Is this a joke?
Get out of my courtroom!
Waste of my time.
Yeah.
That happens too.
So sometimes it does happen.
But anyway, look.
They want to make life a living hell for these cops.
They're actively advocating for breaking the law.
I'm getting to a point where I'm not going to stand up for cops who are standing in a burning building for no reason.
You want to stay on the job, I guess, but it doesn't matter where you live, they will come for you.
And all that's happening is you're enabling people to not take responsibility for themselves.
It's about time we restored personal responsibility.
And that starts by pulling the blanket off of the kids, the adults, cowering under the covers, because the monsters might be there.
Okay.
It's about time you walk into their room, you grab the blanket, you pull it off, and when they go, oh no, the monster!
You say, yeah, well, too bad.
We're not going to be here to take responsibility for you and your laziness.
Maybe you should buy a gun, as is your Second Amendment right, to protect your home and be responsible with it.
Instead of saying, eh, the cops will do it for me.
Because now they can't.
Or soon they won't be able to.
And the sooner people realize what's going on, maybe the sooner they can start voting against these people.
If the cops had stood up in a stronger position last year, maybe the Democrats wouldn't have won in Minnesota.
And all of this would be over.
Oh well.
You get what you vote for, and the cops are supporting it.
I know they might not like it, but if you stay on the job and you just do what you're told, you're supporting it.
And if you say, I don't support it, but I did vote Democrat, you're supporting it.
And if you say, I don't support it, but I'm not going to speak up because I'm scared, you're abstaining from the vote.
So, right now, the vote is in, and it's for abolishing the police.
No matter how many times people say, nobody really wants to abolish the police.
Okay, well, I don't see any of you voting.
I don't see any of you going out and protesting.
In fact, some of these people who are voting are literally voting for the Democrats who want to support, or who want to, or do support, defunding cops.
So, don't waste my time.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 4 p.m.
over at youtube.com slash timcast.
▲
Export Selection