S5222 - Rittenhouse Judge YELLS At Prosecutor Over Grave Misconduct, Judge May Rule MISTRIAL With Prejudice
Rittenhouse Judge YELLS At Prosecutor Over Grave Misconduct, Judge May Rule MISTRIAL With Prejudice. Kyle Rittenhouse Defense team filed a motion for a mistrial with prejudice after the prosecutors engaged in what the judge called "grave constitutional violations"
While democrat activists, leftists, BLM and Antifa activists keep pushing falsehoods it is becoming more and more clear that Kyle was acting in self defense and will likely win this case.
The Rittenhouse trial at this point seems to be malicious prosecution for political reasons.
#Rittenhouse
#RittenhouseTrial
#BLMRiots
Become A Member And Protect Our Work at http://www.timcast.com
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Today is November 10th, 2021, and our first story.
The judge in the Kyle Rittenhouse case explodes on the prosecution over grave constitutional violations and might actually rule for a mistrial with prejudice, meaning Rittenhouse cannot be charged again.
The case is breaking down, and it looks like Rittenhouse is winning.
In our next story, Rep Paul Gosar is facing a criminal investigation, or at least Pelosi's demanding it, for posting a meme in which she is an anime character attacking AOC.
I think it's in bad taste, but still ridiculous for Pelosi to demand.
In our last story, Jimmy Kimmel claims that the reason people don't like Kamala Harris is because they're sexist and racist, never mind the collapsing economy.
And before we get started, leave us a good review and give us five stars.
Tell your friends about the show.
Now, let's get into that first story.
The judge in the Kyle Rittenhouse case has snapped several times at the prosecutor as
the case seems to be imploding on the prosecution.
In fact, it's going so bad that the defense just argued for a motion of a mistrial with prejudice, saying that the prosecutors are doing so bad they're either trying to get a mistrial, meaning they'll get another chance to prosecute Kyle Rittenhouse because they know they're going to lose, Or, they're attempting to use unconstitutional means to prejudice the jury against Kyle Rittenhouse.
Now, there are two important points in that motion.
The judge so far said he'll take it under advisement, and then told the prosecutor, I don't believe you are acting in good faith.
I've got all of this, we'll go through it, but the gist of it is, the prosecutor tried to use Kyle Rittenhouse's right to remain silent against him, actually saying, in front of the jury, Why haven't you come forward and told your story sooner?
Why did you only wait until this trial after you've heard all the testimony to explain your story?
He tells the judge, I am trying to basically lay out the case that Rittenhouse is tailoring his version of events based on testimony.
And the judge goes off saying, you have just committed a grave constitutional violation.
He says you are at the borderline, maybe you're over it, it better not happen again.
And the prosecution tries to make an argument for being allowed to do it.
The next thing that happened was that the judge had already ruled certain evidence was not to be admitted.
Evidence that occurred four months after the night in question in Kenosha.
The prosecutor brings it up anyway, and the judge goes off.
The defense then says, he's trying to get a mistrial.
Now, a mistrial with prejudice would mean the case is a mistrial, it's dismissed, and prejudice means that the judge, or I'm sorry, the prosecutor, would not be allowed to bring these same charges again.
Kyle Rittenhouse would get off on everything.
In this heated exchange, and I will stress, at the time of filming this video, the case is still ongoing.
In the argument, the judge says, I will take the motion under advisement.
Now, I think the judge doesn't want to take away the opportunity of the jury to issue their ruling, but there's already speculation.
The judge, based on evidence from the state's own key witnesses, the judge could issue a directed verdict after the jury comes out and issues their findings.
If the jury comes out and says not guilty, the judge says okay, good.
If the jury comes out and says guilty, the judge could intervene and say no.
Directed verdict on the evidence as a matter of law, not guilty.
There are a lot of things that could still come up.
And I think this is one of the reasons the judge isn't going to issue any rulings right now on dismissing this with prejudice or issuing a directed verdict, and that's the jury could come back and say manslaughter.
They could argue on the gun charges.
But Kyle Rittenhouse already has some other victories.
The judge recently ruled That the curfew violation charge is dismissed.
So this has been nothing but good news for the defense, and it is clear, based on the things, the gross constitution, the grave constitutional violations of the prosecutor, as stated by the judge, they are desperate here.
Now it gets even crazier.
I want to make sure I go through what's happening right now because this is nuts, but yesterday, one of the witnesses who is subpoenaed to testify actually stated the prosecutors brought him in and tried to get him to change his witness statement.
This witness was seemingly offended and anxious saying, you asked me to change my statement after showing me evidence after the fact, naming individuals.
This was a shocking bit of testimony and it was such an egregious violation on the part of the prosecution that they started arguing with the witness saying, we never did that, that's wrong.
I'm watching this legal analysis from Mercado Law and many others and they're like, why is he doing this?
The prosecution looks crazy.
It looks like they're trying to plant evidence or something to that effect.
Absolutely over-the-top actions.
Now, I gotta show you a lot of what's going on.
The lies from the media have only gotten worse.
I wanna bring up some of the lies from the past because it really does look like, on the merits and as a matter of law, Kyle Rittenhouse is not guilty by reason of self-defense, meaning we know it's a homicide trial, we know people lost their lives, but it seems definitive it was self-defense.
There's still the matter of the gun charge.
And I definitely want to talk about some of the prosecution's questionings.
They were trying to accuse Rittenhouse of trying to act out Call of Duty.
No joke!
The prosecutor actually argued that hollow point bullets explode inside of animals.
It's insane.
Rittenhouse repeatedly said, I don't know anything about ammo, I don't know what you're talking about.
And the prosecutor's like, hollow points blow up.
And the judge intervenes and is like, what are you doing?
Let me slow down and let's go through this, because this is crazy stuff.
Before we get started, head over to TimCast.com, become a member to help support our journalists.
They're covering tons of stories, especially stories about this case.
You'll also get access to exclusive members-only segments from the TimCast IRL podcast, as well as other shows.
But don't forget to like this video, share this video.
I'm going to show you video clips.
I'm going to show you the judge yelling at the prosecutors.
And I'll talk about any potential bias, too.
But I'll tell you this.
Many people on the left, and I'll show you these tweets, are lying, are absolutely lying.
One high-profile Twitter account said, I've not been following this case in minute detail, but Kyle Rittenhouse did travel across state lines with an assault rifle, blah, blah, blah.
Never happened.
One of the cases being brought forward by the prosecutor is against Dominic Black, who is accused of supplying the weapon in Wisconsin to Kyle Ritnas.
These people aren't following any of the legitimate trial.
They don't know what's going on, and they're putting out lies, and then the media reports it.
I got a story from the Washington Post trying to argue the judge is biased, and that's a big problem.
I swear, if you watch MSNBC, they're selectively editing this.
NPR put out overtly fake news yesterday, claiming that Gage Grosskreutz, one of the people who attacked Kyle Rittenhouse, had his hands up when he was shot when he testified he was pointing a gun at Kyle Rittenhouse.
Okay, let me slow down.
Let me slow down here.
Here's the first story.
We got this from Post Millennial.
Judge slams prosecutors for trying to use Rittenhouse's right to remain silent against him.
Quote, you are already, I was astonished when you began your examination by focusing on the defendant's post-arrest silence.
That's basic law.
It's basic law in this country for 40, 40 years, 50 years, the judge said.
After giving his testimony to the judge and jury in his defense, and I also got to add, Everyone was shocked that Kyle Rittenhouse was called to the stand.
At one point, he breaks down in tears, potentially a panic attack, as he's explaining what happened that night.
The judge calls a recess.
Here's the news, though.
Let's start with the judge admonishing the prosecution.
They say Kyle Rittenhouse was cross-examined by the prosecution who stated their claim that Rittenhouse intended to kill people the night of August 25th.
The prosecutor tried to bring up Rittenhouse's invoking his right to remain silent after his arrest, which is a long-established in U.S.
law to not be permissible.
If you plead the fifth and say, I will remain silent, I want a lawyer, you can't, as a court, hold that against him.
Juries do.
Now, it's risky to have Kyle Rittenhouse testify.
Often, there is some bias the jury might have saying, why won't he speak up in his defense?
But it's because it's a high-risk, low-reward, and there's a reason for the Fifth Amendment right to remain silent.
In this regard, many people are saying it's risky to have Kyle Rittenhouse testify.
But Rittenhouse brought up several pieces of evidence that could not have been admitted otherwise.
Notably, He stated that Rosenbaum, the guy who chased and attacked him, had threatened his life on two occasions.
Rittenhouse needed to testify that he was personally threatened, that there was a threat made against his life on more than one occasion.
He mentioned that Rosenbaum threatened to cut out his heart.
That's something that he would need to testify to, and perhaps that's why they decided it was good to have him testify.
However, as noted, I believe this was by Rakata Law, there are tens of thousands of people who have cried on the stand in remorse and still been convicted, so we'll see how this plays out.
Based on how things are going at the prosecution, I think the judge may be ready to say, mistrial with prejudice.
He took the motion under advisement, we'll see where that leads to.
The state tried to show that Rittenhouse was not being entirely honest on the stand, tailoring his testimony after having heard eyewitness testimony and seen media accounts of that night and their reactions to it over the past year.
The defense issued an objection, stating that the state was trying to comment on my client's right to remain silent.
I am making the point that after hearing everything in the case, now he's tailoring his story to what was already been introduced.
That is clearly a constitutional violation.
Let me pull up some of these clips.
This is the wrong one.
I'll pull that one up in a second.
We have the law of self-defense noting that the defense made a motion for a mistrial with prejudice.
Here we have from the Columbia Bugle, judge scolding the prosecution in the Rittenhouse case.
The problem is this is a grave constitutional violation.
Let me play the clip for you.
unidentified
You need to account for this.
Your Honor, I don't want a jury here.
He's commenting on my client's right to remain silent.
No, Your Honor.
I am making the point that after hearing everything in the case, now he's tailoring his story to what has already been introduced.
The problem is, this is a grave constitutional violation for you to talk about the defendant's silence.
That is, and you're right, you're right on the, you're right on the borderline.
Greg Price teats, holy effing ish, the judge just completely snapped at the Kyle Rittenhouse prosecutor.
Check this out.
unidentified
He says... To bring this matter before the jury.
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 momsforamerica.us today for more information and to secure your exclusive VIP meet and greet tickets.
See you on the tour.
You are already, you were, I was astonished.
When you began your examination by commenting on the defendant's post-arrest silence.
That's basic law.
It's been basic law in this country for 40 years, 50 years.
I have no idea why you would do something like that.
So this started, this moment when he was yelling at the prosecutor, when the judge ruled certain evidence was inadmissible.
It could not be brought up.
Notably that Kyle Rittenhouse was wearing a shirt expressing, you know, he said something about being free.
He said like, you know, effing free or something to that effect.
The judge said, that was four months later.
It has no bearing on what happened that night.
The prosecution tried bringing it up anyway and the judge goes off.
Check this out.
Here's another video clip.
unidentified
I heard nothing in this trial to change any of my rulings.
That was before the testimony, Your Honor.
Pardon me?
That was before the testimony.
Don't get brazen with me!
You knew very well.
You know very well that an attorney can't go into these types of areas when the judge has already ruled without asking outside the presence of the jury to do so.
So don't give me that.
That's number one.
Number two.
This is propensity evidence.
I said at the time that I made my ruling, and I'll repeat again now for you.
The prosecutors then said to the judge that Rittenhouse had given statements to the press in the past, and they wanted to impeach the witness.
They wanted to challenge his credibility based on what he had said to the media.
I personally, I'm not a lawyer, I'm a layman, but that sounds ridiculous.
Someone, what did he say to the press?
They brought up a quote where he said, if I didn't have my gun that night, I would have died.
How that would now allow questioning his right to remain silent, or something that happened four months later, is an insane argument.
The judge actually said, he said, I don't believe you.
The lawyer was like, I'm acting in good faith.
The judge says, I don't believe you.
This resulted in a motion for a mistrial with prejudice.
Let me pull this up.
Defense threatened.
So this is interesting.
From LawOfSelfDefense.com, this is Andrew Branca.
Defense threatens to offer motion for mistrial with prejudice.
After the second incident, the defense informed the judge that this was inexcusable conduct from an experienced prosecutor who knows better, that they suspected Binger knew this case was so weak that he didn't want it to go to a jury, that he was angling for a mistrial, and that if he engaged in misconduct again, the defense would offer a motion for a mistrial with prejudice, meaning If granted, Kyle could never be tried on these charges again.
And what did we actually get?
We ended up with Defense Cherefisi actually making a motion for a mistrial with prejudice.
The judge said, I will take it under advisement.
By the time you watch this video, he may actually grant it.
Now...
As I stated earlier, I personally don't believe that would happen.
My opinion is worth very little on this.
I'm not a lawyer.
I don't have a lot of... I don't have experience with these trials.
I have no idea what's gonna happen, but I can speak politically.
I don't believe the judge wants to have this trial end.
due to prosecutorial misconduct, because then no one will believe that there was a fair trial.
The left will go out and riot, they'll claim the judge was biased, and there are some questions
that people are bringing up about bias, but they'll believe that the judge is biased and
therefore there was never a fair trial. They will use it as evidence to indict the system again,
blame the courts, blame the police, and say they're protecting Kyle Rittenhouse.
Mind you, there was recently a mass tragic event at a school where the perpetrator was black and was let out on bail that people are bringing up.
I think it's irrelevant to bring up immaterial points in politics and claim, oh, something else happened, therefore this is evidence of that.
No, no, no, no.
What we need to focus on in this case is the details of this case.
I believe at this point, The judge should, is my personal opinion, either issue a directed verdict on the homicide charges, on the first-degree murder charges, or a mistrial with prejudice.
The prosecution, as stated by the defense, seems to be trying to get a mistrial because then they get to try him again.
Or they're just trying to effectively cheat, to prejudice the jury against the defendant in an unconstitutional way.
Now, I got a lot I want to show you on this one.
We have a lot of other issues.
Law of Self-Defense tweets.
Richards.
Binger either forgetting court's rulings or looking to provoke a mistrial.
He's an experienced attorney.
He knows better.
If he does it again, I'll be asking for a mistrial with prejudice.
Binger says, you left the door open on CBS.
The judge shouts at him.
This is like, there were like four or five instances where the judge was yelling at the prosecutor, saying, for me, not for you, Law of Self-Defense got it wrong.
He said, not for you.
He meant the judge said, you can't rule on this.
This is where it gets crazy.
Early on, Rittenhouse already had some major victories.
Check out this story from the Daily Wire.
Judge tosses curfew charge after prosecution falls short on evidence.
One of the things brought up, I believe this was overruled, was the prosecution said, you broke curfew.
The defense objected saying, he's not being charged with a curfew violation.
Those charges are dismissed.
He brought it up and tried saying, you are disregarding the law, trying to prejudice the jury once again on a charge that is not being, that Rittenhouse has already won.
The Daily Wire reports, the judge overseeing the trial of Kyle Rittenhouse, uh, was in Wisconsin last year, blah blah blah, dismissed a charge of breaking curfew.
Rittenhouse is on trial facing six charges, five felonies and one misdemeanor.
The felony charges are intentional homicide, reckless homicide, attempted intentional homicide, and two counts of reckless endangerment.
The misdemeanor charge is underage possession of a deadly weapon.
Judge Bruce Schroeder tossed an additional curfew charge on Tuesday, ruling that prosecutors had failed to produce any evidence that a curfew had been in place, according to CNN.
The judge left in place the misdemeanor gun charge against Rittenhouse, overruling the defense's request to have it dismissed.
Rittenhouse's attorneys have previously argued that applicable Wisconsin gun law is unconstitutional, according to the Kenosha News.
Now, one of the things the defense has argued, I could be getting this one wrong, is that there is a law saying if you're underage, you can't be in possession of a rifle.
However, what the defense has argued is that there's a specific exemption saying 16 and 17 year olds are exempt from this.
That is to say, potentially the law was written saying minors can't have this, and then they amended with an exemption saying 16 and 17 year olds are okay.
So if you're 15 and under, you can't.
One of the interesting things that came up in the case was the prosecution on cross-examination of of Kyle Rittenhouse asked him why he got an AR-15.
They're trying to manipulate the jury in this regard.
Let me explain something to you, my friends.
Virginia is a good example.
If you're under the age of 21 in Virginia, you cannot purchase a handgun.
Now, I think that's unconstitutional.
It is being challenged.
It may have been overturned already.
I'm not entirely sure, but I believe it is unconstitutional.
A few months ago, I went to a gun store in Virginia.
I'm a minute away from Virginia.
And what they do is, they'll ship it to a gun store in your home state, and then, you know, so you can basically have things sent there.
But you can go in the store, look around, say, ooh, that looks nice, send it to another shop where I can buy it.
A young man came in, and he said, I'd like to purchase a weapon.
They said, how old are you?
I think he said he was 20, and they said, you can't buy a handgun.
He said, no, I don't want one, I want to get, you know, a rifle.
And they said, okay, you can.
There are reasons why it is easier to buy a rifle, a long gun.
People on the left don't understand this.
I believe the prosecution is attempting to manipulate the ignorance of the jury, and I don't mean that in a disrespectful way.
I mean that he's betting people in the jury don't understand gun law.
Kyle Rittenhouse stated that the reason he did not buy a handgun Was because he's not old enough to possess one.
In Wisconsin, you have to be at least 18.
However, with a shotgun or a long gun, you can be 16 or 17.
The prosecutor then began arguing about the law, then Kyle Rittenhouse said it was his understanding because the police told him it was okay.
There was an objection, and the judge said, effectively to the jury, It doesn't matter what the prosecutor thinks the law is.
It doesn't matter what Kyle Rittenhouse thinks the law is.
Ignorance of the law is no excuse for breaking it, and the judge would instruct the jury on the law.
But the prosecutor seemed to be trying to make it seem like Rittenhouse was purposefully buying a more deadly weapon.
The prosecutor went in to talk about full metal jacket rounds versus hollow point rounds, and this is where things just go off the rails insane.
I'm sitting here confused why this line of questioning is even happening, and I think the judge felt the same way.
The judge actually intervenes at this point, explaining to the prosecution what they're saying makes no sense.
So get this.
Full metal jacket.
Okay, so you have a softer metal lead or so in as the bullet and it's encased in a harder metal say Copper or something that effect.
I don't know the exact composition.
I'm not a I'm not a big gun nut I don't know a whole lot about it.
What I can tell you is the principal reason for a full metal jacket round is is that softer metals leave deposits in the guns, and this can cause problems.
Jamming, misfiring, malfunctions, etc.
So this is why people will often clean their weapons.
So there are soft tip, meaning it's partially encased in a harder metal, and this reduces depositing.
A full metal jacket is completely encased, this reduces depositing.
Now, because it's fully encased, a full metal jacket is more likely to over penetrate.
The prosecution was trying to make it seem like Kyle Rittenhouse was reckless by using a standard full metal jacket round.
It's a basic round, okay?
The prosecution asked about hollow point rounds and actually says, in front of the court and the jury, hollow point rounds explode inside of their target.
Rittenhouse was like, I don't think that's correct.
That's not true.
And the judge intervenes and says, do you mean expand?
And the prosecution is confused.
The judge actually to stop him saying what you're saying is factually wrong.
It makes no sense.
I got people tweeting at me saying actually full metal jackets are designed to over penetrate They were trying to argue that because and full metal jacket as you need to understand.
It's basic It's like a basic standard commonly used round.
They're not designed to over penetrate, but they are more likely than hollow points and Hollow points flatten in their targets.
They expand.
Now, if you want to talk about overpenetration, meaning a weapon, a bullet that is designed to go through the target, you're talking steel core.
There's armor piercing.
They can go through metal.
A standard full metal jacket, say, Rittenhouse was using 223, is not necessarily designed for that purpose and not guaranteed to overpenetrate.
The judge actually has to intervene.
Alright, there's a lot going on.
Let me actually address some of the charges of bias.
In this tweet we have from David Carlson, the judge's ringtone is proud to be an American.
It is literally so over.
Now if you are, I don't know if this guy is on the left or right, he's a social media manager contributor to Populist Union, so probably something more on the right, but I will explain to you.
As you can hear, the judge's cell phone rings, and the song playing is Proud to be an American.
The judge has already been accused of bias, and I believe incorrectly, because the judge actually is not giving the defense everything they want.
The defense wanted the reckless endangerment charge dropped, they wanted the gun charge dropped, and the judge is saying, no, the jury can decide.
I think he's actually being quite fair.
But this argument here being presented is more ammo for the left to say, Proud to be an American?
Well, he's certainly a conservative.
I believe that's a ridiculous argument to make, but let's be real here.
The mainstream left, the establishment left, would not play a song like that.
That is not something that they would entertain or promote.
And I think it's fair to say the judge is more likely to be moderate or conservative-leaning, in which case the perspective on this case may be more moderate or conservative-leaning.
Not that he's biased in favor of Rittenhouse as an individual, but that the law does support Rittenhouse's claim of self-defense, that the state's own witnesses have, and if the judge is going to be fair and treat this fairly, it's good news for Rittenhouse.
As we can see with the claims made against the prosecution, the actions they've taken, and how the media has lied and manipulated, how social media has censored information, we know the establishment left and many leftists are not being fair on this one.
That is to say, if the judge is more likely to be conservative, he'll be fair, even if it means bad news for Kyle Rittenhouse.
Ultimately, I think it will be somewhat good news.
Now, one of the big moments today was Kyle Rittenhouse breaking down sobbing on the witness stand.
I don't know if he was actually crying.
You can see some, you know, moisture in his eyes.
He's hyperventilating.
I would say sobbing is the appropriate word.
He's trying, he's getting to the point in the story as he's testifying about what happened that night.
A recess was called because he begins hyperventilating and struggling to speak.
I would say it was like a combination of a panic attack and sobbing.
I don't know if this was the right move.
As I mentioned with Rakeda Law, he stated, I believe it was him who said this, that there are tens of thousands of defendants who have cried on the stand in remorse and have still been convicted.
I've also heard from many people saying that the moment they saw him crying They felt that he was being traumatized.
It was malicious prosecution.
All the evidence we've seen so far indicates a self-defense.
The prosecution has committed grave constitutional violations by the judge's own statement.
They've gone after his right to remain silent.
They've tried admitting inadmissible evidence.
And their own witnesses have basically supported the claim of self-defense on more than one occasion.
And I've got prosecutorial misconduct for you right here.
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.
Andrew Branca goes on to mention, this was yesterday, that DeBruin seemed an unlikely candidate to be the defense's most powerful witness on the day because he presented and conceded that he was extremely anxious.
Despite this, DeBruin was absolutely coherent and firm in his testimony, almost driving A.D.A.
Krause into a rage with his calm and cool testimony.
At times, A.D.A.
Krause's cross-examination of DeBruin became completely unprofessional and almost personally bullying.
No joke.
I watched this live.
I was shocked.
Perhaps nothing was as damaging to the prosecution and as personally infuriating to A.D.A.
Kraus as DeBruin's testimony that in a meeting with A.D.A.
Binger and A.D.A.
Kraus, he had the perception they were asking him to change his statement to police about what he had observed on the night of the 25th.
Here, change should be read to mean falsify, in particular to falsify some conduct or presence of Joshua Zeminsky.
On the stand, DeBruin testified that he made a statement to the police.
That was it.
Later, was called in for a meeting because he was threatened with a subpoena, shown video evidence, told by the prosecutor that's Joshua Zeminsky, and then when DeBruin said, oh, okay, the prosecutor said, would you like to now change your statement?
Which is to say, the statement he gave on the night in question was the true witness testimony that he had.
After the fact, seeing other evidence or videos may change his understanding.
In this instance, the prosecutor, according to his testimony, wanted him to add commentary to his statement to help the prosecutor prosecute Zeminsky.
That is gross prosecutorial misconduct, and DeBruin would not back down.
Because of those claims, the prosecutor, Krauss, went up there and started yelling at him for a long time, no less.
DeBruin basically saying, you wanted me to change my statement.
And they're like, no, he didn't.
It was amazing when Kraus said, we never asked you to change your testimony.
And DeBruin goes, yes, you did.
You showed me new evidence and then said, do I want to change my statement now?
He felt that was them trying, he was really uneasy because it's basically like the state saying, you saw this, didn't you?
You don't want to get subpoenaed, do you?
And then he was, the ADA was like, we call it, you came in because you were threatened with subpoena.
And he goes, you did subpoena me.
I'm looking at this and I'm like the prosecutors are just acting with impunity.
These are evil people.
Interestingly, let me see if I can pull up this, uh, find this tweet from Mike Cernovich.
Mike Cernovich mentions, I think, uh, let's see where we have it.
He says, if this case is dismissed due to prosecutorial misconduct, double jeopardy would apply and Rittenhouse could not be retried.
The prosecutor isn't trying to get a mistrial, he's willfully evil.
He got away with it in other cases and couldn't adapt to having a real judge.
That is to comment on.
When the defense... I believe Cernovich made this statement before the defense made their motion for... He did.
He did say this before the motion for a mistrial with prejudice.
The defense was at first saying either he's trying to get a mistrial or he's trying to prejudice the jury.
Cernovich's point is that they're trying to prejudice the jury.
They were hoping to get away with it because they've done it to other witnesses.
Now let's talk about where we're currently at in terms of the past.
We have this story.
Utah Paramedic uses government email to donate to Rittenhouse Defense Fund.
The media went after people who were helping Kyle Rittenhouse's legal defense.
Some of these people lost their jobs.
This was doxing.
It was political.
Facebook was banning people.
To this day, Twitter is still banning people.
It's a dangerous line.
The evidence we have seen, the prosecutorial misconduct we have seen, supports Kyle Rittenhouse's defense.
The state's own witnesses support Kyle Rittenhouse's claim of self-defense.
And still, the media, big tech, are doing everything in their power, seemingly, to destroy this kid's life, this young man's life, and anybody who would dare support him.
People are getting suspended on social media.
Look at what they claimed last year.
Huffington Post.
White supremacists run a hunting spree in Kenosha, says Wisconsin lawmaker.
Absolute lies.
Look at this from the Washington Post.
As Kyle Rittenhouse trial nears end, judges' decisions from the bench come under scrutiny.
Because, establishment Democrat players, the media, leftists, are not acting in good faith.
I'm watching CNN's Jeffrey Toobin, and he's like, Kyle Reynolds is a stupid idiot, a moron, and blah blah blah.
To be fair though, he did say he does have a plausible self-defense claim.
I can respect that.
But the judge actually slammed Tubin on CNN.
Notice the guy who previously lost his job for inappropriate behavior in a Zoom call in front of his co-workers, but I digress.
The judge was like, why am I being criticized by the media when I'm following the law to the letter?
This is how insane things are.
Take a look at this.
Southpaw tweeted, and this is a guy, Southpaw is a lawyer with 241,000 followers.
He said, I haven't followed the Rittenhouse trial in minute detail, but I believe it remains the case that he traveled across state lines with an assault rifle to oppose a protest in a community where he did not live and ended up shooting a bunch of people there and killing two of them.
This is somebody who is fanning the flames of chaos and destruction in this country, and this is an example of the problem.
Southpaw has not been watching the trial.
As I mentioned already, one of the cases being brought forward by the prosecutor is against Dominic Black for giving a gun to Kyle Rittenhouse.
That would mean that the narrative of crossing state lines with an assault rifle isn't true.
Furthermore, I know it may be semantic in a sense, but we need to make sure we're getting definitions clear.
Not a single person in Kenosha was armed with an assault rifle.
Period.
Assault rifle, by the most standard colloquial definition, is a select-fire rifle.
Those are, for the most part, not legal to possess.
They're NFA items.
You can get them.
But typically, most people do not get them because they cost upwards of, you know, $10,000 to $30,000.
Typically, they're manufactured before, I think, 1984.
But, again, I'm not trying to get into nitty-gritty details on gun issues and laws.
The point is, if you want to argue he had a long gun, a rifle, fine.
Let's just say Southpaw intended to say long gun, rifle.
He did not travel across state lines with it, and that is all we hear from people who don't pay attention.
People who want this kid to go to prison for the rest of his life for charges that are wrong, for now a prosecutor, a prosecution that is clearly malicious, clearly engaged in misconduct.
Prosecutorial misconduct.
These people want this kid to go to prison not for any matter of justice.
And let me tell you, shout out to Anna Kasparian.
She says I was wrong.
She admits she bought into the false Rittenhouse narrative.
She thought Rittenhouse chased after Rosenbaum.
She says I was wrong about that.
I want to correct the record.
These details matter because if you're gonna make an argument that you acted in self-defense, there needs to be some proof there was an imminent threat.
What really mattered to me is how this all unfolded, what was the thing that sparked it, etc.
Good on them for admitting that they were wrong.
Or Anna Kasparian admitting her wrong.
I mean that with absolute respect.
This is the right thing to do.
And I think when these people actually recognize the evidence shows that they were wrong, they should acknowledge it.
Anna did that, and she has my respect for doing so.
That's it.
I won't comment anymore on her positions.
I will say, the problem we face right now with Rittenhouse is that you've got a prosecutor clearly engaging in misconduct.
And because these people don't care to look at the evidence, they don't care to go through the video, they don't care to watch the trial, they spout this nonsense and rally violent extremists to the street, threatening riots.
If all of the people acted the way Anna Kasparian did, we might actually walk away from this one without chaos and destruction.
But they don't.
So I'll leave it there.
It's still ongoing.
By the time you watch this, who knows what'll have happened.
For all I know, I gotta record another video because a mistrial was declared.
But we're gonna talk about this tonight over at YouTube.com slash TimCastIRL.
8 p.m.
Check it out.
We're gonna have all the updates.
This may be the last witness, so we may be very close to a verdict.
I'll leave it there.
Thanks for hanging out, and I'll see y'all at 8 p.m.
I didn't think it would come to this, my friends.
I didn't think we would be in this dark of a place.
Nancy Pelosi calls for criminal investigation over rep Paul Gosar's anime meme.
Okay, there's a lot to break down here, but let me just start by saying I did not think Paul Gosar's Attack on Titan anime meme would result in calls for a criminal investigation.
That's why I didn't talk about it the other day.
I assumed, yeah, yeah, yeah, you know, people are gonna complain it's a stupid story, but let me just slow down and inform you all if you have not seen this story, because it is quite silly, but it's now resulting in people likening this to the, you ready?
Civil War!
That's right.
So Rep Paul Gosar of Arizona posted a meme video in which it's the anime Attack on Titan.
Are you familiar with it?
I've seen some of it.
I'm not a big fan.
You know, I'm not saying it's a bad show.
I just haven't watched it.
Basically, there's like a human city surrounded with walls and there are giant humanoid monsters called titans that eat people and the heroes have these things on their legs that fire cables that launch them in the air and they have swords and apparently the only way to kill a titan, these big monsters, is to slice the back of their neck.
I'm probably missing a lot of context there.
I don't watch the show.
That's the general gist of, like, the early episodes.
Maybe something's different.
I know at some point some dude bites himself and turns into a Titan or something.
Anyway, I digress.
That's not relevant necessarily for the bigger picture here with this meme.
In the video, it's the anime opening to Attack on Titan, and Rep Paul Gosar, as you can see in this grainy video, He's one of these heroes fighting a titan, and the titan is Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
In the meme video, the anime character with Gosar's face superimposed over it launches into the air with swords and slices the titan, Ocasio-Cortez.
Okay, it's a silly video.
It's like bad funny, okay?
You know, like, I wouldn't say it was cringe.
I mean, maybe some people thought it was cringe, but I would say it's bad funny.
Like, it's so over-the-top and stupid, it makes you laugh, which I believe is the intent of posting ridiculous garbage like this.
Okay, maybe you really enjoyed it.
Here's what I gotta say.
We're now at the level where there's calls for a criminal and ethics investigation over this.
I think it's dumb.
I don't think he should have posted it, right?
I think it's fair to say, like, let's tone things down, guys.
But come on, man.
Is this really where we're going?
My favorite part about this story and the escalation is, for one, as I mentioned, we're at this point now where they're quoting—here's a quote—South Carolina and send Brooks dozens of new canes, one bearing the phrase, good job, another cane was inscribed to hit him again.
And this was because this dude Brooks beat another member of Congress with a cane.
There was a caning before the Civil War.
And that's what they're putting.
Right-wing fanatics like Gosar and Green are nudging closer and closer to rep-on-rep violence.
They just keep pushing.
All right.
I'm not a fan.
I don't think it was appropriate to post the meme, but I don't think it's the end of the world.
And that's why I didn't care to talk about it until we escalate to this point where CNN is now making a cultural argument against the meme.
Jill Filipovich is arguing that the meme is cringe.
Let me read you the story about what Nancy Pelosi—this is the state of American congressional politics.
This is what Nancy Pelosi has to be worried about.
Let me just tell you, my friends.
A few years ago, you may remember when Kathy Griffin posted a photo of herself holding, it was, I don't even know if I can describe the video without getting in trouble on YouTube, but it was a graphic video of her causing harm to the president.
And it was in bad taste.
It was nasty, and she should not have posted it.
And I criticized her for doing so, as many did.
Now I will say similarly in that context, RepGhost are posting an anime video where he's a character who launches in the air and slices the back of AOC's neck.
Also not a fan.
Shouldn't have posted it.
It's nasty.
I will be critical in the exact same way.
There are certain differences in Kathy Griffin setting up a photo shoot where she's holding someone's head covered in blood.
Really bad.
And someone taking an existing anime video and putting their heads on it.
Still, I don't think we need this kind of stuff.
I think it's fair to say, while I understand why it's funny to see Rep Gosar, who's like in his 60s from Arizona, as an anime character flying through the air, that's the joke.
You know, we don't...
All this does is add fuel to the fire, and I can certainly understand why an anime video is funnier than what Kathy Griffin did, but I put them in a similar category.
Not identically, but it's bad.
You shouldn't do it.
Now, should there be a criminal investigation?
No.
Should there be an ethics investigation?
No, shut up.
Are you kidding me?
Kathy Griffin got a suspension on Twitter or something, and everyone said don't do it.
I mean, she lost her job.
She got fired from CNN because she posted it, and well, that's CNN's decision.
This is a public rep who reps in Arizona, and it's up to the voters to decide whether or not he gets his job back.
But let's break this down, and I have to go through this because the CNN article Trying to critique the meme is the funniest rebuttal I've seen over memes.
But here's the story from TimCast.com.
The 81-year-old congresswoman, Nancy Pelosi, called for the House Ethics Committee to investigate the meme.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has called for a criminal investigation into Rep Paul Gosar over an obvious parody meme that the congressman posted on Twitter.
In the video, Gosar's head is on Attack on Titan character Aaron Yeager's body from the opening credits of the first season of the show.
The congressman fights characters with a Democratic New York rep AOC, and Joe Biden's face is edited onto them.
Quote.
Nancy Pelosi tweeted this.
Threats of violence against members of Congress and the President of the United States must not be tolerated.
GOP leaders should join in condemning this horrific video and call on the Ethics Committee and law enforcement to investigate.
Law enforcement?
I don't remember you or anyone else saying that Kathy Griffin should be investigated over what she did.
And what she did was wrong.
And I also think what Gosar did is wrong.
However, if we're gonna have standards here, I think it's only fair that we operate on the same standards that Kathy Griffin was operating under.
Granted, she's not a member of Congress.
That I get.
So you want to have an ethics investigation?
I roll my eyes and say, okay, tell the dude not to post a stupid meme again, and we can move on.
Criminal investigation?
Sure, just as soon as Kathy Griffin gets indicted for threatening the president.
No, it's not a threat, it's a gag video.
Is it going over the top?
I certainly think we're headed in a dark direction.
I've been saying before, it's only a matter of time before someone in Congress gets caned.
And that's a reference to the Civil War.
And now because of this meme, people are making the same references.
Editing the heads of others onto characters from film and television clips is a popular meme format that really took off during the 2016 election.
Ocasio-Cortez responded to the meme by tweeting, So while I was en route to Glasgow, a creepy member I work with who fundraises for neo-Nazi groups, that's an insane lie, shared a fantasy video of him killing me, also not what he did.
She went on to complain that institutions don't protect women of color, WOC, WOC, whatever.
Ted Liu said, This is sick behavior from Rep Paul Gosar.
He tweeted out the video showing him killing Rep Ocasio-Cortez from both his official account and personal account
in any workplace in America.
If a co-worker made an anime video killing another co-worker, that person would be fired.
And to be fair, Kathy Griffin did lose her job,
and I don't think this was an appropriate video to post.
I just think that when it comes to Democrats, they're quick to ignore when they do things wrong, and they're quick to condemn when someone does something wrong to them.
And herein lies the problem.
Someone like you or I might actually look at this and say, don't post this stuff.
And look at Kathy Griffin and say, don't post this stuff.
Because we're willing to be fair and we're willing to point out it's inappropriate to post videos depicting you committing violence against someone else in a political space when we're hyper-polarized.
The Democrats don't.
They don't do it.
And the establishment types, for the most part, there's certainly some lefty types who will call out the BS.
But for the most part, the establishment never criticizes itself.
And I'll give you the famous example.
When Rep Steve King, I think he was of Iowa, made a comment about white nationalism, Republicans booted him off all of his committees, and then he lost his primary, and he's out.
Because conservatives are like, we don't want to play with that.
That's bad.
We think it's wrong.
When Ilhan Omar crop dusts, as I call it, antisemitism for years, what I mean by crop dusting antisemitism is that, you know how crop dusters get really close to the ground and then they fly away, but they don't actually touch the ground?
Ilhan Omar has made several comments that make people, like, side eye.
Like, is she making an anti-Semitic reference?
But she does it so many times.
At a certain point, you're like, uh... Maybe... But what do we get?
They won't even criticize her.
When Congress came out to condemn hate, they didn't say, Ilhan Omar, you shouldn't have posted these things.
They condemned all hate.
Blank, just glossing over what Ilhan Omar had said on numerous occasions.
She made a bunch of references about dual loyalties and all about the Benjamins, baby, which are very close to being anti-Semitic tropes.
Notably that there's an anti-Semitic trope that people who are Jewish have dual loyalties with Israel and the United States, and it's specific to one country.
That's why it's considered anti-Semitic, because people don't talk about any other country where there are dual citizenships.
For the most part, it's just Israel.
Now, that's why I say crop dusting.
She didn't come out and overtly criticize Jewish people.
She just made these tropes and people, you know... But she did it several times.
I think she did it like four times.
And they couldn't even just say, we condemn anti-Semitism.
Nope.
When it comes to Democrats getting criticized or attacked or... I mean like politically attacked, not physically.
They all start screaming and Nancy Pelosi, we need a criminal investigation into this.
You know what, man?
When Donald Trump was in the White House and a bunch of insurrectionists surrounded the White House trying to tear down the barricades, fighting with police and federal law enforcement to the extent that Trump was forced into his bunker.
The left, the Democrats, and the media started making fun of him, calling him Bunker Boy.
So please spare me when you're gonna cry about a stupid anime meme video.
When I saw the story, I chuckled, rolled my eyes, and said, he shouldn't have done it, but you know.
That's it.
That's it.
We're escalating.
We really are getting to a point where people are posting messages that they don't think are inappropriate.
And I think it's wrong.
Kathy Griffin shouldn't have posted that.
People should not have mocked Donald Trump as Bunker Boy.
And Gosar shouldn't be posting a video depicting AOC and Biden as titans that are being attacked.
I don't think it's appropriate.
And I think it's all a sign that we are headed in a very dangerous direction.
Yet the funny thing is, it's typically the left that says, I'm wrong when I say we're heading in that direction.
Now they're the ones coming out with the posts.
Where, uh, I'll pull up this one.
This is from journalist Lindsey Beyerstein.
She's, you know, a leftist.
And I'm not criticizing her over her criticism of this, because she's entitled to criticize this, because I think it was bad.
But I certainly think it shows that we're headed in this direction, and I think it shows the left agrees.
She tweeted, right-wing fanatics like Gosar and Green are nudging closer and closer to
rep on rep violence. They just keep pushing. I'm not going to sit here and pretend it's
just Republicans or Republicans are the instigators.
I actually think when leftists go out and burn down cities, like they did in Minnesota, and then Kamala Harris fundraises on their behalf, it's actually the Democrats who have been pushing and escalating this for some time.
This is the tweet she quoted.
It's a Wikipedia article for Preston Brooks.
South Carolinians sent Brooks dozens of new canes.
With one bearing the phrase, good job, another cane was described, hit him again.
Paul Gosar, shame of Arizona, ought to be censured by Congress, but he won't be because the Republican Party is made up of the inheritors of people who believe it's their right to threaten and use violence when people tell the truth about them.
Spare me your manipulations, your lies, and the garbage.
Spare me.
I have watched over the past couple of years as violent extremists cause rampant destruction in numerous cities, from Berkeley to Washington D.C., Portland, Seattle, Chicago, New York, and many small towns if you followed Michael Tracy's coverage of the BLM riots during the George Floyd riots.
Far-left extremists caused so much more damage than the right ever has.
Now, of course, there are individuals with right-wing views who have committed horrifying crimes.
Murders and atrocities and all that stuff.
And we all criticize it because nobody wants any of that either.
But here we are, where a meme is warranting a criminal investigation.
But in Minnesota, after the George Floyd riots, they accounted for a certain number of people who died in the riots.
It was about a week or so after, I believe, that in the rubble of a building that had been burnt to the ground, they found a corpse.
This was Black Lives Matter.
This was Antifa.
This was Democratic voters and leftists who were bailed out by Kamala Harris and Joe Biden's staff.
And they have the nerve to cry because of a meme posted by a Republican.
I got no problem saying it.
He shouldn't have posted it.
And again, therein lies the problem.
If you or I are willing to call out the left and the right, but the left will only call out the right, then the left gets away with it.
And now you have conservatives saying, when the Republicans win in 2022, it is revenge mode.
And I get it.
This is the direction we're heading in, and there is no turning back.
At a certain point, people who are moderate, independent, conservative, or ultra conservative and far right are going to say, we no longer care To criticize anybody who agrees with us because you never do it either.
Why should we be the ones who criticize people like Gosar or Steve King when they post things that are considered to be wrong?
But the Democrats don't do it themselves.
Adam Schiff goes on TV holding an envelope.
I've got the evidence of Russian collusion for years.
They lied.
Have they held their own accountable?
No, they haven't.
So I'll tell you what you can expect.
Don't be surprised if the Republican leadership comes out and criticizes Gosar.
For the most part, it's because Republicans are more concerned about the opinion of the New York Times and the opinion of their own constituents.
But this is what you get.
Establishment Republican leadership has no problem criticizing and condemning their own.
And you know what?
I respect it.
They do.
The problem is, we're now at a point where you have these memes.
There's a funny meme.
It was a tweet that went viral on Reddit because Reddit is dominated by leftists.
And it said, I wish I could vote for the Democrats that exist in the nightmares of Republicans because I keep voting Democrat and they don't do anything.
And that's because these people are far left.
And they don't realize that Democrats are fairly far left, but closer to the middle of the left quadrant where they're far, far left.
And they're like, why aren't Democrats abolishing private health care?
Why aren't Democrats making hate speech illegal?
And what are Democrats doing?
Defending the banning and censorship of individuals for hate speech and actively Eroding our borders, eroding our economy.
And so when Republicans are like, it is a bad thing that Joe Biden is no longer enforcing border protections, the left says, but we want open borders.
They think that Republicans, when they criticize open borders, genuinely believe that Democrats have opened up the borders and are just shuffling everybody in.
While that is happening in certain respects, the criticism from the right of the Democrats is that they are not enforcing it enough.
Certainly, Joe Biden's deporting people.
And there was a funny post, I think it was Kyle Kalinske who posted it, and he was like, under Trump there was X deportations and under Biden there's way more, making it seem like Joe Biden was worse than Trump on immigration or on the border protections.
And then I just had to point out, if Joe Biden is not securing the border and more illegal immigrants are crossing in, then you will see more deportations.
It actually is indicative of Joe Biden doing worse on the border than Trump.
But so long as the left genuinely believes that the Democrats are far right, they'll keep pushing these nonsensical lies.
And so long as moderates and Republicans keep saying things like, well, I don't want to lump all the Democrats in with the same category because that's not right.
Then they will lose.
They will keep losing.
And the stat was up.
I'll put it very, very simply.
Why do these corporations do what they do?
Why do they side with the woke, insane left?
Well, for one, we know about the, I think it's called the ESG score, the social credit system for corporations.
But I'll tell you, it's actually much simpler than that.
I'll use Dave Rubin for this example, because I like using either Dave Rubin or Carl Benjamin.
We'll use them both.
We'll use both of them this time.
Do you believe it is possible that Dave Rubin and Carl Benjamin would lead a group of angry classical liberals to Twitter HQ with pitchforks and crowbars and rocks and bricks to beat, destroy, and attack because they're being censored on social media?
Of course not.
That would be absurd.
No one, no reasonable person, would ever believe that Dave Rubin is going to be marching down the street with a crowbar going, Will Antifa?
Will Democrat voters?
Will leftists?
Of course!
We watch videos of it all the time!
So what do you think happens at these corporations when they're like, uh, there's a bunch of angry right-wingers?
They go, who cares?
What do we care about?
First of all, the independent individuals, the libertarian-minded people and the right, won't even boycott a company that spits in their faces, for the most part.
And then they're sitting there, so the corporation, the corporate execs are like, well, look, if we offend the right, they'll grumble about it, and they'll keep buying our product.
If we offend the left, they're going to show up with baseball bats and torches and Molotovs.
Tell them we're sorry.
That's how it plays out.
We don't see Republicans smashing up bank windows.
That doesn't happen.
So, the banks don't care, and they'll just tell Republicans to shut their stupid mouths because they're stupid enough to keep spending money at these businesses.
Look at the companies that are boycotting the post-millennial.
This is serious.
The post-millennial is being lied and smeared about, and these corporations, scared of the left, just cave.
It's time people on the right—and I say the right, but it is independents, and it is conservatives, and it is moderates, and it is even center-left individuals.
I'll tell you this.
Pew Research put out this data, which is interesting, maybe I'll pull up later, showing that the stressed—what are they called?—stressed sideliners, people not involved in politics, lean politically to the right.
The people in the middle who are stressed and don't like politics lean right.
So, I'll just say this.
The left is the French, but they're also the most violent.
So long as that's the case, you will see Democrats call for a criminal investigation into Paul Gosar, and they will say nothing to the left.
They will not criticize Ilhan Omar.
They will make it about everyone and all hate.
But Gosar is the one who's going to get slammed for posting an anime meme.
Again, I don't think he should have posted it.
But it is what it is.
It's about time, I think, people who oppose the establishment politics, the Democratic establishment, and the neocons, like the Lincoln Project garbage, y'all need to wake up and stop acting like the Democrats are going to do anything in good faith.
Everything is a projection.
I'll put it this way.
For four or five years, the Democrats were claiming that Trump had colluded with Russia.
And they spent millions of dollars and did a special investigation.
And we now know, not only was it fake, but the individuals at the center of the Steele dossier, which launched it, are being indicted.
Democrats lied the whole time.
Adam Schiff lied the whole time.
And we're only getting some justice because of a special counsel appointed at the end of the Trump administration that Biden can't really do anything about.
He could, but it would be seen as a, you know, as a hyper-partisan move, so Durham's gonna do what Durham does.
That's the only thing you get.
That's the very little that the right is actually getting out of anything.
The point is, we know they lied for years.
They know they lied for years.
They will not come out and admit they lied for years.
They just blame—oh, throw them under the bus.
So please.
Over a meme?
I don't care.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 1 p.m.
on this channel.
Thanks for hanging out, and I'll see you all then.
The economy is in shambles, inflation is through the roof, and the government is lying about it.
Several experts believe that the inflation rate is actually in the double digits, with some actually saying it could be a size 30%.
Now when I talk to friends of mine who are big on economics and the stock market, the estimate they've given me is like 12%.
So I think Max Keiser is a good example.
This guy's been covering finance.
He's been on Wall Street.
Like 12%.
This is significant because people are quite upset with Joe Biden and Kamala Harris.
And surprise, surprise, Jimmy Kimmel blames sexism and racism for Kamala Harris's historically low approval rating.
That's right, the late night comedian previously hosted a show that portrayed girls jumping on trampolines.
Racism and sexism, my friends.
At 28% approval, say goodbye to Kamala Harris being Plan B to an aging Joe Biden.
28% approval.
Why?
Joe Biden's approval rating is at 38%, according to several polls.
In aggregate, he's at about 41%.
So there are some favorable polls in there and some bad ones.
Among independent voters, Joe Biden's approval rating is at 25%, and that's where it really matters.
But even Democrats are souring on Joe Biden.
As the leader of this country, which is what the president basically is, a lot of people blame Joe Biden for all of the failures and the failing economy and the struggle and the strife, COVID, etc., the failures in Afghanistan.
But there's still some things they probably think he's doing well, or more importantly, many of the tribalist Democrats probably just blindly support Joe Biden and they won't back down.
Kamala Harris?
What is she doing?
I mean, for real, like, what is she doing?
She was supposed to go down to the border and deal with the border crisis.
She didn't do that.
I mean, she eventually did, but she avoided it.
So basically, you've got a vice president nowhere to be seen, a country that's in dire straits, and everybody's upset about it.
Surprise, surprise, the lady who couldn't even get a single delegate in the Democratic primary has a very low approval rating.
We all knew that Joe Biden was the corporeal form they needed to stand up against Donald Trump.
At least that's what the Atlantic said.
They said, stay alive, Joe Biden.
All we need is your corporeal form.
So a lot of people didn't care for Joe Biden at all.
But people despise Kamala Harris.
People genuinely despise this woman.
She laughs during very serious crises.
When talking about children dying on the border, she goes, hehehe.
It's no surprise people don't like her and it has nothing to do with racism or sexism.
If it was a man coming out and laughing when asked about dying children, people would be upset with that person too.
You see, Joe Biden doesn't do that.
The problem with Joe Biden is that he doesn't know where he is and he's doing a bad job.
Some people still give him the benefit of the doubt.
Jimmy Kimmel, however, is playing the game we all know and expected.
Fox News reports ABC late night host Jimmy Kimmel revealed Tuesday that he thought at least part of the driving force behind Kamala Harris' historically poor approval rating, racism and sexism, During his opening monologue, Kimmel joked about the reasons Harris's approval rating would be so low, claiming it made no sense because she basically has nothing to do, but ultimately blamed sexism and racism amid his comedic attempts.
Americans really aren't happy with Vice President Kamala Harris, Kimmel said.
Kamala Harris has an approval rating of 28%, which makes no sense because she basically has nothing to do.
I mean, it's like criticizing a backup quarterback.
Tom Brady, he's okay.
I don't love the way Blaine Gabbard has his legs folded on the bench, I have to be honest.
What?
Kamala Harris has a job as the President of the Senate, as the tie-breaking vote in Senate decision-making when you have a 50-50 Senate.
She's not sitting around doing nothing.
She's doing her job as the Vice President.
Is anyone surprised by this?
Kimmel pointed out that Harris's approval rating of 28%, according to a recent USA Today Suffolk poll, was lower than Dick Cheney's in 2008 following an incident in which he unintentionally shot someone quail hunting.
I think I know why Kamala's ratings are so low besides racism and sexism, haha.
Which are the obvious ones.
It's because whenever she's next to Joe Biden standing near or behind him, she looks like an assassin, Kimmel said, appearing serious when mentioning sexism and racism.
He didn't provide any examples as to why Harris' approval rating would be low for those reasons.
Despite calling out sexism as a reason for Harris' low approval rating, Kimmel has a history of questionable portrayals of women.
I honestly don't care about The Man Show and Jimmy Kimmel having women jump on trampolines.
If they like it, they're allowed to have it.
Now, if he wants to criticize other people for being sexist, I think there's some interesting questions there, but I also think it's fair to point out Just because you have a show where women jump on trampolines doesn't mean you are sexist.
You can make jokes and be funny.
The point of the win on trampolines, in my opinion on the Man Show, was meant to be over-the-top and funny.
Not seriously degrading women.
The women were there jumping up and down enjoying it as well.
I don't think it's degrading when you have two consenting adults agreeing to engage in jokes or coming on a show.
It's just meant to be funny.
I'm not gonna blame Jimmy Kimmel for that because I'm not Jimmy Kimmel.
He wants to play these stupid games by all means.
But my friends, let's talk about what's really going on.
I thought it was relevant to bring up the Kamala Harris approval rating in reference to the racism and sexism, because the Democrats and their lackeys in media only have one response for the most part.
There's no reason to be upset with Kamala Harris or Joe Biden, and the real reasons, you know, sexism and racism, it's because these people are in a cult.
Not every single person on the left is in the cult, but for the most part, they are.
They blindly believe this stuff, and they ignore what's in front of their faces.
And what's in front of their faces is that the country is falling apart, and we have more data.
Take a look at this tweet.
This is from Bowtiedbull.
I'm not going to pretend that Bowtiedbull is the bastion of economic knowledge, but a decent following on Twitter tracking Bitcoin, and they said, Man, you cannot fool Americans into believing inflation is only 6.2%.
Rolls at 5, crackers and bread 7.5, canned veggies 6.6, potatoes a meager 1.7, coffee is about 5%, cakes and
cupcakes 6.6, apples 6.7.
There's a viral image going around where a turkey in 2020 was like 25 bucks and today it's like 55 bucks.
I'm...
I talk to people all the time.
They go to the grocery store.
They are being rocked by inflation.
It's Joe Biden's fault.
It's the Democrats fault.
And they'll tell you it's not.
But it was Joe Biden who pushed the eviction moratorium.
I'm sorry.
When you give free money to people, you disincentivize work.
And there's a whole slew of reasons.
The economy is a complicated beast.
But when people are being given free money, you have a few problems.
One, people who work in landlords, for instance, right?
The left likes to say it's not a job.
Sure.
Managing a building is not a fun job.
Owning the building and renting it out doesn't make you as much money as these people think.
So often the landlords they're referring to are major corporate landlords.
Let's talk about the small mom-and-pop landlords.
Maybe own one building, Live in the basement and rent out the top two floors.
People were able to live in those houses free of charge.
The landlords are still responsible for fixing everything.
What happens?
They go into debt paying the bills.
We've seen many of these stories.
This is just one example.
Eviction moratorium illegally enforced by Joe Biden when the Supreme Court struck it down.
Now, retirees are saying, they're making me fix the sink and the heating, but they're not paying rent.
The landlords, and again, we've heard many of these stories, go in debt, using credit cards to pay the bills because they're legally obligated to fix these properties, even though people aren't paying their rent.
Now, I don't necessarily blame the people who aren't paying their rent, for the most part.
These are people who lost their jobs due to the lockdowns from Democratic governors and mayors.
And Joe Biden offered up free money to many of these people with the extended extending the unemployment benefits.
Many of these people, and not all of them, decided not to pay rent because they didn't have to.
Again, many stories.
Now, I'm not trying to say that the plural of anecdote is data.
I'm just saying that this is a contributing factor to inflation.
Because you end up with people, landlords, they can't pay the bills.
So what happens?
When the rent, when the leases finally expire and they're able to either evict or the people are forced to move out, they now need to recuperate the losses to help solve their debt problems.
What do they do?
They increase the rent to the maximum they can.
All of a sudden now, rent for this apartment that was two grand is $2,500.
Because the landlords lost money.
And these are mom-and-pop retirees that saved up money, bought a single building.
I'm not talking about major corporate property owners.
That I understand people being like, screw them.
Because these big firms were buying up properties and screwing over the working class.
But that's not most properties.
I think the majority of properties are owned by, like, retail mom-and-pop retirees.
Then we have gas prices.
Joe Biden's actually talking about shutting down another pipeline.
They're actually being told the vaccine mandate is on hold by the Fifth Circuit, and the Biden administration comes out, their deputy press secretary tells people, ignore the court ruling and do it anyway.
All of this shakes confidence in the system.
You have a rogue president abusing his power, and regular people know it.
And Kamala Harris is right there, voting on and approving Democrat policy, and people are sick of it.
Let me show you some news, my friends, and explain the realities.
They want to hide behind racism and sexism.
The Daily Mail reports household debt hits a record high of $15 trillion as home and car prices soar and Americans splurge on credit card purchases.
Americans don't have the cash to pay for this.
They are racking up debt.
Then they need to make more money than their debt.
Inflation happens.
Imagine.
And most of you probably already know this.
You're making 15 bucks an hour.
They shut everything down.
You're now not working.
Some people are getting free money and some people aren't.
Many people now unable to pay their bills because they're out of work because of the shutdowns start using credit cards to buy food.
They rack up credit card debt.
Now, as they re-enter the workforce, not only do they need to maintain their standard of living, which is like health care, food, and rent, they also have to pay down the debts on their credit cards and the debts they racked up during the crisis, during the pandemic, during the lockdowns.
So now they're going to their bosses and saying, or their bosses or potential companies they're trying to get a job at, 15 bucks won't cut it, I need 20.
Because that 15 bucks might help cover the costs of, you know, food and rent and healthcare, which it probably won't, let's be real.
But I gotta pay off this debt now that I racked up.
The company then says, if we pay you $20 an hour, we gotta raise the price of food.
So they do.
Then the people who are getting these jobs go and get lunch at a restaurant across the street.
All of a sudden they find that the burger they used to buy at $10 is now $15.
Now all of a sudden they're like, $20 isn't cutting it, because I can't even afford to buy a burger.
Inflation is hitting across the board, and it has a lot to do with the Democrats' policy.
It has a lot to do with the blue states shutting everything down.
It has a lot to do with Donald Trump, too.
15 days to slow the spread happened under him.
And it was that train wreck, the economy grinded to a halt, and then, to be fair, shortly after Donald Trump said he thinks things should reopen, but he doesn't have the power to force states to do it.
In places like South Dakota, Texas, and Florida, they reopened very quickly, and their economy's a-boomin'.
But for many independents in blue states, many moderate voters, they are saying, we do not approve of the job you have done.
Kamala Harris is supposed to be doing something about Joe Biden's failures.
Nothing.
Literally nothing.
So you want to know why people are more likely to disapprove of Kamala Harris?
Does it have anything to do with racism or sexism?
You know, let's be real.
Yes, some some of it.
But what? 0.1%?
She gets elected.
Americans voted for Barack Obama twice.
This is not an issue of racism or sexism.
Barack Obama enjoyed a very high approval rating for the majority of his presidency.
They went down later on.
That's common, for the most part.
But people approved of Obama.
Across the board, they loved him.
He was charismatic, even though he was blowing up kids.
Now the problem is that Joe Biden is floundering and babbling and in crisis, and Kamala Harris is literally doing nothing.
So of course people are upset with her.
They never liked her in the first place.
And I'll tell you this, if there was one metric I could go by to help you understand why people despise Kamala Harris, it's that she laughs in the face of devastation.
Joe Biden doesn't do that.
Let's be real.
Joe Biden might say things like trim on a shop at a pressure and bat a calf care.
He may stumble and stammer and fart or whatever it is he does.
But when asked serious questions, the worst thing we get from is, come on, man, you know, of course, it's bad.
Oh, come on, man.
How about that?
People may say, I don't think he's all there and I don't think he has the ability to do the job.
But when Kamala Harris is questioned about the border, she laughs when she's questioned about riots.
She laughs.
She laughs.
The American people are facing massive debt, and the narrative from Democrats is that inflation is good.
MSNBC runs this story.
We get statements from some of Biden's cabinet like, actually, inflation isn't all that bad, and it's just transitory.
Lying, lying, nonstop.
First, they said there was no inflation.
Then they said it's only a little bit.
Then they said, don't worry, it's transitory.
Now we're at the point where they're like, inflation is good.
These reports are coming out where they're like, it's time to ask for a raise.
Inflation is a good thing.
No, it isn't.
You can't afford to buy milk, bread, and eggs anymore.
And they're saying, but at least you can ask for a raise.
Oh, why?
So I can hopefully be able to buy milk, bread, and eggs?
And that's on the Democrats who control everything.
They've got Congress, they've got the Senate, they've got the executive branch, and let's be real, the Supreme Court is not some conservative bastion the media is making it out to be.
Certainly it leans conservative in some respects, but it's not like it's staunch far-right or anything like that.
It's fairly middle-of-the-road in how they've been handling their rulings.
But Democrats have everything.
So don't be surprised when the Democratic Party is like, You know, Joe Biden's approval rating among Democrats at 75%, according to Civics, around 75.
Don't be surprised when even Democrat voters aren't going to sit back and accept the lies anymore.
Because at a certain point when you're like, um, I can't afford gas, And then they tell you, oh, that's because you're racist and sexist.
That's why you're really angry.
At a certain point, you can't lie to the people who are experiencing the problems that you created.
Someone comes to Jimmy Kimmel, this is a hypothetical, and says, I can't afford gas.
And he goes, are you upset about it?
I actually am.
I don't think Kamala Harris is doing a good job.
Well, that's because you're a racist and you're a sexist.
And it's like, you say that to someone, and they're literally saying to you, uh, no, I'm just mad I can't buy gas.
Like, I don't care if Kamala Harris is a woman, Indian, Jamaican, whatever.
That's fine.
In fact, actually, I think a lot of people think it's a good thing.
They're like, hey, great, you know, a different perspective.
But she's doing a bad job.
Or I should say she's doing no job at all.
Take a look at this.
Total debt balance in its composition.
We have this total U.S.
household debt increased by $286 billion to $15.24 trillion in the third quarter of 2021 after leveling off for much of the pandemic.
These are people suffering.
These are people taking out loans, having to sell their homes, losing their retirements, desperate because the economy is in dire straits.
Joe Biden said he didn't run on polls.
You know, his polling is in the gutter.
And he's like, well, people are upset about COVID and supply chain issues.
And it's like, bro, That's you!
They're mad at you as the president.
What is Joe Biden doing?
Vaccine mandates.
He doesn't get it.
Vaccine mandates are hurting the economy.
I mean, it's a fact.
You look at Florida and Texas.
Their COVID rates are going down.
California's going up.
In Florida and Texas, the economy is booming.
South Dakota, the economy is booming.
South Dakota, there was one graph that came out as one of the only states to grow over the past year because they never forced people to shut down.
Mandates and restrictions hurt people.
They did not help.
I'm not convinced that they actually slowed the spread because even Dr. Fauci said it.
He was asked when, this was several months ago, Florida's rates were going down, New York's going up.
He goes, I have no answer for this!
Yeah, because when humans try to centralize power, thinking they're smarter than nature or market forces, they just cause chaos.
And regular people can see that.
The smartest thing the Democrats could have done is said, we'll take reasonable precautions to protect the vulnerable, but for the most part, it's an act of nature.
Then when people say, look at all these bad things, they say, listen.
We don't have the authoritarian right to restrict your rights, so don't blame us for it.
Instead, they said, we are!
We do have the right to do that!
And the Democrats then started locking people down and effectively destroying livelihoods.
You think the people in New York and across this country are going to forget that?
No.
Jimmy Kimmel, you know him, you love him.
He's gonna come out and look you in the eyes as you lose your job, as you lose your business, as you are struggling through debt and say, the only reason you're mad is because you're racist.
It's incredible, isn't it?
As if you, the American voter, don't know exactly why you are mad.
It's funny, I see a lot of these journalists that I've known for a long time, working out of Columbia and CUNY, saying that the narrative around critical race theory is all fake.
And it's pushed by right-wing propagandists.
And I'm like, that mother who's testifying in front of a school board in Loudoun County demanding their resignation is not blindly believing some fringe right-wing website.
She's telling a story about how her own child came to her making racist comments that they learned in school.
And the parent says, I don't want my kids learning this neo-racist garbage.
And what do you get?
Progressives, Democrats, politicians just keep telling you you're wrong.
I'll tell you this.
When they come out and say it's a lie, they wrap a lot of people up in the cult.
Jimmy Kimmel can come out and blame racism and sexism, and people will believe it.
There are a lot of people who will tribalistically just blindly support the Democratic Party, no matter what.
And they're going to be like, you know, I think everything's fine.
I'm getting free money and I can't be evicted.
So clearly the problem must be racists.
But something happens when the unemployment benefits dry up and the eviction moratorium ends.
All of a sudden now people are like, hey, things are really bad.
The Democrats seem to be maintaining support by bribing people.
Indirectly, mind you.
Giving them free rent.
Arguably in violation of the Third Amendment, depending on if some of these people were service members.
Giving them free money, and then blaming the problems on everybody else.
And there are people who buy it up.
I wish those people would pay attention to the news.
I'll leave it there.
We got big news.
I'm wrapped up in the Rittenhouse trial, but still trying to make sure I'm getting those segments out.
4 p.m., big breaking story on what's going on with Kyle Rittenhouse.
He's testifying.
I'll leave it there.
I will see you all over at youtube.com slash timcast at 4 p.m.
