Biden Declares A New World Order Is Coming Triggering Viral Trend And Journalists Crying FAKE NEWS
Biden Declares A New World Order Is Coming Triggering Viral Trend And Journalists Crying FAKE NEWS. The Democratic President said a new world order is coming and we need to lead it.
Theories are flying all over the internet as the media tries to claim the new world order is fake news. but the idea is very real and Biden meant there will be a new order to the world. Media for some reason is desperate to claim the theories are exaggerated or insane yet many presidents, candidates, and even a Ukrainian MP have expressed a desire for a new world order.
The reality is these people are working towards international laws and norms that some view as authoritarian or wrong. The media lying about makes more people think the conspiracies are real
#Biden
#Democrats
#NewWorldOrder
Become A Member And Protect Our Work at http://www.timcast.com
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Speaking at an event, Joe Biden announced the New World Order is coming.
And a viral trend began with over 160,000 tweets discussing the New World Order.
And of course, the fact checkers say it's fake news.
It's fake news.
But there is a new world order.
It's just not as crazy as the media tries to make it out to be.
So let's break down what's actually happening with Joe Biden's liberal world order and his new world order, or what he actually meant by it.
In our next story, The Daily Wire smacks down Harry's razors, launching their own razor company after the shaving company dropped them and dropped their ads from their platform, denouncing The Daily Wire's audience.
In our last story, Project Veritas exposes Biden's DOJ spying on journalists.
Now if you like this show, give us a good review, leave us five stars, share the show with your friends, and now let's get into that first story.
Recently, Joe Biden, giving a speech, said that a new world order is coming.
He says that, at a certain period, we created the liberal world order and that we're going to be experiencing a big change.
He also goes on to say that, what is it, like 60 million people died between 1900 and 1946.
And of course, from Joe Biden's claim of a new world order coming, Theories are abound.
And of course, with every statement made by an individual about what New World Order might or does mean, the fact-checkers are out in force on Twitter saying, it's a wild conspiracy theory and there is no New World Order, which is the strangest thing to me.
Because when Joe Biden himself says a New World Order is coming, I don't immediately think of aliens and pyramids and all seeing eyes or conspiracy theories.
I think to myself, what does he mean by a New World Order?
And when we have a Ukrainian MP only a few weeks ago saying she was fighting for a New World Order, I simply ask, in their minds, what does a New World Order mean?
Not that it's a reference to any kind of conspiracy.
I'm genuinely curious what Joe Biden meant when he said it.
Well, I think I can break down, generally speaking, what is publicly believed to be the New World Order.
But there is a lot of conspiracy nonsense, and I think what the media tries to do with these fact-checkers is take anybody who talks about the concept that Joe Biden was speaking of, anyone who's critical of it, they'll say, but they're actually talking about some fringe nonsense.
Case in point, biolabs.
As we now know, there are biological research facilities in Ukraine.
I'll try and be very specific in my language.
And when we were critical of the idea that there were biolabs in Ukraine, No one bats an eye.
When Victoria Nuland, in testimony to the Senate, says Ukraine does have biological research facilities, and we at TimCastIRL talk about it, the Daily Beast runs this piece claiming we're pushing some weird conspiracy about shady U.S.
bioweapons research, which we never claimed.
It's almost like they're telling us what they're doing, but they want to make sure stupid people aren't paying attention?
I really don't get it.
Joe Biden himself came out saying there's a new world order.
My question is, what does that mean?
I'm not saying I know what it means.
I don't know.
Joe Biden said it.
But then how do they come out and claim there isn't one?
I'll give you the gist of it, and then we'll read what this is all about.
The general idea for the New World Order among many conspiratorial-minded individuals
is that there's a cabal of elite, global, international individuals
who want to create a one-world authoritarian government.
Well, call it conspiratorial, it may just be a sort of exaggerated or hyperbolic version
of what's actually happening.
There is something called the Liberal World Order, or the Liberal Economic Order, created after World War II.
The idea was, among leading nations, to create international trade systems and judicial systems, essentially, to prevent international conflict.
Now, on the surface, I think it's a fantastic idea.
But you have to wonder about the corruption of our political elites.
And this may be the actual, non-conspiratorial, simple explanation of the problem with the New World Order.
When Joe Biden comes out and says there will be a New World Order and we have to lead it, I say this.
I know not for what your vision of a New World Order is.
I do know that you are a corrupt politician and you should not be in charge of any kind of world order.
Now, the liberal economic order, I think, is particularly interesting because, you know, you've got the United Nations, you've got the G7, the G20, you have international agreements, all with the either express intent or the ancillary intent to prevent World War III or great global conflict.
If that already exists, what is their new version of a world order going to be?
And what does it mean?
Well, let's take a look at the news and see exactly what Biden said, how the media has responded to it, claiming it's all crap lies.
Alex Jones has chimed in with a very simple statement.
Before we get started, head over to TimCast.com and become a member to help support the work we do.
We're working behind the scenes on re-upping our infrastructure.
So let me just stress, it is vitally important for all of you right now, if you really do want to support us, to become a member and check out our members-only podcast from TimCast IRL.
You know, we've got an uphill battle across the board, from activists attacking us to trying to make our infrastructure more resilient to avoid being canceled by some of these companies.
These are real challenges, and we could use your support.
But don't forget, there's another way to support us, and that's sharing this video right now.
Granted, being a member at Timcast keeps all of our journalists employed, but, you know, we're going to make it work and do what we have to do to keep this system growing and expanding.
Don't forget to smash that like button, subscribe to this channel, share this show with your friends.
Let's talk about Joe Biden's new world order.
Newsweek reports!
Claims about the existence and implementation of a New World Order have spread online after President Joe Biden used the phrase in a speech.
While the phrase New World Order is generally used to denote a significant geopolitical change, it can also designate a conspiracy theory that stipulates a secretive globalist authority He's seeking to control the world under a totalitarian regime and strip sovereign countries and citizens of their freedom.
It seems to me that both of those are very extreme interpretations of it.
New world order is just a passive phrase that literally means new world in order.
We don't know exactly what it is.
And then you have the, a dominant authoritarian global regime seeks to strip you of your rights.
Okay, whoa, hold on.
Slow down there a minute.
Isn't there a happy medium?
That there are powerful international elites who are aligned with this cultural idea of a one-world government or authority?
I think that's fairly obvious.
Nobody wants World War III.
I think it's fairly obvious that there's the Bilderberg meeting, the G7 Summit, G20, the World Economic Forum, the United Nations.
Yes, there are many international elites who meet regularly, and much of these meetings are for the express intent of some kind of global order.
Be it intentionally targeting one world government, I don't necessarily think so, but a lot of these meetings are just adding grains of sand to the heap to create international ties, prevent war.
The question is, what will this new world order be like, whether intentional or otherwise?
I don't think we need to assume intent of, you know, many people like Joe Biden.
I think Joe Biden's a self-interested corrupt individual, but I believe at the highest level, With people like the Clintons and Joe Biden and George H.W.
Bush, who have all said in the past there's going to be a new world order or they want one, I think they view themselves as better men.
And I mean that figuratively.
It's a phrase referencing the founding fathers and their ideas towards the Senate.
There genuinely are people who think they're smarter and better than you.
Truth be told, there are people who are smarter and better than you and me.
The problem is, why should we believe it's them?
Merit.
You should be able to prove yourself as a true leader through merit, not corruption and manipulation.
Therein lies the problem.
Me, personally, I'd love it if there were international trade agreements and treaties that prevented war.
I think most people think war is bad.
We can mind our own business as a sovereign nation, grow and develop, and, you know, litigate and mitigate our conflicts with other countries in world courts and things like that.
This would mean the people who are leading that charge need to have earned that right and that privilege to be, and that duty, responsibility to be in these positions.
It shouldn't be people like Joe Biden who, in my opinion, just lie, cheat, and steal.
Newsweek says several conservatives and conspiracy theorists, including followers of the radical QAnon—oh, here we go—quickly jumped on Biden using the words while speaking at Business Roundtable's CEO quarterly meeting in D.C.
on Monday.
During the speech, Biden described how there is significant opportunities to make some real changes with regards to how the world reacts to Russia's invasion of Ukraine, adding that it was currently at an inflection point that occurs every few generations.
Let me just play the video for you and hopefully we'll get sound out of this.
You know, some people might take that to mean that there was a purge or people were killed or whatever.
I think what he's saying, and if I'm being, you know, generous, between World War I and World War II, there was a lot of death.
That's why we established the liberal world order, as they call it.
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 momsforamerica.us today for more information and to secure your exclusive VIP meet and greet tickets.
Right now, Russia is saying, no, you can't put your rules over us.
Truth be told, whether you agree with them or not, they're talking about world domination.
Maybe that's a hyperbolic way of explaining it, but they're talking about there's a subset of people You know, uh, in powerful positions who think there's a right way for things to go.
They want the world to be in this not- It's the old liberal world order and their new world order, whatever it means.
Does that mean that there's going to be a totalitarian regime spying on you at every moment?
Spying on all of your communications?
Yes.
I know it sounds crazy, right, but we know from the Snowden leaks, the NSA, they already do spy on everybody, or at least they have the capability to, and they can spy on you whenever they deem it necessary.
So, are there fears about a globalist elite?
Here's my issue with that conspiracy theory.
It sort of implies there's, like, a handful of people specifically driving towards this.
I don't think that's necessarily correct.
Like, there's no small group of people who are conspiring to make it happen.
The problem is, I think there is a group of powerful elites of industry and politics who just agree with the idea, so their actions push in this direction.
There's got to be some kind of razor to this.
Never attribute to a conspiracy that which can be explained by cultural forces.
Or maybe a better idea is there's a standalone complex.
In a conspiracy, a group of people act in concert towards some kind of means that's typically illicit or criminal.
In a standalone complex, you'll notice a lot of people acting towards a similar goal, but they're doing it all independently.
So, that's my issue here.
I don't think Joe Biden is in any way capable of leading any kind of new world order.
I think in his mind, in the mind of his circle and the political establishment, There is a net benefit to having control through international trade ties, and I've personally met people who work on this who are not part of any kind of cabal.
I know young people who go to Davos.
They go to the peripheral events outside of the World Economic Forum to be involved in this global expansion.
They're not part of any conspiracy.
They're not receiving any money from secret members of any conspiratorial group or wealthy family.
They're just young people, typically in this community, and this is what they're striving for.
That's the issue I take with the idea of a tight-knit conspiracy.
I view it more as powerful, internationally-minded people want to pull everyone under a certain economic system.
That's what they're doing.
Here we go from the Daily Mail.
Here's what they say.
Conspiracy theorists jump on Biden saying there's a new world order.
Now look, I don't normally think, you know, this is necessarily something we need to go on and on about, but Some days are just funny, that's what I tweeted.
Because here's what's trending.
It had 160,000 tweets.
New world order.
The Twitter editorial says, Unfounded claims about the New World Order conspiracy theory are discussed after President Joe Biden used the phrase as he spoke about the United States response to Russia's invasion of Ukraine during an address at Business Roundtable's CEO quarterly meeting.
Why would they frame it that way?
Unfounded claims.
Why wouldn't they just say people discuss New World Order conspiracy theory?
Why wouldn't they just say, Joe Biden said a New World Order is coming.
Many people question what it means.
Some people push conspiracies.
That's probably a fair way to put it.
Well, Alex Jones came out in a video.
Let me see, do they have it right here?
He said, F you, F you.
I've got plenty of words for you, but at the end of the day, F you and your New World Order, and F the horse you rode in on, and all your ish.
Well, that's Alex Jones.
The clip they pulled, at least, because I'm pretty sure he was talking about something else.
They say the phrase New World Order has been used in the past to denote a major shift in the organization of world powers, such as after a global conflict.
It was famously invoked by former President George H.W.
Bush during the Persian Gulf Crisis in 1990.
Quote, Out of these troubled times, our fifth objective, a New World Order, can emerge.
A new era, freer from the threat of terror, stronger in the pursuit of justice, and more secure in the quest for peace, the late leader said in September of that year.
But it's more frequently used in extremist circles to describe a conspiracy theory
dealing with the vast global network of shadowy operators and elites working to install a
worldwide socialist government to rule the masses. Yeah, I'm not a fan of the more hyperbolic view
on this, the more extreme view, and I'll tell you why. We don't have evidence for it.
We do have evidence that there are powerful political elites who have used the phrase and want to move in a direction.
Quite literally, George H.W.
Bush did say, We want a new era, a new world order, freer from the threat of terror, stronger in the pursuit of justice.
Certainly it stands to reason that the invasion of a foreign country was at the behest of a man who said he wanted a new world order.
I think it's fair to point out the phrase New World Order can mean different things.
It doesn't necessarily have to mean one specific conspiracy, and that's another reason I take issue with the conspiracy.
Each and every time a president states there will be a New World Order, they could just be referring to their personal vision of what they want with global authority.
I'm not necessarily saying authoritarianism, though I think that would be the likely path.
I'm saying what kind of authorities can be enacted at an international level.
Now, in this quote from Joe Biden, he referenced the liberal world order.
That, I think, I think is interesting.
So, let's take a look at this from World 101, the Council on Foreign Relations dot org.
What is the Liberal World Order?
Explore the organizations and agreements that have promoted global peace and prosperity for 75 years, as well as the challenges that now threaten to undermine those gains.
In this website from the CFR, we can see... Actually, I thought this was NewsGuard certified, is it not?
Oh, it is!
There you go.
The CFR, the Council on Foreign Relations, receives a 100 out of 100 from NewsGuard.
So when they tell you what the Liberal World Order is, that's exactly right, isn't it?
Now, of course, they have their bias, and you might not like them.
I'm saying, this is mainstream, credible authority on what the liberal economic order is, right?
So certainly, I'm not talking about conspiracies.
I'm talking about fact.
Over at world101.cfr, they say, After World War II, the deadliest conflict in human history, countries sought to ensure the world never again devolved into such horrific violence.
World leaders created a series of international organizations and agreements to promote global cooperation on issues including security, trade, health, and monetary policy.
The U.S.
has championed this system, known as the Liberal World Order, for the past 75 years.
During this time, the world has enjoyed unprecedented peace and prosperity.
I gotta be honest, after World War II, we had a whole lot of wars.
The Cold War, Proxy Wars.
So I'm not entirely sure I agree with their assessment.
I will say in the past 30 or so years, at least in the U.S., we have known tremendous prosperity.
I wouldn't say peace.
They say, but these institutions are far from perfect, and today they are struggling to address new sources of disorder, such as climate change and a deadly pandemic.
What's more, democracy is on the decline around the world.
Authoritarianism is on the rise, and countries like China are deliberately chipping away at the liberal world order, creating parallel institutions of their own.
Faced with these challenges, will the liberal world order survive?
If a new system emerges, what will that mean for freedom, peace, and prosperity worldwide?
In this module, we will outline the authority and limitations of the UN Security Council in ensuring global peace, explore the challenges of holding governments accountable for violating international law, Evaluate the success of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund in promoting trade development and economic stability.
Investigate how the World Trade Organization has contributed to the decades-long boom in free trade and learn about the role of the World Health Organization in safeguarding global health, its shortcomings, in coordinating an effective international response to crises like the COVID-19 pandemic.
We've certainly seen corruption at every level.
We've certainly seen bad information coming out of the World Health Organization.
Not all of it.
And therein lies the big problem.
I love the idea of a liberal world order and a new world order in this context.
It sounds noble.
The liberal world order is facing a challenge from China!
We need something new to ensure that countries are abiding by the law!
Sounds good to me.
The only problem is, these are people who believe the ends justify the means.
And in order to attain whatever kind of international agreements they're looking for, they do nasty things.
Now, of course, I find this fascinating.
The idea that there is a conspiracy of global elites working towards some kind of global authoritarianism is basically based on your perception of whether or not Joe Biden and his ilk are good people.
I mean, that's it.
If we have the Council on Foreign Relations outright stating that world leaders created a series of international organizations and agreements to promote global cooperation on issues including trade, security, health, and monetary policy, With the U.S.
championing its system.
How does that differ from the conspiracy theory?
I mean, perhaps the conspiracy theory can get a bit crazy, depending on which one you're referring to, but this is the game they play.
There is no one unified conspiracy theory around a new world order.
Some people probably believe in lizards or something, sure.
Weird.
Probably not a lot of people, though.
Most people, like Alex Jones, are probably just saying, powerful global elites are doing quite literally what the CFR says, and we don't like it.
Now, if you question what they say and say it's corrupt, then they'll say, oh, you're talking about the conspiracy theory.
If the only difference between the truth, according to the Council on Foreign Relations, and the conspiracy theory is that you think these are good people or they're bad people, then it's not a conspiracy theory, is it?
But they're saying conspiracy theory to discredit it.
Now, I do find fascinating how often this phrase has been used.
Logically.ai.
Fact checks.
I love this because it's a fact check.
Look at this.
Ukraine is fighting for a new world order.
They say, fact check with logically.
An offhand comment by a Ukrainian MP has been taken out of context by conspiracy theorists.
Has it now?
Well, let's see how they describe it.
Let's see, a Fox News interview with Ukrainian MP Kyra Rudik is being misleadingly taken out of context by online conspiracy theorists.
In the interview, Rudik makes an offhand comment about defending Ukraine in which she said, we not only fight for Ukraine, we fight for this New World Order for the democratic countries.
This is being misleadingly taken as an accidental confirmation of the New World Order or Great Reset Conspiracy Theory.
The great recent conspiracy theory asserts the number of global organizations, politicians, and business leaders are conspiring to create an authoritarian one-world government by divesting people of autonomy and opportunities to own property.
It's so weird.
At the World Economic Forum, a forum of powerful global elites, quite literally published a video saying you will own nothing and you will be happy.
And then they say there's a conspiracy theory.
Okay, I don't know what that means because we're talking about things people have publicly stated.
I don't know what they believe, nor do I believe any of them are necessarily telling the truth.
But what do you think they meant when they said you would own nothing and you will be happy?
I mean, honestly, maybe everyone's taking it out of context.
Give me an answer.
They want to say, it is particularly focused on Klaus Schwab, the founder and executive chairman of the World Economic Forum.
Schwab published a book in 2020 titled COVID-19, The Great Reset, from which the conspiracy theory movement derives its name.
They launched a website, theworldeconomicforum.org, W-E-F, forum.org, talking about the Great Reset.
They're very much in line with woke politics, and they're saying this stuff outright.
The question I have with all of this, It seems to be there is, obviously, an element of truth to the goals of a new world order.
Not any kind of specific goals.
I'm saying, you know, when the Council on Foreign Relations publicly says, like, you know, we need something new to combat China and these issues, they have a liberal world order, as they call it, and they want a new world order.
What would it be?
Not liberal?
A woke world order?
I don't know.
Call it what you want, but they're certainly working towards something like that, whatever it might mean.
Yet, in this article, when a member of parliament in Ukraine says they're fighting for a new world order, instead of saying, what do you mean by new world order?
They simply say, she must mean Great Reset, and the Great Reset is crazy, therefore it's not true.
There is no evidence this conspiracy theory is true.
It is a common rhetorical tactic, and conspiracy circles take phrases, symbols, or numbers out of context and use them to imply that secret messages are hiding in plain sight.
What is this?
What does that have to do with anything?
There's no secret messages.
The weirdest thing is I'm sitting here and Victoria Nuland, the Undersecretary of State, is speaking before the Senate and she says, there are bio research labs in Ukraine and we're concerned Russia might get them.
And I'm like, whoa!
The U.S.
outright confirming there are bio labs and they're concerned Russia will get them.
And they're like, that's a conspiracy theory.
I'm like, what?
All I'm doing is telling you what the lady said before Congress.
Something doesn't add up, does it?
It's things like this that help generate the worst elements of this conspiracy theory.
Because this fact check, I'm not saying this logically is like any kind of good organization, I don't know who they are, but when you see this kind of tactic used by these fact checkers, instead of saying, we don't know what she meant by New World Order, she does reference democratic countries, so she may be speaking about a similar concept to what we've heard in the past, The rest is speculation.
Instead, they're like, well, she may be referring to the Great Reset, and the Great Reset... No, no, no, no, no, no.
She never said Great Reset.
I don't know why you're bringing that up.
The Great Reset, in my opinion, is just like powerful interests thinking that if everything gets shuttered or reset by COVID, they could start things back up slightly different.
A Great Reset could help normalize global economics or something.
I don't know what his plans are or who their plans are.
They say when Rudik's comments on Fox News are put into context, it's clear that she is referring to a broader struggle for democracy against authoritarianism.
I disagree.
Because she's saying a new world order.
And what the CFR and other countries are saying, or other institutions, is that we're slipping into authoritarianism.
If authoritarianism is growing, it is not new to create more democracy.
It would be new to create something not democracy to either be a part of or combat the authoritarianism.
So I don't know what she meant.
But apparently, everyone seems to agree.
From Northwestern.edu, expert on Ukraine, we've awoken today to a new world order!
February 24th.
Why, Russia's war?
The Guardian writes, how Ukraine has become the crucible of the new world order.
From Russia's threat of nuclear weapons, to the patriotic courage of Volodymyr Zelensky, and A to Z of how the world has changed.
I don't think this article right here is talking about any kind of global conspiracy.
I genuinely think some people use the phrase to mean the world has changed, there is a new order of governance.
And you know what?
They're not wrong.
When I see international citizens volunteering in the Foreign Legion of Ukraine, I think that is a new order to the world.
Right?
I see that.
It's very strange that Russia can declare war and then citizens, not governments, of all these different countries come together and wage a war.
What would you call that?
A mark in reprisal?
Private citizens acting in the interests of NATO powers?
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.
In this article from March 20th, Murphy quote, we should not allow Vladimir Putin back into the world
order.
The reason I highlight this article is because it's not about new world order.
It's referencing the concept from the Council on Foreign Relations.
There is a world order, the liberal world order.
It doesn't mean liberal like in the United States.
It means more to do with economics, neoliberalism, corporate expansion, etc.
That's what we have.
I'm curious as to how that will change.
I don't know.
What I do know is all of this changed when Vladimir Putin invaded Ukraine.
Politico reports Davos freezes out Putin and Russian oligarchs.
World Economic Forum is siding with Ukraine and blowing a hole in its budget.
It's fascinating.
The World Economic Forum has put on ice its relationships with Russia, including strategic
partnerships with conglomerates run by oligarchs, a Kremlin-backed research center in Moscow,
and an advisory council led by Russian President Vladimir Putin's economic advisor have also been
torpedoed. We are not engaging with any sanctioned individual and have frozen all relations with
Russian entities, a World Economic Forum spokesperson told Politico. Frozen perhaps, but not dead.
World Economic Forum is leaving open the possibility of serving as a bridge builder between Russia and Ukraine once active conflict is over.
The 800-pound gorilla of the elite global conference circuit has walked a tightrope for decades when it comes to Russia, basking in the Kremlin's attention while cringing over oligarch antics.
The Forum's founder Klaus Schwab prides himself on making his annual meeting in Davos open to all comers, including via a personal relationship with Putin dating back to the early 1990s.
Well look, I'll tell you a bit about the World Economic Forum.
Powerful international elites.
You need to understand what that means.
Does it mean that there is a group of like 13 families?
No.
Does it mean that there are a few thousand wealthy individuals that are all relatively connected to each other?
Yes.
I know.
I've actually been to Davos during the World Economic Forum one time.
Spent a few days there.
A lot of snow.
It was a blizzard.
Why was I there?
I have friends who have friends who have friends.
I have, I know people who know politicians.
A friend of mine is a friend of a family member of a high-ranking politician, someone I met several years ago.
It happens to be friends with this billionaire family because people are connected.
People know other people.
Now, What happened at Davos when I went?
I didn't go to the World Economic Forum, but outside of the World Economic Forum, there are a whole bunch of events put on by people.
Who are not directly associated or affiliated with anybody involved in the World Economic Forum, like, on paper.
Actually, I should walk that back.
There are many people who put on events.
The events that I... So, I had friends working on a cryptocurrency event.
They wanted to tell all of these politicians and CEOs to use Bitcoin and use cryptocurrency.
So, knowing the World Economic Forum is coming, they rented a space, they put on this big event, their hors d'oeuvres, and everyone talks about the prospect of cryptocurrency.
It was huge!
Personally, I believe that the World Economic Forum and powerful international interests will use Bitcoin as some kind of global standard.
I mean, maybe.
I certainly think they will.
Because I saw what this was.
And I'll tell you what I saw.
We couldn't go.
Like, when I went to Davos, I couldn't get anywhere near the actual forum.
It's all blocked off and super hoity-toity, right?
But I could certainly walk around the city and see all of these people.
It's not hard to get there.
If you can afford a plane ticket to Davos during the World Economic Forum, you can walk around the city.
You don't need permits or passes.
There's a city there.
Get your passport, go to Switzerland.
You can walk into these events that allow it, and you can schmooze and break bread and drink with powerful, wealthy individuals who are trying to pitch their ideas, seeking investment, or trying to see something catch on.
This is what I think about what the New World Order is.
Of course there's hierarchy, of course there's wealthy people, of course there's Klaus Schwab, of course there's Joe Biden.
I don't think Joe Biden goes to annual meetings where he sits down and says, everyone, gentlemen, the secret council of the New World Order is here to take order, bangs the gavel or anything like that.
What I think is that once a year there's a conference organized by a group of people that has an agenda, they invite powerful interests, they promise them things, they show them luxury, and they lobby.
What I really think is there are maybe tens of thousands of people who are wealthy and interested, know someone who goes here, they go to these events.
People get invited if they're wealthy enough or powerful enough to the World Economic Forum, and you have people lobbying things to them.
They probably do have, well they for a fact have agenda items.
Here's what we think about this year, here's what's been happening, here are our concerns.
But I do not believe, at the World Economic Forum, they leave with a packet saying, here's what you must do as leader of these countries and here's our plan for the new world order.
Nothing like that.
I guess what I'm trying to say is, never attribute to a conspiracy that which can be explained by a cultural emerging, an emergent cultural phenomenon.
And that is, the more people hear about this, the more people of means meet and try and be a part of it and say, I want to influence, you know, people of power, the more those people of power will spread those ideas within their own countries.
I think a lot of what we think are conspiracy theories are emergent phenomena.
So, in the case of the World Economic Forum, you have a guy who starts a conference, he's well-connected, and he lobbies all of these ideas to all these world leaders.
They then agree with him, and they work towards these things.
I'll explain it another way.
You know, I think about it this morning, like, there were a few stories I wanted to talk about.
There was one about Spring Break going crazy in Florida and a state of emergency being declared.
And I saw that and I said, okay, we could talk about that one.
Then I saw the Daily Wire launched this new product, Jeremy's Razors, and they were competing against Woka Culture.
I said, hmm, that one seems a little more important, at least to me.
What if I chose the Spring Break story?
You know, what would many of you be thinking about those who watched it?
The point is, out of sight, out of mind.
If there are certain stories we don't talk about, we don't know about, we can't address them.
I did another segment on James O'Keefe and Project Veritas being spied on by Biden's DOJ.
I could have talked about something else.
I could have talked about swimming issues.
But by choosing to talk about this, you know about it, you can be focused on it.
That's important.
That's what I think happens with the World Economic Forum.
If you go to these events, and you walk up to someone and say, did you know about this problem?
You're going to influence them.
They're going to spread those ideas.
And because all these people are extremely wealthy, well-connected, or political, they have the means to make rapid changes.
I don't think there is an absolute plan for a new world order.
I think wealthy individuals meet once a year in a variety of ways, and all of them sitting in the same room, or sitting in close proximity, spread the same ideas and worldviews to each other.
And they trust each other, and they act upon those worldviews.
That is to say, it's an emergent phenomenon, not a conspiracy.
That's also to say there are powerful elites pushing for a global international system, and you can call it one world government or whatever.
I'd say one world governing authority is absolutely on the mind of most of these people.
Why?
Since World War II, that nobody's wanted war.
Now, the question is, will it subvert U.S.
sovereignty?
The Trans-Pacific Partnership would have.
TPP.
Trump crushed it.
It would have actually allowed foreign countries or corporations to sue U.S.
citizens and things like that.
And so there are questions about whether or not it's an intentional act or whether it was an accidental byproduct of these international treaties.
Ultimately, you decide.
The reality?
I'll put it simply.
To reiterate once, finally, to push back on the media and their constant screams of conspiracy theories, most people, including Alex Jones, are not talking about lizards.
They're talking about powerful interests that want control of things and believe they know better than you.
It's really that simple.
Look, if you go out and your neighbor thinks they know better than you, of course Bill Gates would.
The dude's rich!
Now if you take your money and you donate to a local fire department because you want to help out, what do you think powerful interests do when they want to help out?
Mackenzie Bezos donated billions of dollars to critical race theory non-profits and woke issues.
A lot of people think it's a conspiracy, it's terrible.
It's just one person of means heavily influencing the system.
The more you know about it, the more you can push back.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 8 p.m.
over at youtube.com slash TimCastIRL.
Thanks for hanging out, and we'll see you all then.
Just over a year ago, a random Twitter user with like two followers tweeted to Harry's Razors that, how dare you support the Daily Wire?
They are a bigoted and offensive, and Harry's agreed.
Harry's said, oh, we reject these views and we will no longer sponsor Daily Wire programming.
Specifically, I believe it was with Michael Knowles.
Well, the Daily Wire has issued a rebuttal!
After one year, they've released IHateHarris.com, which is Jeremy's razors.
And I gotta say, the commercial they put out may be one of the funniest commercials I've seen.
They hit the nail on the head with the hammer, and this is significant.
If there's any one company that is doing the most, or doing a lot, To build culture and push back on far-left wokeness, it's the Daily Wire.
Not a day goes by I am not impressed, inspired, and jealous of what they're doing.
We may end up going and hanging out in Nashville a little bit with the crew from the Daily Wire, but the Daily Wire is absolutely fantastic.
I mean, this is brilliant.
This is their website, I Hate Harry's.
Quote, stop giving your money to people who hate you.
Give it to me instead.
And there's God King Jeremy Boring with a cut on his face from shaving.
So they tell the story, breaking down why they're launching this new product, and it's absolutely hilarious.
But in this segment, I will talk to you not just about the fact that The Daily Wire has created their own razor company, but also how many on the left are accidentally watching The Daily Wire's new cultural content, and then going, oh no, what have I done?
I enjoyed Ben Shapiro's movie.
This is fascinating.
As many of you know, we here at TimCast.com are trying to do something relatively similar, maybe slightly different.
The Daily Wire knows the power of culture.
Ben Shapiro and the crew at the Daily Wire, they understand you have to build culture.
For the longest time now, for I think several years, they've been working towards releasing movies and TV shows.
And we've been talking to Daily Wire about, you know, making some kind of show or content.
I don't know exactly if that's anything significant.
But you know, Ian over at TimCast, you know, Ian on TimCastIRL, he's got crazy ideas for shows, and maybe something more will come of this, but we're inspired by this.
You know, I watch these Netflix shows, I watch these movies, and the wokeness is just, it's palpable.
Even when it's a light touch, I'm just like, I don't agree with those values, so it comes off just bad.
The truth be told, many on the left are looking at this and they're like, ew, cringe, oh, it's so awful.
And I'm like, you know what, man, if you think it's awful, that's, I don't care, like, good for you.
I've always, always been of that opinion, because I'm much more a little live and let live civil libertarian type.
So I remember back when, you know, these, like, Ghostbusters 2016 came out.
Get woke, go broke.
I'm like, dude, if you like that movie, I got no beef with you.
I don't like it.
I'm not gonna watch it.
If you wanna make an overly woke film like the remake of The Craft or that Shudder film, what was it called, like Spiral?
By all means, I think they're terrible films because it's just a ridiculous premise, what they're doing with like, you know, wokeness, but if you like it, you're allowed to like it.
You know, I'll go make my own thing.
And that's what's happening.
Ben Shapiro and the Daily Wire crew are like, we're gonna make our own things.
Now, we've actually, I think we have a similar mindset to a lot of the crew at the Daily Wire.
Because we've talked about what we can make in terms of services and products.
So we of course have our own book at invertedworldbook.com.
I think I'm getting that one right.
Or you can search Amazon for Tales from the Inverted World.
Our first book, we have a book!
Man, we got like 30 employees, we're nowhere near as big as the Daily Wire, but I am inspired by the work they're doing.
Let me break down for you what's going on with Jeremy's Razors.
This is their website, I Hate Harry's, and they say, Harry's and the Daily Wire had a deal.
They paid us, we advertised their razors, we did this for years with a clear understanding that Harry's can leave at any time for any reason.
But then they did the one thing we expressly said they cannot do.
Harry's betrayed us.
At the behest of a two-follower Twitter account, they publicly condemned our show, attacking not just me, the CEO and God King, but all of you!
They said the views you hear on our programs, whether you agree with them or not, are inexcusable, and dropped their ads on our network because of misaligned values.
They tried to shame you for the unforgivable sin of not adhering to their woke platitudes du jour.
Enough.
We told them if you ever denounce our audience, we will spend the energy we would promoting you doing the opposite.
Actions meet consequences.
Harry's and their ilk don't want you in their world, but I want you in mine.
So stop giving your money to people who hate you, give it to me instead.
Yes, I completely agree.
As most of you know...
I don't shave.
So I think, like, once a month I'll just, like, buzz my face.
So, uh, plus I, you know, it's the Korean in me.
I don't grow a very prominent beard as it is.
But, um, I would absolutely say Jeremy is correct, The Daily Wire is correct, and they do deserve your money.
Now, if you like Harry's and you are offended by The Daily Wire, well then, by all means, Harry's deserves your money, don't they?
I mean, they stood up for your values.
There you go.
Now, if you're moderate, libertarian, post-liberal, civil libertarian, Jeremy's deserves your money.
And, uh, no, not a promo spot or anything like that.
I just think the fact that Harry's publicly denounced the Daily Wire, that is the problem.
If Daily Wire went, um, if the, if Harry's Razors went to the Daily Wire privately, And so, guys, look, man.
You know, we're getting a lot of heat from activists.
We don't feel comfortable dealing with this, like, overt political culture war stuff.
And I think we're gonna be suspending our campaign moving forward, but we appreciate everything you did for us.
The Daily Wire would have been like, we understand, man.
Life's rough and these people are crazy.
We get it.
Instead, Harry's publicly denounces them.
Check this out.
We have this tweet.
There's this Twitter user named Kay.
It's a picture of Jesus with sunglasses.
says, Harry's is sponsoring Michael Knowles, the same Michael Knowles who is spreading
homophobic and transphobic content.
He had Joseph Nicolosi Jr. as a guest on his show and equates being trans to having schizophrenia.
It is wrong that Harry's or anyone sponsors this vile content.
This Twitter account does not have followers.
This Twitter account, at the time, okay, it's got 43 followers now, after a year, and it did a reply tweet, not a public tweet.
So for those unfamiliar with Twitter, if you start your tweet with an at symbol, it's a reply, and it doesn't go out to everyone.
Harry's responded.
Thanks for bringing this up.
We condemn the views in this video, which are inexcusable and at odds with our longtime support of the LGBTQ plus community.
We've ended our relationship with this show and are looking into our sponsorships to prevent any values misalignment going forward.
It was simple, Harrys.
All you had to do was say nothing.
Send an email to the crew over the Daily Wire and say, Guys, we don't want to deal with this political stuff, okay?
We don't want to be a divisive brand.
We're just gonna stop advertising.
Instead, they chose to publicly make a statement.
Now, here's the most important part.
Get this.
The guy who tweeted this, probably 14 years old!
Or whatever.
So the guy tweets a few days later, OMG y'all are so musty for trying to cancel a high schooler.
Like y'all are mad for me making a customer complaint on Twitter.
Come on.
If you're going to cancel me, do it in style.
Do something like cancel insert something here or cancel blank is over party or hashtag blank is over party.
Do better.
You are arguing with 12 year olds.
I tweeted on Twitter, no one knows you're 14.
I love how people take Twitter seriously when they are probably like a 35 year old New York based blue check journalist arguing with a 12 year old who called them a slur.
Then those journalists turn the slur into a huge story about online harassment.
You wanna know why I don't take Twitter seriously and I don't care?
Because I don't feel like arguing with 12-year-olds.
And these people never realized this?
Yo, there's a reason people use anonymous accounts.
Because online, no one knows you're 14.
And they are.
And I find that absolutely hilarious.
That Harry's Razors, get this, Harry's Razors cancelled a lucrative advertising contract with one of the biggest media outlets in the world because a teenager with no followers complained.
Bravo Harry's, you morons!
The 14-year-old doesn't shave.
Jeremy Boring, who is, I guess, a silver fox, as he calls himself in the ad.
The ad's hilarious, by the way.
He does shave.
Well, he likely trims, actually, because he keeps that beard.
But Michael Knowles seems to shave.
And these are people with large, prominent followings that often get the most engagement on social media, who are constantly in the news and are just skyrocketing in prominence and popularity.
And Harry said, I'm gonna bet against that.
Why?
Because some 14-year-old or, you know, okay, fine.
High schooler could potentially be 18.
But I'm willing to bet this person is probably like 15, 14 years old.
Harry's decided to play that game.
Well, how stupid do you have to be?
Apparently, very stupid.
The Daily Wire writes, it's time to win.
Introducing Jeremy's Razors.
Jeremy Boring writes, do you remember one year ago today when Harry's Razor dropped their ads on the Daily Wire because we had the audacity to disagree with them on a political issue?
Of course you don't, why would you?
While corporations cancel the advertisements on conservative shows and platforms all the time, it's hardly even news at this point, just the cost of doing business.
Corporate America wants it both ways.
They want conservatives to buy their goods and services, but they also want to virtue signal to the woke mob and their 23-year-old employees by publicly repudiating those same conservative customers.
I just want to pause and say, Jeremy, I think that dude was 14.
I understand you're talking about employees.
I'm saying that dude is probably 14.
Well, here's the thing I do remember.
I remember every time one of these cowardly companies betrays us, and it is a betrayal.
Make no mistake.
They know our politics before they advertise with us.
That's why they advertise with us.
We reach a large audience that they want to sell to.
We go out of our way to make absolutely sure they know what they're getting into, and they do because it works.
They're happy that we leverage our personal credibility to tell our audience about their products.
Then, at the first sign of trouble from the mob, in the case of Harry's Razors, it was a Twitter account with two, yes, two followers attacking them.
They not only pulled their sponsorship, but publicly attack us and that very audience they paid to reach.
You know why they do it?
In my opinion, once Harry's realized they capped out maximum subscriptions to the Daily Wire, they said, terminate it.
We need an excuse.
Kill the contract.
So, I say this.
Go to TimCast.com and become a member to help support our work.
At a certain point, here's how it works.
When we first launched the website at TimCast.com, there was a major spike in signups.
Core audience and core fans signed up right away.
Slowly then, over time, we only add little bits of membership here and there because the core audience is already signed up and there's an upward cap.
I mean, it's not like we're going to have a billion paying members at TimCast.com, but at a certain point, we've signed up as many people as we can.
So then we start realizing that we used to gain hundreds of new members a day, and now it's dozens.
And it's still really good, but you see, you reach that cap.
For Harry's, they're probably saying, we've paid them, we've reached this point where instead of getting hundreds of new subscribers, we're getting 20.
Well, now it's costing us more money.
We need an out from this contract.
If they have a set contract, maybe.
I'm not saying this is how they do it because, you know, I guess they could leave at any time for any reason.
They just say, all right, let's terminate.
Let's terminate.
And maybe we can generate buzz for ourselves in doing so.
I'm willing to bet that Harry's thought, now that we've got these people, they're not going to cancel on us.
And if they do, it'll only be a small percentage because the rest aren't paying attention.
We'll then say, we stand for LGBTQ values, and then generate press in all these left outlets, and get equal play.
You get it?
You buy sponsorship with the Daily Wire, you then stand up and say, oh harumph I say, how dare you!
And then all the left outlets promote you, and you get new customers on that end.
I think it's scumbaggery.
Harry said their views were inexcusable.
Well, here's what they did.
Jeremy says they went on to launch their own company, Jeremy's Razors.
Will it work?
I don't know.
It certainly won't perfectly, this being the real world.
No, I'll tell you this.
Jeremy's Razors, I think, is going to do wonderfully.
It is going to take off.
Why?
The Daily Wire has a massive audience.
People aren't just blindly following creators like us and TimCast.com or The Daily Wire.
They're following these sites because they want an honest take on things and they disagree with all of our opinions.
Not every single one of them.
But the people, I know this, I know you guys who watch me disagree with me all the time.
But the one thing that I think the Daily Wire audience expects, what you guys expect, is that even if our opinions don't line up, we're giving you the facts as they are.
What does the mainstream press do?
They lie.
They'll give you twisted facts and omit information for the sake of trying to mislead you.
Now don't get me wrong.
We all get things wrong.
We make mistakes.
Sometimes we miss things.
But we're trying to be like, here's what is.
Here's what I think about it.
Whereas the media is saying, here's what we want you to think about a fake scenario.
Like, don't say gay.
That bill doesn't exist.
There is no don't say gay bill.
Isn't it crazy how they lie?
I think it'll work.
Jeremy says, I know what won't work, what doesn't work.
And what doesn't work is the non-profit right losing its way to hire donations from a conservative movement that still has to actually spend its real money paying the left for goods and services.
I want y'all to think about this.
Every time you give money to a leftist organization or an organization that espouses leftist values, and many do, you are funneling money into your political opponents and they use it against you.
So do what you can.
We're working on this on the back end, and I'll tell you this.
We're working on a new system for members.
I don't want to say too much because we're not there yet.
But this is going to be... Well, I'll put it this way.
We are working on building up products and membership services and systems that utilize companies and individuals very similar to what The Daily Wire is doing.
Because it's time to stop playing these games.
Let me show you this.
Laughable.
Laughable.
Defector writes, I watched a Ben Shapiro movie by accident.
Oh no!
Here's what they write.
You're gonna love it.
Just check this out.
Let me zoom in.
If you're looking for something to watch, Shut In is pretty fun, and Vincent Gallo gets his ass kicked if you're into that sort of thing.
That's a tweet I wrote a couple weeks ago, late on a Saturday night.
It no longer exists.
The reason it doesn't exist is because almost immediately after I posted it, I got a DM from a friend.
Uh, you know that movie was produced by the ultra right-wing Daily Wire, with only ultra right-wing producers, talent, and so forth, forth, for that market.
Uh, what?
No, no, delete, delete, what?
Yep, they're trying to make real movies now.
Sneak that ish in under the cover of actual production values.
For F's sake, this always happens to me.
I'll be watching an ultra-evangelical movie and not realize it's ultra-evangelical.
I will be listening to Christian radio and not realize it's Christian radio.
If Jesus is around, I need him to announce himself, or I'll just think he's from Brooklyn.
The Daily Wire should have been enough of a signpost.
The conservative media company co-owned by Ben Shapiro produced Shudden.
I saw the name appear and thought, huh, interesting, I guess some media site made this weird.
I made a mental note to look that site up.
Otherwise, there was no reason for me to intuit the right-wing underpinnings of a single mom who used to be a drug addict being locked up by her drug addict ex in a pantry with a crucifix and a Bible and some drugs and a whole bunch of apple butter.
Lots of apples, they're everywhere.
It's amazing.
Shudden belongs to the stealth Christian genre.
Ben Shapiro is Jewish!
I love this, man.
These people are insane!
Look at this one.
From Fast Company.
Ben Shapiro's Netflix rival is shockingly competent, but still obsessed with right-wing grievances.
They say the last five years or so have not been cinematically kind to conservatives.
So many movies were either direct or indirect rebukes of Trumpism.
Red-pilled performers like James Wood, Kevin Sorbo, and Antonio Sabato Jr.
pronounce themselves blacklisted from Hollywood.
For no reason other than political and or Christian beliefs.
Definitely not for being difficult to work with or be around.
Adding insult to injury, Clint Eastwood only made five movies.
Because Hollywood isn't serving much of what conservatives crave these days, they've increasingly begun making it without Hollywood.
The most interesting recent examples come from the popular, what do they say, reactionary platform, The Daily Wire, which launched a production shingle at the top of 2021.
As of this March, the company has released three films, none of which are quite what Daily Wire critics might expect to find on a streaming menu in between various talk shows hosted by CEO mascot and what are they?
I'm not reading that.
Our mission is simple.
We will make great entertainment that all Americans can enjoy regardless of their political views.
Daily Wire co-CEO Jeremy Boring said in an announcement.
If you're fed up with the cultural edicts of our country's self-appointed moral overlords in Hollywood and legacy media, stay tuned.
It's a fascinating promise.
Movies with an express conservative bent often turn out like the staggeringly bad Roe v. Wade, the cloying self-righteous God's Not Dead, or Dinesh D'Souza's eminently debunkable documentaries.
Run, hide, fight, they mention.
The school shooting vigilante flick that kicked off the studio's slate last year is shockingly competent.
It's acting, what, this thing keeps playing, it's so annoying.
They say, the acting is solid, especially from our vigilante hero, Isabel May, and the lead shooter, Eli Brown.
The action sequences are engaging, and there is an attention to craft in the structure and pacing that keeps the film from dragging.
I'm not sure what I expected from Run, Hide, Fight, or other Daily Wire outings, but they're far superior to those expectations.
Credit where it's due, these are real movies, not simply vehicles to express one's worldview.
They go on to mention ham-fisted conservative messaging.
Sure, let me tell you something.
The goal of producing culture is to instill your values.
On Twitter the other day, I posted a video.
I'm sitting in the basement over here at the studio, and we are watching Star Trek The Next Generation, because it's the best show ever, just before we went up to go to the studio.
And I was watching the episode where Data, the android, creates a child.
My friends, if you have not watched Star Trek The Next Generation, and you are into politics and all of this stuff, you're seriously missing out, and I implore you to watch that series.
And I'm not joking, and don't roll your eyes, because let me explain something.
In this episode, there's a character on the show named Data, most of you probably know.
Data is an android, and the only one of his kind, technically, because he also has a brother named Lore, who's, you know, is called defective.
But there was a great scientist who created an android, an artificial life form.
In the Star Trek universe, they've not been able to recreate this at the time.
So Data, the android himself, trying to learn to be more human, creates a new android based off of his internal workings to carry on the legacy of the doctor who created him, but also because he wants to know what it is to have a child.
Well, this is a profound scientific breakthrough, and an admiral for Starfleet says, I want that android that he created delivered to us now.
Because the creation of artificial life is profound, it's meaningful.
Well, Data, who has no emotions, seeking to be human to understand what it means to be human, refuses, saying, I will not give up my child.
And the Admiral says, then I'm going to order you to give your child to us.
And Data, you know, makes a face and then stands up and Captain Picard says,
Belay that order, Commander.
And, or Lieutenant, or whatever.
And then the Admiral says, I beg your pardon.
And Picard says, Stand your ground, Mr. Data.
The Admiral looks at Picard and says, You are jeopardizing your command and your career.
And then Picard smirks and says, there comes a time when men of good conscience must, you know, do what's right.
I'm paraphrasing.
And he says, to compel a man to give his child to the state.
Not while I'm captain.
And he says, we'll take it to Starfleet ourselves.
Man.
You know, the values that I have very much come from the writing on that show, and I'm not kidding.
Not only that show, obviously, but these are the things that my parents or my dad would watch, what I grew up watching.
This is the kind of cultural content that resonates with me to this day.
When I see Patrick Stewart, Captain Picard, making these statements, standing up, he says to the Admiral, You recognize their sentience, but you would deny them their freedoms, their liberties, to compel a man to give his child to the state.
The Borg, the collectivism, how it's this evil encroaching entity.
Brilliant.
Now, modern Star Trek?
Sad, really.
The Picard series.
Meh.
Eh, whatever.
Nostalgia.
It's fun to watch Picard on Paramount Plus because you're getting a continuation of the 90s era Star Trek, which they've not given us.
Even now they're not giving us.
And now the new series, the new season of Picard on CBS is woke.
Wook-ish, I mean, but it's getting there.
They have to go back in ti- I'm not- I kid you not, listen to this.
In the new series of Picard, it's like Star Trek, right?
They have to go back in time to change the past in 2024.
Because something happened in 2024 that turned Earth into a human supremacist planet- Aw, geez.
Vomit.
Just absolute trash.
Now look.
Star Trek was always political.
Absolutely.
It was always political.
And it was rather progressive.
But, this was, I say progressive in the sense of advancing civil libertarianism.
Today's modern progressives, it doesn't mean that.
I don't know what modern progressivism is.
Star Trek was overtly political.
The episode, The Make of a Man, questioning whether or not Data and Android truly is a sentient being has a profound impact on me.
How do you determine the rights of something else?
How do you know something else actually is a sentient being worthy of rights?
Amazing questions.
There's also an episode where Or is it The Sins of the Father, maybe?
I don't know if that's the one or if that's the name of it.
But there's an ensign, I think an ensign, or someone working on the ship who is hiding that their grandfather, I think their grandfather, one of their parents or grandfather, is Romulan.
And they're accused of being a spy and there's a witch hunt to hunt down the person and it's moral panic.
It's just really amazing.
Who's the spy?
Who's leaking?
What an excellent show.
Those values.
The politics in that show were civil libertarian.
When Captain Picard stands up to the Admiral and says, you know, men of good conscience must not follow unjust orders.
Do you think these values would persist today?
No.
And many people who are fans of the show say, in the modern, in Picard, he'd probably be like, you must go with the state because they know what's best.
Because the values have completely changed.
So I think shows can have political backing, but don't need to be overt.
They don't need to be.
So I wonder, I wonder what the authoritarian factions back in the late 80s, early 90s thought about Star Trek.
Star Trek at the time, The Next Generation, was the most popular show on TV.
It was syndicated on multiple networks.
I wish we had more shows like that.
Instead, we have, we have, I think we raised a generation Millennials and Gen Xers, who don't realize why civil libertarian values played so well.
And so what they end up doing is saying, well no, it wasn't the libertarian values, it was progressivism.
It was what young people wanted.
That's what worked.
So now they're just making this crackpot nonsense BS.
Nonsense BS.
Nonsense.
So, I look at what the Daily Wire is doing with everything they're doing, and I'm inspired.
And I'm jealous.
And I wish that we had the budget to do half of what they're doing.
I would absolutely love to make a series that instilled these values.
You know, I've talked about varying ideas and how to do shows, and a lot of people want to do these dramas, but I think what we need right now, what would be great, think about what Star Trek is.
It's a military exploration vehicle.
The Federation isn't overly militaristic in Star Trek, but they follow naval tradition.
So it's, you know, a lot of the same terminology and ranks and everything like that.
It's very much military.
It is Starfleet saying, you know, delay that order, Commander.
I am gonna take this.
It's very much militaristic.
It is overtly a show about a political structure.
In this show, they explore, they encounter interesting circumstances that question our values, beliefs, and how we would apply them, and technology, and entities beyond our comprehension.
There's so many questions about religion, philosophy, human behavior, and drama.
I'd love to make a show like that so that kids growing up today can see a person of authority defy their ranking officer because the ranking officer was violating the rights of someone.
That's the kind of value that I think we want instilled.
I watched a video on Reddit.
And it was a bunch of people protesting racism.
And a woman, a Chinese woman, protested saying that black people had been racist to her.
And people immediately tried shutting her up and taking the mic from her.
She wasn't really using it, she was yelling.
And they were like, okay, okay, no, no, no.
And she was like, anyone can be racist, we need to look inside people.
And they were like, no, no, no.
And she's like, wait, maybe I'm not saying, am I not explaining myself right?
Because English was clearly her second language.
No, they just don't share your values.
They don't agree with you.
But this young woman genuinely thought that the anti-racist people didn't want to judge someone based on race.
And then she got a rude awakening.
They do.
They want to judge you based on race.
So how about we make shows and content that express civil libertarian values and true equality, not equity, not cult garbage that tries to manipulate you.
A message that says, you are responsible for yourself, you are free, and we will defend your rights.
We've lost so much of that today.
It's all considered right-wing now.
Well, you know, so be it.
Good on you, Daily Wire.
Keep it up.
We're going to be doing the same thing.
We're working on bits and content with Castcastle.
Go to youtube.com slash castcastle.
Watch our vlog.
Because our approach to this is going to be less traditional, more social media-based.
I'd love to do shows, by the way.
We also have Chicken City.
Go to YouTube.com slash Chicken City if you want to watch chickens.
Because we're making everything.
Oh, I'll tell you this, man.
Tales from the Inverted World.
InvertedWorldBook.com.
Cultural content.
It's exploring... The next book we're having coming up is like Ghost of the Civil War.
I think, or Ghost of the Confederacy.
Crazy stories.
Not overtly political because I think building culture is paramount.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 1pm on this channel.
Thanks for hanging out.
Shout out to the Daily Wire crew.
You guys are killing it.
And we'll see you all in the next segment.
It's never a dull moment with Project Veritas.
Every story they seem to come out with is damning and serious, and this time, the story involves them.
The latest release from Project Veritas, Microsoft Corporation legal documents, show Biden DOJ spying on Project Veritas journalists and hiding it from a federal court judge.
Man, it is dark days to say the least, and I have to wonder, man, was it always this bad and we just didn't know?
Maybe.
Maybe, truth be told, because Project Veritas is exposing much of this malfeasance in government and corporations, and I wonder if we've ever really had real journalists who are willing to stand up and take these serious risks.
The story is multifaceted.
Project Veritas, investigating corruption and malfeasance, then becomes the target of the FBI, who raided the homes of their journalists, including James O'Keefe.
A federal judge basically said, you need a special master.
You're going after journalists.
This is wrong.
I'll go into the finer details on that point.
But what we have now is that Veritas has uncovered the DOJ is continuing to do this work behind the back of the judge, in secret, spying on journalists.
You want to know why this pisses me off?
For one, I think James O'Keefe does fantastic work.
I think they're one of the last true investigative journalistic outlets.
They're doing undercover reporting.
They're exposing documents.
The cover-up at ABC about Epstein exposed thanks to a brave whistleblower and Project Veritas.
As many of you probably know, I'm a big fan of WikiLeaks as well.
And what they're doing at Julian Assange is nightmarish.
I have to wonder.
What does James O'Keefe think about Julian Assange?
Maybe the next time we have him on, I'll ask him about this.
And I think maybe we did.
But you take a look at the work that he's doing.
And you take a look at how powerful individuals are willing to break the law and play dirty to shut down those who would expose them.
And you can see what happens to Julian Assange.
And you can see what's going on now with Project Veritas.
But wait!
This wouldn't be a complete segment if I didn't give you some contrast to explain why I'm frustrated hearing about this all the time.
First and foremost, we need journalism.
We need journalists to expose corruption and inform the people.
Do we have it?
For the most part, our establishment mainstream culture lacks any real journalism.
Project Veritas is smeared and slandered and lied about left and right.
I bring you this story.
Bill Barr slams Biden for lying about his son Hunter's laptop, saying it was Russian disinformation and says his claims were verging on election interference.
Former Attorney General Bill Barr slammed Joe Biden for lying about the authenticity of Hunter Biden's laptop.
I was very disturbed during the debate when candidate Biden lied to the American people about the laptop.
You want to know something funny, my friends?
Bill Barr was the AG when the laptop came out.
Think about this for two seconds.
The laptop, which exposes, at the very least, probable cause for very serious crimes.
Enough for the DOJ to say, maybe we should investigate this.
At the very least.
If you want to come out and say Biden was innocent, it's all smears, it's all lies, fine.
I don't care.
The point is, the photographs, the claims, the emails, the statements were more than enough to warrant an investigation.
A public outcry.
Now, of course, there is an investigation into Hunter Biden, but I'm talking about Joe Biden.
Bill Barr wouldn't do it, because they're all scared.
They're all cowards.
Oh, no, no, no, it would be interference if I did an investigation into outright criminals.
Imagine if we didn't play politics.
Imagine if they said, look, I don't care if you're running for office, we have evidence of a crime, we're going to pursue it.
Sorry, we don't get that.
Here's the story from Project Veritas.
They say, Microsoft Corporation legal documents show Biden DOJ spying on Veritas journalists and hiding it from a federal court judge.
Bombshell corporate legal documents released by Veritas reveal That President Biden's Department of Justice filed a series of secret warrants, orders and a subpoena to surreptitiously collect privileged and constitutionally protected communications and contacts from eight Project Veritas journalists from Microsoft Corporation.
Department of Justice then muzzled Microsoft from disclosing these orders via a series of secrecy orders signed by
magistrates The documents further revealed the DOJ then went behind the
US District Court judge and Elisa Torres is back to obtain extensions on the gag orders on Microsoft from
magistrate judges after judge Torres ruled Project Veritas was entitled to journalistic privileges
Good on Annalisa Torres, man Despite multiple opportunities to do so the DOJ has not
publicly disclosed the orders warrants or subpoenas to Judge Torres or special master judge Barbara Jones who was
appointed by judge Torres to Project Veritas's journalistic privileges from potential DOJ overreach
To protect Veritas' privileges, Judge Torres ruled The DOJ's investigation must be overseen by Judge Jones and ordered the DOJ not to review any material seized from Project Veritas without Judge Jones's approval.
The DOJ has not sought Judge Jones' approval to review Project Veritas' materials seized from Microsoft.
The documents uncover a 16-month clandestine campaign against journalists in which the DOJ obtained seven secret orders, warrants, and subpoenas from six magistrates within the Southern District of New York.
Paul Calley, an attorney for Project Veritas, fiercely opposed the actions from the DOJ, which he called an act of violence to the First Amendment.
In a motion filed Tuesday, Calley argued, by the time Project Veritas filed the motion to appoint a special master, the government already had the opportunity to review Project Veritas' journalistic and attorney-client-privileged materials, based on preliminary research data.
The SDNY appears to be in possession of nearly 150,000 documents they should not have.
In addition to the emails, the SDNY obtained over 1,000 contacts from journalists they also failed to disclose to Judge Torres or to a special master.
I want to pause.
I want to pause and mention.
Are you guys using a VPN?
Are y'all protecting your data?
You know, Maybe they're not after you.
Maybe you're just someone who's watching videos on YouTube and you're a plumber, a carpenter, a tradesman, an electrician.
Maybe you work in an office and you got nothing to worry about.
Alright.
Maybe you're someone who might uncover malfeasance at some point within a company or corporation.
They will go to the companies you use.
Microsoft, AT&T, T-Mobile, Sprint, whatever.
You name it.
Verizon.
They will say, we want you to give us their private communications and information, whatever you have.
Now, if they went to you and requested these things, you'd say, I object.
I won't do it.
I'm going to have a lawyer file a claim.
When they go to these big companies like Microsoft, they go, sure, whatever, we don't care.
Now, Twitter and Google and some companies pride themselves, or at least they pretend to, coming out and saying, we have rejected these attempts to seize data from our company.
But many of these companies have no problem handing it all over and saying, okay, not us, we don't care, it's theirs.
Don't let the people who hate you have control of your communications.
They're going to say, Project Veritas' motion seeks to require the SDNY to comply with the Special Master Order by stopping their review of the surreptitiously obtained emails and disclose other hidden spying campaigns executed against the nonprofit's journalists.
The SDNY has launched a retributive campaign that does violence to the First Amendment, writes Kelly.
While the special master litigation proceeded, the government apparently misled the court by omission, failing to inform it and failing to inform the aggrieved journalists that the government had already obtained the contents of privileged emails from Project Veritas' cloud computing provider.
The documents reveal a peek into the SDNY's covert surveillance of American journalists, commenced by Assistant U.S.
Attorney Robert B. Sobelman.
The surveillance culminated in a search warrant seeking every email sent to or from Project Veritas founder and CEO James O'Keefe for a three-month period, along with every contact he had ever saved.
By virtue of these orders, the SDNY gave unsupervised and unfettered access to O'Keefe's emails, including privileged communications with his attorneys and notes to and from O'Keefe's confidential sources, among other constitutionally protected communications.
I'm gonna go out on a limb here.
I'll tell you what I think.
I think James O'Keefe has got a whistleblower inside the government.
That's what I think.
I think somebody working for the FBI or some other or the DOJ went to Project Veritas and said, here is malfeasance.
Wouldn't be the first time, it's my understanding.
Or I believe.
So how much you want to bet the DOJ was like, oh man, someone's going to expose my corruption.
Someone who knows my corruption is going to leak it to Project Veritas.
What do you do?
Simple.
You play these dirty games.
You seek to get the communications from Project Veritas to expose whoever it is might be spilling the beans on you.
This is the danger of corruption.
Powerful individuals in law enforcement likely to be exposed will use their powers and smear and defame those who would expose them.
I don't know what Project Veritas has on anybody, to be honest.
Maybe they don't.
I don't know.
It certainly seems like they got somebody scared because this is desperation.
They say the SDNY also managed to convince a rotating cadre of magistrates to give the SDNY unchecked access to seven other journalists' emails and contacts.
According to an order, the DOJ sought to keep secret to justify obtaining access to journalists' emails.
The Justice Department appears to have argued there is probable cause to believe the email accounts maintained at premises controlled by Microsoft Corporation USA contain evidence, fruits, and instrumentalities of crime.
Each order, warrant, and subpoena were accompanied by a non-disclosure order.
which barred Microsoft from disclosing the SDNY's surveillance for one year,
claiming without evidence that disclosure could lead to destruction of evidence by Project Veritas.
Multiple NDOs were set to expire in January 2022.
Interesting, I wonder if that's how they got them.
On December 8th, 2021, however, Judge Torres, over the opposition of the SDNY, granted Project
Veritas' request to appoint a special master to supervise the SDNY's review of material seized
from journalists to protect the news organizations' journalistic privileges, among others.
I just want you to think about this for a second.
If they didn't find out about what was going on, how could they file a complaint against it?
Right now, for all I know, they're spying on Timcast.
What can I do?
File a FOIA, demand to know whether or not there's an investigation so I can file a complaint?
No idea.
Only, you know, when Veritas discovers what's happening can they actually complain about it.
They say, Judge Torres ordered the SDNY to provide the seized materials to the Special Master, Judge Barbara Jones, who, rather than the SDNY, would conduct an initial review of the extracted materials and rule on objections raised by Project Veritas on any grounds, including on grounds related to any First Amendment concerns, journalistic concerns, and attorney-client privileges.
Although the SDNY began issuing nearly weekly reports to the Special Master only a few days after Judge Torres' order, the SDNY has never submitted any report disclosing its surveillance of Project Veritas' emails to the Special Master, let alone provided the seized emails to the Special Master.
The SDNY's briefing submitted to Judge Torres regarding the Special Master procedure also failed to disclose the SDNY's covert spying or the voluminous Records seized by the SDNY.
When a round of the SDNY's NDOs requiring the spying to be kept secret began expiring in January 2022, the SDNY, having had their arguments rejected two out of two times by Judge Torres, apparently opted again to keep the surveillance of journalists secret from Judge Torres, and instead obtained renewals of those orders from magistrates who were apparently unaware of Judge Torres's order.
This is corruption, man.
Simply put, this is overt and outright Biden-DOJ corruption, seeking to cause harm to Project Veritas.
Journalists who routinely make the Democrats in the establishment look bad.
Man, I tell you, it's a dangerous business.
If you're a journalist and you're not worried about what the government has in store for you, you're not really a journalist.
Real journalists are worried about, look, you're on the ground, you've got government agents, you've got cops, and you don't know how they're going to respond to you.
Maybe you'll get arrested.
If you're a journalist working in the investigative beat or undercover, you're going to upset very powerful people with connections to government.
And you have to be worried about these things.
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not after you.
Right, it's entirely possible that, uh, you know, all of us working in these spaces have illicit and illegal activities going on behind the scenes, and I wouldn't be surprised.
If someone came to me and said the DOJ was doing something similar to all of us here at TimCast, I'd be like, what else is new?
They say these revelations come on the heels of a trio of FBI raids of Project Veritas journalists, including O'Keefe, during which the SDNY indiscriminately seized 47 devices, including a device belonging to a journalist's roommate.
Crazy.
The SDNY's spying campaign represent the latest example of governmental misconduct in a seemingly politically motivated investigation By President Biden's Department of Justice into Project Veritas' news gathering activities surrounding allegations against then-candidate Joe Biden made by his daughter, Ashley Biden, in her diary.
Though Project Veritas ultimately did not publish the allegations in the diary, it attempted to corroborate the allegations by requesting comment from Mr. Biden and his daughter, whose attorney, Roberta Kaplan, reacted by saying, we should send the request for comment to the SDNY.
The SDNY appears to have been doing Ms.
Biden's bidding ever since, with little to no oversight beyond what appears to be judicial rubber stamps from magistrates not fully briefed on the matter by the SDNY.
Why the Biden administration's Department of Justice sought voluminous amounts of journalists' emails, including confidential source and attorney-client privilege data from Microsoft despite vowing a year ago to protect press freedoms, is one of many questions the Biden administration will likely have to answer in the coming days.
They said Trump was the monster.
They said Trump was attacking press freedoms.
They said Trump was the fascist.
Joe Biden's Department of Justice, seemingly with him involved, are engaging in overt corruption against American journalists.
It's right there for everybody to see.
I wonder what Bill Barr is going to do about... Oh, I'm sorry, Bill Barr is not AG anymore.
You think anything's going to happen with Hunter Biden's investigation?
Maybe.
Do you think they're ever going to do anything about Joe Biden's connections?
Who's the big guy?
There's more than enough evidence that Joe Biden is lying, covering things up, and we'll get away with it.
Dark days indeed, men.
But maybe not.
You know, I say dark days when we have these bad stories, but let's be real.
I mean here we are exposing and talking about the corruption.
That means the light is shining brighter than ever.
The work Veritas is doing and these journalists who are coming out with these stories exposing what's going on.
The Hunter Biden laptop story.
The New York Post.
It's shining a light.
I think we should have hope.
I think this is a sign of optimism.
The DOJ doing what they're doing with Project Veritas shows absolute desperation.
Serious desperation.
Now it's frustrating for me to see Bill Barr kind of half-assing everything.
Hey buddy, you had every opportunity to go up against Joe Biden then.
You did nothing.
The Daily Mail reports former Attorney General Bill Barr slammed President Joe Biden for lying about the authenticity of Hunter Biden's laptop.
Quote, I was very disturbed during the debate when candidate Biden lied to the American people about the laptop.
He squarely confronted with the laptop and he suggested that it was Russian disinformation and pointed to the letter written by some intelligence people that was baseless, which he knew was a lie.
And I was shocked by that.
He writes, Trump tried asking about Hunter Biden's laptop, and he yelled at the president in return.
Mr. President, I can't talk about that.
I'm not going to, Barr said he told Trump.
Trump, in turn, was displeased with his tone.
Barr said he asked Trump to consider if the laptop had belonged to one of his five kids.
You know, if that was one of my kids, Trump began, according to the book.
Barr then cut him off.
Dammit, Mr. President, I am not going to talk to you about Hunter Biden, period, Barr said.
Why?
Why?
Didn't Bill Barr do anything?
The New York Times recently confirmed the authenticity of the laptop following outlets including the New York Post and Daily Mail.
Last week, the White House wouldn't say if the President stood by the Russian disinformation claims.
I'd point you to the Department of Justice and also to Hunter Biden's representatives, Press Secretary Jen Psaki said on Thursday.
He doesn't work in the government.
The laptop includes a trove of emails about Hunter Biden's business dealings, and graphic photos and videos.
Federal prosecutors are looking into Hunter Biden's taxes related to his foreign business dealings.
When you're talking about interference in an election, I can't think of anything more, Barr remarked on Fox, when talking about how now-President Biden tried to blame the Russians for the laptop.
Barr said he didn't want to venture an opinion on whether the president could face legal problems due to the contents of the laptop.
Well, as the Attorney General, you certainly could have taken action yourself.
Barr acknowledged the laptop narrative could be politically problematic for the White House.
From a political standpoint, now that this is in the people's consciousness, it has been suppressed up until now.
Obviously, they have a hot potato, and just to see how they handle it will be interesting, Barr said.
Yeah, okay, Bill Barr.
If you had done something about this, maybe you could have appointed a special prosecutor to take a look at it.
You got a special investigator on the Russiagate investigation.
How about a special prosecutor on Hunter Biden and a laptop?
He didn't do it.
And now, you think Merrick Garland, the Biden administration, is going to go after themselves?
Therein lies the big problem.
Who watches the Watchmen?
If Joe Biden is committing all of these crimes, and it appears that he was, at least in my opinion, And then people elect him president.
It is the most frustrating and nightmarish thing.
But you know, that's why a lot of people don't want to believe that Joe Biden won.
I think you underestimate the power of marketing, manipulation, control.
I think you underestimate the ease at which they can sway people into voting against their own interests.
The left likes to say, why are all these MAGA supporters, Trump supporters, voting against their own interests?
Maybe it's you.
Maybe you're the one voting against your own interests.
I gotta say, with Joe Biden, you are.
How many people in this country would support corruption?
How many people in this country would be like, eh, it's a good thing that Joe Biden did all this stuff?
None.
You know, Ukraine, the prosecutor, his son's business dealings and income, the shared bank accounts.
Yeah, the list goes on.
Yet, why is it that so many people don't know about this?
And why is it that so many people actively supported, and still do, support Joe Biden?
Ignorant people full of hate who don't care about principle or the truth will doom this country.
But, it seems like we're seeing more and more people of good conscience standing up and putting this information out there and making sure people know what's really going on.
And I can tremendously respect that.
As for Bill Barr, I don't know.
As for Project Veritas, some of the best of the best.
So this will be interesting to see what happens next.
We'll see how the judge reacts to this.
I can't imagine the judge is going to be happy.
Basically, Biden's DOJ went to a local judge and said, screw you, your orders are meaningless.
