All Episodes
Sept. 2, 2021 - Tim Pool Daily Show
01:21:48
S5178 - SF Announces Plan To Pay Criminals Not To Shoot People, Newsom Recall Data Is Bad News For Democrats

SF Announces Plan To Pay Criminals Not To Shoot People, Newsom Recall Data Is Bad News For Democrats. While polling data has improved for Gavin Newsom mail in ballot returns are showing positive signs for the recall effort. Democrats in the past have dominated mail in ballots to extreme degrees but right now it stands about 53% - 47% with democrats favored in the returns. But conservatives often show up on the day of voting to huge numbers which could swing this in favor of a recall and ultimately a Larry Elder governorship. #Democrats #Newsom #Republican Become A Member And Protect Our Work at http://www.timcast.com Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Participants
Main voices
t
tim pool
01:19:40
Appearances
Clips
j
josh hammer
00:33
| Copy link to current segment

Speaker Time Text
tim pool
Today is September 2nd, 2021.
In our first story, San Francisco has announced a plan to pay criminals not to shoot people.
Because that's how you stop crime.
You reward the criminals.
It's an insane policy, but goes to show that California is in a state of collapse.
So much so, the governor is facing recall.
And latest polling shows it's close.
He may win, but he could very well be removed.
In our next story, Dozens of outlets or more are lying about Joe Rogan after he contracted COVID and treated it with monoclonal antibodies as well as Z-Pak and Ivermectin.
They all keep saying he took horse dewormer, which I'm sure he didn't.
He probably got a prescription like any other regular person who goes to Walgreens and gets Ivermectin.
And in our last story, the Wii Spa Incident.
Not a hoax.
It turns out the individual claiming to be a trans woman who exposed themselves to young girls is actually a repeat offender going back 20 years, thus vindicating many conservatives.
But it was Antifa who came out and brutally beat people and caused fights over this, and it was the media that claimed conservatives were wrong and transphobic.
Now, if you like this show, please give us a good review and leave five stars.
And if you really like the show, tell your friends about it.
Now, let's get into that first story.
California is in the midst of a recall election because the people of California are fed
up with Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom.
Now, the polling shows that it's neck and neck.
Recent polling shows that Newsom may have an advantage and may narrowly escape being recalled.
But if he is recalled, Larry Elder is likely to become the governor.
There's a lot of problems in California, and many, even on the left, have said it's a failed state for a variety of reasons.
I think it's fair to say that the state is collapsing.
Now, that doesn't mean it's going to completely dissolve, fall apart, and cease to function.
It just means it is, on its current track, very, very bad.
And if something isn't done, yeah, eventually, at some point, it just will cease to function.
But I don't mean to say like it's the apocalypse.
What I mean is crime is skyrocketing.
Homelessness is skyrocketing.
There's human waste in the street.
A violence prevention city official was mugged on TV.
A few months ago.
I mean, it's bad.
And this is no fault to a certain degree, no fault to the leadership there, but there are droughts and there are fires.
Certainly they do bear certain responsibility for the emergency response and how they're handling water reservoirs and things like that.
I'm not going to blame politicians necessarily for natural disasters, but those are factors in the continued decay of the state.
And now we have one of the most brilliant ideas I've ever heard.
Note the sarcasm.
San Francisco rolls out program to pay people $300 a month not to shoot each other in a bid to curb gun violence in woke city where crime is basically legal.
Yes, we've seen all the videos where the people are going into Walgreens and Target ever just stealing whatever they want.
It's so bad that the other day we were joking about a sketch where you have two guys trying to come up with a get-rich-quick scheme and they're always doing these crazy shenanigans and then they see a news report about how police don't prosecute shoplifters in San Francisco and they go, yeah!
And then that's their get-rich-quick scheme.
It's basically free stuff in California because nobody will do anything about it.
Now their idea is, hey, how about we pay criminals?
Something many on the left have floated before.
This idea that if we're going to spend $30,000 to incarcerate someone, why don't we just pay them $20,000 not to commit the crimes?
It sounds like a good idea.
If you're a child, Because how do you know someone's a criminal unless they commit a crime in the first place?
In which case, what would have to happen is someone would have to commit a crime, then you'd say, okay, you've committed a crime, here's what we'll do.
We're gonna give you 20 grand if you don't commit any crimes for the rest of the year in installments every month for every crime you don't commit.
unidentified
What?
tim pool
It makes no sense.
Basically, you're telling people, go commit a crime and then enroll in this program.
It doesn't make sense.
This is why I'm saying California is collapsing.
Because their solutions are absurd.
And when they even attempt to have a solution, it's not really even a solution, but a band-aid.
I mean, take a look at San Francisco with their human Waste problem in the streets.
So they create a poop patrol to go around a poop department.
You think I'm joking?
San Francisco has a poo department.
You know, I got a fire department, a police department in my county.
Your city probably has a sheriff's department or police department or fire department or EMS.
San Francisco has a public poo department to go out to clean this up.
It's not a joke.
Paying criminals won't solve the problem.
So let's take a look at what's going on with this specific program.
No, I want to show you policy failures that are escalating in California.
And then we'll talk about this recall effort, which I think is warranted.
And my friends in California vote yes on recall.
And you should vote for Larry Elder, not because I agree with Larry Elder and a lot of policy positions, but that I think you vote for the Democrats and you will get dogmatic cultists who are pandering to the crowd for whatever they want, whatever they want to hear, and they solve no problems.
More of the same.
Larry Elder will be an outsider in California politics.
Again, not that I agree with his policy ideas.
He won't be able to implement most of them, but he will be able to veto and challenge Democrat supermajority, which is failing the state.
The best I can say is Larry Elder shakes things up a little bit, and maybe that's what California needs.
Before we get started, head over to TimCast.com, become a member, as I always say, to support our journalists who are doing a ton of work.
We just hired another journalist, we're gonna be hiring more because that, to me, is the most important thing that money can buy.
Real, honest reporting, trying to...
Inform you of the world so that you can make your decisions.
You can make the decisions you need to make.
Not because we're going to tell you things you have to believe or frame things.
Though I admit, I think we have our bias based on what we focus on.
We try to present the stories factually.
You'll also get an ad-free experience and access to members-only content, which is, for now, Timcast IRL member segments, which can be up to an hour long.
But we have a couple new shows.
We're doing one called The Green Room, where we're going to be just showing the crew hanging out in the green room as our guests come in.
So it's off the cuff.
We'll probably only be for 10 or 15 minutes, but just more bonus content for you.
Don't forget to like this video, subscribe to this channel, share the show with your friends.
Let's read the story from the Daily Mail.
San Francisco rolls out program to pay people $300 a month not to shoot each other in a bid to curb gun violence in Woke City where crime is basically legal.
They say the Woke scheme to curb soaring violent crime is set to begin in October, offering gift cards as an incentive for prospective criminals to lay down their guns.
I don't think it's fair to call this a Woke program.
I think it's just progressive garbage.
Called the Dream Keeper Fellowship, the pilot program will kick off with 10 individuals who are deemed at high risk of committing a shooting or being shot, paying them $300 to act as public safety ambassadors.
Sweeteners could kick the monthly payments up to $500 if they meet certain benchmarks.
Such as seeking a job or maintaining parole appointments.
I love this idea because I'm wondering how they go about doing this.
Is it going to be that there's someone who does shoot someone?
And then instead of going to jail, they'll say, if you don't do it again, we'll give you 300 bucks a month.
Or are they going to show up to a random person's house and be like, based on your lack of education and impoverished living standards, we assume you're going to shoot somebody, so here's money not to do it.
Can you imagine?
Because come on, it's going to be one of the two, isn't it?
I don't know how they expect to determine who is at high risk of shooting someone.
It's amazing, isn't it?
They say it comes as violent crime skyrockets in many cities, including San Francisco, where gun crimes are up 100% so far this year compared to the prior year.
San Francisco Mayor London Breed, a Democrat, insisted in an interview that the generous program is not simply cash for criminals.
These folks do not have any sort of income.
And so part of what we're trying to do is make sure that money is not a barrier to turning your life around.
I love this idea.
You know, it's like we could do universal basic income, right?
There are a lot of hard-working people struggling to get by, so here's some free money.
Use that to pay your bills.
Instead, they're like, we're not going to do that.
We're going to give the money to the worst, like the people committing crimes.
Amazing.
But we want them to turn their lives around.
So what do you think is going to happen when hard-working people who can't make ends meet see criminals getting paid and are like, yo, I work every day.
I work hard.
My fingers to the bone.
So that I'm honest.
So that I don't commit crimes.
I'm not committing crimes.
I'm working hard.
To, you know, get a job at Starbucks, McDonald's, or a factory or something.
And then you watch criminals get free money.
You're gonna be like, I'm in the wrong line of work.
Might as well just be a criminal, right?
It's a ridiculous proposition.
Much like when the left often says, why don't we just put homeless people in empty homes?
As if homeless people are homeless simply because they don't want to work.
There are homeless people who can't or who are struggling.
I would say in my experience working with homeless shelters, there is a small percentage that are homeless through no fault of their own, through bad circumstances that desperately want to get jobs and recover.
And there are a lot of homeless people who are homeless because of some choice or mental illness.
And you can't just put them in a home and expect the home to be maintained.
Look.
We had a major storm just roll through the East Coast and I just found out at the neighborhood we were in before Massive damage trees fell down roads are shut down.
They can't even get emergency crews in powers out in some areas and I'm like, wow What are you gonna do?
You're gonna put a homeless person at the house and when the tree falls down and smashes into it It just sits there Or someone's gonna have to go and fix it.
Who's that gonna be?
People need to maintain homes.
And you can't just put a homeless person in a home and think the problem's solved.
It's childish thinking, as is this.
City officials claim the controversial pilot scheme is based on the theory that criminals' bleak financial circumstances caused them to carry out violent crimes.
The program is run by the Human Rights Commission and Office of Economic and Workforce Development and is funded through the Dream Keeper Initiative, a city program that works to redirect funding into communities of color.
So, you know what?
Here we go.
You mean that they have a program specifically targeting non-white communities.
And you're going to go there, accuse these people of having high risk of shooting each other based on their race, and then give them money.
This is the most offensive and one of the stupidest things I've ever heard.
Breed said, We're looking for ways to provide incentives to make sure that they are actively engaged in seeing their parole and probation officers.
She added, The data shows that when you provide people with opportunities, that could change somebody's life.
Giving someone money isn't an opportunity.
When you feed a man a fish, you feed him for a day.
When you teach a man to fish, you feed him for the rest of his life.
This is just hurting, in my opinion.
unidentified
Hey, it's Kimberly Fletcher here from Moms4America with some very exciting news.
Tucker Carlson is going on a nationwide tour this fall, and Moms4America 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 Moms4America.us today for more information and to secure your exclusive VIP meet and greet tickets.
See you on the tour!
tim pool
Thanks for watching!
She said to Fox News, That's right.
It's not necessarily as cut and dry as folks may think.
It's not as transactional as, here's a few dollars so that you don't do something bad.
But it really is about how you help us improve public safety in the neighborhood.
As you become better, your community benefits from that.
That's right.
They're hiring criminals to be public safety liaisons.
I'm not sure $300 is going to cut it.
Is $300 enough for your insurance, your medication, to pay for rent, to pay for your food?
No.
So even if you give them $300 or $500 if they get jobs, they're still gonna be like, yo, I can make more money and make money faster just taking it from people.
So why do this?
You'd have to pay them a lot more.
But then the problem is, the more you pay, the more people are like, yo, why am I working $15 an hour for this job when I can get money for free?
Maybe that was their idea, like, okay, we gotta keep the money low enough so that they don't, you know, they don't quit their jobs and start committing crimes, but enough to incentivize them not to commit crimes, which probably isn't true because criminals probably make more money than a lot of jobs in California, so, stupid idea.
And here lies the greater issue.
Look at this story from June 29th.
This one is truly something special.
Robbery attempt disrupts anti violence officials interview.
Talk about irony.
Robbers held up a television crew, a news crew at gunpoint Monday in Oakland as they
were interviewing the city's director of violence prevention.
Authorities say.
The crime outside City Hall was just hours after the police chief slammed a move to cut the department's budget by $18 million and redirect the funds in an effort to support alternatives to law enforcement.
Amazing!
They defund the police, they start paying criminals, and the dude in charge, the anti-violence official for the city, this is Guillermo Cepedes, head of the city's Department of Violence Prevention, was mugged on live TV after the police had just said, don't defund us!
Alright, I'll tell you this.
In places like New York, defund them for all I care.
In places like this city, yeah, I say defund them.
People need to take responsibility for themselves.
They do.
I understand cities are different.
In this instance, it's because of the authoritarianism on the rise that I'm like, just abolish the police.
Sheriffs are better.
Not perfect.
We gotta have some law enforcement.
Okay, I get it.
I just find it funny that you have skyrocketing crime in your city.
And you're like, we're gonna defund the police.
And I'm like, okay, you know what?
Do it.
I don't live there.
Fine, whatever.
The cops are enforcing edict anyway.
Let's talk about what leads up to a recall effort.
Because these stories are just indications of what I believe is the collapse of California.
California as a failed state.
We have this.
News one.
Homeless crisis takes center stage as recall election heats up.
They say, Angela's house will soon be a permanent housing complex in South LA that is dedicated to getting families with children off the streets.
I mean, that sounds good.
It does.
Seeing the progress has filled Reverend Andy Bales with pride.
Reverend Bales is CEO of Union Rescue Mission.
He has dedicated the last 35 years of his life to the nonprofit's mission of solving homelessness.
Reverend Bell said he can relate to voters who question why the problem of homelessness has ballooned, despite billions being poured into programs, many of which are taxpayer-funded.
According to him, the government way is too expensive and inefficient.
Homelessness is getting worse in California, across the board.
And it was bad when I was there.
They referred to it as the homeless capital of the developed world.
I guess that was kind of an insult to India to call them undeveloped because India has more homeless people, but they said, look, of, you know, Western wealthy nations, LA, more homeless people than anywhere else.
That's what they would say.
I don't know if it's exactly true, but that's how they would phrase it.
Homelessness, crime, political corruption.
You look at Newsom going to these fancy restaurants, not wearing a mask, not caring, and people say, it's time to recall.
And then there are some things that I think aren't the fault of the politicians, but the responses, the emergency response, is the fault of the government.
We have this story from Mother Jones.
Drought is complicating California's plans for a carbon-free future.
It's hard to generate clean hydropower with so little water.
That's true.
Take a look at this image from the past drought.
Lake Oroville, October 30th, 2014.
The water levels dropped dramatically.
Isn't that crazy?
You ever see, like, how it looks when you're in a lake and you wonder how deep it really is?
Hey, that's what it looks like.
Now here's what's happening.
California's facing another massive drought, and it's worse my understanding that it's been, you know, the previous drought.
There's now some bills that are going into effect that say, I believe by 2025 you will only be allowed to use 52 gallons per day.
unidentified
That's a lot of water to use!
tim pool
And, you know, there are some videos saying, you gotta recall Newsom because of this.
And I'm like, no, no, no, no.
California is a failed state and collapsing not just because of the government, but because of all of the people, okay, who are entertaining these laws and don't understand what's happening.
I get it.
A lot of people say, Tim, overpopulation isn't true.
Well, regional overpopulation certainly is a fact.
You can't sustain a state.
When you have people taking long, hot showers during a massive drought so they have to divert water from the farms to bring to the city, because that's what they do.
Or when they drill down 5,000 feet to find groundwater and then the houses in Tulare County have no water left.
I'm sorry, that's a failed state.
You have too many people guzzling too much water and voting to strip the water away from the people where the water is from.
The farmers are like, hey, we need water to grow our crops.
We provide a large portion of this economy for your well-being and taxes.
And the city, having substantially more people, they all put it to a vote.
And the larger, denser population votes to take the water away from the farms.
And there you go.
Failure.
It doesn't work.
There's too much, there's too many people.
Y'all need to spread out, diversify.
Stop hyper-concentrating in these massive urban sprawls.
Because it ain't working.
And now we see another issue.
Fires.
From Reuters, crews save California town near Lake Tahoe.
Wildfire rages on.
Again, I'm not going to blame California for a natural disaster, but the responses have been relatively bad.
Now, as for the wildfire, this is a lot... it's very different relative to the droughts.
The droughts, I can say, I've covered that story.
Yeah, they're failing across the board.
They're relying on... it's just not working, to put it bluntly.
They get water from Colorado River.
They're relying on desalination.
These things are not long-term solutions.
Too many people in hyper-concentrated areas voting for self-interest ultimately will not work.
As for the wildfires, it just goes to show that California has problems that can't accommodate a lot of these houses, these towns and these small houses, because of the rapid spread of wildfires, which are naturally occurring phenomenon.
When a lot of brush and foliage and whatever falls to the ground and sweeps the forest floor, there is a lot of tinder material.
When it gets really dry, fires start.
The problem?
Some of these wildfires are started because of the failures of the institutions in California.
Notably, when a wildfire was started, because there was some power lines above ground and sparks went flying.
Or people driving in cars with chains dragging, and then sparks.
Or people flicking cigarettes out of their cars.
It is not just about the government.
It is about the individual actions that are taking place that result in the chaos in California.
But let's talk about the recall effort.
Let's talk about what's happening because people are upset.
They're upset by what they're seeing, and they want change.
Thus, Governor Gavin Newsom is facing a recall, and it's close.
Some say it's within the margin of error.
We're not entirely sure right now.
Things could change.
The latest from Politico.
Newsom has strong support in latest California recall survey.
With a strong majority of residents backing his handling of COVID-19 amid the Delta variant spread, California Governor Gavin Newsom enjoys support from a strong majority of likely voters who say they're voting against his recall, according to a new poll from the Public Policy Institute of California.
The survey released Wednesday night showed that 58% of likely voters say they'll reject the recall, with just 39% voting yes.
The margin is slightly larger than in two previous PPIC polls this year, with less than two weeks left until the September 14th election, the latest evidence that Democratic governor has gained breathing room in recent polls, according to a consolidated average by 538.
Well, let's take a look and see where we're at.
538 says right now, There is a plus 8.4% lead for Gavin Newsom, with 52.1% saying, keep Gavin Newsom, and 43.7% saying, remove Gavin Newsom.
Of course, they also show that Larry Elder has a 23.5% of the polling, if it was going to be someone other than Gavin Newsom.
Now this may be true, but I'm still not convinced.
I think there's a strong possibility that Gavin Newsom does win.
In fact, there's a lot of conservative and anti-establishment, new right personalities, whatever, who have said things like, Newsom's not going to be recalled.
But you gotta go vote yes on it anyway.
You've gotta tell your friends, and if you're not doing the work right now, well then you deserve Gavin Newsom.
There's not a lot of conservatives in California.
I should put it this way.
There's actually a lot of conservatives in California in a lot of different areas.
Relative to the total population, not as much as you might think.
But how many moderate people are there?
How many regular people are there that don't like Newsom and don't like Trump?
And you can go out and start telling them, hey, come vote.
How about this?
You got friends?
Hey, they're getting their mail-in ballots.
Why don't you tell them to fill it out?
Do what the Democrats do.
Encourage your friends to vote.
That's one of the key issues of the 2020 election as to why the Democrats had the gains where they had them and they had losses where they had losses.
But one of the main strategies of Democrats is with universal mail-in voting, it is incredibly easy to go to your friend and say, vote.
And that's the secret.
When you don't have mail-in voting, there's a lot of people who don't care.
And you'll say, hey, you should vote, and they'll be like, does that mean I gotta get up and go somewhere?
Yes, I'm not doing it.
But when the mail-in ballot's right there, they go, alright, whatever, I'll fill it out here, I'll vote, okay.
And then they'll go mail it in.
Now, perhaps there's some ballot harvesting, or maybe it's just people going door-to-door and saying, did you fill out your mail-in ballot?
You should fill it out right now and then mail it.
They don't gotta do anything other than that because it's right there in front of you.
They made it extremely easy.
And with the removal of that barrier, people who normally don't care, now are like, okay, it's not that hard anymore, now I'll vote.
I don't think it's a good reason to vote.
I think you need to know what your vote's about and know what you're voting for.
But they've certainly made it easier.
But they've made it easier for Republicans, too.
The issue is Republicans don't have the organizational power to actually push people to go and vote.
So Republicans gotta learn this.
You've gotta start using the same tactics.
Going to your friends, asking if they voted, ask your parents, ask your kids, ask whoever.
Or you can have activists go door-to-door encouraging people to register to vote and to vote.
It's that simple, isn't it?
People need to feel like there is a chance here.
You need to give it your all.
Otherwise, you know what?
Then you'll deserve Gavin Newsom.
Now, let's take a look at the polling data, I'm sorry, the mail-in ballot data so far from Political Data, because I'll tell you this, there's actually a lot of good news for people who want to see Gavin Newsom recalled.
Even though they're saying the polls are favoring Gavin Newsom right now, I'm not convinced based on the recall ballot return tracker from Political Data, Inc.
Right now they say all ballots mailed out, 22,240,112, Returned.
23% have been returned.
That's 5,054,661 with 17 million remaining.
How many of those 17 million remaining are moderates, centrist Democrat types, and conservatives who would probably vote to recall if only you went out and talked to them and said, hey, are you guys going to vote?
Now the truth be told, you could go and tell someone to vote and they vote not to recall.
And that could be bad.
But the issue is that Democrats will go to areas where they know they're likely to vote Democrat.
Republicans should go to areas where they know people are likely to support recall and encourage people to vote.
Truth be told, I think we should just encourage people to vote and try and inform them.
Just don't do any of the ballot harvesting stuff, all that illegal whatever.
Actually, I don't know, California might be illegal, I'm not sure.
Figure out what your laws are.
Make sure you're operating within the law and do your best to encourage people to engage in the civic process.
Let's take a look at some of this data, which I think is really good news.
Of the ballots mailed, 10.3 million went to Democrats, 6.5 went to Independents, and 5.3 went to Republicans.
That's very, very interesting.
Of the ballots returned, 26% are Democrat, 17% are independent, and 23% are Republican.
You can clearly see.
josh hammer
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.
It's America on Trial with Josh Hammer.
tim pool
More ballots have been returned, 2.6 million Democrats, proportionally to Independents or Republicans.
Why?
Independents and Republicans are more likely to vote in person.
This is good news and bad news.
The good news is it means that right now Democrats have only 53% of the vote.
Then you have Independents at 22, Republicans at 24.
There's no guarantee that all 53% of Democrats who voted voted to keep Gavin Newsom.
Many of them who are more moderate may have actually said, nah, get rid of him.
3% maybe?
I'm not so sure.
Maybe not.
Of the independent voters, how many are actually saying keep because they lean left?
It may be the case.
Let's do this.
Let's take a look at civics polls.
Do you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion of the Democratic Party?
61% says unfavorable, 28% says favorable, and 11% are unsure.
If we just extrapolate from this and then go back to the data, we can say that about Two-thirds of independents are in favor of a recall because they're more likely to hate, dislike the Democrats.
And about 21% will keep, you know, Gavin Newsom.
If that's the case, and Democrats are unified, right now votes may be around 65% in favor of Gavin Newsom.
But like I said, there's still some good news here.
It is a disproportionate amount of votes for Democrats, and their lead is only 3%.
Independents are underrepresented in this vote.
Y'all need to get out, get active, and start telling people to go vote, because independent voters haven't come out.
But, the good news, like I said, many of these voters are going to come out in person, and that's when the percentages will shift dramatically.
If right now Democrats only have a 3% lead over Independents and Republicans, that means very much so.
That come Election Day, there's going to be a surge of people voting to recall Gavin Newsom.
Now, just because an Independent favors the Democratic Party, still doesn't mean that they favor Gavin Newsom.
And they may want him out, even if it means Larry Elder, because they know Larry Elder is just one guy.
He doesn't have the state legislatures, he doesn't have the, he's not a rep or anything like that, he's just one guy.
Now he can jam up a lot of Democratic agenda stuff, and so they may be thinking like, Well, at least Gavin Newsom will agree to some of these things.
Or they could be saying, look, Gavin Newsom is really, really bad, okay?
And he's obstructing what we really want, at least with Larry Elder.
It'll send a shock to the Democrats.
Maybe we'll get that other guy who's trailing behind Larry Elder.
Maybe the polls are wrong.
Maybe we just gotta get Gavin Newsom out.
I don't know.
I will give you my personal opinion, is that I believe it is a higher probability that Gavin Newsom is not recalled, but there is a very good probability he is.
In that event, it seems like Larry Elder will win.
But this is just me basing my opinion off other people's data.
I don't know for sure.
You'd think after all of the insanity you've seen in California, that they'd be like, I'm done with this.
I don't care.
I'm done with this.
But I'll tell you what.
In the civics poll, we see it across the board.
Democrats are overwhelmingly tribalist.
Overwhelmingly like the Democratic Party.
And you know what's funny?
Republicans hate the Republican Party.
Let me see if I have the right poll here.
Yeah.
Do you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion of the Republican Party?
Republicans only have, only 64% of Republicans view the Republican Party favorably.
Isn't that just sad?
Republican Party is trash.
17% of Republicans don't like the Republican Party and 20% are unsure.
Larry Elder is something different though.
Larry Elder is something different.
But I will warn you, my friends, there are many reasons other than statistics as to why I have the opinions I do.
Let's throw it to our good friend Colin Moriarty, who said good news. I haven't lived in California
since 2019, but I got a gubernatorial recall ballot sent to me in Virginia.
And then he posts these images, which he has redacted information.
You can see this official election mail from the county of Los Angeles.
Mr. Colin Moriarty official ballot.
And you can see here, September 14th, 2021, California gubernatorial recall election.
All registered voters in L.A.
County have been mailed a vote by mail ballot.
Take a look at this.
It says on the front, Virginia.
How did California get his Virginia address?
Why did they send him a ballot to Virginia?
Yeah, I wonder what's going to happen in California.
I wonder.
Because if this is a mistake, I wonder how many mistakes have been made.
L.A.
sent a ballot to a Virginia address.
How is that possible?
How is there no failsafe to say these ballots should not be sent out of state?
And how many people might get these and be like, sure.
Makes you wonder, doesn't it?
Now on this you can see there's a lot of people listed.
I don't think Larry Elder is listed on the front page, but there are a lot of people you could potentially vote for.
Caitlyn Jenner, for instance.
Let's see, who else is on this list?
You can see this image.
You got Caitlyn Jenner down there, that's for sure.
Larry Elder isn't... I don't see him anywhere.
There's another guy I don't see.
Let's jump to the polling.
It's Paffrith.
So, uh, I'm not familiar with Paffreth.
I know that Larry Elder's running.
I know a few other people are running.
There's a lot of people you may not be familiar with.
And what you need to understand about the recall election is that you don't need a majority to win.
If there's a recall, whoever gets the most votes becomes governor.
And that could be Larry Elder, my friends.
That could very much be Larry Elder.
I can't understand how people choose to live in these states.
I gotta be honest.
I can't understand how they choose to remain with skyrocketing crime.
With the violence prevention city official getting mugged on live TV.
I don't know if it was live, but they were mugged while doing a shoot with a news crew.
While San Francisco decides that we're gonna pay criminals.
While criminals are running into stores, taking whatever they want.
I don't know how this persists.
You'd think at some point people would say, I'm mad as hell, I'm not gonna take it anymore.
But you know what?
You take a look at how the Democrats view the economy, and they mostly view it as good.
And that is wrong.
There is no objective measure by which you can say the economy is doing well.
Every day businesses shut down, more states shut down.
People are saying their business is in decline in New York City because of the mandates.
It's just getting slammed across the board with shortages, labor shortages, fuel price increases, food cost increases.
By what metric can you possibly say the economy is doing well?
They believe it!
Because they watch CNN, and they say, oh, you know, what Tim says is wrong, and he's lying, and it's like, bro, I just read all of the news.
I read as much as I can.
California needs new leadership, and I don't think it matters who it is, to be completely honest.
Even one of these other Democrats would probably be better, even though they wouldn't be as good as Larry Elder, because they'd probably just fall in line and support the party line.
We need something to change.
And we need to start calling out California more often.
Rolling blackouts, the power outages, the drought, the chaos, the poo patrols.
Yo, this is not a way for people to live.
And unless or until people decide to say, enough, California is a failed state, it'll happen, and it'll spread.
And therein lies the other challenge.
As more and more people leave California, the likelihood of this spreading to other places, yeah, these people bring these ideas with them.
You know, my respect to Joe Rogan, him moving to Texas is a good dude, and I think he's principled and won't vote for this, but what about the people who move to Austin to support his endeavors?
The people that, you know, when he does a comedy club, when more actors come out and they bring their support staff and they're all gonna vote Democrat, they're all gonna vote Left, and they're gonna change the landscape and vote for things that fail.
Pay attention to what's happening around you.
Sorry, Californians, man.
But you better go out and vote for recall.
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 I'll see you all then.
We've long known that corporate press has completely lost the plot, but you know what?
I'm glad they made this latest move against Joe Rogan to smear him for taking cocktail of meds, including horse dewormer.
I'm glad they did it, you know why?
Because now regular people who know and like Joe Rogan can see these stories and go, yo, the media's lying about this.
Absolutely long.
And I want you to understand just how political everything has gotten.
Of course, I'm sure most of you who watch videos like mine, you already know this.
But perhaps there are many people who don't.
So you can share this video with them and say, look at these stories, because I'm going to show you the history of ivermectin only a few years ago.
Now it is true, absolutely true and correct.
The FDA has not approved hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin for treating COVID.
There are some doctors prescribing it because it is a drug used in humans, but far be it for me to give anybody medical advice.
There is another alternative to vaccines, monoclonal antibodies, or Regeneron, that is FDA approved.
It is.
And that's what Joe Rogan said he took first.
So Joe Rogan comes out and says he's got COVID, or he had COVID.
He's like, I came back, I had a headache, I had fevers, I knew it was going on, got tested, and sure enough, Joe said he had COVID.
So he said he got, and he threw a bunch of, the kitchen sink at it, got monoclonal antibodies, as you may know this as Regeneron.
It was, I believe it was put under emergency use authorization in November.
I think it's fully FDA approved, but it is used for, Trump used it.
And that's one of the things Joe Rogan did take.
And he does say he also took Z-Pak and Ivermectin.
The big issue I have right here is, as much as it's not FDA approved and that's a fact, the media's lying and just calling it horse dewormer.
unidentified
All right?
tim pool
So I'm on Twitter, right?
And I made the joke that, you know, there was a prison where the doctor was prescribing this stuff, and I said the doctor was not only prescribing horse medicine, but also instructing the inmates to ingest hydroxic acid along with it!
Where are the people calling out the forced ingestion of hydroxic acid?
Hydroxic acid literally means water.
It's a joke.
The point is, the media is taking something that is far beyond just horse dewormer and calling it horse dewormer because they want clicks.
Because, listen, Their whole goal is just, what can we do to shock people to make money?
You know, we have the Castcastle Vlog, and every day we're like, we gotta get a good thumbnail and a good title, and it's a vlog, so it's not particularly newsworthy, we gotta get that hook.
And there's a line between overt, deceptive clickbait, and like, punchy titles.
And so we're playing around, but I'll tell you this.
I get that vlogs use snappy clickbait titles for their shows, but why is the media doing clickbait?
When the media is doing it on news stories, they are lying to you, making you believe insane crackpot BS.
I'm going to show you the history of ivermectin for everybody who wants to understand this.
And I'll tell you this, look, the FDA approved the community vaccine.
This was from USA Today Fact Check.
And there's a lot of people concerned about legal distinction between that and the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine is FDA approved.
They officially approved the, this is my understanding, because I did read through the letter.
There's a legal distinction between the brand name Community and the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine.
Both have the exact same formulation.
The Community brand is FDA approved and the Pfizer-BioNTech brand is EU under emergencies authorization, but they are the exact same thing.
So take that for whatever it means.
I don't know, whatever.
That's what the FDA letter said.
The issue here is, you can talk to your doctor.
I'm here to talk to you about politics.
I'm not here to advocate for any of this stuff, any medication.
I'm just here to show you how the media is lying about this.
But there's another story that I do want to talk about in this regard, and that's Candace Owens.
She said that she was refused a COVID test because of her politics.
Now, Newsweek, of course, calls her, you know, anti-vax or whatever.
Basically, she was trying to get tested for COVID and this facility was like, no, we know who you are and we will not allow you in this facility.
And it's like, okay, you see what's happening here?
People are going insane.
The media is driving them insane.
The media is literally driving people insane.
I've been saying it for some time.
Now you need to understand.
And as long as YouTube and these other outlets force us to use broken and psychotic media, we're screwed, man.
Look, you may say, Tim, you know, at least you can do your show.
And it is a good sign that my show, you know, I'm able to cut through the BS.
It is a good sign that TimCast.com is taking off, massively exploding, new staff members, new journalists.
Those are good, good signs.
Indicative of victory.
As I was saying the other day on TimCast IRL, by your mere existence, it proves that victory is not only possible, But that it's happened before.
Meaning, our parents who fought for certain ideas.
And here you are today.
And the fact that you are here today standing up and speaking out proves that victory is possible.
And your parents having you proves it happened before.
So there is cause for optimism.
So I'll say this.
I think it's good.
You know, in the long run, whatever.
When the media comes out and says Donald Trump did X, Y, or Z and it's a lie, it's hard to debunk these things because people just hate Donald Trump.
Now, of course, you have the tribal cult and they're looking at the stuff and they're just like, I'm going to believe whatever the media says.
The important thing here is Joe Rogan is not controversial.
The media wants to say he is a controversial podcaster.
He's not.
He's the most popular podcaster on the planet.
Regular people know and like Joe Rogan.
He's not a far-right guy.
He's actually kind of a left-wing guy.
But he's like a regular dude in his demeanor and his behavior.
That's why people like his show.
And he's funny.
And he's funny.
And he gets some things wrong.
And sometimes he corrects them.
And sometimes his corrections are bad.
What was it?
There was one story where he was talking about He said something like Antifa was starting fires in the Pacific Northwest, something like that.
And then came back out and said he was wrong.
It didn't happen.
But the reality is there was one guy.
So the mistake he made was using the plural.
So anyway, I'm like, that correction was a mistake.
But Joe's a good dude that people like.
People love listening to his podcast.
It's interesting.
And he's genuinely trying to be honest with you.
So when the media comes out and lies like crazy, now you've got something special.
Because there are regular people.
Okay, I went on the Joe Rogan podcast several times.
I think I went on three times.
And there are people who are like, I thought Tim was this, you know, unbiased voice when he appeared on Rogan.
Then I went to his channel and realized he's just a right-wing hack or whatever.
Okay.
You see, the issue is, on Joe Rogan's show, you have a lot of people who are uninitiated, normies, regular people who don't know the detail of, say, like the Ukraine scandal with Joe Biden and the multiple investigations into Burisma for corruption that were ongoing and that were ended when Joe Biden demanded a quid pro quo.
There are people who will hear me on Joe Rogan talk about basic things and talk about what's wrong with Trump and his behavior and the problems with the Democratic Party and they'll be like, there you go.
Then they'll come to my channel where it's higher level and more esoteric commentary and they'll be like, what is this?
So here's what happens.
These regular people now, if you come to them and you say, hey, it's not true.
Donald Trump, the verifying people thing is not real.
Donald Trump did not call white nationalists verifying people.
He said, quote, they should be condemned totally.
They'll say, that's not true, I know it's not true, you're lying, I hate Donald Trump.
Okay, now they're lying about Joe Rogan, again.
But this time, it's much, much more obvious.
So the way I see it is, we need a thousand more stories like this about Joe Rogan talking about horse dewormer.
Because then regular people who don't believe it, and think you're being biased when you call out the media, will be like, yo, they're lying about Joe.
Joe fills stadiums.
Him and Dave Chappelle, what did they do?
They did a stadium show and like tens of thousands of people?
Yeah.
Rolling Stone says, crazy times.
Joe Rogan got COVID and ate a cocktail of meds including a horse dewormer.
The only thing I can say is, who cares?
It's none of your business if he goes to a doctor and a doctor makes a decision for him.
That's it?
I thought we were supposed to be all about bodily autonomy and pro-choice.
And so if Joe Rogan went to the doctor and the doctor said, here's what we're going to do, I'm not a doctor.
I'm not going to say anything about it, positive or negative.
Just the media's lying about what's going on.
Joe Rogan said he tested positive for COVID and then imbibed an array of drugs to try and fight it, including the horse dewormer ivermectin.
You see, this is the crazy thing.
Did you ask Joe for a comment?
Did his doctor recommend certain things?
Regeneron.
Okay, let me pull up Regeneron.
I'll just make sure we get all the facts here.
Regeneron.
They say, on October 7th, Trump posted a 5-minute video to Twitter reasserting that this drug should be free.
The same day, Regeneron filed with the FDA for emergency use authorization.
In the filing, it specified that it currently had 50,000 doses and that it expected to reach a total of 300,000 doses within the next few months.
The FDA granted approval.
For emergency use authorization in November 2020.
This is monoclonal antibodies.
All right?
Right here.
Monoclonal antibodies.
Regenerons.
They've got, uh, I believe it's, I thought it was FDA approved.
Let me, let me, uh, see if they've got anything up here.
I don't know if it's fully FDA approved, but it does say it is for emergency use authorization and a treatment for COVID.
Joe Rogan came out and mentioned he got a bunch of other drugs, Z-Pak and stuff, but the first thing he says is monoclonal antibodies.
So did he go to the doctor and the doctor said, this is an emergency use authorized treatment for COVID and you should take it?
And that was the real issue?
And maybe the doctor said, here's why I recommend these things?
Yo, for all you know, Joe Rogan went to the doctor and he was like, hey, I think I got COVID.
And the doctor was like, well, take monoclonal antibodies.
And then also for your butt parasite, here's ivermectin.
I don't know.
I'm not his doctor, but I love how the media plays this game.
Check it out.
You go to Google.
Joe Rogan says he has COVID, took widely discredited drug Ivermectin.
Widely discredited?
Ivermectin has not been approved by the FDA for use to treat COVID.
I have had people on Timcast IRL who are proponents of it, and I have not been convinced.
Okay?
And there are people who very much think it's ineffective, but the truth is, we've got a story from Reuters.
Oxford University explores anti-parasitic drug Ivermectin as COVID-19 treatment.
There are many studies saying they've seen positive results, and there are many studies saying they've seen nothing.
There are some people saying the concern is people could take too much, the amount you need is too high, or ultimately it's just inconclusive because there's too many different studies.
A lot of people have said that You know, they believe the reason ivermectin is being restricted is because if there's any alternative treatment, then, you know, they can't have their emergency use authorization for the vaccines.
It is true, according to the FDA, if there is an approved and effective treatment for a disease or, you know, circumstance or whatever, Then you cannot have emergency use authorization.
But that isn't an argument, my friends, because they could just create an emergency use authorization for ivermectin if they wanted to.
It's because there's conflicting studies.
And a lot of people think there's some big conspiracy.
I really, really don't.
But I ultimately just don't think it matters all that much if someone's doctor makes a decision for them.
It's none of my business.
Monoclonal antibodies, Regeneron, are under EUA, I believe.
So if you're like, they just want everyone to take the vaccine, then why do they have Regeneron available, okay?
It's expensive, I guess?
It is expensive, but it exists.
If the reality was they didn't want there to be an alternate treatment, they could still put ivermectin under EUA, emergency use authorization.
Just like Regeneron is.
I think the issue is they're still exploring it.
It's not easy.
I don't know what to tell you.
I'm not a doctor.
I'm not here to give you advice.
Reuters says, The University of Oxford said on Wednesday that it was testing anti-parasitic drug ivermectin as a possible treatment for COVID-19 as part of a British government-backed study that aims to aid recoveries in non-hospital settings.
They say Ivermectin resulted in a reduction of virus replication in laboratory studies, the university said, and even a small pilot showed giving the drug early could reduce viral load and the duration of symptoms in some patients with mild COVID-19.
Dubbed Principle, The British study in January showed that antibiotics, azithromycin, and doxycycline were generally ineffective against early-stage COVID-19.
Here's the issue I have with this.
We had Dr. Chris Martinson, very, very smart guy, on the show, on TimCast IRL, and we did it in the members-only section because YouTube is ban-happy, and I don't even know if this video might get banned.
But he said, like, here are all of these studies saying ivermectin is good.
And I pulled them up, and sure enough, there are studies saying this, just like this one that says it reduces viral replication.
Then, I simply Google-searched, you know, a story and it said that those studies were bad studies.
And I said, look at this.
This assessment by a university says those studies are no good because their methodology was bad.
And he's like, oh, well, you know, you can't trust that.
And so then I pulled up a study that said, a bunch of studies that said ivermectin didn't work and was told, well, that science is bad.
And I'm like, yo, If I can do a Google search and I find a story says yay and a story says nay, who am I to just arbitrarily decide which one is true and correct?
And it becomes very political and tribal.
So let me just seriously just break this down once and for all on this stuff because the media lies all the time.
Okay, let me show you this.
Let me show you this.
Newsweek.
From 2015, ivermectin, a drug for parasitic diseases developed by Nobel Prize winners, could also control malaria.
Long-lasting pill that releases malaria drug for two weeks.
A game changer, once again, about ivermectin.
Anti-parasitic drug is, you know, what does this one say?
Could make your blood deadly to mosquitoes.
Once again, talking about ivermectin.
Nobel Prize winning drug, ivermectin, may fight malaria five years ago.
Meeting Bill Campbell, the Nobel Prize winner for medicine because of ivermectin.
Here's one.
Nobel Prize awarded to three scientists for parasite-fighting therapies.
When the media comes out and says horse dewormer over and over and over again, it's like the past few years didn't even happen and ivermectin having won Nobel Prizes is meaningless.
The way Reuters puts it is correct and very simple.
They're exploring an anti-parasitic drug, Ivermectin, as a COVID-19 treatment.
I do not believe there is this grand conspiracy.
Because, I mean, maybe.
Whatever.
I don't know.
I just don't believe in conspiracies.
Regeneron exists.
And Joe Rogan was able to take monoclonal antibodies.
I'm assuming was Regeneron.
It's a brand name, so I don't know exactly.
But Joe says it.
That he got prescribed an emergency use authorization, you know, FDA, EUA, medical treatment for treating COVID, and he feels better, and he took other stuff.
Instead of saying that Regeneron works, or it helps people, you know, abate the worst symptoms, they come out and just say horse dewormer 50 million times.
But I want to make sure I stress this point for all of you, because I know there's gonna be a lot of people who are gonna hate on me for it, and they're gonna comment, but let's talk about the truth.
If Ivermectin was as effective as people thought it was, the FDA could implement an emergency use authorization.
I believe, for the most part, that they don't know if it actually is going to work.
In which case, they're like, okay, if we have to tell people, here are things that can help, what can we do?
Well, they very heavily promote the vaccine, for one.
Despite them now saying there's booster requirements and things like that, I think that rocks people's confidence.
Absolutely.
You put all these studies out talking about the efficacy being reduced and then boosters being required, and people are gonna stop trusting it.
But hey, guess what?
They still have the EUA on these things because there is no effective treatment, right?
There's no approved alternative treatment, which means you also have Regeneron, emergency use authorization.
I hope you understand my point.
Regeneron, the FDA believes, works.
Joe Rogan took... I don't know if it was exactly Regeneron, but he took monoclonal antibodies, which is what Regeneron is.
And Joe Rogan feels better.
I'm not here to play tribal politics.
I'm not here to be like, you know, the government is doing things because they're evil or the Democrats.
I'm here to criticize people who are hypocrites.
I'm here to criticize the media.
I'm here to point out that the Democrats will come out and say they're pro-choice all day and night and that you should have full medical autonomy for your body unless it comes to vaccines and there should be mandates.
How about this?
How about New York City implement a Regeneron mandate or whatever?
Ultimately, let me just say, I don't know, I'm not a doctor, but I can easily point out at least one hole in the whole Ivermectin thing, okay?
Regeneron exists.
It is an alternate to the vaccine in terms of treating COVID.
Why wouldn't they do the same for hydroxychloroquine or Ivermectin if they thought that to be the case?
Some people say it's because Ivermectin is cheap and people want to make money.
Well, capitalism, man, profit motive and all that stuff, that I understand for sure, but I just, I can't make those assumptions, right?
I've talked to people about this.
I understand there's a lot of people who are scientists, who are smarter than me, who make these claims, but am I just supposed to believe that there's like a good and evil going on and some people are lying for some reason and some people aren't, and these other scientists who are saying it was inconclusive are doing so because they want to help a private pharmaceutical company?
Yo, you're getting deep, and you're making some assumptions that I can't get to.
By all means, you're free to believe whatever you want.
Take everything I've said, and if you disagree with me, use that to arm yourself in future arguments and then have these questions ready, but...
Ultimately, what it comes down to is, when the media claims Ivermectin is just horse dewormer, regular people can see that.
And they can see what Joe Rogan said to his legions of fans.
Because this video, I don't know how many views it got, it probably has millions of views on his Instagram.
Joe's got 13 million followers.
His other video is just doing little tidbits, gets like 2 million.
And they're going to be like, oh, he did a bunch of these things.
Okay, good for him.
Instead of saying that an FDA approved emergency use treatment, monoclonal antibodies, helped Joe Rogan overcome this, they simply say he took a cocktail of meds and horse dewormer.
So when regular people see it, they're gonna be like, yo, that's, that's, that's complete BS.
Now here's the problem.
Why is YouTube gonna ban me or anybody else for talking about this stuff?
Because of the media, because the media lies.
So this video make it, make it pull down, whatever.
We gotta talk about the truth, we gotta tell the truth, and that's, that's what needs to happen.
You can see it's all becoming overtly political when Candace Owens, here I have the tweet here, Candace Owens got an email, I've just learned of this testing request and as the owner of this business I'm going to refuse this booking and deny service.
We cannot support anyone who has proactively worked to make the pandemic worse by spreading misinformation, politicizing and discouraging the wearing of masks and actively dissuading people from receiving life-saving vaccinations.
The only other local testing option is the free kiosk by City Hall.
They mail their test to Texas and have inconsistent result times.
Do not take appointments.
So it's walk-in only midday weekdays in their back alley.
What?
Insane.
My team and myself have worked overtime to exhaustion, unpaid and underpaid this past year, spending our own capital to ensure that our community remains protected.
It would be unfair to them and to the sacrifices we have all made this year to serve you.
My friends, we have a lot of people come on the Tim Castyro podcast.
unidentified
We've got someone different every day, Monday through Friday.
tim pool
No one here has gotten sick, and I'm glad that's the case.
We have had guests who have gotten sick in the past, and I think we have one guest who around a month or two after appearing did get COVID.
We've had people who come on the show and talk about their experiences getting COVID.
Yo, it's bad!
I'm not saying it's the apocalypse, but I think even, I think it was Michaela Peterson, I'm not entirely sure, but we had a lot of people who were just like explaining what it was like when they got COVID.
It sounds bad, man.
It's like double flu, it's like worse than the flu, right?
I've had the flu before, it's awful.
I wouldn't want to get anything worse than that.
Even if it does have, you know, for someone in my age group, a low risk factor, it's like, I don't want to get it.
I don't want to get sick, period.
I got work to do, man.
So, I'll put it this way.
I think we can be reasonable people and take this stuff seriously and have honest conversations about what medication and, you know, what things seem to make sense, but ultimately it's down to you and your doctor, period, no matter what.
That's always been the position I've been in for basically everything.
Because I don't want the government intervening and I don't know where that line is where the government does intervene.
I just think you've got tribal politics playing everything.
Joe Rogan is controversial so say I think CNN said it.
He's not.
He's the most popular podcaster.
He's like the biggest show.
It's bigger than all late night cable shows, bigger than Tucker Carlson, all of that stuff.
Pretty sure it's bigger than Tucker for sure.
And that's what people want to listen to.
Those are the conversations they want to listen to.
And so you know what?
If we're going to wake people up to the lies of the media, I'm glad they're saying over and over again horse medicine, when Ivermectin won some scientists the Nobel Prize.
And it's also true it's not FDA approved and there's no emergency use authorization.
And you can believe that is whatever you want, like you can believe whatever reason you want
as to why that is.
I'm not going to make assumptions about intent or draw any conspiracy theories on the case.
I just don't know.
All I know is you will not come to me for medical advice.
And if you take issue with your doctor because you don't like them, you got a bad doctor.
We've had conservatives, Trump supporters on the show who have Trump supporting conservative doctors who go to their doctors and get medical advice, and it varies.
Sometimes the doctor says you're ineligible because of this underlying condition, or they recommend it even when they're Trump supporting conservative doctors.
Yo, I just think the culture war is ruining everything.
And you might not like your doctor, find a good doctor that you can know and trust.
Talk to your doctor about what you see in the media, ask them these questions, see how they respond, and make sure you are in a situation where you trust the other person.
Because I'll tell you this, the more the media puts out this garbage, the more people, the more they so distrust.
And what we need more than anything is for you not to trust me on these things, question me, challenge me.
You need to trust people close to you and not the internet people and the TV people and the TV doctors.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 1 PM on this channel.
Thanks for hanging out and I'll see you all then.
Bye.
A woman filmed a video complaining that a man had exposed himself to children and that people were upset and uncomfortable.
The man working at the spa said that they can't discriminate on the basis of gender identity, so there's nothing they can do.
That's the law in California.
Well, on the left, mainstream media, they said it was a hoax, it was a lie.
Antifa showed up and began beating people who protested.
This country is sick, my friends.
It turns out now, it wasn't a hoax, it wasn't a lie, it was true.
The individual who exposed themselves to the children and other women has been charged with several felony counts of indecent exposure, I believe.
We'll get into all the nitty-gritty on the charges, but they have been charged.
They're now claiming it's transgender harassment.
But this person apparently has a previous record.
Now before we get into this story, I want to point something out as to why this segment is so important.
I'm not a conservative.
It is not a conservative position to say offenders should not expose themselves to kids.
But this country is sick, and this is evidence of it.
Why, I've been tweeting about pro-choice and traditionally liberal and socially liberal values, but the issue is, if you take a look at this chart they put together of economic positions versus social positions.
Trump supporters were diverse.
Among Trump supporters, they were mostly not woke and economically left and right.
But the Democratic Party, those who voted for Hillary Clinton, were overwhelmingly, this is 2016 mind you, overwhelmingly in the economic left and socially left category.
What this means?
There is a truth to what happened.
An individual was angry that a biological male had exposed themselves to children in violation of almost every single social norm people expect, believe in, desire, demand.
Now, there is a large faction of individuals who believe that there should be no gender segregation, as they call it.
That's why when this woman filmed what happened with the indecent exposure, a man walks up to her and says, it was a trans person, you know, you're being bigoted.
And the woman filming says, no, it wasn't.
And as it turns out, it was an offender.
We'll break through the story.
When I come out and say the mainstream media is lying to you, and they are, they'll say that's a conservative position.
When I come out and say this story is false, they'll say, ah, but Tim doesn't criticize conservatives.
Well, you know what the issue is?
Conservatives have different values than I do in some regards, and I argue with them.
And we had a big argument on religion on Timcast IRL with, you know, Sidney Watson, Elijah Schafer, Ian, me, Lydia.
I thought it was an amazing conversation.
We disagree.
But we're not lying to each other.
We might be wrong, but we're not lying to each other.
There are conservatives who lie.
There are conservatives who are stupid.
But if my issue with someone is that we fundamentally disagree on a policy or value issue, as long as we're having a conversation, I can say, We need to find a compromise.
We need to find a way to live together.
But when the issue is that the left is lying to your face and empowering offenders who abuse children, and I say, how are you making these assertions?
They'll say, you're right-wing.
It's the only explanation.
So then they say, but Tim talks about how he wants universal health care and how he supported Tulsi Gabbard and Andrew Yang, and that doesn't change anything because he opposes the machine!
That's what it's really about.
Do you support the cult?
So right now, I guess it is true.
There's a left and a right in this country.
If you define left and right as either you are a blind ignoramus who believes whatever you're told, then I guess that's the left.
If that's how you want to define it.
If you are a discerning individual who challenges the news as presented, then I suppose you are on the right, and you are right.
No, like, right.
Like, you're right.
You're correct.
Let me read you this story, and then I want to show you what the media does and why this country is broken and sick.
From the New York Post, Offending Suspect Claims Transgender Harassment in WeSpa Case.
In June, a group of women complained that a person who identified as a female exposed their privates at the WeSpa in Los Angeles.
The incident led to months of sometimes violent protests, with media outlets declaring it example of bias against the transgendered, or even that it didn't happen.
Slate said it was a transphobic hoax.
But on Monday, charges of indecent exposure were discreetly filed against a serial offender for the Wii Spa incident, following an investigation by the LAPD.
Mind you, Andy Ngo reporting.
Excellent work, Andy.
Sources with knowledge of the case, but not authorized to speak publicly, say four women and a minor came forward to allege that Darin Aji Marajor was partially... Wow.
We'll just say excited, because I keep this family friendly.
Was excited.
In the women's section of WeSpa.
Besides being a suspect in this case, Marajor is facing multiple felony charges of indecent exposure over a separate incident in LA.
Marriger, who spoke exclusively to the Post, denies the allegation and says that she is actually the victim of transphobic harassment.
On June 23, several women confronted staff at the Wii Spa in LA, Koreatown, over accusations that a person exposed their male privates in the women's section.
Video of the interaction was posted the following day on Instagram by a woman using the name Cubana Angel.
Quote, It's okay for a man to go into a women's section?
Show is...
You know, around the other woman.
Young little girls underage in your spa, she asked the staff.
He's a man, he's a man.
The three and a half minute video was reposted across social media and promptly went viral.
Kibana Angel spoke at a press conference on July 7th in Pasadena, next to her attorney.
As I was walking, I noticed something that was really disturbing.
Something that caused me to feel that I was transported into the men's locker room, the woman said.
She said some women and girls were uncomfortable and began putting their robes back on.
She complained to staff where the video was recorded, but they legally could not do anything because of California law.
We as women have rights to be safe in public spaces, and they are being violated by men, she said.
Now I just want to pause and just say this.
Just because it's the law doesn't mean it's right.
Now, in this regard, you got a very serious challenge.
The SPA said we won't do anything because it's the law.
That's not true.
The law is you can't discriminate.
But when you see an individual, and you make... When you can discern this individual is not genuine, then you can act.
In fact, dare I say, offenders like this make it harder for trans people to actually get those rights.
There's a meme.
And it shows a very effeminate, wearing female clothes with, you know, breasts and everything, walking into the men's room and it says, the future conservatives want.
And I'm like, it's actually a good point, right?
There are issues we need to contend with as we deal with trans people and ensuring that they have safe spaces and, you know, are being fairly treated.
But there are very difficult questions that must be answered.
When you have a clear case, as a spa owner, of someone who is clearly violating What the law, the spirit of the law, then you should intervene and say, you are ruining the actual, like, the actual spirit of what we're trying to do with this.
This person's a serial offender.
Now, I'm not going to pretend to be the arbiter of morality.
So, I don't know.
I'll tell you this.
People should stand up, speak up, and say no when they are being told to apply fascistic decrees or things like that.
They're going to say, The video was followed by weeks of sometimes violent face-offs between right-wing and evangelical Christian protesters at the Wii Spa, and Antifa and far-left counter-protesters.
On July 3rd, after police formed a line to separate the two groups, 40 people were arrested.
The LAPD so far have confirmed few details about the Wii Spa incident.
Inquiries sent to the department were responded with statements saying the investigation is ongoing.
Then, this week, A warrant was issued in LA County for the arrest of 52-year-old Darren Marrager of Riverside, California, based on five felony counts of indecent exposure in connection with the Wii Spa incident.
As of publication, Marrager has not been arrested.
Everything about the Wii Spa was a bunch of garbage and lies, Marrager said in an interview.
She says she is legally female in California and was in a jacuzzi in the women's section when she was accosted by Cubana Angel.
She says she is actually the victim of harassment by transphobic women at the spa.
Marriager denies ever being excited around children at the spa.
She says she is actually the victim of harassment by transphobic women at the spa.
And therein lies a very big problem.
There are multiple witnesses who have come forward on the side of Cubana Angel.
In which case, Meriger is innocent until proven guilty, but you can see the problem.
People are not... These ideas that are being put forward, these laws that are being put in place, I'm sorry, but most people don't agree with them.
Whether it's right or wrong, whether you think it's morally right or wrong, the people are saying no.
They're challenging it.
And I think there's, what, five plaintiffs in this case?
Or witnesses, I should say?
They say, law enforcement sources revealed Marrager is a Tier 1 registered offender with two prior convictions of indecent exposure stemming from incidents in 2002 and 2003 in California.
She declined to comment on the convictions.
And that's a reference to Marrager.
In 2008, she was convicted for failing to register as an offender.
You see where this goes?
It goes way, way, way back.
It says to me that Cubana Angel is not the bad guy here, but the victim.
A law passed by California Democrats that went into effect this year replaced the state's lifetime registration requirement with a tiered system.
The law allows lower-tiered offenders to petition to be removed from the list.
However, Marrager is not eligible to do ongoing criminal charges.
She also has a long criminal history in California that includes nearly a dozen felony convictions for crimes ranging from Offenses and burglary and escape.
You know, keep it friendly.
So we'll call him adult.
Trying to keep things family-friendly as best as I can, not like I want your kids to watch this stuff.
In addition to Marrager's new felony charges over indecent exposure, she is also facing six felony counts of indecent exposure over a separate locker room incident in December 2018.
L.A.
County prosecutors accused Marrager of indecent exposure to women and children in a changing area at a swimming pool in West Hollywood Park.
Marrager claims to identify as female so she can access women's locker rooms and showers reads an internal flyer by the LA County Sheriff's Department that was sent to law enforcement departments in Southern California in late 2018.
Marrager has pleaded not guilty to all six counts, and her next court date for the incident is on September 8th.
Marrager told law enforcement she's transient, but bail was set at $150,000 in early 2019, which was paid.
Marriager says her open cases involving accusations of indecent exposure show a pattern of abuse from a state and society that punishes transgender people.
You allow transgender women to go in there, and then people simply claim indecent exposure and you are arrested.
But 2002? 2003?
Marrager says she is speaking with progressive California lawmakers, like State Senator Scott Weiner, in the hope that they change state law to better protect trans people.
Quote, If you go into an area where you're expected to be nude, there has to be an indecent exposure exemption, she says.
Marrager says she may file complaints or lawsuits for the discrimination, she says, she has been made to suffer by law enforcement and women in the Wii Spa.
She says she has been in contact with the L.A.
County District Attorney since learning of the warrant and plans to turn herself in.
What did the media say about all of this?
Let me show you, uh... Let me show you some of this.
LAPD under scrutiny for excessive force and WeSpa confrontation.
WeSpa, look at this, we've got cops, WeSpa protests, demonstrators file claim against City of LA alleging excessive force by police.
Proud Boys and QAnon expose dangerous hatred of trans people at WeSpa.
It goes on and on and on.
On and on and on.
So it turns out, this individual, going back almost 20 years ago, is a registered offender who has done similar things in the past.
The police believe this person is only feigning being transgender to gain access.
Maybe that's not true.
Maybe this person's been trans the whole time and just protested by going in and demanding this space for trans people.
I'm sure that's what a lot of the activists will say.
But I'm not sure that's relevant in the long run.
The point is, whether you think there should be gender segregation or not, right now the people do.
And there is really interesting questions about this.
Because this goes to show you that the issue isn't necessarily segregation.
It's something else.
You know, back in the day, we had very similar cases pertaining to race in the Civil Rights Movement.
They said we should not have, you know, mixed-race things or whatever, and I think they were wrong.
I think the reason they were wrong is that The differences between race are, for the most part, only skin deep.
And I say for the most part because I recognize that some people are taller, shorter, have different kinds of hair, colored eyes, but it's mostly just skin deep.
If people are going to share spaces, I don't see why we segregate on the basis of race, religion, national origin.
That makes no sense to me.
But I understand the biological differences of biological sex, and I understand why these traditions and norms exist.
And the challenge is right now.
I mean, how do you deal with the anger, the outrage, the fear, and the law as it stands?
There are many people, and I'll try to break this down because these are challenging more questions.
The left would say, segregation was wrong when it came to race, and it's wrong when it comes to gender.
People should be allowed to freely occupy spaces without discrimination.
And this is getting us into the transhumanist argument, where people say, your body is not what makes you you.
Your soul, your internal self, is what makes you you.
And we should not discriminate against people for anything.
You know, you should be allowed to use facilities that are in the public.
And that's actually fairly interesting because, based on a lot of the arguments we heard about segregation in the past, it would apply here.
Just because you have women who are offended that a man is coming in, or a trans woman, depending on the circumstance, doesn't mean they have a right to demand segregation.
Back during racial segregation, you had white women outraged that black women or men would be coming into their areas and say that shouldn't be allowed, there's segregation.
But segregation based on race was wrong.
In the end, I think it's fairly simple.
Right now, where we're at as a society, there is an obvious limitation to national origin, race, and gender in many respects, but there are still differences.
There's a challenge here.
I can only say it as that much.
It's that much.
But so long as men tend to be larger, so long, I'm sorry, so long as males tend to be larger, tend to have more muscle mass, tend to have more collagen, I think they actually have double the collagen, stronger bones, etc., there's a reason why we create a safe space because biological sex is... it exists.
And there are biological distinctions.
And muscle mass, bone density, center of gravity, all of these things play a role in physical capabilities.
So we say, for this reason, it's why it's different when it comes to race.
Now some people might argue, but Tim, some people based on race are shorter or whatever, and it's like, yeah, well, there's exceptions, there's rules, and I think for the most part in the United States, the differences between races are substantially more minuscule.
And although there may be some people who are bigger or taller, I don't know if it makes sense to play that game.
What I'm trying to get at is, Sometimes we might say, segregation is wrong, and here's the reason why.
And if we try to deconstruct it to a great extent, you'll find people poking holes in your argument in an attempt to say what you're saying isn't truly right or wrong.
And that's, admittedly, there's, you know, we're dealing with analog versus digital, we're dealing with waveforms versus, you know, particle forms.
We're dealing with, can we quantify the exact moment we've decided why this is wrong and why it's wrong, or do we know it when we see it?
I don't have all the answers.
I really don't.
I just think, for the most part, people who are men, people who are male, people who are female have biological differences, and people who are female have requested safe spaces.
But there is this ideological divide, and one side is going to win.
And I gotta be honest, I wouldn't be surprised if it's the left on this one, because of the arguments that already exist against racial segregation and segregation based on any other issue.
When they said you can't discriminate on the basis of You know, race, national origin, gender, etc.
When they had the ruling of Plessy versus Ferguson, when they said separate but equal, that same principle is still applied to men and women, to males and females.
That the courts have basically said, it is discrimination if you have a bathroom and don't let women in.
It is discrimination if you have a bathroom and don't let men in.
But it is not discrimination when you have a bathroom for men and a bathroom for women and they're both able to use the bathroom.
The problem there is that's the argument they use for segregation, racial segregation.
So, you tell me how you navigate this one, and I tell you, it is, well, it's difficult.
Because there are many differences that, well, maybe the issue, I suppose, isn't necessarily race isn't the same as biological sex.
I think that's probably the easiest way to put it.
It's a very difficult conversation, I can say that 50 billion times, but race is kind of a collection of genetics that result in, for the most part, outward appearance and certain characteristics like height or otherwise.
You know, I went to Scandinavia, everyone was taller than me.
I went to Thailand, everyone was shorter than me.
Because genetics play a role in people's development in their lives.
But, there's a lot of people who are, you know, Asian, who are very tall, very short.
And so we decided, you know, we're not gonna... The differences between race aren't as pronounced.
We don't think it's right to do this.
Between men and women, there are exceptions to the rule, but for the most part, if you say everybody who's a man... Everyone, you know, tell a room to line up from tallest to shortest, and it'll be mostly the men, followed by mostly women being shorter.
I would just say there are more pronounced biological differences between men and women.
But I will also contend the argument simply that separate but equal among genders is acceptable, I think you're going to run into very serious problems with that argument because we want to stand on what the law says and what the principle is about segregation.
I think there's a very, very, very easy solution to this.
Family and individual changing rooms and showers.
Done.
Problem solved.
How about this?
Instead of having a big locker room where there's a bunch of different showers, You have a bunch of individual stalls.
So it's the same exact room, but there are doors on the stalls.
And so an individual can walk in, open the door, lock it behind them, and then go about their business in private.
This, I believe, would protect trans people, it would protect biological males, biological females, and I don't see what the problem is.
In fact, that's what many places have done.
Problem solved.
You know what?
I'm not a fan of big open bathing areas anyway.
How about that?
And I suppose the challenge is when you're dealing with a spa and you have lots of people moving about naked and the only solution I suppose to all of this is that don't let people walk around naked anymore and you get a challenge.
Either we say you can't discriminate on the basis of sex or you can and then you tell me how we solve that problem.
I get it.
Traditionalists, conservatives will say we simply separate males and females.
Alright.
Progressives will say you can't do that.
That's wrong.
Okay, so what do you do?
I don't know.
I really, really don't.
And that's why I think this country is headed down a dark path, because these divides can't be mended.
Already, I know, there's gonna be people commenting saying, Tim, you're wrong, it's evil, it's terrible.
There's gonna be people saying, Tim, you're wrong, you're evil, you're terrible, you're transphobic, and all of that stuff.
And my goal is simply to make sure we can live together, live together peacefully, peaceably, and progress and pursue happiness and all of those things.
How we do that, I don't know.
I can say one very, very important thing, though.
It appears that this individual, in the initial case of WeSpa, is a known serial repeat offender, registered.
This is not the case of a trans person in good or earnest, you know, wanting to be left alone, just going to a spa.
This is the case of an individual who, according to the police, does this specifically to expose themselves.
Multiple witnesses saying the individual was excited, if you know what I mean.
So we need to make sure that when we're talking about the nuance in segregation, we're talking about the nuance in these cases as well.
Is this person truly a trans person being discriminated against?
Or is this an offender exploiting the system for gain like many conservatives complained about and warned about in the first place?
Because the left refused to acknowledge the reality of this, calling it fear-mongering.
What does it say?
L.A.
Times.
Fear-mongering about sports conceals discrimination against the trans community.
And, of course, they go on to talk about the Wii Spa.
Actually, let me pull this one up.
They say, in June, a woman at the WeSpa in L.A.
recorded her reaction and berated the staff after she claimed she had seen a man go into the women's section, exposing himself.
Protesters clashed in the streets, two people were stabbed, and conservative pundits wrung their hands over the prospect of women and children being preyed upon by men who could pose as transgender women.
How many times have we heard this harmful and baseless trope?
And there it is.
Baseless.
Harmful.
That turned out to be true.
This country is sick and it's broken.
I'm not going to pretend to have all the answers.
We are entering this era where if we follow through on the anti-discrimination laws, then we have to uphold them the same as we would for any person.
I think back to Frederick Douglass.
He has this great quote where he challenged Americans to live by the words they themselves had written.
That all men are created equal.
And that was his argument against slavery.
Do you actually believe that?
Or is it just for you?
And he was proven right.
No, it's for everybody.
So when we write, you cannot discriminate on the basis of these characteristics, of which we include sex.
Then how do we still have men's rooms and women's rooms?
Because society didn't want to let that one go.
They didn't want to say, OK, no, because even the racial justice activists were like, OK, that one we understand and are OK with.
But as times change and a growing faction says, we don't want this anymore, I think it's fair to say the younger generation will continue to embrace this and you will probably end up with just straight-up unisex bathrooms moving forward.
Which is why I say maybe the solution is you have the same locker room, but instead of like just open showers, you put up walls with doors.
It really is that simple, isn't it?
I don't have all the answers, my friends.
I really, really don't.
Just some things to think about.
Let me know what your thoughts, based on what I was saying.
And I'll see you all in the next segment coming up at 4 p.m.
over at youtube.com slash timcast.
Thanks for hanging out.
Export Selection