S5132 - Fauci Warns Refusing The Vaccine Is Splitting US Into Two Countries, Judge Sentences Men To Vaccination
Fauci Warns Covid Delta Variant Splitting US Into Two Countries, Judge Sentences Men To Vaccination. Dr. Fauci's statements line up with data showing states won by trump are less likely to vaccinate than states won by biden.
Democrats and republicans are so divided on vaccines that now even Fauci is entertaining the idea of a cold civil war or peaceful divorce in the United States.
In one instance a judge is sentencing men to be vaccinated sparking outrage among even leftists and the ACLU
#DeltaVariant
#Democrats
#Republicans
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Dr. Fauci is warning that the new Delta variant is splitting the United States into two Americas.
Because red states aren't getting vaccinated and blue states are.
He's not wrong about that.
It's going to be interesting how this plays out in the culture war or the cold civil war.
In our next story, the NSA is slammed, even by many on the left, for a strange non-denial denial over whether or not they are spying on Tucker Carlson.
In our last story, Democrats in Ohio in a bizarre video are seen screaming and banging on their desks as a Republican introduces an amendment to ban biological males from competing against females.
If you like this podcast, please give us a good review and give us five stars.
And if you really like the podcast, share it with your friends.
Now, let's get into that first story.
It appears we have the unlikeliest of individuals entertaining the possibility of a peaceful
divorce in this country, or a civil war.
Now, Dr. Fauci didn't come out and say there was going to be a civil war, but he said, he warned that the country may be divided into two Americas over the Delta variant, which is just the Indian strain of COVID.
You see, when it comes to vaccination rates, states that voted for Joe Biden have very high rates and states that didn't have very low rates, except for the five states that are being contested, which is strange in and of itself.
But at any rate, there really is two Americas, and it's been this way for a long time.
And as I've stated over and over again, I have no reason to believe The connections are going to rebuild themselves.
And the current state of this country, I don't think it's going to be improving.
More and more, with the news coming out around COVID, around the plans from blue states versus red states, it seems that things will only get worse.
And I know perhaps it's a bit pessimistic.
In the long run though, I'm fairly optimistic that things will improve for the most part.
The night is always darkest before the dawn.
You see, there are some stories that make me feel pessimistic in terms of the cohesion of the United States.
Now, in terms of where I live and my plans for the future and TimCast.com, I'm fairly optimistic that we will retain our freedom.
And many other people who don't want freedom and individual rights will lose it, but if they want it, so be it.
So long as we defend our rights.
It's not just that Dr. Fauci is saying these things.
We had a story the other day I covered where a Trump supporter speaking to CNN said that there was going to be a civil war.
I know it's just one guy at a Trump rally, but many people have expressed the same thing.
Something is going to break, violence is inevitable, and I certainly hope not.
But here's another big story.
I didn't know if I should have been leading with this one because it's one judge, but a judge is now sentencing men.
to COVID vaccination in their plea agreements, or I should say, in their sentencing terms.
That is, in one story, a man who was convicted of one count of mishandling firearms was told, you're gonna get probation, and as part of that, you must be vaccinated within 30 days.
The ACLU is coming out against this, saying, I don't know if the government should be mandating medical procedures.
You know, that's not gonna build trust.
And I'm sure many people might actually challenge this, but the issue is for a lot of these guys, they're saying, sure, okay, whatever.
Now look, I'm not saying... All I'm saying is, you have very, very clear, distinct views as to what people should or shouldn't be doing.
And I think Fauci is correct when he says it's dividing this country into two Americas.
Now I always say the disclaimer is, you gotta talk to a doctor.
Here's my personal Political opinion on all of this is, you shouldn't be getting advice from people on the internet or TV doctors like Fauci.
You should go to a doctor.
You should ask them and give them your medical history.
And this includes all of these celebrities telling you what to do when they say to get vaccinated.
Just make sure you go to a doctor and talk to them before you do anything.
Because some people, it's rare, but some people actually are not candidates for vaccination.
Which is why Fauci is correct.
What happens when someone goes to the doctor and the doctor says, you're pregnant.
You should not get this vaccine.
Your doctor may say something different, so you should go talk to them.
What happens when they're not allowed to go to venues?
What happens when New York implements more and more of the Excelsior pass?
What happens when Washington and Oregon implement vaccine passports?
What happens when you have mainstream leftist press demanding this, and conservative states and red states are making this illegal?
We are inching towards an untenable situation where blue states say you must and red states say you cannot, you cannot obligate people to be vaccinated.
It's very obvious what's happening.
There will be a period where you'll be in California and you can't go to Florida or Florida to California, vice versa, and guess what?
California has already passed that law.
No state travel to many states.
16 now over ideology.
Alright, well let's jump in and see what Fauci's actually saying because I didn't think he'd be the guy to come out and be like, hey, the country's splitting apart.
And I want to show you what really freaks me out.
A judge in Columbus, Ohio sentencing people to vaccination.
Okay, what if the doctor says they can't do it?
It freaks me out.
Before we get started, head over to TimCast.com and become a member by clicking that Members Only button to get access to our exclusive Members Only segments of the TimCast IRL podcast.
We talked last night with Candace Owens about the Mandela Effect and a TED Talk from Bill Gates where he talked about stopping out-of-control population, which is very, very fascinating.
Now, a lot of these things, even the things I'm going to be talking about here, It's risky business.
Sooner or later, YouTube is going to be banning channels like mine.
They've already demonetized, and they've already given a strike and a warning to Brett Weinstein for talking about his opinions as a scientist on COVID.
Now, my opinion legitimately is, you know, anything someone says on the internet, be it me or Rogan or Fauci, take it with a grain of salt.
Go talk to a medical professional who knows your history.
I know I say it a lot because I genuinely do want to drive home There's so much in the culture war, and the cold civil war or whatever, of people trying to advocate for why you should or shouldn't do something, and I just want to be the person who's like, you need to be a strong individual who doesn't think I'm telling you to do something, who's just taking information and then making personal choices for yourself.
That being said, YouTube still might ban me.
Join TimCast.com.
Help us grow.
We just hired, like, four people.
No joke.
The newsroom is going to be expanding tremendously.
We've got an editor joining very, very soon.
Our executive editor, who's going to be handling a bunch of news.
And the news site should be launching in the next week or so.
So, that being said, let's read the story from the Daily Mail.
Fauci warns country may be divided into two Americas by Indian Delta variant that continues to spread in under vaccinated areas.
The CDC director has said those who have had the shots are safe from the mutant strain and don't need to wear masks.
Now that one's really fascinating as well.
Because, Los Angeles is reinstating their mask guidelines, and the LA Times put out a column saying, even if you're vaccinated, basically just wear the mask, and shut up, don't whine about it.
It's gonna be really strange.
You've got the CDC saying that if you're vaccinated, you don't gotta worry about Delta, but then you're in a state like California, which has high vaccination rates, and they're telling you, we're gonna implement these guidelines anyway?
We'll see how things play out.
They say, the nation's top infectious disease expert warned that the U.S.
may soon be divided into two Americas as the disparity grows between vaccinated and unvaccinated regions and the Indian Delta variant continues to spread.
In an appearance on CNN's Don Lemon on Tuesday night, Dr. Fauci said he is very concerned about seeing the country split in two, one half where the majority of residents are vaccinated against COVID-19 and the other half where they are not immunized, leading to a rise in cases.
This is fascinating, because I mentioned something like this when Joe Biden came out earlier this year saying we may need more lockdowns.
Texas and Florida had already rejected mask mandates and lockdowns, were totally reopened, and apparently, they were fine.
But Joe Biden came out and said, we're gonna need more lockdowns, and I asked, who is he speaking to?
As the President of the United States, who is he speaking to?
These red states are defying everything he's saying.
He was only speaking to the blue states.
It's even if he was trying to actually communicate and bridge that divide, the worldview of the red and the blue states are so diametrically opposed that Joe Biden comes out and says, I think we need more lockdowns.
And the red states are like, shut up.
Where do you think that leads us?
Quote, when you have such a low level of vaccination superimposed upon a variant that has a high degree of efficiency of spread, what you are going to see among under-vaccinated regions, be that states, cities, counties, you're going to see these individual types of blips.
It's almost like it's going to be two Americas.
Several U.S.
counties in the South and West have been seeing an increase in cases according to a report from the CDC.
Health officials say low vaccination rates are the problem, and that the virus is transmitting rapidly in under-vaccinated regions of the U.S.
The states are also reporting a rise in cases linked to the Delta variant, which counts for 26.1% of all COVID infections, up from 20.6% last week.
Some states have reported that more than half of all new cases are associated with the strain.
But studies have shown that two doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine and AstraZeneca vaccine are 88% effective against the Delta variant, and lab experiments showed the Moderna vaccine generates neutralizing antibodies against a strain.
This is entirely avoidable, entirely preventable.
Fauci, the director of National Institute of Allergy, we know his position, said to CNN.
If you're vaccinated, you diminish dramatically your risk of getting infected, and even more dramatically your risk of getting seriously ill.
If you're not vaccinated, you are at considerable risk.
It comes as CDC director Dr. Rochelle Walensky said on Wednesday that fully vaccinated Americans are safe from variants and do not need to wear masks.
If you are vaccinated, you are safe from the variants that are circulating here in the U.S., she told NBC's Today, and said it is exactly right that vaccinated people do not need to wear masks.
unidentified
Well, Hey, it's Kimberly Fletcher here from Moms 4 America with some very exciting news.
Tucker Carlson is going on a nationwide tour this fall, and Moms 4 America has the exclusive VIP meet and greet experience for you.
Before each show, you can have the opportunity to meet Tucker Carlson in person.
These tickets are fully tax-deductible donations, so go to momsforamerica.us and get one of our very limited VIP meet-and-greet experiences with Tucker at any of the 15 cities on his first ever Coast to Coast tour.
Not only will you be supporting Moms for America in our mission to empower moms, promote liberty, and raise patriots, your tax-deductible donation secures you a full VIP experience with priority entrance and check-in, premium gold seating in the first five rows, access to a pre-show cocktail reception, an individual meet-and-greet, and photo with America's most famous conservative and our friend, Tucker Carlson.
Visit momsforamerica.us today for more information and to secure your exclusive VIP meet and greet tickets.
These politicians, they came out and they were saying that even if you get vaccinated, you should wear a mask.
And there were a lot of complaints, even from moderate individuals, saying you need to encourage people to get the vaccine, not discourage them.
Tell them that there is a light at the end of the tunnel and that we may be moving forward.
Now with what Dr. Fauci is saying, It sounds like there isn't a light at the end of the tunnel, for the most part.
There's gonna be two Americas.
Well, no, maybe he's saying there is, I guess.
I'm not a fan of Fauci.
He's been wrong a lot.
And his defense is, oh, but the science says, so you're mad about the science.
Dude, Fauci is a TV doctor.
I'm not, I'm not, look, he is a TV doctor.
He heads the infectious disease, you know, they listed his position.
You know, he's one of the highest paid government, he is the highest paid government employee.
And the problem I have with Fauci is that while he goes on TV and says all of these things, there are people who need to show their medical history to their doctors.
If someone goes on YouTube, say Brett Weinstein, and says, you know, here's his recommendation.
They take down his video and give him a warning.
They do it again, they give him a strike.
Now they've demonetized his channels.
Okay.
I don't think Brett should be advocating that people take a certain action.
Now if Brett wants to talk about the efficacy of certain drugs, that's different.
YouTube shouldn't ban either of these things.
We need to encourage people to be Personally responsible for themselves.
Candace Owens brought this up the other day when we were talking on the podcast and she made a really good point.
So what if Joe Rogan has an opinion on vaccines?
He's Joe Rogan.
You shouldn't be getting your advice from a comedian.
Why is the responsibility on Joe Rogan and not you?
It's a really good point.
I don't think people should be getting advice from personalities and TV doctors.
You should be going to your doctor.
And that's the point that Candace basically drove home.
Take a look at this.
It's two Americas, man.
Fauci is not wrong about that.
Maybe he can go one step further and say, legit, this country is breaking in half.
Now, I love this part.
I've shown this graph numerous times, and every time I have, I've pointed out the only states that don't follow the trend, meaning you've got Michigan, Wisconsin, Arizona, Nevada, and Georgia, have lower vaccination rates, And they voted for Biden, whereas every high-vaccination-rated state is blue, and almost every low-vaccinated state is red.
It's fascinating that the five states that are being contested by Trump and his supporters are the ones that aren't getting the vaccine in the same numbers.
I do find that strange.
It's totally non-sequitur for the most part, but a lot of people are pointing out some, you know, Some correlation between this and the claims about Trump and Biden and things like that.
I don't know anything about that.
I'm just saying this.
You've got red states, for the most part, with low vaccination.
You know, Florida and Texas around 58%.
And then you've got these blue states that are like 70.
Or Vermont with 82%.
Interestingly, I wonder where's New Hampshire at?
Let me see if I can find New Hampshire.
There we go.
New Hampshire, which is the free state, 71%.
It's the Free State Project.
Everybody's very libertarian.
71% of adults are vaccinated.
It voted for Joe Biden.
This is the split in America.
It's obvious that it's happening.
And it's not just about the vaccine.
It's about worldview.
Naturally, the vaccine falls into that, which is why I'm showing you Biden and Trump states and vaccination rates.
That shows that the political has transcended everything.
Now, here's where it gets crazy.
First, let me see if we can... Where do we have... Ohio was a red state, wasn't it?
Ohio, there we go.
Ohio.
Trump won.
57.5% of adults are vaccinated.
Check this out.
Not that one, this one.
From the Columbus dispatch.
Columbus judge is adding a new term to defendant's probation.
Get your COVID shot.
This one freaks me out.
They say, a Franklin County judge recently began including vaccination against COVID as a condition of defendants' terms of probation.
Common Pleas judge Richard Fry said last week he added the vaccine as a condition on three cases in the week of the roughly 20 sentences he's imposed.
He said he discussed the matter in open court with the defendants, and they attributed their unvaccinated status to procrastination.
None raised any philosophical, medical, or religious objection.
Quote, it occurred to me that at least some of these folks need to be encouraged not to procrastinate.
Fry said, I think it is a reasonable condition when we're telling people to get employed and be out in the community.
He declined to speculate what would happen if a defendant raised a medical, religious, or philosophical exemption to vaccination, but said this is a different situation entirely than people who have simply put the matter off.
An example.
A man named Cameron Stringer entered a guilty plea for one charge of improperly handling firearms in a motor vehicle, for which he was sentenced to two years of probation.
That's it?
That was the only charge?
We have a Second Amendment in this country.
If an individual is handling firearms, and they have a constitutional right to do so, I think we should have jury nullification, or this law should be repealed.
Now, in this instance, okay, fine.
The law exists.
Obey the law.
File your lawsuits.
We have a process for this.
It's a brilliant process by which our Founding Father set it up.
There could be a law on the books.
You may get charged for it because the people are voted in to make the law, but you can sue.
It's not easy.
We have to fight for our rights.
But this guy could theoretically sue and say, I shouldn't be convicted of a crime of handling firearms with Second Amendment in play.
Well, that's a totally different subject.
What ends up happening is this.
Stringer must submit to a random drug screening, avoid further legal trouble, return a firearm in question to its rightful owner, and obtain a COVID-19 vaccine within 30 days and provide proof to the probation department court documents show.
Look, I think people should get vaccinated.
I really do.
If your doctor says you should.
I stress this all the time.
I have a friend.
I've tweeted his post from Facebook out.
He went to the doctor and got vaccinated.
He got injured.
Now, I guess what he was saying was, you know, he should have talked to another doctor because there may have been some complicating factors.
I'm worried about people going to a bar, I'm worried about people seeing, you know, a celebrity on Instagram, or Dr. Fauci, saying, just go do it, and then not talking to a doctor about what makes sense.
I get a lot of people on the other side saying, your doctors don't know, and I'm like, dude, talk to a doctor, ask them very specific medical questions, you wanna make sure you're getting your advice from the best possible person, and it ain't me.
I'm a dude on the internet.
Joe Rogan's a comedian, and Fauci doesn't know you.
So you go to your doctor who's got a history, you know, you've got history with it, you've got your medical files, figure it out.
For a judge to tell people they must do it, it's insane.
Imagine if you went, imagine if you go to court and the judge is like, so why haven't you had your tonsils removed?
I have no idea, your honor.
As a condition of your probation, I think you should get them removed.
Like, wait, what?
That's a medical procedure and you, judge, should not be mandating it.
I get it.
Vaccination is the most minor of minor medical procedures.
Well, not the most minor minor.
I guess minor would be like taking aspirin or something.
But I understand.
People go in.
177 million vaccinations.
There are many people reporting to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System.
You can take all that information into consideration.
Ultimately, you still need to get advice from a doctor.
The point being...
Why is a judge mandating a medical procedure that is not up to him to decide?
Now, perhaps one of these individuals can go to a doctor, a doctor will say you shouldn't, and then maybe they can see what the judge says after that, but still, I don't think this is appropriate.
Going back to what Fauci was saying, isn't this the kind of thing that's going to rip this country in two?
Like, how is a judge going to mandate that?
It's unclear how widespread this judicial practice is.
Frye said he didn't know if any other judges were doing anything similar.
A spokesman for the Supreme Court, which oversees lower courts, said he didn't know of any judges doing anything similar.
However, he sent a link to a media report about a judge offering to shorten probation stretches for those who obtain a vaccine.
Incentivizing people who have committed crimes to take lower sentences in exchange for a medical procedure.
I know, I know.
Maybe saying it that way is a bit more extreme than just saying they went and got their vaccine.
Either way, I don't like the idea.
It should not be up to a judge.
It should be up to a doctor.
Gary Daniels, and here's where it's at, the ACLU agrees.
A lobbyist with the ACLU expressed concern about the practice Thursday, comparing it to Ohio judges who have ordered defendants convicted of crimes not to procreate.
Seriously, what?
It doesn't have any real relationship to community control, Daniel said of Fry's practice.
At minimum, it appears to be problematic.
Fry's practice comes in a period of stagnation in a vaccine campaign against a disease that has killed more than 600,000 Americans, despite a skyscraping death and morbidity toll.
Five $1,000,000 lottery drawings for people who get vaccinated.
More than six months of availability.
Fewer than 48% of Ohioans have started the vaccination process against COVID-19.
I just wanted them to be safe in the community, Fry said.
Has it occurred to any of these people that they have gone to their doctors and said, I am, you know, I'm 25.
And I have no history of illness and I'm physically fit.
The doctor says, you're fine.
Has it occurred to them, has anyone asked doctors what medical advice they're giving?
Could it be that many people aren't, it's not that they're procrastinating, it's that they did get medical advice.
Has anyone considered that?
That's what, I've had people in this studio, In my house, conservatives who are critical of things like this, who have gotten the vaccine and are fine, and have family members who didn't, all because they went to a doctor and asked about it.
I know, maybe I say it too much, okay?
But this is, it is kind of crazy.
The ACLU mentions this story, look at this, from December 18th.
Ohio Supreme Court rules, man can't be ordered to abstain from procreation.
Yo, this is cruel and unusual punishment in my opinion.
The doctor should not be allowed to mandate any kind of invasive medical procedure.
They're talking about putting a needle in your arm and injecting you with something.
These are deeply personal decisions that people need to make based on their medical history and sound advice from medical professionals, not judges.
In LA, it doesn't seem to matter.
LA Times says, put your mask back on and don't whine about it.
Okay, okay.
I find that one odd.
Then we have this one.
NYC has no plan to revisit mask requirements amid Delta variant spread, Mayor says.
Plus, the Gansevoort Meatpacking District Hotel plans a series of new restaurants and more intel.
Well, this is from Eater.com, so naturally they're going to talk about restaurants, but it seems like New York is not going to go that route.
So maybe it's not so bad.
We're not going to see a hard, you know, an axe slicing through a piece of wood and splitting it in twain.
Perhaps what will actually happen is it'll be more, it'll happen more slowly.
I love this story.
Check this out.
Vice News says, the GOP wants to save you from vaccine passports that mostly don't exist.
April 8th, 2021.
Okay, let's read.
This could get interesting if businesses start mandating proof of COVID vaccination on a massive scale.
Vice reports.
On Tuesday, Governor Greg Abbott signed an executive order banning the state and local governments, as well as organizations, receiving state funding.
from requiring documentation of inoculation. Government should not require any Texan to
show proof of vaccination and reveal private health information just to go about their
daily lives," Abbott said in a statement announcing the move. We will continue to vaccinate more Texans
and protect public health, and we will do so without treading on Texans' personal freedoms.
The passport is some form of documentation, either digital or physical,
that shows your vaccination status.
In broad use, these passports could be used by sports arenas, music venues... I think you guys know what that is.
Last month, New York became the first state to roll out such a voluntary program, using an app created by IBM called Excelsior Pass.
And it's been used at NBA and NHL games in New York.
Last month, Walmart announced a plan to make the vaccine records of people inoculated at their stores available digitally.
But so far, the backlash has outpaced the project itself.
They say, Texas is one of four states whose governors have either signed laws or announced executive orders barring these so-called passports.
Florida, Idaho, Utah have also signed orders of some sort, I suppose they're saying.
Quote, it is completely unacceptable for either the government or the private sector to impose upon you the requirement that you show proof of vaccine to just simply be able to participate in normal society, DeSantis said at a press conference last week.
Keeping in mind that this story is from April 8th.
Okay, so we get it.
Vice is saying they don't even have vaccine passports.
Well, in the Pacific Northwest, I think it's in Oregon, they're actually now rolling these out, and many stores are requiring them.
You want to come in, you gotta show it.
In New York and other places, it's not mandatory, but they're doing vaccine sections of sporting events and bars, meaning you walk into a bar, there's everybody partying, and they say, yeah, but if you don't got your proof, you gotta go to the back of the bar.
Hey guys, Josh Hammer here, the host of America on Trial with Josh Hammer, a podcast for the First Podcast Network.
Look, there are a lot of shows out there that are explaining the political news cycle, what's happening on the Hill, the this, the that.
There are no other shows that are cutting straight to the point when it comes to the unprecedented lawfare debilitating and affecting the 2024 presidential election.
We do all of that every single day right here on America on Trial with Josh Hammer.
Subscribe and download your episodes wherever you get your podcasts.
The Republicans have been fighting against the idea that we would implement vaccine passports before they happened in many places.
Why?
To stop them from happening.
It's preemptive.
If you don't want them to happen, say you can't do it, and then people don't do it.
What did Vice think that they should be doing?
Waiting until they're actually implementing vaccine passports, and then coming out and saying you can't do this?
Yeah, I guess so.
It's weird, isn't it?
So what?
If a bunch of Republicans came out and said, we're gonna ban flying spaceships, you know, in figure eights for three days, I'd be like, well, then when we build spaceships, people won't do it, I guess.
If they said, we are going to ban the practice of launching small home-built satellites into space, what are we gonna say?
The GOP wants to save you from low-orbit satellites launched from people's backyards, even though people aren't doing it.
Could there be a reason why they banned it?
I don't know.
Let's say people did somehow start launching satellites from their backyards.
Could it be that those satellites would crash into other satellites?
Look at what happened with drones.
You see, the legislation wasn't there.
When consumer-grade drones came out, everybody was flying them all over the place, and there were a bunch of stories about drones nearly hitting planes.
Could you imagine if they regulated drones before anyone used them?
What would the response be?
The GOP wants to save you from drones that mostly don't exist.
You see how this works?
Perhaps making a law saying, hey, it's a bad thing, we don't want it to happen.
Fine.
Right?
Okay.
I think it's deliciously hypocritical that Vice doesn't seem to understand what's happening, or what they even want.
To be fair, they're two different writers, two months apart.
But you see exactly why the GOP did this.
And now you'll see exactly why there is a strong divide in this country.
Dare I say, two different Americas.
Because we can look right back at this.
This graph that I showed earlier on.
It really is fascinating because it's not built to be this.
They just have a list of states and their percentages of vaccination.
And there's a natural major dividing line.
I mean, look at this.
The two closest states to each other in the middle.
You have Wisconsin at 63% and Oregon at 66.8.
These clusters weren't made by NPR.
This is not a clever graphing to make it look like there's a hard divide.
They're literally just throwing the states out there and then giving a number of how many, which percentage of people have been vaccinated with at least one dose.
And naturally, you see all of the blue in the high area and all of the red in the other area, save the exception of Georgia, Nevada, Arizona, Wisconsin, and Michigan.
States, of course, as I mentioned, are being contested by Trump supporters.
So what does the future hold for us?
You know, the other day we saw that Trump supporter say civil war was coming.
And that's why I saw this and I saw the story about the people being sentenced to vaccination and I was like... Peaceful divorce.
Balkanization.
Collapse of this great country.
I hope it doesn't happen.
You know, we've got China to worry about.
But here we are, right?
There seems to be every day something adding to the story that we are being split further and further apart.
Fauci comes out and says, two Americas.
And I'm like, that's fascinating because I've been saying that for years now.
And initially the left was like, Tim's crazy for thinking this could happen.
In fact, I had many conservatives saying I was crazy for saying we're facing a civil war, there's a cold civil war, it could go hot.
Now more and more conservatives are saying cold civil war.
But even that I think is wrong.
A cold war is like two forces pressuring each other.
Now we've actually had people die.
So maybe nobody wants to say hot civil war because we don't have battlefields and people marching.
What do you think it's gonna look like?
Do you think that in Afghanistan the American soldiers like all line up and start marching towards the city?
You know, whatever, to Kabul or something?
No!
It's mostly guerrilla warfare now.
Snipers in buildings.
The goal is to win.
We are in a modern version of a civil war.
This is modern warfare.
Political manipulation, we've got economic warfare, we've got information warfare, and we even do have hot skirmishes.
We do have some guerrilla combat.
Nobody wants to really end anyone's life right now, because that would be bad in the information war.
If Antifa went out and clubbed someone or beat a journalist, like they do with Andy Ngo, That generates tons of sympathy from regular people saying, why are they doing this?
These stories are bad for them, so propaganda is important.
That's why they're so adamant about censoring certain information.
That's why they infiltrate, destroy, and rebuild these prominent newsrooms.
And it's why, I mean, just in general, censorship is one of the biggest issues in the culture war.
Conservatives started to realize that if they didn't have the ability to speak, they would lose the information war.
And the left knows if they can control what words mean, then they control, what is it, the means to meaning.
They can make it so that your laws on the books mean something totally different.
Think about it this way.
If woman is scientifically defined as an adult human female, Then when we pass laws saying women can't be discriminated against, or something like that, we know what the word woman means.
The law means someone who is biologically female, right?
Then, they change the definition.
They say trans women are women, okay?
In which case, now the law includes trans women.
That's the power of semantics.
Language is underlying everything.
That's why they say, you know, anti-vaxxer, for instance.
If you're a pro... And I see a lot of people saying that they're pro-vaxxers.
People are really scared to be smeared by the media.
People are saying, like, I post something and they're like, Tim, that's an anti-vax stance.
I'm like, oh, shut up.
I don't care.
Idiots.
I've gotten, like... How many shots have I gotten in the past, like, five years?
When I was at Vice, I got, like, three or four.
Vaccines are awesome.
It's great technology.
Um, it really really is.
But if you have concerns about your health, and you think people should talk to a doctor, and shouldn't be sentenced to getting vaccinated?
Okay, that's a political issue, you morons.
It's nothing to do with being pro or anti-vax.
I'm anti-authoritarian, and I'm pro sound medical advice from a doctor.
Not a Dr. Fauci on a TV.
Yeah.
Well, you know, one of these days I'm gonna get banned for even talking about these things, but like I said, this is an example of the country being divided, and I agree with Fauci in that regard.
I don't like the guy, but he's got this one.
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.
A couple nights ago, Tucker Carlson said he was contacted by a whistleblower who informed him the NSA was spying on his communications and was planning on publishing these communications to hurt him politically, potentially get him taken off the air.
Since then, the NSA has issued a denial, which has only ignited more controversy because they're lying.
Like, their denial is just a lie.
Now, maybe they're not really spying on Tucker Carlson.
I don't know.
But the funniest thing about all of this, and the most important thing about all of this, is... Well, I shouldn't say the most important, but while it is very, very important...
To get to the bottom of whether or not the NSA is spying on Tucker Carlson is important, look at all of the mainstream corporate shills that are defending the federal government once again and ask yourself, do we have journalists in this country?
Glenn Greenwald, for instance, is a journalist, but he's in Brazil.
It's really funny.
Glenn Greenwald comes out as the guy who reported on the NSA's ability to spy on people.
And the mainstream journalists say, oh, what has happened to Glenn Greenwald?
Oh, the great fall of Glenn Greenwald.
And I love the response.
Glenn's like, yes, because I used to defend the NSA.
Glenn pulls up some stories proving the NSA probably is spying on Tucker Carlson and they're lying.
And they put out this statement.
The NSA put out this statement.
I want to read to you.
I'm going to break down how they manipulate you.
How they lie.
Now, let me just stress.
I don't know if the NSA is actually spying on Tucker Carlson.
I'd go ahead and assume it's probably the case because they spy on everybody.
Are they directly targeting Tucker Carlson, wanting to leak his messages to get him pulled from the air?
I don't know.
Tucker says so.
Tucker says that there is a whistleblower who's communicated with him.
Perhaps.
Now, of course, CNN has come out and said not even Fox believes him, pushing back and trying to defend the NSA of all organizations.
Sure.
But let me read for you first a little bit about what's being claimed.
I'll read you a little bit of the story and then we'll go through what's being claimed and debunk the lies and expose the lying journalists who want to defend the federal government.
The Daily Mail reports Tucker Carlson doubles down on claim that NSA is reading his private emails as he reads infuriatingly dishonest statement from the spy agency that doesn't deny it.
That's actually true.
That statement from the NSA does not deny it.
Let me read.
They say, a statement from the NSA regarding recent allegations.
On June 28th, 2021, Tucker Carlson alleged that the National Security Agency has been monitoring our electronic communication and is planning to leak them in an attempt to take this show off the air.
That was a full quote.
This allegation is untrue.
Tucker Carlson has never been an intelligence target of the agency, and the NSA has never had any plans to try and take his program off the air.
NSA has a foreign intelligence mission.
We target foreign powers to generate insights on foreign activities that could harm the US, with limited exception, e.g.
an emergency.
NSA may not target a US citizen without a court order that explicitly authorizes the targeting.
That is a lie.
I mean, it's technically the truth, the best kind of the truth, but it's not true.
They spy on everybody.
We've seen it.
It was almost 10 years ago.
All the documents that got released by Edward Snowden, published by Glenn Greenwald and Laura Poitras and others.
For the Guardian and then The Intercept, we saw the NSA was just bulk collecting data.
And apparently they could just search through the data after the fact to see if there was anything they should know, or shouldn't know but thought they should know, and yeah, violation of the Fourth Amendment much?
But this is a really great opportunity so I can help you break through the lies and manipulation of PR statements to help you understand how to see the truth of what's being said.
Now, in this denial—well, non-denial, they're not denying it—from the NSA, they definitely want you to walk away with the impression that Tucker Carlson is wrong, his allegations are not true, do not believe him, they are not engaging in this, and they couldn't if they even wanted to.
But you've got to look between the lines.
When you see statements like this, there's clever wordplay that is used so that they are technically telling the truth.
Let's play a game.
What are the allegations that Tucker Carlson has leveled against the NSA?
They are spying on him.
That's one allegation.
They are planning to leak his communications.
That's another allegation.
And they're doing it for political reasons.
That's another allegation.
And they're doing it because they want his show off the air.
Now, those last two may overlap.
That's why, you know, I said and.
But anyway, I digress.
Check this out.
They say, Tucker Carlson alleged the National Security Agency has been monitoring our electronic communication, planning to leak them in an attempt to take his show off the air.
This allegation is untrue.
What allegation?
You see, here's the challenge.
Here's... I'm sorry, let me put it this way.
Here's the first question.
Are you spying on Tucker Carlson, yes or no?
Okay, no answer.
Do you have any intention, or does anyone, intend to leak the communications?
Do you not like Tucker Carlson?
Do you want him off the air?
You see, those are different questions.
This is the trick you see in fact-checking.
When they say, Donald Trump claimed that CNN had stolen all the ice cream on Sunday.
And then they'll do the fact-check where they're like, CNN never stole any ice cream from Donald Trump's campaign.
It was completely absurd.
Though they did steal the ice cream on a Tuesday.
You see how that works?
They add the extra little bit.
Tucker, wanting to give the full context of the story, explained what was happening to him.
The NSA is now lumping it all into one thing, saying it's not true.
So while they may actually be spying on him, they're not spying on him because they want his show off the air.
Which is...
I suppose you could say opinion anyway, because think about it this way.
What if the person who went to Tucker Carlson said they don't like your show and they want to get it taken off the air?
The point of leaking it isn't to directly get it taken off the air.
It's so that it can create a cascade effect for activists to try and get you banned.
Then the NSA could say, we're not trying to get him off the air!
We're trying to get other people to take them off the air.
You see how that works?
Non-denial, denial.
NSA is a foreign intelligence mission.
That's a funny one.
Oh, wait, wait, I'm sorry.
I skipped this part.
Tucker Carlson has never been an intelligence target.
Oh, they added a word!
Why did you add intelligence target?
That's interesting.
You see, look, I'm not saying anyone's proven anything.
I'm certainly saying the NSA has not denied anything.
Tucker Carlson has never been an intelligence target.
Okay, is he an ancillary target?
Are his communications being intercepted due to the sources he's communicating with?
And therein lies the big story.
What if Tucker is communicating with a confidential source?
The NSA is spying on that source, and in the process, has spied on Tucker Carlson.
This happens all the time.
In fact, it happened to Michael Flynn.
The whole unmasking scandal.
You may remember.
So here we go.
You know what?
I see this and I'm like, sounds like they're spying on him.
We target foreign powers to generate insights with limited exceptions and emergencies.
So they're basically saying there could be a circumstance in which they are spying on Tucker Carlson.
The NSA may not target a US citizen without a court order.
Who said they were targeting him?
It's entirely possible what actually happened is that they intercepted his communications in the process of spying on someone else.
Now, there's something else entirely here.
It could be that individuals at the NSA are doing this.
It's really that simple.
And we see it all the time with news organizations.
When a single journalist does something wrong, they'll say the name of the company and not the person.
You see how that works?
So you can have someone like Oliver Darcy of CNN publish a big fake news article.
And then they'll say, CNN does not do this.
CNN did not do this.
Because it was Oliver Darcy who did it.
You know what I mean?
I'm not suggesting Oliver Darcy actually did publish a fake news article.
But I used his name simply because I have an article from him defending the NSA.
I love it.
Tucker Carlson claimed the NSA is spying on him.
Even his own colleagues don't seem to believe it.
Okay, is there, um... Is there anything here that says opinion?
No?
There's no opinion tag on this?
It just says media?
Oliver is just posting opinion pieces?
That's fine, I got no beef with opinion pieces.
But that's all this is.
CNN's upset that Fox News didn't run wall-to-wall coverage.
I'm exaggerating a bit.
They're upset that Fox News isn't covering the story, saying it should be big.
Here's what Oliver Darcy says.
Fox News host Tucker Carlson made an explosive claim on his show Monday night.
He had learned through a whistleblower the National Security Agency is spying on him and planning to leak his communications in a bid to take him off the air.
Quote, the Biden administration is spying on us, Carlson declared to millions of Fox viewers.
We have confirmed that.
Let me just pause and say, Tucker didn't break any news when he said that.
Okay, I mean, he technically did, but like, I can tell you right now, it has been confirmed the NSA is spying on you and me and everybody else.
But you get the point.
Darcy says, Carlson's own colleagues don't appear to be buying what he's selling.
What makes you think that, Oliver?
Did you ask the people at Fox News?
What's that?
You didn't?
You're just making assumptions and then writing things about it?
Amazing.
Barring an unusual circumstance, if a reputable news organization had confirmed the NSA or any arm of the U.S.
government was spying on one of its top employees, it would be a story of significant consequence.
When the Washington Post, CNN, and the New York Times recently learned that the Trump Justice Department had seized the records of its reporters, the revelation led to weeks of coverage and a commitment from the Biden administration to end such practices.
You see the game they're playing?
When they recently learned.
Tucker Carlson came out and said a whistleblower provided them with information.
Could it be that the reason Fox News hasn't run stories on it yet is that Tucker is relaying an experience and the news division needs confirmation?
Do you trust Tucker Carlson?
Clearly, Oliver doesn't.
Do you, though, viewer?
Probably.
I tend to trust Tucker Carlson.
I don't trust everybody completely, but I don't think he's making it up.
However, the individual who came forward, Tucker Carlson, and made these claims Could be wrong.
You see?
So maybe the journalists at Fox News are like, we need hard legal confirmation of this, and they're reaching out for a comment.
And Tucker decided to run with his experience to preempt any potential leaking that may occur.
It's that simple.
There's not a lot to say about it other than, show me the evidence, Tucker, and, you know, in the meantime, we'll just say, okay.
We're not going to take actions based on it.
We know the NSA spies.
Of course, CNN is desperately trying to jump up ratings.
Carlson not only alleged that the NSA was spying on him, but that it was conspiring to take him off the air and engaging in the conduct for political reasons.
But the morning after Carlson delivered his bombshell claim, none of his colleagues covered it.
A search of Fox's transcripts did not reveal any coverage on Tuesday morning.
Even Fox and Friends.
And this is interesting, to be completely honest, because ground.news has tracked 44 sources discussing this story.
These are rated sources, so there's probably way more sources Way more outlets that have covered this.
One of the biggest stories of this past week, maybe even the month, maybe even the year.
So yes, it is getting heavily covered.
And they're saying Fox News isn't covering it?
I'll give them that one.
That is interesting.
A search of Fox's transcripts did not reveal any coverage Tuesday morning.
Even Fox and friends.
Blah, blah, blah.
Trump conspiracies.
Blah, blah, blah.
Passed on the story.
And the Fox News website also did not appear to carry coverage of Carlson's claim.
Fox's top executives, such as Chief Executive Susan Scott and President Jay Wallace, had also not released statements condemning the NSA's supposed behavior by Tuesday afternoon.
Are you saying that Tucker literally made the whole thing up?
That's a bold claim.
That is a very, very bold claim.
You'd think that instead of writing a speculative op-ed, you would try to prove whether or not Tucker Carlson is making these things up.
Now, I know, I know, I can already hear people saying, what are you doing, Tim?
You're just reading CNN.
We are hiring journalists.
We just hired another reporter who's on TimCast.com.
We will absolutely be having a newsroom, and we will absolutely be saying we need comments from CNN, from Fox, from all these organizations.
I want to know if CNN's actually done any work.
I would like to reach out for comments.
CNN, did you do, are you currently working on any stories to track this down, or are you just publishing op-eds?
The same to Fox News.
Is anyone currently working on these stories?
But we'll get there.
We'll get there in the next week or so.
Hopefully, TimCast.com will be relaunched with the new design, which is going to look amazing.
And we've already got, I think we're going to have four writers already.
Four writers.
This is really fantastic stuff.
They say, a Fox News spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment on why the network is failing to cover Carlson's claim.
Because maybe they are.
They go on to say, the spokesperson also did not respond to questions about why Fox executives were remaining silent.
Carlson stood by his claim during his broadcast Tuesday night.
He also indicated he tried calling the NSA director directly, but he couldn't get through.
On Tuesday, as Carlson's show was beginning, the NSA tweeted a statement indicating the Fox hosts claim is untrue.
Tucker Carlson has never, but we went through that.
They're going to say that Carlson is Fox's highest-rated host.
He has a history of peddling conspiracy theories as fact to his viewers.
He recently claimed the FBI orchestrated the January 6th insurrection, a claim that has since been thoroughly fact-checked.
I love that one.
He didn't say debunked.
You know why?
Because it's nuts!
They used to say, that's a conspiracy theory and it's been debunked.
And then it gets re-bunked, I guess.
And so they don't say they've just been fact-checked.
What does that mean, fact-checked?
Confirmed?
Are you saying it's been confirmed?
Is that what fact-checked means?
Okay.
Did the FBI orchestrate the January 6th insurrection?
Orchestrate's a strong word, but it seems like there were definitely confidential informants, and the FBI knew it was happening.
And I wouldn't say orchestrated.
But maybe.
We don't know.
I certainly think they played a role.
I certainly think, at the very least, they knew because they did have informants, and a lot of questions are raised.
I do disagree with Tucker Carlson in his segment because he said, These people weren't arrested.
They are unnamed.
They're likely informants.
This means the FBI— It's like, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa.
You're playing hopscotch, buddy.
Okay?
With all due respect, I understand the point he's making.
I think he's probably correct.
The FBI is heavily involved in a lot of this stuff, but we gotta slow down a bit.
Alright?
I can't play into that speculation.
Why?
Because look at CNN refusing to debunk the story.
They have been burned so bad on publishing fake news that they're worried about asserting a hard claim about bunking or debunking or whatever.
Now, Glenn Greenwald chimed in.
He says, first, it's bizarre that NSA.gov allows no replies.
That's true.
On the actual NSA tweet, you cannot reply.
Second, NSA has used the same deceit for years.
They can spy on U.S.
citizens' communications without targeting the American.
Third, NSA has extremely broad authorities to collect communications without targeting a person.
He says I'm in no way ratifying or supporting the claim that NSA collected the communications of Carlson or any Fox host simply because I don't know.
What I know for sure is that this is NSA's non-denial denial, using the same false framework they always use to mislead the public.
Back in 2013, using the NSA's top-secret documents, I reported in detail how the NSA collects, stores, and monitors Americans' communications without a warrant and without targeting the American, which is all NSA denies that it did.
Here's another article we reported at the height of the Snowden reporting.
The NSA constantly lies about the FISA process.
It has broad authorities to collect Americans' communications, and often does without targeting the person.
And just FYI, the Pentagon just suspended a pro-Trump security official for unauthorized disclosure of classified information from the NSA, meaning, presumably, that she leaked NSA activities to someone she wasn't supposed to talk to about it.
This, my friends, sorry for burying the lead, may be the bombshell from Glenn Greenwald.
Bloomberg.com.
Yesterday, top Pentagon cyber official security clearance suspended over suspected disclosure of classified info.
Kate Arrington, a SC lawmaker, beat Mark Sanford in the 2018 primary with help from Trump but lost the general, appointed the Pentagon in 2019.
Fascinating.
This could very well back up Tucker Carlson's claims that he's being spied on and that someone came forward.
A pro-Trump?
Here's what they say.
Katie Arrington, Chief Information Security Officer for the Pentagon's Acquisition and Sustainment Office, was informed May 11th that a security clearance for access to classified information is being suspended as a result of a reported unauthorized disclosure of classified information and subsequent removal of access by the National Security Agency.
Could it be That the reason Tucker Carlson is reporting this information now is that this story is just coming out and now he can reveal that information?
Or maybe, to be completely fair, this story has nothing to do with Tucker Carlson.
It's all speculative.
We don't know.
I do think, however, it's interesting and maybe a bit speculative on Glenn's part.
He says the Pentagon just suspended a pro-Trump security official.
Well, she learned on May 11th her clearance for access to classified information was being suspended.
The National Security Agency, which is part of the DOD, gathers some of the information, blah blah blah.
So we don't know exactly what happened.
They say the memo to Arrington provided no details about the possible disclosure of information.
Pentagon acquisition spokesperson Jessica Maxwell said the department can't comment on any question about Arrington's claims.
Tucker said that he got a phone call from a whistleblower.
Recently.
So, perhaps they're completely unrelated.
That's fair.
Still, there's a lot to investigate in this story.
There's a lot more.
I mean, this is a pro-Trump official who is leaking information.
Then you get one of the most prominent, like, thought leaders in MAGA.
Well, I guess a lot of Trump people don't like Tucker Carlson.
And saying that someone leaked in this information.
I think there's a time problem here, but maybe some of the details are being held back for the sake of security, or maybe it's just wishful thinking and they're not related.
Glenn says, this is what you do when you're a security state agency designed to lie to the public and you don't want anyone to see the debunking of the misleading claims and propaganda you post.
Just bizarre.
And he's referencing that they're not allowing people to reply.
Which is interesting because I wonder if that's a violation of the First Amendment.
Yeah.
I guess they're not creating a public forum, though.
CNN and NBC personalities who never heard of Incidental Collection and couldn't spell FISA, let alone explain it, are out in force demanding everyone believe that the NSA's statement constitutes a meaningful denial.
It doesn't.
And should be uncritically accepted.
They're state TV.
That's true.
More points about the NSA Carlson matter beyond what I just noted.
Amazing timing.
New York Times Today reports, there are serious questions at the Oversight Board's review of how the NSA collects and reads Americans' communications without warrants or targeting.
Isn't that funny how that works?
Oliver Darcy, did you even read the New York Times?
I mean, this story is from literally yesterday, updated this morning.
Incredible.
Privacy Watchdog Board's secret report on NSA system fell short, members say.
They go on to mention the system X-Keyscore, a system for spying on Americans, and they're not targeting them, they're just collecting all their information.
As that NYT article notes, the controversy is about the program I first reported in 2013 called X-Keyscore, a gigantic database of internet communications that NSA agents can and do use to search communications without warrants.
And then he links to his original reporting.
It's fascinating, isn't it?
Tucker Carlson comes out a day before the oversight watchdog has a story in the New York Times about them falling short.
We have a story about a woman who was pro-Trump and had her clearance revoked just about a month and a half ago.
I think it's all rather interesting.
It could just be incidental or coincidental.
But let's be real people.
The NSA does spy on everybody.
We know it.
And it was stupid to think they weren't.
We had Bill Binney back in the 2000s telling us they were doing this.
We didn't need, necessarily, all of the hard evidence to know it was happening.
But the hard evidence was an excellent, uh...
Well, a bit of evidence.
I mean, getting all of these documents helped confirm what we already knew.
I'll put it that way.
So when Tucker Carlson comes out and it's happening, I'd say, uh-huh, and?
And then if it were to come out that I was being spied on, I'd be like, okay, yeah, and?
Yeah, of course they're spying on me for sure.
And Tucker.
They're probably spying on you.
They got all your nasty little phone messages.
Well, the media loves to just hate.
CNN, MSNBC, all these other NBC, they exist to hate Trump and the right.
So, of course, they'll defend the NSA.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 1 PM on this channel.
Thanks for hanging out, and I will see you all then.
Across the United States, we have seen new bills being signed into law that bar biological males from competing against women.
Notably, in Florida, Ron DeSantis signed this bill.
He's now being sued over it.
The human rights campaign, a non-profit, is filing a lawsuit.
In Ohio, Democrats, in a very bizarre fashion, began screaming and banging on their tables so loud you could barely hear what was happening.
Why?
Because a Republican introduced an amendment that would bar biological males from competing against biological females.
It's that simple.
The conversation around trans people in sports is a very complicated conversation.
There's a lot of questions that get brought up that I think are legitimate coming from the left, but there's a lot of things the left ignores when it comes to biology and competition, and the purpose of competition.
The first thing I'll say is, this political behavior, Democrats just screaming and yelling, I saw this and I'm like, I don't care what the bill is, what is wrong with you?
And when you see this screaming, makes me wonder how far away it is until someone starts caning the other person.
You may know the story of a congressman caning another congressman just before the Civil War.
I'm not trying to get too much into that, but the point is, I mean, this is unhinged.
Just banging and slamming like, what are you doing?
Are we in kindergarten?
And this is like an old white dude.
It's a very strange behavior.
We need to have a conversation around transgender individuals in sports, and we have these bills passing, so it's very important we actually get to the root of the arguments and talk about them.
And for that, I want to say one thing before we start.
I'm not trying to disparage or disrespect anybody.
I'll try and be as respectful as possible when talking about trans people in sports, but I think that there is a very real discrepancy in the conversation around transgender athletes in sports.
We typically only ever hear of bills barring biological males from competing against biological females, but not the other way around.
I mean, this in and of itself is a very serious problem.
In major league sports, women, biological females, are allowed to compete.
But for some reason, they don't.
It could be very simple.
These are people who aren't the best of the best.
So if you have an open league where literally male or female, anybody can compete, and it's typically just like tall, strong men, well, there's a biological component to competition, and you can't change these things.
Now, I want to read you the story about what's happening with Ohio.
Well, we're going to get into some issues pertaining trans men.
These are people born biologically female and then competing against females.
In one instance, an athlete was forced to do it.
Mac Beggs, you may know the story.
And conservatives thought this was someone who was male competing against females.
No, no, this is a trans man who did not want to wrestle Biological females but had to because many of these laws that get passed Don't understand It's it's it's a one-way street essentially if a trans man wants to compete against biological males That there's no it's actually just a disadvantage for the trans man But if a trans man competes against biological females, and they're taking testosterone.
It's a disadvantage for the biological females you can't Well, I shouldn't say what you can't do, but I'll just say, it does get complicated.
The other component of this is, it appears that there is a trans individual, born female, knowing they were trans, I don't know if this person was taking hormones, but choosing, instead of coming out and saying it, to compete against biological females.
And this is a bit more complicated, but this is the component of the conversation that's being missed in this.
When the Republicans in Ohio are coming out and saying, biological males against females, and the Democrats all start screaming, There's another half to this conversation that needs to be had that creates a very serious conundrum for a lot of these laws and what we should do in terms of sporting events.
But I'll tell you what.
One of these individuals I'm going to be talking about is a skateboarder.
And I certainly think it is... We are entering a world where people just want to... There's no competition.
You know?
If you want to play basketball, do you identify as being tall?
Well, no.
If you're tall and strong and athletic, you can be the best.
Michael Phelps has long arms, I guess, so he's a good swimmer.
But we're entering this world where you literally can identify as a world's best, and that's what's starting to happen.
And I'm not kidding.
So I could just say this.
Look, I've never had a vision of myself as the best skateboarder in the world.
When I was younger, I didn't envision a future where I was on the top podium at the X Games, and I never pushed myself all that hard to be the best skateboarder in the world.
I just liked skateboarding.
But what if there's somebody who truly believes they are the best, that to be themselves, they must be one of the best skateboarders in the world?
And another component of that is their gender identity.
So they decide that it makes sense for them to compete against women when they're biologically male, and then they end up just winning a lot.
This actually doesn't happen all that often.
I think conservatives bring up a lot of stories where they're saying it does happen, and the left does have a good argument.
It doesn't happen all that often, but when it does, it's substantive, and there's very serious philosophical arguments about why we shouldn't do this.
I don't have all the answers.
Let me just read you the news, and then I'm gonna go through some actual athletes where we have this conundrum.
Fox News reports, chaos erupted on the Ohio House floor when a Republican proposed an amendment that would ban transgender women from participating in women's sports.
Now, first of all, Fox News said transgender females.
Fox, fix your headline!
Someone who is transgender is an individual who doesn't identify with the gender they were assigned at birth.
That's what they say.
If they are female, meaning they have ovaries, and they are transgender, they would be a trans man.
The bill does not ban that.
Anyway, I digress.
I know, it's confusing for a lot of people.
They say Rep.
Jenna Powell had proposed the addition to a bill that would allow college athletes to make money off their name, image, and likeness in the state.
The bill itself passed the Ohio House 57-36 and will now be sent back to the Senate to vote on the amended legislation.
It is crucial to preserving the integrity of women's rights and women's and girls' sports, Powell said, over the din of the Democratic outcry.
Unfair, yelled Democratic Rep.
Michael Skindle.
The bill would prohibit transgender females—no, that's wrong—from participating in girls' sports on both the high school and college level, instead requiring them to join male or co-ed teams.
Schools that violate the rule would face civil lawsuits.
They are not talking about females trying to compete against males.
This is incorrect language.
You don't transition between male or female.
The idea is transitioning from man to woman, although, to be fair, they've definitely changed the definitions over time.
Lawmakers also voted to remove the emergency clause, which would have allowed the bill to take effect immediately upon passing the Senate.
Ohio, if the bill is ultimately signed, would join Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, New Mexico, and Texas to become the seventh state to pass name, image, and likeness legislation, set to begin on July 1st.
Ohio's bill is no longer on track to take effect that day with the amendment.
This is about making transgender people the other, said Rep.
Casey Weinstein, Democrat from Hudson, of the amendment, according to Buckeye Extra.
Like many of you, I have fought for women's equality all my life, and now I am continuing to fight for it today, said Rep.
Jean Schmidt, R. Loveland, who argued that menstruation hampered female athletes.
If you have a daughter, you should believe in this, said Rep.
Sarah Carruthers, R. of Hamilton.
In March 2020, Idaho became the first state to ban transgender women from girls' sports this year alone.
Governors from Alabama, Arkansas, Mississippi, Montana, Tennessee, West Virginia, and Florida all signed legislation similar to the transgender ban that was taken up in Ohio.
Now what we're- the video, I might add, is just absolutely bonkers.
Uh, let me- let me just play it.
Prepare your ears, I suppose.
Here we go.
unidentified
To achieve their dreams and athletics in our state.
And it's crucial to preserving women's rights and the integrity of women's and girls sports.
Across our country, female athletes are currently losing scholarships, opportunities,
medals, education, and training opportunities.
This amendment will require schools that are part of the OHSAA to designate separate teams
for participants of the biological sex.
No school interscholastic conference or organization that regulates interscholastics shall permit biological
males to participate on athletic team or an athletic competition
designated only for biological female participants.
And the bill only targets biological males wanting to compete against biological females.
Alright, let's get into all of these arguments.
And I have a lot to say on this.
Because I've had a lot of arguments with a lot of leftists.
And this one, I mean, that is just insane.
These people screaming.
Shut up!
Calm down!
You lost.
Present your arguments.
These people, this is not how politics is supposed to be in this country.
And I want to stress, I am in no way intending to disparage any of these people.
In fact, I'll be defending them to a certain degree.
The first thing I want to start with is Mac Beggs.
Macbags is a high school wrestler.
Macbags was born female, started taking testosterone to transition to male, but because of some of these laws was not allowed to compete against males.
It doesn't make sense for someone who is taking testosterone supplements and born female to wrestle against females.
Many conservatives were on the wrong side of this one because they saw this photo of someone who looked very masculine putting someone who looked very feminine in a headlock and they said, this is just wrong because they assumed Mac Beggs was born male.
Not correct.
This is an instance where these laws need to be carefully thought out.
If you just say you can only participate in a sport in which your birth certificate is recognized, whatever, you're missing a big part of the picture.
A one-way street.
If you are born female, no one seems to have a problem if you compete against males.
But if you are born male, this is where people bring up issues because there are advantages.
Prenatal testosterone.
I've interviewed scientists about this and it is a real issue.
It is not something you can just transition away from.
There is a very prominent transgender athlete who is actually a researcher, I think in the Pacific Northwest, who did a study that found Prenatal testosterone, meaning the baby in the womb receiving more testosterone gets an advantage, perhaps due to what's called fast twitch muscle.
These are muscle fibers that can release large amounts of energy very quickly.
My understanding is that they're good for big bursts of strength, and then slow twitch is better for endurance.
But if you're competing in sports, you're often going to be using high burst energy, at least many of these sports.
So it's very difficult to figure out how to actually solve this problem.
Now, I've had a lot of leftists say to me, there you go, Tim.
That argument in and of itself suggests that it's all arbitrary, and we should just decide who can compete on whatever they want.
Yeah, okay.
Then we're gonna refine the rules, and I'm fine with that.
But there are certain things that need to be talked about.
In the instance of Mac Beggs, this is a biological female who is transitioning to a man, which is, as they say, a social construct, and there's a distinction here that we should talk about, first and foremost.
They say that... I mean, first, let me just stress this point that I'm personally confused about.
How is it that you say someone is transitioning based on the clothing they wear, right?
That they say it doesn't... Anybody can wear any clothing.
There are biological males who are not trans who wear dresses and put on makeup, and they say they're challenging the gender binary, but they consider themselves to be men.
Because clothing is a social construct.
There are many people who, simply by nature of changing their clothing or choosing different colors, claim to be male or female.
One of the core reasons why we label people based on male or female is specifically because of biological differences.
Men tend to have more muscle mass.
Tend to.
Men tend to be taller.
The average male is a few inches taller than the average female.
Because of this, we have gender segregation.
You want to argue against it?
I'm all for it.
The argument, I'm saying.
By all means, have the discussion.
But we need to talk about something else.
Now this one's admittedly a little personal.
As many of you know, I've been skateboarding for several decades.
I have some friends who are prominent female pro skateboarders.
And a lot of people watching this show, maybe you watching this, are prominent skateboarders, perhaps even some pros, because I know you guys message me and I talk to them about certain things all the time.
So this one, I was actually contemplating whether I should even get into this, but I'm going to because we need to have this conversation.
I am in no way seeking to disparage Leo Baker in any way.
In fact, I've skated with Leo in the past, years and years and years ago, at a few different parks.
I know many people who know Leo, and I think Leo Baker is seriously an amazing skateboarder.
However, there are some things that I think need to be brought up because if we're trying to be fair, And we want to say that biological males, you know, if you transition, can compete against biological females.
Then we need to address people who are trans, either non-binary or male, who still choose to compete against biological females.
The issue I take with this is if you want to be fair and have a distinct bracket between men and women, Be it social construct or otherwise, it doesn't make sense in my opinion that someone who is born male and transitions will compete against females, and that someone who is born female and transitions will still compete against females.
The same is true for Macbags.
I believe Macbags should have been allowed and should be allowed to compete against biological males.
Or perhaps there's a different discussion to be had there, but like I said, it's not like you can just say treat everyone identically because males and females are different.
I want to point something out.
There's an article from Popsugar.com, and we have this segment here.
Let me just read a little bit.
Leo Baker is a seven-time X Games medalist, the fifth-ranked street skateboarder in the world, among women, not men.
I am not trying to be disparaging in any way.
That's just not the fifth-ranked street skateboarder in the world.
If we were going to make a non-binary bracket, Leo Baker became one of the youngest skaters ever to medal at the X Games in 2006 against women.
in the bottom hundreds, maybe thousands, maybe bottom thousands.
Again, not trying to be disparaging. This is just true.
They say, and became one of the youngest skaters ever to medal at the X Games in 2006 against women.
But dominating the women's division for years, you see, made Baker's journey to embracing
themselves as a non-binary person and athlete difficult.
Just being non-binary in competition and in sports is a really large thing to pick apart,
they told PopSugar.
Baker, now 28, says their success in the women's category played a role in suppressing their true gender identity.
Exploring their masculinity wasn't something they began to do until around 18 or 19 years old.
There wasn't anything to think about, Baker said.
I was successful.
I was out following my dreams, and that was that.
Baker was encouraged by sponsors to dress feminine, and they complied.
But looking back, they say it came at a cost.
Now this, um... On Instagram, Leo Baker says pronouns are he and they, I believe.
So I think he is appropriate.
I just want to point out, this is grammatically confusing.
When you include a singular and a plural in the same sentence, again, I'm just trying to point out my difficulty with the language and something people should clear up.
When you say Baker was encouraged by sponsors to dress feminine and they complied, it's a confusing sentence.
Just say he complied.
Looking back, he said it came at a cost.
There's this obsession with using they when they don't need to and Baker on Instagram says he.
My career didn't really allow for that exploration, so I kind of just tabled it for a really long time, until it got to the point where I couldn't take it anymore.
And so that was an 8-year process of living a fragmented life.
It became public knowledge that Baker was non-binary when they were featured in the music video for Miley Cyrus' Mother Daughter in July of 2019.
In the video around the 1.30 mark, you'll see the camera pan over Baker with they and them written on their white shirt.
In a way, it was really natural for me.
It just made sense because of the vibe of the video, they said.
I obviously knew I was trans when I was 20.
They went on to explain.
I would say if I wasn't in the public eye and I wasn't skating in competitions or was just a regular teenager, I think I probably would have figured it out a lot sooner.
The skate industry at large I feel a lot of resistance from.
They believe that when they first started to present as masculine, they were judged unfairly in competitions based on the way they looked.
Obviously standing in my power and sticking to who I am and being authentic really spoke volumes more than just winning a competition because I think it's paying off now.
What would it be like if I was living as Lacey Baker?
There's nothing there.
It's just hollow.
He goes on to mention that, or they, had a nickname Lee from 2013.
Okay, with respect, if you knew that you were trans when you were in 20, and I mean this genuinely, I am not trying to be disrespectful.
I'm trying to be very, very careful here.
I'd like to point out that we can pull up from November 15th, 2019, women's street competition, in which Leo Baker, 20th place, global ranking 58.
Okay, so that's November 19th.
If it was public to the world that Leo was trans in July 2019, and that Leo knew he was trans at 20, why still compete in the women's category?
Why is it that we have Macbags wanting to compete against males?
Why is it that we have trans women wanting to compete in the women's division, yet when we have a very prominent trans individual who was born female, they remain in the women's division?
This is a double standard that needs to be talked about, especially in the context of these laws.
Because I will stress, It makes no sense for someone who was born female and transitions to stay in the women's division if you are arguing that trans women should be competing against women.
You see my point?
We can't just put every single person in the women's category unless we have like One category like two categories of just no gender requirements and in one category one one's literally meritocracy and one's just Whatever you want it to be.
I don't understand Here we have we have more in october 20th 2019 U.s.
Skateboarding national champions women's street leo baker competing against women fourth place And then we, I mean, there's a few more.
We have this one, uh, 32nd place, and this one is September 19th, 2019.
If Leo is saying they knew they were trans since they were 20 years old and had a nickname from 2013, why still compete against women?
Is there something barring Leo from competing in the men's skateboarding division?
Or should there be a non-binary division?
I don't know.
My point is this.
We have a large group of Democrats screaming and slamming the table saying it is unfair to ban biological males from women's categories.
But they're not screaming when you have trans, uh, people who are female who are transitioning, or trans, competing against females.
Well, actually, I guess in the case of Mac Beggs, it was because they wanted something.
Mac Beggs wanted to compete against biological males, and they said no.
The argument is broken.
It is not a complete conversation.
That's kind of the point.
Now, with respect to, uh, Leo Baker, There are these claims that pop up that I think are inappropriate.
They're taking away any concept of actual biological ability.
It's a fact.
When PopSugar opens with 5th ranked street skateboarder in the world, Under under what?
What ranking system if I were to name the top skateboarders in the world?
Let me see.
Nyjah Houston would probably be number one maybe rivaled by We got Yuto Horigome and Aurelien Giraud Giraud Chris Joslin and Like man, who'd I is Paul Rodriguez might be a little bit older There's top four, but I can tell you this.
You look at the top rankings and there's 12 or 15 guys that set themselves apart from everyone else in the world.
Plus you've got VertSkate and stuff like that.
When you blanket statement and remove women from the statement, it changes everything.
So I'll put it like this.
Leo's rad.
Cool person.
Wish the best for them and all their great success.
But I'm wondering why it is that we don't have any kind of calm, rational, and legitimate conversation around how to solve for whatever this is.
If you have people saying Macbags should be—like, these are Democrats.
Macbags should be competing against males, not females.
I don't understand why there's no call for the same thing for Leo.
Now, to be fair, and absolutely, with respect, Leo has not competed, at least according to the Border.com listings, has not competed since November 15th, 2019.
Many other women have competed in the women's division, so it may just be that, you know, Leo had a coming to of being like, this is who I am, and I'm finally now aware of it, and I'm gonna be stepping out and not competing against women because it's not appropriate.
But, you look at that interview and Leo says that they knew they were trans when they were 20.
Had a nickname in 2013.
It sounds to me like there's a very serious double standard and we need to talk about this.
If Ohio, Florida, Arkansas, West Virginia, Montana are going to be passing these laws that are specifically saying males can't compete against females, well then we need to have a discussion about what it means for females to compete against males.
And therein lies, I guess, the obvious truth.
Biological males out-compete biological females in almost every single major sport.
I say almost because I'm not an absolutist.
I don't have all of every sport.
There could be some, you know, something specific that women are doing better.
There's the legend of the Soviet female snipers.
They had an easier time of laying still for long periods of time, and maybe that's true.
I'm not an expert on this.
I'm not an expert on a lot of the stuff, but I can point out one very simple bit of common sense.
There is no rule barring females from competing in the NBA, the MLB, or otherwise.
But they're not in these leagues.
Females have tried out for the NFL as kickers, and they've come up short.
But it's possible we could see a female kicker soon.
It doesn't make sense.
Okay?
And we need it to make sense so we know what the rules are.
Otherwise, right now, it seems to me that there are people... You know, I was reading... I was reading about Macbags wanting to live their true self, and they have this documentary where they're talking about these trans women runners, you know, running track in Connecticut.
There's a lawsuit over this.
And they say they want to be their true selves, and I'm like... I... I Tim Pool.
Uh, actually pretty good at skateboarding.
I've been rollerblading a bit more recently because I'm just chilling out and, man, skateboarding's got real corporate and the Olympics and everything's kind of got me down a little bit, but, uh, I'm pretty good at skateboarding.
Um, I had some light sponsorships when I was younger.
I can do a bunch of really crazy flip tricks.
I'm 35, out of my prime, not, not super interested in being the best, never was.
I was never built for being the best skateboarder in the world.
I was never driven to be the best skateboarder in the world.
And I, quite honestly, did not have the physical capabilities to be the best skateboarder in the world.
And I skated to the best of my abilities.
I still do.
I learn new tricks every single day.
And I have fun.
I'm not going to demand that my identity as my true self, this great skateboarder, be recognized by anyone else.
It's not reality.
Some people are born, like Michael Phelps, with specific physical traits that just, congratulations, that's what you are.
But people have different bodies.
Some people are tall, some people are short, and that means as much as you want to be Michael Phelps, you might not be.
Now look at Muggsy Bows.
That dude was amazing.
Dude, what was he like?
He was like 5'5", or like 5'3", or something?
He could 360 dunk?
Because that dude said, I'm going to take it.
He says, if I want it, I will see it, and it will make it mine.
And he is one of the greatest basketball players of all time, especially considering that he didn't have the height advantages of many other players.
He proved you can just do it.
But think about the hard work that he put in, the dedication, the determination.
What we're talking about now is the elimination of that and just making sports more about feel good.
Anybody for any reason wants to join can join, in which case I think the end result should be like an open league of anybody can compete, you can have bionics, you can take drugs, you can take hormones, you can do whatever you want.
I think that's the end result.
And just people...
Pushing... I mean, I genuinely think it makes sense.
You get a human being, large bionic arms, and if they can throw a basketball or swing a hammer and throw it farther than someone else, well, there we go.
So long as it's attached to a human brain that's computing, I suppose that's where we're going.
Eventually, I guess it'll just be computers and robots competing against each other.
But if we're really coming to this place now, Where we can say that someone who was born male, who isn't good enough to be in the top leagues, could just compete against females.
And that someone born female, who is one of the best females, but decides to transition and be trans, should still compete against females.
Clearly, something isn't making sense for what the women's division is supposed to be, right?
Should someone who is not a woman compete against women?
And if you believe trans women are women, Then I have a question about Leo Baker competing against women.
And to be fair, again, this may just be why Leo Baker hasn't competed since November of 2019.
So, look, I know that I often try to avoid bringing up people's names specifically in certain stories, unless they're of a particular status.
And, you know, to the best of my ability, I'm being respectful, but please, let's address these questions.
Otherwise, it's just going to keep It's going to be more and more contentious.
No one's going to know what the rules are.
Maybe these arguments are happening.
I mean, like, maybe the lawsuits and these battles in politics are the arguments that will eventually hammer out the details and we'll figure it out.
Until then, here are some issues I think need to be addressed, and I'll leave it there.
