Pelosi Support Of Abortion Protests At SCOTUS Homes BACKFIRES, Protesters Descend On Pelosi's House
Pelosi Support Of Abortion Protests At SCOTUS Homes BACKFIRES, Protesters Descend On Pelosi's House. Pro Abortion groups targeted Nancy Pelosi saying she was complicit, careless, and cowardly.
Democrats are not going to be able to pass their expansion of federal abortion access as Manchin has said he would not support the bill as it eliminates hundreds of existing laws.
The Biden administration has also encouraged illegal protests outside the homes of SCOTUS judges in violation of federal law
#RoeVWade
#SCOTUS
#Democrats
Become A Member And Protect Our Work at http://www.timcast.com
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Nancy Pelosi's support of protests outside the homes of Supreme Court justices has backfired on her, and now protesters are at her house saying she's complicit in not defending women's rights to abortion.
In our next story, inflation is at 8.3, and as much as the media is saying things are cooling down with record high gas prices and a looming diesel shortage, inflation is expected to get much, much worse.
And in our last story, the media is trying to discredit Dinesh D'Souza's 2,000 mules.
Well, I'm no fan of the widespread election fraud narrative.
These fact-check articles are only making more people aware of the documentary and raising serious questions about ballot harvesting.
Now, if you like this show, give us a good review, leave us five stars, share the show with your friends.
Now, let's get into that first story.
In response to this, as many of you may have heard, there have been protests illegally outside the homes of the Supreme Court justices.
This is a crime because it seeks to influence a judge through picketing, parading, or other demonstrations, which are literally happening.
Now, I personally said these people should be arrested.
Why?
I've always maintained non-violent civil disobedience, warrants, and arrests.
The charges that you would get from this would result in less than one year in prison with the maximum and or a fine, which means typically when you commit a misdemeanor like blocking a road, you get a slap on the wrist.
Well, I think the protesters should be arrested.
I don't think their lives should be destroyed.
I don't think they should be sent to life in prison or anything crazy like that.
But I think we need the rule of law in this country if we are going to actually claim there is equality under the law.
This is what I find so fascinating about the argument.
Equality under the law, as per the 14th Amendment, dictates these people should be arrested for protesting outside the homes of the justices.
At the same time, the left is arguing that under the 14th Amendment, women must be granted equal rights under the law, which is the right to privacy to get an abortion.
Okay.
You can't claim the 14th Amendment, but then reject it outright when you don't get in trouble for breaking the law.
And therein lies the big problem.
Why would I defend these people and their arguments when they clearly do not agree with the 14th Amendment?
Well, Nancy Pelosi is just such a person, and she praised the protests.
Well, that's backfiring because the protesters immediately said, yeah, well, Pelosi, you're complicit, and we're going to your house next.
Pro-abortion activists protest outside of Speaker Nancy Pelosi's San Francisco mansion.
Good for them.
Let me tell you, my friends, there's a big difference between protesting outside the home of a member of Congress, which I still disagree with but isn't overtly illegal, and protesting outside of the home of a judge in order to influence the ruling of that judge.
Well, you reap what you sow, Nancy Pelosi, and now they've come for you, they've shared your address, and this is what happens.
But you know what?
I gotta be honest, I don't think Nancy Pelosi cares.
Chuck Schumer recently said, people protest in front of my house all the time.
I don't care.
Oh, you will care, dude.
It is a security risk.
I don't want people protesting in my house.
I wouldn't want that.
I don't think anybody wants that.
I think what's happened are that people like Pelosi and Chuck Schumer want to defend their tribe no matter what, the establishment Democrat and leftists, even when they violate the law and then get mad at me when I say uphold the 14th Amendment.
I had a guy from Occupy Wall Street be like, 10 years ago, Tim, you would have supported these protests.
What's happened to you, man?
And I'm like, 10 years ago, I said nonviolent civil disobedience results in your arrest.
Now, if the police make up fake charges or lie about it, that's a problem.
But if you go and block a road or go in front of a judge's home, you get arrested.
Well, here's where we are outside of the protests.
We've got Democrats trying to codify Roe v. Wade.
The only issue is the bill they've put forward is actually an expansion of abortion across the country and would nullify hundreds of existing laws.
So for this, many Democrats have outright said no dice.
We're not going to sign on to this, namely Manchin.
But, you know, who didn't see that one coming?
Let's talk about exactly where we are, because I've got to say, what Democrats are proposing, in my opinion, is nuts.
They want to allow, with this codification of Roe v. Wade, abortion in the third trimester, however, if the doctor deems it for the health of the mother.
Now, here's the issue I have with that.
The third trimester and the health of the mother.
The argument's been made.
If the mother can't sustain the pregnancy, you don't have to kill a third trimester baby.
You can try and save it.
But abortion usually refers to the act of terminating the pregnancy, meaning ending the baby's life.
But let's talk about this.
We'll talk about these protests.
We'll talk about the smears and the legality, as we have been, and Nancy Pelosi reaping what she has sown, receiving what she has wrought.
Before we get started, head over to TimCast.com and become a member, and I will tell you why.
As a member, you are helping to support our journalists who are writing up these stories and fact-checking every single day, and if you watch our members-only segments, which you get access to when you sign up, you will see me, in more than one segment, getting angry over incorrect stories, fake news, on my own website.
It's happened twice, and I've been rather upset about it, but we're going to be transparent.
We're going to show you me saying, no, I fact-checked this, I reject it.
Because you know I have those standards, and I don't allow fake news.
We have a corrections line.
I want you to know that we are working as hard as possible to make sure our news is true and correct to the best of our abilities, and we fact check it all.
That's what you're supporting as a member, but you're also supporting something else.
Aside from the members-only segments you'll get, and the other shows we're launching, you will be supporting alternate infrastructure in big tech.
Yeah, everybody's trying to get us banned.
You got these lefty weirdos trying to get us shut down.
So we migrated our servers over to Rumble.
Is Rumble perfect?
Of course not.
They have terms of service.
But it's competition at the very least.
So when you become a member, just know that you are not just supporting our work, you're supporting alternative big tech infrastructure.
So we don't got to be beholden to Silicon Valley.
We've got several more moves coming up and we're going to announce them every time.
It's going to be amazing.
And then once we have removed ourselves from the big tech influences, It's going to be beautiful.
We're going to launch a ton of new features on this website.
It's going to be fantastic.
Of course, the app stores are going to be none too happy with what our website has to offer, but we will see.
We will see.
Let's read this story, but don't forget to smash that like button right now.
Subscribe to this channel.
Share the video far and wide wherever you can.
Tell your friends to subscribe.
Here's the story from TimCast.com.
Pro-abortion activists protest outside of House of Speaker Nancy Pelosi's San Francisco mansion.
The protest was announced by activist group Ruth Sent Us.
Recently made headlines for doxing the home addresses of conservative Supreme Court justices and staging protests at their homes was a collaboration of several pro-abortion groups.
In a Twitter thread about the protest, Ruth Sentos blasted Pelosi for careless and cowardly representation for not doing more to keep Justice Brett Kavanaugh off the bench.
Nancy Pelosi is in the House.
The Senate confirms Brett Kavanaugh.
But I don't think facts and logic matter to these activists.
We have had careless and cowardly representation by Pelosi.
Now, you know, I do agree with that.
She is careless and a coward.
The GOP followed a scorched earth strategy with endless Benghazi hearings and ACA repeals, but she passed endless bills that lay on Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell's desk and refused to hold hearings on Trumpian crimes.
Okay.
It's all pointless in my opinion.
Through Herculean efforts of grassroots volunteers, Pelosi was reinstated in 2019.
She held zero hearings into Kavanaugh's crimes and perjury.
Imagine if she had.
Would this creep beyond the court daring to overturn Roe?
Despite several groups working together to organize the protest, only about seven people showed up.
So let's slow down there a minute.
All right.
All right.
It's not like a horde of tons of people shut up to Nancy Pelosi's house.
That's not really the issue.
The issue is you reap what you sow.
They will come for you all the same.
And actually, I agree with some of what the protesters are actually saying.
Nancy Pelosi is a bad person and a bad politician.
But I would actually appreciate it if y'all protested her stock portfolio.
We're here because Nancy Pelosi and the whole leadership of the Democratic Party has been complicit, complicit with the fascist Republican Party that warns to not only eliminate abortion rights, but gay marriage, trans rights, and a whole slew of rights.
A female protester shouted into a bullhorn in video posted to Twitter.
Now, here's what I had to say about this.
I don't think Pelosi has any grounds to complain about it.
I think Pelosi and Schumer are going to pretend like they don't care, but I'm sure they do care.
I know for a fact they care because they have security detail.
It's a handful of people.
I'm not going to act like it's the apocalypse.
Fair point.
But you guys know that we have had serious security issues over here.
This is probably costing Nancy Pelosi a lot of money.
Well, you know, to be honest, the government's probably paying for it, so it's costing you a lot of money as a taxpayer.
Previously, we saw this just two days ago, Pelosi hails abortion protesters after demonstration at Justice's homes.
So, I can only say it's fairly obvious when you reap what you have sown.
Now, until Pelosi, I don't think Pelosi will ever come out and claim she's perturbed by the protests, but I think Schumer and Pelosi are not happy with this.
I think you are watching the absolute radicalization of these people.
Take a look at this.
unidentified
Hey, it's Kimberly Fletcher here from Moms 4 America with some very exciting news.
Tucker Carlson is going on a nationwide tour this fall, and Moms 4 America has the exclusive VIP meet-and-greet experience for you.
Before each show, you can have the opportunity to meet Tucker Carlson in person.
These tickets are fully tax-deductible donations, so go to momsforamerica.us and get one of our very limited VIP meet-and-greet experiences with Tucker at any of the 15 cities on his first ever Coast to Coast tour.
Not only will you be supporting Moms for America in our mission to empower moms, promote liberty, and raise patriots, your tax-deductible donation secures you a full VIP experience with priority entrance and check-in, premium gold seating in the first five rows, access to a pre-show cocktail reception, an individual meet-and-greet, and photo with America's most famous conservative and our friend, Tucker Carlson.
Visit Moms4America.us today for more information and to secure your exclusive VIP meet and greet tickets.
Here's what The Hill publishes from Andrew McCarthy.
They say the best interpretation of this astonishing assertion.
Here's the quote.
I know that there's outrage right now, I guess, about protests that have been peaceful to date, and we certainly do continue to encourage that outside judges' homes, and that's the president's position.
The best interpretation is that Biden wants people who choose to protest outside the homes of Supreme Court justices to remain peaceful, but is not recommending that they conduct such protests.
The more rational interpretation Is that the president is encouraging people to violate federal law by protesting at Supreme Court justices' homes, and that he views this as appropriate as long as they don't resort to violence.
To be clear, it's a criminal offense to picket or parade, or demonstrate, it says, near a residence of a federal judge for the purpose of influencing the outcome of a judicial proceeding.
It is not a defense that the behavior is nonviolent.
When statutory crime does not necessarily involve forcible conduct, the fact that people commit it peacefully is irrelevant.
There you go.
Joe Biden outright encouraging this.
Now it was Jen Psaki who said it.
Is there going to be rule of law?
There's not.
But let me give an honorable mention to our good friend Susan Collins.
Oh, amazing.
Intricately drawn message urging Republican senator to back reproductive rights was not a crime, police say.
Collins calls the cops over polite abortion message chalked outside home.
Okay, that's just sad.
Look, Nancy Pelosi praises protests outside of people's homes, and they come to her house.
You reap what you sow.
Susan Collins called the police over a chalk message outside of her house.
Look, it's not a crime.
You're a senator.
It is different.
Now, I don't agree with showing up to these people's houses and chalking on their sidewalk, but you got two really grand interpretations of this.
Senator Collins calling the police.
All right, well.
I don't really blame her, to be completely honest.
I do roll my eyes a little bit, but I really don't blame her.
And here's the issue.
While many on the left are going to drag her, I think it's a little cringe, I'm going to be honest.
But I also know the realities of security.
We've had issues, and we've been warned, if we don't take police action, then we lose credibility when we need to.
The idea for Susan Collins is probably that she doesn't care, she's not scared of chalking, but she has to call the police and say, there are people outside my house.
Because in the event someone does come and commit a crime, or a trespass or something, they could argue, Collins has allowed this to occur.
So let me throw it back to Nancy Pelosi.
When she comes out and defends protests, she loses most of her legal standing when protesters go to her house.
Now, if someone vandalizes her home or attacks her, I mean, it's different.
Don't do any of that.
We don't want any of that, but I don't think people should be in front of other people's houses.
Let's talk about where Democrats are at, though.
Managing to vote no on Senate Democrats' abortion access bill amid fallout from draft Supreme Court opinion.
We'll throw it to Manu Raju with the Twitter thread.
He says, Let me see if I can make this bigger.
Manchin tells us he's a no on the Democrat bill on abortion rights, says it's too broad of an expansion, says he would support a codification of Roe, but says this bill goes too far.
This means there is expected to be a bipartisan majority voting against the codification of Roe v. Wade.
I should say the Democrats' abortion bill, because it's an expansion.
Manchin said, I was hopeful the Democratic Party having control of the agenda would put a piece
of legislation forward that would codify Roe v. Wade. For me, that would be the reasonable,
rational thing to do. The bill we have today to vote on, the Women's Health Protection Act,
is not Roe v. Wade codification.
It's an expansion.
Asked him how he reconciles being pro-life versus supporting codifying Roe.
I've just thought this.
The land, the legislation we've had in 50 years, it's a precedent and law.
He added, when justices came to us, they confirmed their belief and support of precedent of law.
I believe them.
We found out that's not what they're either moving towards, or we'll find out when they have the final ruling coming out, but I was very disappointed to see that.
It's so stupid and pathetic.
You're not pro-life, dude.
It's just all meaningless nonsense.
You either support unfettered abortion, or you don't.
Me.
When I say pro-choice, it's like I'm thinking of a bygone era of us traditional liberals.
Yeah, my assumption is abortion in the first trimester and maybe into the second trimester with certain exceptions because, you know, people develop at different rates.
But I certainly think that where we're at today is not that.
On what today's vote says about his party, he told us, I don't fit the mold.
Let's put it that way.
And I understand that.
I'm just who I am.
Okay, let's talk about this bill.
This is the bill that Democrats are trying to pass.
The Women's Health Protection Act of 2021.
Let me show you what they would like to make happen.
Here we go.
Permitted services.
They would be expanding, in many ways, abortion across the country more so than Roe even permitted.
They say, a healthcare provider has a statutory right under this act to provide abortion services and may provide abortion services and that provider's patient has a corresponding right to receive such services without any of the following limitations.
Nine, a prohibition on abortion after fetal viability when, in the good faith medical judgment of the treating healthcare provider, continuation of the pregnancy would pose a risk to the pregnant patient's life or health.
Okay.
After fetal liability, when in good faith it could affect the health.
Here's what you'll hear from the left.
The pro-abortion side will say, ectopic pregnancies kill.
If a woman has a third trimester ectopic pregnancy, she's already in trouble.
So we're not talking about that, are we?
No, probably not.
If the baby is in the third trimester and becomes cancerous, which is another story you've heard, okay, well there's an issue where you've got to terminate the pregnancy before it spreads to the mother.
But if you're in the third trimester, The baby can survive.
Here's the issue with this particular portion of the bill.
It says, there will be no prohibition on abortion after viability.
Abortion would kill the baby.
Otherwise, we're talking about inducing labor.
If a woman is seven months pregnant, the baby is viable.
The baby can survive outside the womb.
Why kill it?
Because of the mother's health.
If the doctor says the baby is going to kill the mother, why kill the baby?
Why would Democrats want abortion, the death of the baby at viability, after viability?
That I don't understand.
That's why I've always been in favor of these restrictions.
I understand terminating a pregnancy, and maybe that's what they're trying to say.
The issue is then, they need to actually clarify that.
Abortion can refer to the termination of the pregnancy without the life of the baby.
Perhaps we should actually say that efforts to preserve the life of the child should be made to the best of their abilities.
Speaking with Seamus Coghlan of Freedom Tunes, who is pro-life, anti-abortion is a better way to put it, He says, there's never a reason to just kill the baby.
If you are seeking, and this is, I'll tell you this.
These people have never talked to pro-lifers.
And if they have, they've talked to people who don't really know all that much about what they're talking about.
You need to talk to the people that are looking to set policy and are better educated on this.
And I will absolutely be the first to say, both the left and the right have their ignorant masses who barely know what they're talking about.
That's a reality.
I think it's a tendency on the left and the exception on the right for the most part, but I do think the right has their, you know, ignorant masses.
Seamus says that if you're trying to save the life of the mother due to her health, and in the process the baby dies, that's not an abortion.
And I think he's semantically wrong.
If a baby is cancerous and the mother is going to die, you have to terminate that pregnancy, then so be it.
If you're talking about fetal viability, then maybe we need a better legal term for induced labor.
Why would abortion... Why kill the baby?
Even if it's cancerous.
Even if it's malformed or deformed or whatever.
I just see this, and I think the bulk of what will happen is you are going to see women be like, yeah, I don't know if I can handle it because of my health.
Kill it.
It's like, well, hold on.
I mean, this baby can survive.
It's alive.
Why kill it?
I don't know.
And so that's why Manchin is saying no to this.
Now, how do they describe it?
Well, The House describes it as such.
The bill prohibits governmental restrictions on the provision of and access to abortion services.
The government may not limit a provider's ability to prescribe certain drugs.
Offer abortion services via telemedicine.
That one's amazing.
Immediately provide abortion services when the provider determines a delay risks the patient's health.
Now, the only thing I can understand from the abortion services via telemedicine would be them prescribing the abortion pill or something.
Further, they may not require a provider to perform unnecessary medical procedures, provide medically inaccurate information, comply with credentialing or other conditions that do not apply to providers, yada yada yada.
Carry out all services connected to an abortion.
In addition, they may not require patients to make medically unnecessary in-person visits or prohibit abortion before fetal viability or after fetal viability when a provider determines the pregnancy risks the patient's life or health.
So, sorry for repeating myself again, but they're basically saying, if the baby is healthy and fine, eight months, nine months in, but the woman's health is going to be negatively impacted, They can kill that kid.
I just don't understand.
I really, really just do not understand these positions.
Now, Republicans who support abortion rights have come up with their own bill.
This is from the New York Times.
Two Senate Republicans who support abortion rights, Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, have raised objections to the Democrats' bill.
Collins said she opposed the Democrats' bill partly because it lacked an exception to give Catholic hospitals the right to refuse to perform abortions.
Oh my friends.
Oh my friends, do we have a fun one here.
There's a meme going around.
And it's a person saying, my religion says I can't do this.
And the secularist, the leftist says, good for you.
They then say, my religion says you can't do this, and they say F off.
That's their argument.
Oh, I love it.
My religion says I can't perform an abortion, so saith the pro-life Christian doctor.
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 You take a look at Oberfell, gay marriage.
I remember those Prop 8, I think it was Proposition 8 videos.
You know, you have Jack Black singing and he's like, your nation was built on separation of church and state.
Subscribe and download your episodes wherever you get your podcasts.
The problem is it's fused with our legal institutions.
That's a problem.
If you want to argue that we should separate church marriage from the state and call it something else, I agree.
How about we do that?
Fine.
Churches can have their marriages, but perhaps legally we call them unions or something else.
The issue was, people were arguing that churches should have to perform gay marriages.
They said, you can't deny people service under the law.
If you think someone, according to their religion, can't do something, and you say, okay, what if it says, what if my religion says I can't write a message?
Oh, they won't say okay to that.
They'll sue the bakery and say, make the message!
Bake the cake, bigot!
I think.
That if you are in, uh, so this is the problem I have.
I actually try to logically break down what makes the most sense in terms of liberty and community and all that stuff.
So I try to avoid playing these ridiculous double standards the left is playing to.
I think in terms of a bakery, right?
You provide a service to the public.
You are using public infrastructure.
If you are doing that, and you're receiving the benefits of tax dollars via fire departments, police departments, national defense, the EPA, etc., you should provide the same services for all members of the public.
Many people have argued that when it came to the baker, he was offering to give him a cake, but he just didn't want to personally write the message because it violated his personal beliefs.
I respect that, but I do think it's not his message.
Him just making a cake isn't him being forced to speak.
There's an interesting question there because the challenge overlaps with two rights.
The right of speech, which means the government can't compel you to speak, and the right of public accommodation.
I would actually argue on the speech grounds, you can't force someone to say something.
I would argue on the public accommodation grounds, you shouldn't consider it your own speech and you should provide the service.
I can't pretend that I'm the arbiter of morality and I know what is right and what is wrong and how the world should function.
I can only point out the challenges and the questions I have.
So ultimately, if it were me, I'd be like, yeah, I'll make the cake, dude, you know, whatever.
But there are some limitations.
What if someone went to a bakery, a LGBTQ bakery, and then asked for something offensive and they said no?
You gotta bake the cake.
Therein lies the big challenge.
I don't know how we reconcile this because there's no solid line for which you can say yes or no.
It's gradients of tolerance.
Meaning, if someone said they wanted me to make them a t-shirt that had some abhorrent political message, I'm like, I'm not writing that.
They could be like, you're discriminating against me and you should provide public accommodation.
It's like, oh man.
In which case, when do we decide who we can and can't provide services to?
And if the government mandates everyone has to, then what happens when a bunch of Nazis show up and want Nazi cakes?
Washington, D.C.
This is where things get interesting, with the whole cake baking scenario.
Washington, D.C.
actually has political affiliation as a protected class.
So what would happen if you went to a bakery in D.C.
and asked for a swastika cake?
They have to bake it for you under the left's argument?
That's kind of scary actually.
Because I would say no, I wouldn't do it.
And then what do you do?
You had, after this guy got sued over the gay wedding cake, the gay message, a transgender individual wanted a coming out cake and he also refused.
He's getting sued again.
So what about in DC?
What about if you went to a leftist bakery in D.C.
and asked them to make some horrifying message?
What if you asked them to make a message that said something like Leviticus?
You know, man shall not lie with man or whatever.
And then they said, no, it's like, that's religious discrimination.
You can't do that.
That's what I find fascinating.
The double standards.
Now here's where it ultimately comes down to.
You look at Glenn Youngkin not arresting these people.
That's what you get with Republicans.
Republicans will not stand up, speak out, and push back.
But let me tell you about Democrats, too.
At the very least, they're all bad, mind you.
We have this Twitter thread from Sarah Ferris.
After Rep.
Katie Porter gave an emotional speech to fellow Dems about skyrocketing grocery bills, she said it felt like the first time it sank in with some colleagues.
One told her, it's not coming up in the polls.
Her response?
You don't know what to ask.
It's the economy, stupid!
I am eternally impressed by Democrats' ability to be out-of-touch lunatics.
Look at this.
She goes on.
Porter says the episode revealed the communication gap between elected Dems and regular Americans.
If you're a regular American and you keep voting for these people, then you get what you deserve.
And I'm not going to shed a tear over that.
Porter warns that voters are quick to sense hollow rhetoric.
As for as one dem made, put it, if you're explaining you are losing. But there's one area
Democrats think they can successfully use personal stories to connect with the public abortion.
Democrats like Barbara Lee have come forward for the first time to talk about their experiences.
Okay, let me tell you, my friends, if you look at the list from Gallup.
Of the top issues affecting Americans, it's the economy, stupid.
Like, 35%.
Abortion doesn't even come up, for the most part.
It's like, in the single digits, I think.
It's amazing.
It is just not that big of an issue.
And if that's the best Democrats got, then, uh, sorry, I think, I think you're gonna lose.
Let me show you this story real quick.
TimCast.com, top electricity provider, Talen Energy files for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. A
declaration from the company claims global climate issues played a significant role
in the company's financial woes. I wonder what's going to happen politically when there's no food,
when there's no electricity, there's already no baby formula.
Man, it's getting sad.
I'm hearing stories of women crying in grocery store aisles because they have babies they can't feed.
Not every woman is lactating.
Some women need baby formula.
The invention and development of baby formula, while it is funny to say what did women do before Nestlé was incorporated, Yeah, sometimes their babies went hungry.
Sometimes their babies didn't make it.
Baby formula does help.
Personally, I think breastfeeding is substantially better, but I ain't a lady, and I ain't about to breastfeed anytime soon, so it's gonna be up to the women to figure that one out.
I think when you look at the science, breastfeeding is substantially better if you can do it.
But for many of these babies, they need food, and they need formula.
So what do you do when you don't have it?
I think energy companies filing for bankruptcy over climate issues?
Yeah, that's Democrat policy.
Lack of baby formula, Democrat policy.
It has been a year.
I have been saying for a year food shortages are coming.
It's the economy, stupid, and they're not paying attention.
They're too busy saying people should be protesting Roe v. Wade, thinking that will catalyze a Democrat movement to stop the red tsunami.
But it is the economy, stupid.
And when someone can't buy gas, when there is no gas, when there is no food, they are going to vote for anything other than Democrats.
So that's where we will find ourselves.
By the end of the year, if everything stays the way it is without any variables happening, it looks like a red tsunami.
Things are only getting worse for the Democrats.
They're out of touch.
They're talking to people like, abortion!
And the people are like, I'm hungry.
Yes, but you can kill your baby.
I'm hungry!
Yeah, wow, amazing political messaging.
I certainly think abortion, Roe v. Wade, is a big issue.
But so far, they haven't issued a ruling yet.
We expect it to happen.
And blue states aren't going to change.
Red states, many of them are going to ban abortion, sure.
But then what?
It's a state issue?
Hyperpolarization, I guess.
I suppose we can only sit back and see, and I suppose the Democrats will continue to reap what they have sown.
We'll see how it all plays out for them.
Next segment is coming up at 8 p.m.
over at youtube.com slash TimCastIRL.
Thanks for hanging out, and I will see you all then.
I know, I know.
You wake up, it's a beautiful sunny day wherever you are.
You grab your morning coffee, you look out the window in your robe or your boxers or whatever,
and a bluebird floats on by and it's flapping its wings and whistling and you're like, ha ha,
it's gonna be a good day.
And then you pull up your phone or sit on your computer and along comes Tim Pool with a new Timcast video
where he's like, inflation is worse than we expected, but, but, I know you wanted good news.
It's not a 40 year high.
All right.
It's kind of special when the latest Consumer Price Index comes out and inflation is a little bit lower than the 40-year high, a little bit lower, but still worse than we expected.
And I'm just like, could you guys have pretended it was going to be worse so we could pretend to be happy about 8.3% inflation?
So Joe Biden comes out the other day and he's like, inflation's gonna be bad.
I know it's gonna be really bad, but ultra MAGA!
Yo, I think this country's imploded a long time ago.
8.3% in April compared to last year, showing signs of leveling off.
Ah, it's good news!
It remains near a 40-year high, but little change from one month ago could be a positive sign for the price of goods, services, and the broader economy.
Yo, they're yanking your chain, man.
I hate to be the bearer of bad news on this fine, sunny, what is it, Wednesday morning?
Is it Wednesday?
I lost track of the day.
I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but with the latest news about shortages, fuel prices, you know, inflation is going to be massively bad next month.
So, or I should say this month.
Right now, actually.
So this is April's data.
And they were expecting it to be 8.1%.
And so when you look at the news from yesterday, they were like, it's going to be lower than it was at 8.5 in March.
So that's good news.
And then it turns out to be worse.
It's kind of crazy.
I feel like it's so bad that when it's 0.2% less than it was last month, even though it's almost a 40-year high, we all pretend like it's good news.
We're in some dangerous territory, my friends.
We are in some dangerous territory.
Let me just go through everything where we're at right now.
You guys know about the baby food shortages.
Parents are stressed out over baby formula shortage and limits.
I love how it's like, this Eat This, Not That website says there are shortages of these two grocery staples right now.
And it's like, this is the millennial woman's nightmare.
Cat food and baby food.
I mean, if you are a conservative millennial woman, you're like, there's no formula!
And if you're a liberal millennial woman, you're like, there's no cat food!
It's not, what's up with that?
I don't know, is that- am I insulting millennial liberal women?
Or do they actually have- I have a cat!
They're all cat ladies.
Okay, anyway, Republicans are trying to play it up like they're upset about this, like inflation is bad, House Republicans, yet Jack Posobiec points out they just sent $40 billion to Ukraine, so you know what, man?
Spare me.
It's bad.
Diesel prices are at an all-time high.
Let's go through all these stories, and then we'll hit them one by one.
Diesel prices at an all-time record high the other day.
There's a diesel shortage coming next.
So when they play these games, and they say to you, don't worry, it's leveling off, they're whacking you over the head and telling you you're not being, what is, okay, fine.
They're pissing on you and telling you it's raining.
Like, it's bad!
But they're telling you it's not that.
I mean, nobody wants to get rained on.
You're like, outside, you're getting wet.
But worse still, they're pissing on you.
I don't know.
Is that family-friendly?
Probably not.
I tell you what, my friends.
I'm gonna shout it out as I periodically do.
SafeAndReadyMeals.com.
This is a sponsored spot for this segment.
SafeAndReadyMeals.com does help support the work we do and the show, and these are emergency food supply buckets.
You know why that's cool?
Because you can reuse the bucket.
Head over to SafeAndReadyMeals.com.
And you can get your three-month emergency food supply or your four-week emergency food supply.
And I'll tell you why I did.
We got a bunch of this stuff.
We have a lot of employees.
So at the facility, we have a decent amount.
But we don't have three months of food.
At least, I don't believe so.
Maybe, but probably not.
People are always like, Tim, don't tell people you have food supplies.
I'm like, yeah, we also have like 30 people and guns.
I'm not really worried about it.
Here's why I think it's a good idea to pick up emergency food.
One, sometimes it rains.
There could be a- The river over here was flooded recently, and it was crazy.
They were gonna shut down the bridges.
Not like you won't be able to get food if that was the case, but you'd have to go somewhere else.
Sometimes there are floods, sometimes there are storms, sometimes the power goes out, and sometimes you might not be able to get food for a little bit.
This stuff is up to a 25-year shelf life.
You put in your closet, you forget about it.
One day something bad happens, you've run out of food, then you crack it open.
You never crack these things open unless you absolutely have to.
With the shortages and with inflation, I think it's something you should consider.
If it's right for you, I don't, I don't want to tell people to go and become, you know, preppers and build underground bunkers, but you got a first aid kit, you should have some emergency water, you should have some emergency food.
In my opinion, I think it's a good idea.
Considering the shortages that are, that are here, chicken, they're, they're culling chickens by the millions, I think it's a good idea.
The other thing I would say is, this stuff lasts 25 years, so when I, when I have people, you know, when we have guests over, and they're like, why would I, why would you buy this?
I'm like, you know, honestly, I don't know if I'll ever need emergency food in 25 years.
Maybe something might come up.
I think it's a good chance that we get a snowstorm and we get, you know, the roads shut down or something bad happens, I guess.
But I was like, I gotta be honest.
First of all, the food's good.
They've got like stroganoff and mac and cheese and it's just like you mix it with water and you heat it up.
If inflation is hitting this bad, and there's diesel shortages coming, and diesel prices are through the roof, my attitude was like, if I buy this now, I have it for 25 years, a year from now, it's gonna be more expensive.
And it's gonna last 25, so I think it's like, it's almost like a food investment.
But if you're watching this news, and you're concerned about this stuff, safeandreadymeals.com, special shout out, because it is a sponsored spot from the show, but, you know, consider it.
Just make sure you can survive.
That's what I always tell people, and I always say this.
Download an emergency survival guide onto your phone right now.
Get a backup battery with solar chargers.
The solar charging batteries, they don't work very quickly, but if you can turn your phone on and get access to a calculator, a calendar, and an emergency survival guide, you are going to be infinitely better off than the person who doesn't have access to these things.
I do not believe that we're facing the apocalypse to that degree.
Even if there is a major war, even if there's no fuel, I still think we're going to have access to electricity to a certain degree.
I mean, California's had, you know, rolling brownouts and other problems.
New York suffered these things with the hurricane.
So, I'll tell you what I got.
We got these things called EcoFlow batteries.
And they're these big batteries.
We use them because we have, in the studio, if the power goes out, we switch over to backup battery power.
But they also come with, if you order it, these big solar panels.
And so we've actually set this up, and it actually is quite amazing.
We bought a bunch of them.
They can all link together.
And you can charge up these things in a matter of a couple hours.
And here's the crazy part.
We actually ran an air conditioner off of it for two hours when the power went out during a storm once during the show.
I was like, It is boiling hot up here because we did the studio in the highest point of the building, which was a mistake.
And then we got these emergency batteries, and I just think you need to be able to have water, food, and a way to get power now.
For most people who live in the middle of nowhere, not that hard to do.
If you live in the city, you're in serious trouble if you don't have access to sunlight.
Here's a story from NBC News.
And then we'll go through what they're not telling you.
The inflation rate was little changed in April.
A potential sign that the rapid growth in the cost of goods and services would soon taper off.
May soon taper off.
Yo, get out of here, dude.
That is insane.
Rob, you wrote this article?
This is an opinion.
This is what I don't understand about these articles.
It is an opinion piece, and they call it news.
A sign that the rapid growth of cost of goods may soon taper off.
May soon?
That's your opinion about what- I'm sorry, I just can't stand the news.
I go on TimCast.com periodically, and I'm looking at articles, and I'm like, guys, put an opinion tag on this!
And then they have to argue with me why it's not an opinion, and I'm like, okay, fine, fair point.
We had one article about what could happen with Roe v. Wade being overturned, and I said, opinion tag, and they were like, wait, wait, these are actual trigger laws in effect.
Oh.
Okay, fine.
But guys, opinion article.
Consumer prices rose 0.3% in April after rising 1.2% in March.
According to data released by the U.S.
Bureau of Labor Statistics on Wednesday in April, the inflation rate grew 8.3% compared to a year ago.
The number in March was 8.5.
The numbers indicate that inflation, which has been sitting at a 40-year high since December, is showing signs of cooling off.
I just want... I just...
What are you thinking when you write this?
Showing signs of cooling off.
May soon taper off is an opinion for sure.
I think it's showing signs that it is always darkest before the storm.
There you go.
It's the calm before the storm.
Take a look at this.
All right, Joe Biden, let's hear what you have to say about this.
unidentified
We haven't had enough truckers, for example, to deliver the lumber.
Could it be that diesel prices just hit a new record high?
Here's why a diesel shortage may be next.
Could it be that diesel is up to six bucks a gallon and some of these tankers are going to spend thousands of dollars to refuel?
And these semi trucks, these truckers only get like eight miles per gallon.
And you're talking almost a dollar per mile.
Yo, this is insane.
From AGWeb.
Farmers are already faced with shortages of equipment, parts, tires, and some crop inputs.
Now, due to increased demand and a drop in production, diesel shortage may be next.
The largest diesel distribution hub in the U.S.
is sitting on supplies at a 30-year low.
So when they come out and tell you inflation is showing signs of cooling off, it's like Dude, did you even Google search what's happened to the economy?
This is what I can't understand.
Journalists don't know how to use Google.
Because this is what I do.
I'm like, uh, inflation, d-d-d on my keyboard, and then it's like, inflation is bad, but showing signs of cooling off.
And then I'm like, okay, well let's talk about inflation from the bigger picture.
And then I'm like, gas prices are high, wouldn't that result in an increased inflation next month?
Or this month?
Right now!
Right now!
They're saying, it's gonna cool off.
The April numbers are 8.3%.
And they're saying it's gonna cool off, yet in May, right now, mid-May, the beginning of mid-May, diesel prices are at a record high, gas prices are at a record high.
Wouldn't that mean a cost of all goods are going to go up?
Did you not even consider this, good sir over at NBC News, or are you lying?
Here's what happens.
You get these people who will say things to you like, it's gonna get better, it's improving, because they want confidence, they want consumer confidence, because consumer confidence is good.
They then say to people like me, Tim, you shouldn't tell people things are gonna get bad, because then they'll panic and it'll make things get worse, because consumer confidence will drop.
I'm not here to predict the future or dictate what the future should be.
I'm just here to tell people what's happening right now.
And there is a real conundrum newsrooms face when they're like, guys, if we report this economic data, it will make it worse for people.
And then they say, we should withhold the information or lie for the sake of protecting the economy.
My attitude is, I'm just going to say it and tell you and hope that you're responsible enough to take care of yourself, your friends and your family and your community To survive something like this.
Now, I don't think the apocalypse is here.
I don't think everyone's gonna die.
I do think people may tighten their belts.
I do believe some morbidly obese homeless people might be just homeless people after a little while.
I do think the U.S.
has problems.
But if not, if they're saying not only do we have record high diesel prices, but we're also looking at a shortage of it, not only will the prices skyrocket due to the cost of fuel, But the inability to transport this food is going to result in prices skyrocketing further.
You will eventually find two people fighting over the last can of beans in a Walmart parking lot.
Or in this case, baby formula.
Because baby formula is much more serious.
You know, an adult can go almost a month, I think, without food.
You gotta have water.
They can go a month, slowly withering away and dying.
But their babies?
You know, if you have kids, what you'd be willing to do for your kid.
Now, we made the joke on IRL, like, what happened to breastfeeding?
And I do think there's a fair point to stress.
We didn't used to have baby formula.
Women used to nurse their babies and had to figure out ways to feed their kids without corporate Nestle baby formula.
I can't remember who it was, went on the show, but they were like, what did we do for babies before Nestle was incorporated?
It was a funny point.
But there are many women who can't breastfeed, who are currently not lactating and can't just start.
And so baby formula was created for a reason.
It improved the rate at which we were feeding our babies.
So yes, I understand.
It is really scary.
That's what it says.
This is really scary.
There's no baby formula.
Or at least the preferred brands people are looking for.
They're just not available.
I would say, take what you can get now.
You know, I know there's a shortage.
But I think what we're looking at is, you're going to see a dad or a mom, people are going to be fighting in these grocery stores for baby formula.
And it's not just that too.
I don't know if anybody's going to be fighting over cat food because, let's be honest, cats can eat meat.
You know, uh, Mr. Baucus, who's our cat, we call him, his name's actually Bucko, but for a variety of reasons his name has morphed into now Mr. Baucus.
Uh, he can eat, he can eat meat, you know, so we have farm beef and we have salmon and, you know, cats need taurine and stuff like that.
I don't think anybody's gonna be getting into a fight over cat food, but I do think it's funny that millennial women are being hit the hardest by this.
As I mentioned before, conservative women concerned about their babies, and liberal women concerned about their cats.
I know I'm kidding.
Conservative women have cats too, and liberal women have babies as well.
But I think we're getting to the point where...
Outside of the cat food thing, the baby food thing should be the most alarming.
Because if there was ever any product that would result in someone fighting in a parking lot over a shortage, it's going to be baby food.
Like I was mentioning, you'll get some dad, you'll get some guy, and he'll walk in and be like, there's no beans left!
Alright.
And then he walks out and he sees a guy holding a bunch of beans and he's like, whatever man.
Now if he's starving, and it's been a couple weeks, he might fight for those beans.
But what if it's been a few days and his baby hasn't had formula?
Then you might see people fight over formula.
In China, we're already seeing it.
So if fuel prices are through the roof, fuel shortages are coming, yo, you know what, dude?
Don't buy the emergency food.
I don't know.
You gotta do right by you.
Maybe it's too expensive.
It is.
I mean, a three-month supply costs money.
And the one-month supply even costs money.
But I'll just say this.
You need food more than you need luxuries.
You need food more than you need movies.
You need food more than you need video games.
And my biggest fear with the emergency food stuff is that it's gonna get more expensive.
Fuel shortages for shipping will make it more expensive.
Shipping costs alone are gonna be expensive.
Then you've got the distribution of the products to the company that makes the buckets.
It's gonna go up.
Inflation is gonna go up.
And I'm just like, I bought a whole bunch in the past month. Again, I'm not
filling up a bunker of preparing for the apocalypse. All right? I bought some of this stuff because
I'm like, I can if It's not, you know, we have the means to do it, so... I know maybe some of you just can't, like, I can't afford it.
I get it, I get it.
I'm just saying, take care.
You go to the grocery store, I always say don't panic buy, don't buy up 30 years worth of beans, that's kind of ridiculous.
But some of these, you know, get some canned goods that are gonna last you a couple years because you never know.
I don't think that we are going to starve to death, but I do think things will get harder for a lot of people.
in the back and they need stuff in the front. And just be prepared, because I think things
are going to get bad. Now, we are a very well-fed country.
We have, as I mentioned, morbidly obese homeless people. So I don't think that we are going to
starve to death, but I do think things will get harder for a lot of people. Now, the House
Republicans have tweeted out that it's not just the 8.3 percent.
That's across the board.
Let's take a look at meat and eggs.
14%.
Electricity is up 11.
Food at home, 10.8.
Food away from home, 7.2.
Home 10.8, food away from home 7.2, gasoline 43.6.
It's kind of crazy when you look at the breakdown of these numbers.
Skyrocketing.
Someone on IRL was telling us that it was good, in a sense, that Republicans lost Georgia, because now there's no ambiguity.
The Democrats are leading the charge on this, and things are getting worse.
If the Republicans had some power, then everyone would be confused, and, oh, blaming somebody.
But Jack Posobiec points out, 70% of House Republicans voted to send $40 billion to Ukraine last night.
Q, Fire, Elmo, Jeff.
You know that one where Elmo's like, ah, and the fires are raising up behind you?
For what reason?
Did anyone think it was a good idea to give away $40 billion when our economy is in shambles, supply chain is crumbling, inflation is through the roof, and we are going to make inflation worse to defend a country that is not an EU nation, that is not a NATO ally?
We've lost our minds!
I think there's going to be a revolt.
I think there's going to be a political revolt.
I think we're gonna see a red wave, but I think we're gonna see, I mean, what Trump, most of the people Trump endorsed have won.
I think just the other day, one of his candidates didn't win.
Yo, this, it's gonna be, it's gonna be lit in Congress.
We'll see, we'll see, who knows.
I don't see how Democrats can pull out of this one.
You know, they talk about Roe v. Wade, and the Democrats will desperately try to make the midterm issue about Roe v. Wade, but dude, when you have no baby food, or cat food, I think people are gonna be like, I don't know about this Roe v. Wade thing, but I'm hungry.
I think dudes, for the most part, you're not going to win on the abortion argument.
These women are like posting things on Reddit where they're saying, no more dating apps and no more sex until men vote right.
And I'm like, dude, all the guys that would want to hook up with you have already agreed with you on this issue.
So you choosing abstinence is exactly what the conservatives were asking for.
So I don't think that you've got, look, here's what's gonna happen.
I don't think millennial men are gonna be like, I better vote Democrat or else I'm not gonna get a date.
I think millennial men are gonna be like, what was that about?
I don't know, I want a steak and I can't get one.
Certain things have a hierarchy, there's a hierarchy of needs.
And procreation and dating, while pair bonding and copulation are essentials for human beings, When a person is starving to death, they actually put survival above procreation.
I mean, well, I'm presuming that.
I mean, maybe it's not true.
But here's what I mean.
If someone's starving to death, I don't think they're gonna be like, well, I might die, but I'm gonna prioritize getting laid.
If, like, there's a meteor, a comet, heading towards Earth, ready to slam into it and just vaporize everybody, perhaps.
But if you're like, I haven't eaten in a week, I'm gonna try and figure out how to eat.
You're not gonna be like, I'm gonna stop eating and try and find a date.
So I think even millennial men and women may put Roe v. Wade on the back burner when they're like, I have no food.
Especially millennial women with kids.
They're going to be like, well, I certainly think choice is the right option.
I don't know if you want to get emergency supplies or prepare for the worst, but here's what I'd say.
If you can, not just emergency food, get one of those emergency solar packs.
We had a sponsor spot before.
This is not a sponsor spot, by the way, but for Prepper's Peak.
They sponsored IRL a couple times.
And they had these backup batteries you could charge your phones off of, with solar panels built in.
It does take a long time to charge through solar power to generate that current, but I think it's worth it.
I mean, if you can charge your phone up even 3% and it takes you like 3 or 4 minutes, I don't know how long it
takes, then you can open your phone and you can get access to a
survival kit, or emergency survival guide.
And rest assured, man, having access to that information will save your life.
These survival guides I've done a little bunch, they'll be like, don't eat this seed, don't eat that seed, don't eat this berry, here's a leaf you can't eat.
You can eat tree leaves!
I think people don't realize that you watch a D-rate and you're like, maybe I can eat it.
I wouldn't recommend eating anything unless you check to make sure, but like, we have chives all over the backyard.
We threw them in our meat, grilled them up, makes them delicious.
You know, we'll eat what we can get.
Also, I just think, you know, foraging's actually kind of fun.
We have wineberry season up here in the Appalachian Mountains.
There are like red berries, and they're everywhere, and they are amazing!
They're just, so we just, we pluck them all, we get big bowls.
We made wineberry ice cream, that was awesome.
And then we have pawpaw.
You know, pawpaw is like an avocado-mango thing, banana-ish.
And it rains these things here.
I remember watching them grow, and there's like one tree, and I'm looking, and they're not growing, and I'm like, come on, man, you know, pawpaw are supposedly hard to cultivate, because like, you need beetles and flies to pollinate the plants, the flowers, so weird.
And then I was just like, man, this is, it's, it's like, we're only gonna have three, I really was excited for pawpaw, and then, end of September, beginning of October, it was, they were hitting you in the head, they were just falling, and there were thousands everywhere, and we had big bowls, and they spoiled them, like, we got too much.
Pawpaw season's cool, but you really only have a certain amount of time to eat them.
But it is really cool getting your own food and going out in the forest.
Something I didn't know about when I lived in a city.
For all of you who actually live in rural areas, you're laughing all the time.
I see the comments where they're like, ah, it's just, you know, Tim just discovering these basic aspects of life.
It was really cool when we grew our own food.
I'd walk out in the garden and grab a zucchini, massive, chop it up, throw in my omelet.
Take the, it really is a magical moment.
If you are a city person, The first time you get eggs from your own chicken coop, throw in your own vegetables and fresh basil and tomatoes and have food that came out of your garden?
It's amazing.
I think that's what we need.
I think, you know, a lot of people on the left have been like, why don't we put fruit trees all over the city?
And I'm like, because then the fruit falls off rots and then there's rotten food and flies everywhere.
How about you have a garden?
Which you can do if you have a lawn, if you're outside of downtown areas.
You can do it.
You should do it.
Be more responsible.
I think most people who watch this have already gotten the message.
It was a year ago I was talking about looming food shortages, and apparently the Biden administration didn't do anything about it, didn't prepare for it.
Not only did we know food shortages were coming because of the hiccup in the supply chain, but they knew that the war was coming in Ukraine.
They had intelligence suggesting it.
I doubted them, but at the very least I can say this.
I was wrong.
Sorry, guys.
I didn't think we were going to see war.
They did.
They didn't prepare for the food crisis?
Yo, Biden's nuts.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment is coming up at 1pm on this channel.
Thanks for hanging out, and I will see you all then.
As most of you are probably aware, I do not subscribe to the belief that Donald Trump lost the 2020 election due to widespread voter fraud.
I do believe that Bill Barr said there was fraud, but not on the scale that was enough to have changed the outcome of the elections.
I've also interviewed several people who had been investigating voter irregularities, and I can even point to Steven Crowder, who pointed out questions relating to the 2020 election and voter addresses that raise questions.
This is the challenge for everyone.
If you believe that something bad happened in 2020 that negatively impacted the results, we need more than just questions, and we need a full-scale investigation.
Now, there was an audit in Arizona.
Data came out, and many people were like, Tim, why aren't you going through the data?
We did.
It was much of what we had already talked about on TimCast IRL, and all of it results in questions that need to be investigated, individuals that would need to be questioned, but not much more I can draw a conclusion on.
Now, of course, you can look at all the data and come to your own conclusion.
Which brings me to 2,000 Mules, a new documentary from Dinesh D'Souza, Arguing that mules, individuals engaged in ballot harvesting, had an impact or there are questions around whether or not they did have an impact in several key states.
Now, full disclosure, I have not seen the documentary.
But that is not why I'm doing this segment, to talk about the full contents of the documentary.
I'm here to talk about the failures of the media, the obvious manipulations, and the fact that there's no real argument going on.
There are questions raised about people engaged in ballot harvesting, and we know this not from Dinesh D'Souza, but from James O'Keefe.
James O'Keefe had a guy on camera talking about getting paid to do ballot harvesting.
This stuff happens.
In many states, it's illegal.
In many states, it's not.
What we would need is a coordinated investigation.
We haven't had that.
So, of course, until we do, there's going to be there's going to be doubt on the right, because people on the right want to believe that Trump was was on track to win his second term and the left is going to deny it.
But there's nothing substantive for me to latch on to.
And the least effective thing ever are the people screaming censorship.
The brigaders who are going like, Tim Pool refuses to talk about 2000 mules.
I got no problem talking about 2000 mules.
Now, here's what y'all might like.
The media's desperate attempt to debunk a documentary that raises questions and asks for an investigation.
This is the stupidest thing I have ever seen from the mainstream media, and it's backfiring.
So congratulations, mainstream press!
I just want to stress, with 2020, There, if you look at the full picture and how the media was reporting things and what was going on, a lot of what people believe is just wrong.
And I have no problem saying it despite and however many people might get mad and not like it.
There's one video where there is this voting center and people pull out boxes and then pull out ballots and run those ballots.
And everybody started saying, where did those ballots come from?
So I decided to watch the full video on high speed, mind you.
And if you look at the full context of the video, you can actually watch them take bouts, put them in boxes, push them onto the tables from throughout the day, and then pull them out later to run them through the machines.
You want to make assumptions about what that means?
Go ahead.
But when they cut the video context, it will trick you into believing something that didn't happen.
I believe the biggest mistake right now, with this narrative on voter fraud, is that it is going to disenfranchise people months away, half a year away, from one of the most consequential elections we're going to have in a long time.
The midterms are coming up, and we need everyone to get out and vote.
So every time these narratives come out that tell you that people are cheating and you can't win, I am frustrated by it.
There's not enough evidence.
We know there was the Shadow Campaign and all that stuff.
What are they called?
The secret history of the Shadow Campaign that saved the 2020 election.
Yo, they want to spit in your face and say stuff like this, fine.
Time Magazine said there was a conspiracy unfolding behind the scenes, one that both curtailed the protests and coordinated the resistance from CEOs.
Really?
Both surprises were the result of an informal alliance between left-wing activists and business titans.
The pact was formalized in a terse little-noticed joint statement and blah blah blah blah blah.
Okay, that happened.
Here's what you don't need.
What you don't need is this consistent claim that there are secret, fraudulent votes or whatever.
This is what I'm trying to say.
The narrative, I believe, is outright incorrect.
They had this narrative where they were like, you know, ballots made in China and servers in Germany, and I'm like, throw that all away.
Ignore the noise that seeks to disenfranchise you.
Ballot harvesting is simple.
It's simple, and it's illegal.
And I think 2,000 mules raises some questions.
Nothing I can say definitively.
In fact, that's my understanding from even the assessment of people who watched it.
There's a ton of data and video surveillance footage that needs to be reviewed.
And so they release this, questions are being asked.
Okay, I can respect that.
I'm not drawing a conclusion.
I think I would warn people and say, do not believe, don't underestimate your enemy.
You know, I hate to say enemy in political context, but...
You should be operating under the assumption that Donald Trump was crushed definitively.
Why?
Because if you want to maximize your voter returns in 2022 and 2024, you must assume you lost because people don't like your guy.
Now, maybe bad stuff happens, okay?
That should be investigated.
But if you go out with the sole mission to get as many votes as possible, you will win.
Don't let this stuff demoralize you.
Anyway, I digress.
Here's what's happening.
PolitiFact and many other outlets have issued these fact checks, the faulty premise of the 2000 Mules trailer about voting by mail in the 2020 election.
Let me show you this tweet from Polymath.
Polymath is a marginally compelling and occasionally accurate, sometimes writer-engineered cake baker.
This person does not like Dinesh D'Souza, and they write on Twitter.
I'm as far away as you can get from being an election truther, but someone at PolitiFact needs to recognize this fact check is terrible.
It makes 2,000 mules look more plausible than if they wrote nothing at all.
All of the fact checks do.
All they do is push the questions, and that's why I wonder if the blue-checky journalists are trying, are putting out these garbage fact checks that only highlight the film Who benefits?
The people who are demoralized and told just before an election you can't win?
Or the journalists who are trying to debunk the narrative?
Yo, let's read.
Polymath says, some of this is bad editing.
We don't need 400 words telling us that Dinesh D'Souza is a bad dude before you even start addressing the facts of the case.
That looks to any normal reader like you're using ad hominem because you're not confident in your case.
But some of this is just plain bad writing.
True The Vote has, quote, geospatial info from Georgia, Arizona, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania.
Okay, um, is it legal in those states?
They don't tell you.
When you look it up, it's obvious why they don't tell you.
Because in those five states, only two allow even a caregiver to deliver a vote.
The other three require a family member or the voter to do it.
Why not say that?
You lose so much credibility if I have to discover that myself.
Polymath says, I don't believe the 2020 election was stolen, but my god, this fact check is absolute trash, a complete failure to convince the convincible, and so reliant on conjecture and assumption, it might as well be a satire written by DeSouza to promote his dumb movie.
By the way, it is not clear, if it is not clear how I feel about this, DeSouza is a GD hack, scammer, shyster, and his every success drives me back to the bottle.
Here's what I think.
I look at locals and I see a $30 documentary that is mostly being watched by people who want to believe.
And I say, okay, you know, if you had real evidence to release, I think you should just release it.
This is the most frustrating point for me.
The film should be free.
And then I stop and say, I want it to be free, because if it's true that there are people engaged in ballot harvesting that need to be investigated, everyone should know about this.
But I take a step back, and there's a few points to be made in defense of Dinesh and the price of this film.
The cell phone data cost millions of dollars.
The production was likely very expensive in the hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars.
And we're all capitalists, man.
I mean, we're allowed to make money off of our products, so I don't think calling out price is in any way discrediting of the film.
And I would only say, as with anything, I encourage people to watch it.
I know I haven't seen it.
I have not yet seen it.
I've only read a bit about it and watched some clips.
There is some posts that have been made that went viral showing key highlights.
I've read, I've seen some of those.
And there have been, there are some breakdowns, like CliffsNotes versions of it.
I should definitely watch it, and I think you should, too.
Any fact check that comes out only serves one purpose, to encourage people to read it.
Now, this political fact check is silly.
They say the 2020 presidential election was secure, and evidence from state and federal officials and courts show no indication of widespread fraud.
Okay, I gotta stop you right there.
For one, you're not convincing anybody.
Just coming out and saying secure does nothing.
In fact, I think it makes people less confident.
Here's what frustrates me.
I do not live in the same world as the Trump supporters who believe there was widespread fraud and Trump lost due to it.
I just don't agree.
You've long heard my narrative.
When my when my friends who are apolitical were posting videos of them voting, I was shocked by this.
Absolutely.
So the only thing I can say is in the absence of evidence, the solution that makes the least amount of assumptions tends to be correct.
Now, I do think there are creepy things to be said.
To point it out.
To be pointed out.
Ballot harvesting does happen.
Veritas has proven this.
Was it enough to sway an election?
That I don't know.
Time Magazine said there was a conspiracy?
Well, that's kind of weird and creepy.
Perhaps it should be investigated.
Here's what I think.
I believe there was collusion between powerful interests like Mark Zuckerberg, Democrats, and establishment Republicans to change laws because they knew that it would benefit them.
Call that cheating, call that soft power, call it whatever you want.
The fact is, this is politics.
People dump money in dirty ways to influence people to vote.
To either make it easier to vote or harder to vote.
All that matters is, I look at all the data and people point out like the jump in ballots in the middle of the night and I'm like, They wrote about this.
They wrote that mail-in ballots weren't being tallied until the end of the day.
You can call them liars, fine.
The point is, we need a legitimate investigation on the scale of like the Mueller probe or the Durham probe if we're going to have anything definitive coming out of this.
Now let me show you this fact check from the Denver Post so we can talk about what their claims about Dinesh D'Souza and the film are and why they're debunking it.
This is Fact-Checking 2000 Mules.
The Denver Post writes, a film debuting in over 270 theaters across the country, across the United States, uses a flawed analysis of cell phone location data and ballot dropbox surveillance footage to cast doubt on the results of the 2020 presidential election.
I'm going to pause you right there.
When they put flawed in, that made this an opinion piece, not a fact check.
Let me stop right there and jump to Snopes as well.
The AP saying the exact same thing.
If you are to say flawed, you have become an opinion piece.
You want to point out that they used cell phone data.
Whether or not it's flawed or not is an opinion.
Weird.
Why would they do that?
Let's read.
praised by former President Trump as exposing great election fraud. The movie called 2000
Mules paints an ominous picture suggesting Democrat aligned ballot mules were supposedly
paid to illegally collect and drop off ballots in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania,
Wisconsin. Okay, let me slow down there. If you are a proponent of the fraud narrative,
I'm going to tell you your hurdle with people like me.
For one, I was not a staunch Trump supporter.
Staunch, is that the right word?
I didn't vote for him in 2016.
I came around at the end of 2020 because I liked Trump's new agenda, but I am not going to sit here and blindly just believe everything he says.
If you want to convince moderate post-liberals that this is true, you need to overcome some very serious questions.
Okay?
Assumption- They say it's based on faulty assumptions, anonymous accounts, and improper analysis of cell phone location data.
Here's what I want to say.
I hear this fraud narrative, and I say, okay, where's the evidence?
It doesn't come out.
I see questions.
I see circum- I see, uh, uh, uh, suspicious data.
I've spoke with people like Matt Brainerd.
I've actually verified some of the data he's presented as well.
And I say, this is circumstantial evidence of potential wrongdoing.
Was it enough to sway an election?
No.
Honestly, no.
I don't know.
I look at the data that comes out of Arizona, much of the data we already did go through several times.
And I say, okay, okay, we need to actually If you talk about double voting, it happens.
There have been people arrested and charged for it.
Recently, it was like a Trump supporter got arrested, voted for her mom or something like that.
Or her dead mom or something, I don't know.
If you have a list of names, as people at Purdue are saying, these people are registered in two different areas.
Okay, what you need to do is you need to get these people under oath and investigate.
Fox News had a guy on, who was an athlete, and he was, I think he was from Tennessee or Arizona or something, or he had been in one of the other states, and he was registered as having voted in both.
I'm like, okay!
Well, there needs to be an actual investigation.
So I respect the audits.
But what happened after Arizona?
Come on, you gotta... I'm not saying you can't.
I'm saying answer these questions for me as someone who doesn't live in that world.
Cyber Ninjas vanishes.
Where's the release?
The data we saw was data we already had.
They were looking for like watermarks and stuff.
Apparently there was none.
I don't know.
There were a lot of wild claims that Trump would be reinstated, that he was the real president.
None of that happened.
So when 2000 Mules comes out, and it's a new narrative on fraud, I say, okay, I'm willing to investigate, and I reserve judgment.
I won't make any definitive statements as to the veracity of the claims.
But this is a new argument, a new theory.
I know we knew, you know, about the claims of ballot harvesting, I'm saying, but this is a shift in the narrative.
Here's what they say.
Claim, 2,000 mules were paid to illegally collect ballots and deliver them to drop boxes in key swing states ahead of the 2020 presidential election.
The facts.
TrueTheVote didn't prove this.
The finding is based on false assumptions about the precision of cell phone tracking data and the reasons that someone might drop off multiple ballots, according to experts.
They're gonna say ballot harvesting, blah, blah, blah.
They say, TrueTheVote has said it found some 2,000 ballot harvesters by purchasing $2 million worth of anonymized cell phone geolocation data.
Let's pause right there.
I don't think that's a claim that there is proof of voter fraud.
swing counties across five states. Then, by drawing a virtual boundary around a country,
a county's ballot drop boxes and various unnamed nonprofits, it identified cell phones that
repeatedly went near both ahead of the 2020 election. Let's pause right there.
I don't think that's a claim that there is proof of voter fraud. I think that is a claim
of circumstantial evidence that should be looked into, or at the very least, probable cause.
If it is true that cell phone data shows that someone came within a few meters of a nonprofit
and a drop box multiple times, I think there should be an investigation.
I don't think it proves anything.
I think it raises questions.
They're going to mention that cell phone data can only get within a few meters or blah blah blah.
They say, self-experts say cell phone data, location data, even at its most advanced, can only reliably track a smartphone within a few meters, not close enough to know whether someone actually dropped off a ballot or just walked or drove nearby.
So, that doesn't debunk anything.
If the criteria for a mule is that they went near an NGO and a Dropbox several times within a few meters, okay then, maybe we should ask these individuals.
Do you know who they are?
There's footage they've published of what appears to be fraud.
Again, James O'Keefe found fraud.
Does it mean the entirety of the election was stolen?
No, but it does mean those people should be arrested and charged.
I don't care if you're for Trump or for Biden or for whoever.
Does mail-in voting make fraud easier?
Yeah, oh absolutely!
I don't like the changes they made to all these laws and everything, but I'll point out I do not.
I don't play the definitive conspiracy game, and here's what's frustrating.
The people who go online and just spam 2,000 mules nonstop, you hurt your cause.
Sorry, that's the reality.
I'll talk about the news.
I'll talk about the claims.
But the claims for now are, hey, we found some suspicious cell phone data.
These individuals were going near these places several times.
We should probably, you know, take them in for some questioning.
That's where we're at.
That's where we are at.
It is probable cause, which leads us to say, a preliminary investigation.
For people who come out and say it proves it, It doesn't.
And these fact checks, eh, technically correct.
They say, the claim that this happened.
Well, I think there is circumstantial evidence suggesting it may be the case.
The next thing we do is we look for hard evidence.
Financial transactions.
How about we do those investigations?
I'd be fine with that.
And if you discover it, I'd be like, wow, look at that.
I just, I do not, I do not appreciate zealousness in conspiracy theory.
I, I, it makes it harder.
You know, I try to explain to people that if you come out, and here's an, here's the example I love to use.
They're turnin' the frickin' frogs gay, yells Alex Jones.
Well, to a regular person, that sounds nuts.
What do you, what?
Well, Alex Jones was talking about something real.
Atrazine was disrupting the endocrine systems of frogs.
He then talked about it and then yelled they're turning the freaking frogs gay.
And then you get a bunch of people who think Alex Jones is crazy because they don't know what he's talking about.
You can't just take someone, blindfolded, walk them to the edge of a cliff, and shove them off thinking they'll know how to pull the parachute or if they're wearing one.
But if you take a person and say, I'm holding a parachute I am going to give to you.
I would like you to put it on.
Next, we're going to walk towards this cliff.
You are going to jump off and then pull the parachute to land safely.
They'll be like, That makes sense.
If someone is blindfolded, you walk them to a cliff, take the blindfold off, and say, have fun, and push him off, they'll think you just tried to kill him.
They'll have no idea what your intention was.
So the only thing I can say is this.
Watch the film.
And then, if they've presented strong enough evidence to make you believe, well, that's on you.
I've not yet seen it, okay?
So I'm not saying it's wrong.
I'm saying the fact checks are backfiring on the fact checkers.
But then my question is, why would they do that?
Are regular people going to see this and then be like, okay, it must be fake?
Or is this creating brand value for Dinesh D'Souza and his film and spreading the narrative that there was fraud?
Having worked in non-profits, I will tell you, When they come out and say that you can't win because people are cheating and then people choose not to vote, you lose.
Look at Georgia.
There were videos of people saying, what's the point?
And then the Democrats won.
Now maybe in the long run that was a good thing, because it makes it look like everything is the Democrats' fault.
But all I can say is, what frustrates me the most about any fraud narrative is, we just had several primaries, alright?
Trump's endorsed candidates are winning.
We need everyone to go out and vote.
You want to believe this stuff?
Fine, just please go out and vote.
Don't tell people not to vote.
Tell people to go out and vote.
Get everyone you can to participate.
Everybody's gotta go out and vote, and the primaries are coming up.
So look.
Shadow campaign?
I don't, look, I don't know.
YouTube says they'll ban you if you claim there was widespread voter fraud or whatever.
I don't know if there needs to be fraud in the sense that people are claiming there's fraud.
Time Magazine is making the claim there was a conspiracy.
Here's what I think.
You want to say rigged?
You want to call it whatever you want?
I think a dirty game is politics.
I think people spend large sums of money to win these games.
I think the establishment Republicans and Democrats did not want Trump to win.
I think laws were changed that ultimately ended up benefiting Democrats, but that is all part of the game, whether you like it or not.
If you believe that elections are going to be as simple as I cast my vote, we're done.
You're wrong.
Smear campaigns, lobbying for voter rule changes, purging voter rolls versus preserving dead people on voter rolls.
The left says the right is trying to disenfranchise people.
The right says the left has got, you know, false names on these rolls.
Everybody is fighting in every possible way to win.
And in the end, Donald Trump lost.
You can say he didn't really lose.
No, no, no, no, no.
Who's sitting in the White House right now?
That's who won.
Everything else is politics.
So, I am not saying 2,000 Mules is wrong.
Not at all.
I think there's interesting questions being raised about the cell phone data, and I believe when they bring that up and show it, they're probably right.
Surveillance footage showing people dropping multiple ballots probably exists.
There have been people on the right and the left who have illegally voted.
It happens.
Those people should be investigated.
We should start unraveling the threads and see where it brings us, and not just make definitive statements as to what we think it means when a handful of people are seen on video doing something.
Voter fraud's a real thing.
The left tries to claim it doesn't exist?
That's stupid.
Widespread enough and on a scale to overturn a presidential election?
I don't know if I believe that over the fact that people just hate Donald Trump.
Maybe you don't want to believe it.
Maybe people don't want to believe that there are a lot of people in this country who hate Trump, but they do, and the media radicalizes them.
So the reality is, you need to be spreading the message.
You need to be explaining to people what they need to vote for.
You need to be calm, reasonable, and you need to guide them carefully and slowly.
These kind of narratives do not help people.
If you want to convince a regular person something bad happened, some may be convinced by a documentary about like 2,000 mules, no doubt.
But a lot of people are going to be like, I don't believe you.
