Democrats PANIC Over Biden 2024, Desperate For ANYONE ELSE As Rumors Of Trump DeSantis Ticket Grow
Democrats PANIC Over Biden 2024, Desperate For ANYONE ELSE As Rumors Of Trump DeSantis Ticket Grow. Democrats fear an 82 year old joe Biden will fail miserably in the 2024 election.
Meanwhile Republicans pass rumors of a Donald Trump Ron DeSantis ticket as both are proving to be incredibly popular among the GOP.
With record gas prices, inflation, and shortages happening it seems the red wave is inevitable and Democrats should just accept that they are not coming close to winning anything for years.
#democrats
#trump
#biden
Become A Member And Protect Our Work at http://www.timcast.com
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Democrats are freaking out because they don't think Joe Biden will be able to run for re-election, and the clock is ticking.
They desperately need a replacement, but they don't have anyone.
Meanwhile, rumors that Donald Trump will run with VP Ron DeSantis have them particularly scared.
They can't beat that.
In our next story, USA Today caught making fake news stories and are now admitting to 23 articles with fabricated or misattributed sources.
The journalist in question, if you can call her that, has resigned.
In our last story, Twitter employees are freaking out because Elon Musk apparently said something akin to, all lives matter.
One Twitter employee says they suffer from Musk derangement syndrome.
If you like the show, give us a good review, leave us five stars, and share the show with your friends.
Now, let's get into that first story.
During the 2020 primaries, we were told that all we needed of Joe Biden was his corporeal
I kid you not.
There was an article titled, Stay Alive, Joe Biden.
That was it.
The idea was that there was enough hatred of Donald Trump among Democrat voters, it didn't matter who ran.
So probably what happened was they looked at Buttigieg or Yang or whoever else and said, let's not waste an up-and-coming young star.
Throw Joe Biden out there because he doesn't got to do anything.
And it was surprising to many of us who paid attention and knew that Joe Biden would be awful, and here he is.
So Joe Biden, effectively, he gets elected through what I refer to as Trump being anti-elected.
Meaning, people voted against Trump.
Obviously, Joe Biden wasn't even campaigning.
But this brings us to potential 2024 races.
And do you think Joe Biden's gonna win?
No.
It may have worked one time, along with a lot of other strategies, like the Shadow Campaign, Time Magazine called it, where powerful individuals came together and strategized on how to defeat Donald Trump, changing rules and laws, and there were lawsuits, and a lot of other things happened.
And Joe Biden ends up becoming president.
What are you going to do now in 2024 with record high gas prices, record high inflation?
Right now, Democrats are desperately searching for an alternative, knowing they cannot run this man again.
It's simple.
Joe Biden will be 82 years old by the time he assumes his second term, assuming he does, and he will be 86 By the last year of his term.
And that's a big number.
Look, Joe Biden has a storied career, as it were.
Let's give him that.
I'm not a fan of Joe Biden, or what he represents.
I'm not a fan of his policies, or what is he at?
51 years in office, or some ridiculous number?
Let the man sunset.
Sit down in his wheelchair, or his rascal.
Wheel off into the sunset.
Put a blanket on his lap, or he can just sit and fall asleep.
So I don't think they can run this guy again.
I don't think he's going to win.
The other day we were talking with Robert Barnes.
You may know Robert Barnes.
Viva and Barnes, they do a show together.
And he said he doesn't think the January 6th committee is going to go after Trump with a criminal referral.
Why?
Because if Donald Trump gets indicted, Ron DeSantis runs.
And the Democrats stand no chance against Ron DeSantis.
DeSantis is insanely popular.
And over on Predicted, it goes back and forth as to DeSantis going to be the next Republican nominee or maybe Trump.
Now, Ron DeSantis says he won't run if Donald Trump is running.
But many speculate that we may get a Trump-DeSantis ticket, which would be incredible!
I mean, that's a landslide ticket.
Okay, figuratively landslide.
I mean, that's a ticket that probably does really well.
The funny thing now is, you actually have, I think it's what is on The View, they're like, Pete Buttigieg, Kamala Harris, that will crush Trump and DeSantis.
Are you kidding me?
Democrats are so desperate, that's the best they can offer?
Let me show you the polling.
Let me show you the new polling.
Democrats have lost Latino voters.
Republicans are actually making tremendous gains against young black men.
Regular people in general are showing up to gas stations and they're seeing a sticker of Joe Biden pointing to the price saying, I did that.
And they're going, you sure did, Joe.
Jake Paul comes out and he says, if you voted for Joe Biden and you don't recognize or you don't regret it, you are the American problem.
Democrats, if they run Joe Biden, who apparently says he's going to be running again, if they run him, then okay, maybe this time you get your figurative 49-state landslide.
Landslides have happened in the past, and we are dealing with unprecedented times.
Desperate times call for desperate measures, and that may mean That regular people just say, I don't care, give me the mean orange man!
It's almost like a big ask.
Donald Trump couldn't cut it in 2020 because people just really didn't like him.
Blame the media.
But now things are so bad, I don't know if there is a word that could be said by the press that would make someone be like, okay, yeah, I'll vote for Biden again.
So they have no choice.
This is where we're headed now.
Of course, there's also the possibility of a constitutional crisis.
Over in New Mexico, Otero County is still refusing to certify the election and rejecting a court order.
And here's the crazy part.
No one knows what will happen if they don't do it.
We're just sitting there scratching our head like, uh, what do we do now?
There's no results.
One election commissioner said, what's the point of a commission if a court can just force you to do something?
So he's saying, nah, I'm not going to do it.
The midterms are gonna get really interesting.
2023 is primary season, and 2024 is going to be bonkers.
So let's see.
2023, primary elections.
It's gonna be crazy.
And then you get the actual campaign in 2024.
Oh man, I hope you already strap on your safety belts, my friends, because this is gonna get nuts.
Let's read the news and figure out what's going on in Democrat world as they're trying to dump Joe Biden.
Before we do, head over to TimCast.com and become a member to help support our work directly.
We need you.
As a member, you are supporting our journalists writing important stories about Julian Assange's extradition.
That's Adrian Norman.
We're also hiring more journalists and working to put together a fact-checking organization so we can use your support by going to TimCast.com, clicking that sign up button, and signing up.
You will also get access to exclusive segments of the TimCast IRL podcast Monday through Thursday at 11 p.m.
And you're supporting our infrastructure because we are using Rumble's cloud infrastructure and video player to get away from big tech censorship.
So again, TimCast.com.
But don't forget, smash that like button right now, subscribe to this channel, and share this video everywhere.
The most powerful way to help is just sharing the video.
Let's read that first story from Yahoo News.
Democrats are weighing whether Biden should decline to run for re-election in 2024, report says.
Now, I'm going to pause right there.
You're going to be saying, Tim, you said Democrats want to replace the guy, not that they're weighing it.
No, no, I know.
This is just the latest story.
We also have this one from May 24th from New York Mag.
There has to be a backup plan.
There's a backup plan, right?
Inside the 2024 soul-searching that's happening in every corner of the Democratic Party.
They are basically saying, we must run somebody else!
I don't think they want to admit it.
You've had journalists ask the press secretary, is Joe Biden running again?
And they have no choice but to be like, of course!
Joe Biden is a strapping young lad of mental... of robust cognitive faculties.
Come on, no one believes that.
They didn't say that literally, I'm joking, but here's the story from Yahoo News.
Last December, President Joe Biden told ABC News that he planned to run for re-election in 2024 if he remained in good health.
I'm gonna pause right there.
Considering Joe Biden is not in good health, he must certainly mean he's not gonna be running, but sure.
Earlier this year in Brussels, he said he'd be very fortunate if his 2020 opponent, former President Donald Trump, sought a rematch.
However, an increasingly vocal segment of Democrats, rattled by Biden's middling approval ratings, concerned about his age, worried about the lack of voter enthusiasm heading into the 2022 midterms, are questioning whether the president should seek re-election in 2024, according to the New York Times.
I don't buy it!
lawmakers are pondering Biden's standing in the party with the base deeply appreciative
of the 79-year-old former Delaware senator and two-term vice president for defeating
Trump at the ballot box in 2020.
I don't buy it.
That's what I told Steve Bannon.
Trump got anti-elected.
When you looked at voter enthusiasm for Joe Biden, it was in the gutter!
Come on, leftists and young people were not enthusiastic about Joe Biden.
But these same people, their enthusiasm for voting against Donald Trump was through the roof.
Comparable, if not higher, than Trump supporter enthusiasm.
And that was an overlooked predictor of what was to come.
So I certainly think so.
I do think if you have questions about rule changes or ballot harvesting, let's make sure we answer them because I want a good clean fight, no hitting below the belt.
I want to make sure that come November, people are confident in the results.
I want to make sure that come 2024, people are confident in the results.
And that's why I say to all of Trump supporters, have the audits, have the investigations, Have the signature verification, do all of it, get it done so we can move on and then have a legitimate election.
But I tell you this, I'm sure there are a lot of Democrats who are crossing their fingers that they can use Donald Trump's own statements against him.
Because when they lose, they're going to say, but wait, they did it in 2016.
Let's not play that.
We know that polls are swinging heavily in favor of Republicans, which means, quite simply, Win it.
Go out and vote.
Get your friends to vote.
What were they saying before?
MAGA three times or whatever?
You bring three people with you to the polling place.
To your designated polling place.
Vote.
Win the election.
Crush it.
They say.
unidentified
Hey it's Kimberly Fletcher here from Moms4America with some very exciting news.
Tucker Carlson is going on a nationwide tour this fall and Moms4America has the exclusive VIP meet and greet experience for you.
Before each show, you can have the opportunity to meet Tucker Carlson in person.
These tickets are fully tax-deductible donations, so go to momsforamerica.us and get one of our very limited VIP meet-and-greet experiences with Tucker at any of the 15 cities on his first ever Coast to Coast tour.
Not only will you be supporting Moms for America in our mission to empower moms, promote liberty, and raise patriots, your tax-deductible donation secures you a full VIP experience with priority entrance and check-in, premium gold seating in the first five rows, access to a pre-show cocktail reception, an individual meet-and-greet, and photo with America's most famous conservative and our friend, Tucker Carlson.
Visit Moms4America.us today for more information and to secure your exclusive VIP meet-and-greet tickets.
Democrats have a wafer-thin majority in the House and the Senate, and have struggled to pass major pieces of legislation.
And the GOP is looking to 2024 to win back control of the White House, particularly if Trump decides to run again.
Yeah, we all know Trump is running.
Come on, let's be serious.
Here's the story from the New York Times.
Should Biden run in 2024, Democratic whispers of no start to rise.
In interviews, dozens of frustrated Democratic officials, members of Congress and voters expressed doubts about the president's ability to rescue his reeling party and take the fight to Republicans.
Midway through, this is from June 11th, through the 2020 primary season, many Democratic lawmakers and party officials are venting their frustration.
So it's effectively the same story we saw over at Yahoo.
So let's move on to the more overt panic from Intelligencer.
I love this.
There has to be a backup plan.
There's a backup plan, right?
Here we go.
Oh, they're doing one of these.
On a Tuesday evening in April, nearly half a century after Joe Biden first publicly mused about running for president, an unsettled cross-section of the Democratic establishment assembled at Pinehurst, a golf resort in North Carolina.
Inflation was at a 40-year high.
Full stop.
A 40-year high six months in a row.
Shove off, dude.
Biden's disapproval ratings had hit 56%!
And editors of the New York Times were writing a front-page report about how his signature achievement, $1.9 trillion in coronavirus relief spending, has barely registered with voters.
I love that quote.
unidentified
Joe Biden's like, don't criticize us for massive spending, we're changing lives here!
Gas prices are through the roof and inflation is at record highs.
Come on, man.
Here we go.
The lobbyists, donors, staffers, and elected officials were gathering for the spring policy meeting of the Democratic Governors Association, and the scheduled sessions concerned such topics as health care and diversity in governance.
But between panel discussions in the hallways and at the cocktail reception on the lawn, conversation shifted from grim, the midterms, to grimmer.
The state of the party's planning for 2024 when Biden will stand for re-election on the eve of his 82nd birthday.
Oh man, I'm sure they had to throw up in their mouths a little bit.
Biden hasn't formally announced his campaign for a second term.
But in his mind, there's no question he's running.
That's my expectation.
He said early in his tenure, yes, he told an interviewer he had to.
Now I'll tell you what.
If Joe Biden is not running, they need to announce now.
Like, they've got only a few months, because they need to start Democratic primary campaigning.
Okay, here's how it goes.
They need to start taking people like Gavin Newsom.
You see, Gavin Newsom joined Truth Social.
Okay, he's running, right?
Gavin Newsom, Pete Buttigieg, Kamala Harris, whoever it is.
They gotta have a primary.
Maybe they step back and say, go for it, Kamala.
We're gonna give you the chance.
But she can't even win.
She didn't even get one delegate.
Tulsi Gabbard got more delegates than Kamala Harris did.
So what are they gonna do?
They need to start murmurs now.
To give people a chance to mull over, to do polls, to try and figure out who is the top contender.
Now!
Then come 2023, you will start to see people stand up and say, OK, we're running.
By early 2024, you will see hard debates between the frontrunners in this primary.
If they wait, if they aren't planning now, then they will be late to the party.
So we should know relatively soon, unless they are so out of their minds that they don't know how to deal with this and they can't make a decisive action.
But you know what?
I got to be honest.
Considering the state of the Democratic Party, I'm convinced they're in shambles.
They have no idea what's going on.
Look at this image that intelligence are used for Joe Biden.
It makes him look like he's just not there anymore.
Oh, man.
He was never there to begin with, I guess.
Here we go.
Oh, I love this one from the New Republic.
Democrats who want to replace Biden in 2024 have lost touch with reality.
No!
You had one chance left.
They should be worried about their party's dismal electoral prospects this fall.
But making a swap at the top of the ticket isn't the solution.
Lost touch with reality?
Okay.
I think you have.
Reality is, Joe Biden could maybe pull off something against Trump because people didn't like Trump, but he's certainly not pulling off something again.
Not with his performance at this level.
People genuinely believed.
Everything's bad because of Trump.
Now it's worse under Biden.
So they're gonna say, give me back Trump, please!
Okay, well, here you go.
Joe Biden is old.
79 years old now.
He will be 82 when the next president is inaugurated in 2025.
He is also underwater in the polls.
According to FiveThirtyEight's poll of polls, fewer than 40% of voters rate his presidency positively.
Okay, well, let's go through the numbers.
Let's go right for it.
We got the President Joe Biden job approval.
Job approval on the economy and foreign policy, blah, blah, blah.
Here's the average.
USA Today Suffolk just released a poll showing his approval rating at 39%.
His disapproval at 58%.
His spread in aggregate is minus 14.9.
Over here at Interactive Polls, you ready for this?
President 2024 general election.
Trump with 44% to Biden's 42%.
Wow.
That's amazing.
Among Hispanics, Trump is at 39 to Biden's 28!
Yo.
That's apocalyptic.
Donald Trump is 11 points up among Hispanics next to Biden.
Granted, Hispanics still don't like Trump all that much.
Among independent voters, this is it.
Trump is at 47% to Biden's 28.
You've lost.
That's it.
Donald Trump has the middle of the road.
He has about half of independence.
That's huge.
And there it is.
The swing voters.
How do you expect to win?
Well, The View host Sonny Hauston has an idea.
Harris-Buttigieg 2024 ticket would obliterate Trump or DeSantis.
And that has to be the most psychotic thing I've ever heard.
You think Kamala Harris, who is very unpopular and didn't get a single delegate, would beat Ron DeSantis of tremendous popularity?
You think Pete Buttigieg, who's as generic as a candidate can be, can beat someone as popular as Ron DeSantis or Trump?
Now Trump's got his haters for sure.
The Washington Times reports, the ladies of The View can't wait for the 2024 Dream Ticket.
Kamala and Mayor Pete In a segment Tuesday, co-host Sunny Hauston called Florida Governor Ron DeSantis a murderous fascist.
Death Santis, she deliberately called him, who would easily be defeated by that ticket.
She said that if President Biden did not run for re-election, as a number of Democrats are speculating about or even hoping for, Vice President Kamala Harris and Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg would be great as a ticket.
Do you really think they could win?
Really?
Asked co-host Joy Behar.
Mr. Biden defeated both of them on his way to clinching the 2020 Democratic nomination.
Well, I would vote for them, Ms.
Hauston gushed.
I hope this country is ready for something like that.
I think the brainpower alone would just obliterate Donald Trump or Death Santas.
Ms.
Hauston suggested.
There were other good Democratic candidates, especially the pretty ones.
I do think there are plenty of Democrats that have tons of verve and energy.
Like, I like Gavin Newsom, because he's really pretty to look at.
Yeah, okay.
As long as it isn't the governor of Florida.
I hope it's not Death Santas over in Florida, because I think he's a fascist.
The Connecticut Senator is at the center of negotiations of a new legislation for guns, blah, blah, blah.
Okay.
Roy Cooper.
Who?
Seriously?
A Democrat in North Carolina.
Okay.
Well, that was number 10 and number 9.
Here we go.
Number 8.
Cory Booker.
Alright, well, we got Cory Booker.
I'm sorry, dude.
Cory Booker is beat here, and we all know it.
He's Spartacus.
Yeah, I don't think people are going to take this guy seriously.
New Jersey Senator.
Next up we have Amy Klobuchar.
Klobuchar is also B tier.
Yeah, I just don't see it.
Bit player.
Now Joe Biden, I hate to admit it, but despite all the guy's shortcomings, he has more gravitas than the rest of these so far.
That's why I think they said we gotta go with Joe Biden.
He was already vice president.
He was there and people felt that.
But you look at Cory Booker and Amy Klobuchar, you're not thinking I could see them as president.
I gotta be honest, Joe Biden either, but I would say, you know, more so than these two.
Elizabeth Warren, oh spare me, she's not.
That's ridiculous.
Next up we have Gavin Newsom at number 5.
Okay, Newsom I can see.
That guy looks like a hot shot business type.
An 80's businessman, as it were.
Maybe.
Maybe Gavin Newsom.
He does come off as, like, a generic kind of presidential.
I don't mean presidential in, like, his abilities.
I mean, like, you look at him and you're like, that could be a president, right?
President Newsom.
We'll see.
Still, I don't think so.
I don't think Newsom has what even Biden had, and Biden's brain doesn't even work.
Next up, we got Pete Buttigieg.
Sorry.
Pete Buttigieg is a bit player, and they keep trying, but it ain't gonna happen.
Bernie Sanders.
Okay.
Bernie, I can see.
The man talks with vigor.
And people really like him.
They do.
I think he's duplicitous, like most of these Democrats, but I certainly see Bernie as having more than any of these other candidates because...
He's got that energy about him.
I really do.
I see Bernie Sanders as a Class A, right?
He's not a B-Tier, he's A-Tier.
Doesn't mean I think he can win.
Not against Trump or DeSantis.
Then they put number two at Kamala Harris.
Oh, please.
She's the bottom of the barrel.
And then Joe Biden.
They say, number one, there is zero question that Biden is in bad political shape at the moment.
Approval ratings in the high 30s guess at $5 a gallon.
Inflation, the highest it has been in 40 years.
There's also zero question that if Biden decides he wants to run for a second term, he will almost certainly be the party's nominee and probably won't have to fight all that hard for it.
It's an open question as to whether that is the best thing for Democrats nationally.
Are you seriously saying you think Joe Biden is number one?
At 82 years old, running for re-election?
Yo, just stop.
I'll tell you.
Democrats have no idea what they're doing.
And let them spiral.
Here's the story from the Wall Street Journal why Democrats are funding the GOP fringe.
Hoping to face the weaker candidates, they're running ads that help the far right.
What?
You're spending your money to prop up Republicans?
More people are concerned with the economy now than in previous month.
Ya think?
Why would Democrats believe that funding far-right candidates doing the January 6th— You think this is gonna save you?
They don't learn, do they?
They're insane.
That's just it.
Look, I don't know what's gonna happen with the primaries.
I don't know what's gonna happen in the midterms or the election.
Maybe, maybe, you know, to my surprise, Amy Klobuchar wins!
I can't see the future.
Don't ask me.
I can certainly tell you, though, there's a real potential for a constitutional crisis.
It's not gonna go the way you think it will.
In 2020, Trump and his associates were screaming fraud.
There were lawsuits and ultimately we got a very interesting lawsuit.
It was original jurisdiction.
48 states all involved in lawsuits against each other over whether or not certain states handled their elections properly.
I believe it started with Texas.
I mean, that's crazy.
This country was on the verge of tearing itself apart as half the states were suing the other half or something like that.
Ultimately, I believe the Supreme Court said, get out of here.
We're not looking at this.
My attitude is, Just to win.
Get so many votes, prove it just to win.
Otherwise, it's all going to be torn apart.
Now we're heading into the midterms, and right now we have this from WHSV.
HSV. New Mexico election crisis intensifies as deadline looms.
Here's the story. Republican commission in Otero County, New Mexico refused to certify
the results of the election saying we don't trust these voting machines from Dominion.
Personally, I don't like proprietary voting machines.
I think they should be public, you know, open source.
But here we go.
A standoff between a Republican-dominated county, a county commission, and New Mexico's Democratic Secretary of State over the commission's conspiracy-fueled refusal to certify election results came to a head.
The state's certification deadline.
The showdown is proving a stark example of the chaos that election experts have warned about, as those who promote the lie that former President Donald Trump was cheated out of re-election seek to populate election offices across the country, and the usually low-profile boards that certify the results.
The governing commission in Otero County refused to certify the local results.
Blah blah blah blah blah.
Okay, so I told this story yesterday.
Here's the thing.
The Secretary of State filed a suit.
The court said, you must do it.
The Secretary of State's office asked the Attorney General to investigate.
There was a court order.
They say it can be felonies if there's a violation of ethics, if the action is willful.
At least one of the three county commissioners, Commissioner Coy Griffin, told CNN he was not planning to vote for certification.
Quote, Why have a commission if we just get overridden by the court system?
It was not immediately clear what would happen next if the county refuses to certify its results.
A typically ministerial duty, but one that has drawn the spotlight since Trump tried to pressure some certification boards in the aftermath of the presidential election in 2020.
Okay, I've got a serious question.
What does happen?
No one seems to know.
Are we all just gonna stand around shrugging?
And they're gonna be like, but you have to certify the results.
It's ministerial.
And then the response from them is, if that were the case, you wouldn't need the commission anyway.
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 In which case, seems like there's a stalemate and no one knows what's gonna happen.
I don't.
No, I think things are gonna get crazy.
with Josh Hammer. Subscribe and download your episodes wherever you get your
In which case, seems like there's a stalemate and no one knows what's gonna happen.
I don't. No, I think things are gonna get crazy. Well, I should say, I think things can get crazy.
They're basically saying we don't care what the courts say.
They're at least as one guy is.
AP has the story.
Election crisis intensifies.
So the deadlines today?
What happens if he just says, yeah, see what happens?
What if this is testing the waters?
Come November, let's say, to the shock of Trump supporters, Democrats end up doing better than polls suggested, which makes no sense, because we know that the polls favor the Democrats.
All of a sudden, these Republicans say there's no way.
All the data suggests otherwise.
This doesn't make sense.
And then you get a wave.
Let's say 300 counties refuse to certify.
Let's say even 17, 20 members of Congress are not certified.
What happens on January 3rd?
Who goes to D.C.?
What if a bunch of these counties send more than one person?
Yeah, that's where things get weird.
If Republicans refuse to certify, or en masse certify the results they deem to be appropriate, or anyone does, Democrats or Republicans, then what happens when you have two politicians from one district?
It's not just about Democrats either.
Part of the chaos is also Robbie Starbuck in Tennessee.
They boot him off the ballot for no reason.
It's completely corrupt.
What if people vote him in?
What if he wins independent voters?
What if people vote for a write-in candidate, Robbie Starbuck in Tennessee?
What happens if he does manage to win?
And the GOP says no, and they say, we won't certify those results.
You really gotta wonder, huh?
To see where this will go.
This is why I am no fan of the Bidens, and I think we need change.
Because the corruption isn't just in the election.
It's not just whether or not we are going to get clean results and accept them.
It's the fact that under Joe Biden, there is rampant corruption, and we all know it.
So what do you do, man?
I don't know.
I can tell you it's the economy, stupid.
I can say that Democrats don't play by the rules.
Here's another story from Tim Cass.
Democrat legislators announce plan to subvert SCOTUS decision that overturns Roe v. Wade.
Don't forget Casey, Adrian.
Overturns Casey as well.
Casey v. Planned Parenthood.
25 senators urge Biden to take executive action.
He can't do that.
But he might try.
And then if Joe Biden does, here's what happens.
The president issues an executive order.
Trump did this.
And then it's incumbent upon the people to challenge it to the Supreme Court?
That's insane.
The president can just do it and then we have to cross our fingers and hope we can make it to a legal battle to win?
This is where things are going.
Personally, I think the Democratic Party is in shambles.
Which means victory is looming for Republicans to a degree we've not seen in a long time.
The silent majority, as it were.
But Democrats have lost the plot.
Everything they're saying and doing, their support for the far-left extremists, is why I think civil war seems all but inevitable.
I mean, you take a look at what's going on in New Mexico, to go back to that story.
What happens when two slates of electors in 2024 show up to cast their vote?
We had this almost in 2020.
It was funny.
I did a story.
And I said, GOP electors vote, cast ballot for Donald Trump.
And then I had, I think it was some factioning agency was like, this is fake news, Tim.
And then I was like, no, it isn't.
They literally did.
And they were like, but they weren't certified electors.
I didn't say they were.
In fact, at the beginning of the video, I literally said they weren't certified electors.
I said, it was the GOP slate of electors.
What else do I call them?
That's what it was.
And they literally signed off on their own slate.
Democrats tried claiming that it was a coup attempt by doing so, but they did it with Nixon and Kennedy, you know?
The fact that no one will agree, and that everything is a coup attempt, says to me that we are just dangerously close to that point.
Coy Griffin is awaiting sentencing over his involvement in January 6th, to whatever degree it was.
I'd imagine it wasn't as crazy as they say, because they're all misdemeanors.
Maybe that's why he's saying, I'm not certifying, I'm going to jail anyway, right?
Maybe he's saying, I don't trust it, I won't trust it, and I won't stand for it.
Steve Bannon wants more conservatives to become poll watchers and poll workers, election workers.
So what happens when he gets his wish, and in two years' time, half of poll workers are diehard Trump supporters?
What happens when they say, you can't make us certify anything?
What happens when the courts say, if you don't, we'll hold you in contempt, and they say, do it?
We don't know.
That's the interesting thing.
If they can't get certification, and there's a legal battle, and then no representatives or elected officials actually go to office, I'm sure you'll end up with Democrats and Republicans sending their reps, and it'll be like the 1800s all over again.
And then what?
Oh, uh, Civil War?
Maybe eventually you get someone caned in Congress or the Senate, just like in the 1860s.
My friends, I can't see the future.
One thing I can't say for now.
Joe Biden doesn't have it.
Democrats don't have anyone to replace him, and they know it, and they are frantic and panicking.
And that means Donald Trump probably has a clear path straight towards a re-election in 2024.
And we all know what that means for Democrats.
To them, it's apocalyptic.
I don't think they could beat Ron DeSantis because they have nothing against him.
I mean, like, they'll try and smear him and call him a fascist.
With Donald Trump, look, Trump made some mistakes, don't get me wrong.
So they're hoping they can go up against Trump to beat him.
But I don't think they can beat Trump either.
Joe Biden has just gutted this country and ripped it to its core.
So what'll they do if Trump-DeSantis is the 2024 ticket and it wins?
You think they're gonna sit back and be like, good game everybody, shake the hands and be like, well, we'll try again next time.
Or do you think they're gonna start pulling out their hair, screaming, and banging their heads on the wall?
I think it could only get worse.
2020 was bad.
2024 will be worse.
It's gonna be an exaggeration, an escalation of everything.
It's already happening!
I don't know.
Maybe they'll try running Joe Biden because they're crazy people.
And then when Joe Biden loses to, like, astounding numbers, because he's like Jimmy Carter worse than Carter, Trump wins that landslide.
Yeah, we'll see, man.
I do think Democrats got to get Joe Biden out of there and get somebody else, but I don't think they got anybody else anyway.
Maybe it'll be Newsom.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up tonight at 8 p.m.
over at youtube.com slash TimCastIRL.
Thanks for hanging out, and I'll see you all then.
There's a lot going on in the news.
The problem is we don't trust the news all that much.
It's difficult to know what's true because the media lies so often.
Many people come to me and they say, Tim, how can we explain to people the media is lying to them?
And it's very difficult.
We are fortunate to have an admission in today's major news cycle from the Washington Post.
USA Today removes 23 articles says reporter fabricated sources.
They may come to you, your friends and family, and say, well, you know, they admitted it, and these things happen.
Sometimes there are bad people and all.
That's true.
But let this just be another grain of sand in the heap.
If someone comes to you and says, I don't, I trust the news and I don't believe you, show them this.
How was it that USA Today was allowed 23 articles with fabricated sources to get posted?
Now let me ask some questions.
Do they not have fact-checkers?
Do they not have editors?
Or an editor-in-chief?
What is the process by which they actually verify the news that's being reported on their platform?
To put it another way, if this reporter, who I believe her name is, was it Gabriela?
Gabriela Miranda.
She resigned from the paper.
She had fabricated sources.
So what was happening was that this woman was writing fake news Uninhibited.
Publish.
Done.
Was there no process by which an editor looked at the piece and checked it?
Well, the reality is, maybe.
There's probably an editor, but they just assume it's true.
I was at Politicon, which is a political convention, you know, every year, and they had a panel with a bunch of left personalities talking about news and fake news, and I said, you know, when they're talking about fake news and, you know, trusting the mainstream press, I said, how do you know that they're telling the truth when they don't even employ fact-checkers anymore?
And I was told, well, the journalists are the fact-checkers.
I mean, that's what they do.
How about that?
Now, to be fair, the staff at TimCast.com is particularly small.
And we don't have fact-checkers right now.
We are in the process of trying to... There's a lot going on.
We're new.
Obviously, the newsroom isn't that old.
It's only about a year old compared to the Washington Post's storied legacy.
But we're in the process of filing the paperwork to set up a non-profit so that we can have an independent organization doing fact-checking for us as well as other organizations.
So, we're getting to that point.
I'm not going to come out here and claim that we're, you know, necessarily doing a better job in terms of do we have fact-checkers and a staff.
What we have at TimCast.com is that when someone writes an article, it goes to two
different individuals, our executive editor and our editor-in-chief, who review it and to the best of
our abilities try to determine whether or not it's true, but we don't publish nearly as much as the
Washington Post and then I also read through the stories and very often will kick things back
and say that doesn't seem to be true.
So we do have a process by which we are fact-checking, which apparently the Washington Post doesn't.
I'm not going to pretend again that, you know, I don't know, maybe these things happen.
That's fair.
Maybe they just made a big mistake.
But my point is, USA Today, NewsGuard certified.
This is the point I want to make.
Right now, TimCast.com is undergoing a review by NewsGuard.
You can see up here that NewsGuard is a third-party certification agency that determines whether or not your outlet is typically credible or not credible.
That's basically how they do it.
You get a green check or you get a red exclamation point.
There's a deeper review to the process, a deeper rating system, but let's talk about that.
TimCast.com from NewsGuard says this website is in the process of being rated or reviewed.
I do like NewsGuard.
I do.
But there's a problem here.
The problem is, institutional and legacy bias has polluted our system and has broken it.
Right now, with one of the biggest scandals in media we have seen in a long time, that USA Today had a woman resign because she was fabricating stories, outright making things up.
All right, let's go to the front page of USA Today.
Where's that apology?
Let's see, we've got top headlines.
Blonde teaser, Anna de Armas as Marilyn Monroe.
Transgender athlete bans could be the beginning, Advocates warn.
For Trump, theory about pants.
Check your Gmail.
Alzheimer's, life's changing.
Okay, Ukraine moves close.
Where's the story where they admit in big, bold front page, we posted fake news and lied to you?
It's not there.
Bravo.
Bravo, ladies and gentlemen.
So, as we are now experiencing a major scandal, and this is serious, you know, 23 stories, how much you want to bet it was more?
The only reason, in my opinion, with my experience in news, the only reason they're admitting this is because it was so egregious or they got caught.
Someone probably brought it up to them and said, we're going to expose you, and they went, uh-oh, what do we do?
Quick!
Throw the reporter under the bus.
No, they like the fake news.
They like the fake stories.
Let me tell you how it works, my friends.
You work for one of these outlets.
You can write a headline saying, you know, Donald Trump steals puppy from child.
A ridiculous story that no one should believe, but these people just tend to believe it, I guess.
Well, the reality is, liberals and conservatives, for different reasons, will click the story and share it like crazy.
Now, let's say the USA Today does this.
Do they run ads?
I'm pretty sure they run ads.
Do they have a subscription service?
I'm pretty sure they have a subscription service.
So when you get a million views on your fabricated article, you make, let's just say a million views, you're going to make maybe five to ten grand on a typical ad CPM or something like that.
No, no, I think actually, yeah, 5 to 10 grand.
I think because they control their ads, it may even be upwards of 20,000, maybe even $40,000 off a million clicks.
I don't know for sure.
The next day, they issue a retraction, saying, oops, that was fake news, we're so sorry.
Can you sue when they defame you with this fake news?
You need to prove damages, you need to prove they knew it was false.
The retraction gets only a few thousand views, but they still make money on it.
Is USA Today going to return the money to the advertisers that they made off this fabricated news?
The economic incentive is to lie, and then just apologize.
Whoopsie!
Good luck suing.
The standard is insane.
And this is where we are today.
The Washington Post reports, not that I trust them either, USA Today removed 23 news stories from its website Thursday after an internal audit concluded that the reporter who wrote them misattributed quotes and in some cases may have fabricated interviews and sources.
Amazing.
I've had journalists do this to me.
I believe it was a New, was it New York Magazine or the New Yorker?
I think it was New Yorker.
I think it was.
So forgive me, you know.
I'll just say, in my best estimate, there was a reporter who took two different quotes from me, mashed them together to make it seem like one quote, and it was a fabrication.
But I actually said those things!
That was their argument.
They refused to correct and retract, and ultimately ended up issuing—I say refused because the correction they issued Was a sneaky... It was sneaky BS.
They said, we removed a quote from Tim Pool because it contained errors.
Ah.
And then I got accused of lying because people assumed it meant the errors came from me.
Ah, you see how they play these dirty games?
This is why you don't respond to the press.
It's why you don't give them answers.
It's why you don't talk to them.
Because they will lie, they will cheat, and they will steal.
The breaking news reporter Gabriela Miranda has resigned from the newspaper and could not be reached for comment.
USA Today has removed nearly two dozen stories she wrote between spring 2021, TikTok bans milk crate challenge from its app, citing concerns over dangerous acts, and spring of this year.
This is my land, I stay.
These Ukrainian women are among thousands choosing to fight, not flee.
Fabricating pro-war propaganda, too?
Okay, okay, come on.
It was an audit, they say.
They released a list of removed articles as well as a brief account of its investigation, which the company said began with an external correction request several weeks ago.
And there it is.
Someone else said, take a look into this, and they knew they were busted.
The audit eventually broadened to encompass a wide swath of her reporting, which focused on trending topics and viral stories.
Look, these things do happen.
I think it's fair to point out that they dropped the ball on this one and had a reporter producing fake news for a long time.
We've had our issues at TimCast.com with articles that need corrections.
Fair point.
But 23 articles?
Is there no fact checker?
Is there?
How do you?
You know what?
I'm just going to put it this way.
How do you know any of your journalists are telling the truth?
Take a look at NewsGuard over at USA Today.
100 out of 100.
Still, after USA Today has admitted 23 stories were misattributed or even fabricated, NewsGuard's like, well, you know, they're the most credible credible can be.
Here's the game.
NewsGuard, not all bad.
I like them for a reason.
But come on, NewsGuard!
In response to this story, you should have immediately pulled their certification.
Immediately!
What is your justification for claiming that a powerful corporate press institution gets to retain a 100 out of 100 when they admit it to employing someone fabricating sources?
Incredible.
So let's get into the nitty-gritty.
Let's, uh, let's, let's, you know what?
I'm gonna do it.
I've been in communication with NewsGuard.
They've reached out to me about TimCast.com.
Let me tell you a story.
NewsGuard emails a news outlet, and they say, we have concerns about these stories.
What say you?
Let me pull up the nutrition label NewsGuard has.
NewsGuard says, do you repeatedly publish false content?
Do you present information responsibly?
Do you regularly clarify errors?
Do you handle the difference between news and opinion responsibly?
Do you avoid deceptive headlines?
Do you disclose your ownership in financing?
Do you label advertising?
Do you reveal who's in charge, including conflicts of interest?
And do you provide the names of content creators along with contact or biographical information?
I believe The Economist has a perfect score and doesn't do that.
Here's the reality of what NewsGuard is.
They're a biased establishment rating agency, and they exist to protect the ads of major corporations, and it's a clever business model.
But there's no actual way to run a news certification agency, or at least in this way.
Now, we have a plan on how we're going to do this over at Timcast, and that's why we're filing for a non-profit.
We're actually going to certify news agencies, and I'll tell you how.
But first, let me tell you the story.
So we get emails from NewsGuard because they're in the process of certifying TimCast.com.
And they say, we take issue with this one story.
Now, to be fair, we had issues of a couple articles that appeared to be plagiarism.
They were very, very similar.
In some instances, it looked verbatim.
I'm not entirely sure what the issue was.
I don't handle editorial at TimCast.com.
We have Cassandra Fairbanks.
I believe there were quote grabs from other articles.
We don't allow that.
I believe there was a potential issue of plagiarism.
We outright said, no, correct it, don't let it happen again.
We take action on this.
We have had, at TimCast.com, incorrect articles.
That's different from fabricating news.
We had articles that were just wrong, because one of our writers just got the facts wrong, and we took action on that.
I take it very seriously.
That is not an issue of anyone intentionally fabricating stories on our platform.
So we get, they reach out to us, and they point these out, and I say, we correct instantly.
You let us know, and if the correction is true, we will correct.
So we took action, I think, on like five articles out of the thousands that we have, because I think we do a pretty good job.
But one of the things NewsGuard asked was, we had an article on New Hampshire.
New Hampshire's legislature had allowed, I think, ivermectin or something.
The news article was straight news.
New Hampshire legislature says this about this.
We include quotes from them, and that was it.
In a good faith attempt, we included statements from, I think, the FDA saying ivermectin doesn't work in treating COVID.
They said, why didn't you include a study, a clinical trial, showing that it was ineffective?
And I said, excuse me?
Are you emailing me suggesting an editorial change?
Why would NewsGuard ask us about a potential editorial issue?
It's not their position.
Our article was 100% factually correct and even included assessments from the FDA in a good-faith attempt.
Now, so far, we haven't seen the release from NewsGuard as to what they're going to write to TimCast.com.
But here's another thing that happened the other day.
Now, again, I can respect their attempt at fact-checking, but let's call it out because it needs to be called out.
They emailed me and said, in a video you produced, you said Hunter Biden was helping secure funds for Ukrainian biolabs or something to that effect because you read a headline from the Daily Mail.
That's right.
I did not assert any facts, as I typically do not.
I read news sources.
And there's a reason why there is a little box here with my face, and the article dominates the page on YouTube.
So that you can see, the articles I'm reading are certified by a third-party agency.
You may not like what I have to say, but I only use sources that have a third-party certification to check my bias.
It protects me.
Perhaps these sources are false.
Don't know.
The best I can say is I rely, I say as much as I might not believe many of these outlets or trust them, I'm gonna use sources if they're certified by a third party because it's fair.
I'm not the end-all be-all of what is true and correct.
So they emailed me and said, you made these claims but it appears you are just repeating Russian disinformation.
They said Daily Mail was just repeating Russian disinformation and the emails had not been independently verified.
Okay, so you know what I said?
Did you not see in the video you are challenging the NewsGuard certification on this source?
Did you not check to determine whether or not these emails had actually been independently verified?
Because they have been.
The New York Post and the Daily Mail both have asserted that they had independently verified emails from Hunter Biden's laptop showing that he was trying to secure funds for these biolabs.
At least that's what those stories said.
And both the New York Post and Daily Mail are certified as credible by NewsGuard.
This is the issue.
What they really do is employ people who are just as bad at doing journalism as anyone else, who don't fact-check and use their opinions to determine what is true.
But here's the important point.
Are they... Let me put it this way.
USA Today is given a 100 out of 100, even though we know They fabricated news.
Certainly, you could ding their credibility and say, USA Today is no longer deemed credible while we do an independent review of these stories.
Here's the problem.
Did NewsGuard, when they read these news stories, how do they know it's true?
If I said in a news story that I independently verified an email, they would just say, not true, New York Times said it wasn't true.
But I did.
Are you calling me a liar?
By all means, try and call me a liar.
Let's see how courts handle defamation.
I'm interested to see how NewsGuard is going to rate TimCast.com, considering they tried questioning whether or not a story from an outlet they certified as credible Was true.
They tried claiming that it was not verified and the statements were incorrect for me to read them.
The fascinating thing.
I was opining on a story from a news outlet.
They certified as credible.
How dare you question me?
You certified it.
I was relying on your organization to assume these were true articles.
USA Today, on the other hand, has proven to produce fabricated news, and you give them a perfect score.
But the Daily Mail and the New York Post said they both independently verified the emails and the New York Times, and you dare email me saying they were not independently verified.
This is the game, ladies and gentlemen.
This is the corruption of the corporate press.
Organizations like NewsGuard, They will give USA Today a perfect score under the assumption that what they're writing is true simply because they are corporate press.
If the New York Times says Donald Trump farted, they'll say, well, the New York Times said so, so it must be true.
How else do you fact-check these things?
Did you contact our sources?
When we read a story, do you then independently verify the emails to confirm the veracity of the claims made?
No!
You simply pull up PolitiFact, who is wrong, and say it must be true?
This is the game of the corporate press, and it needs to be called out.
So, when your friends and family say, how do we know it's true?
You say, it's tough.
It's hard to know if it's true or not.
But at the very, at the least, the bare minimum, you should approach every single news story with a grain of salt.
Be it from Fox News or CNN or MSNBC.
Do not just blindly watch CNN or MSNBC and assume they're telling you the truth.
Now, we have our issues with Fox News' primetime opinion lineup.
I am no fan of Hannity.
I think MSNBC lies.
I think CNN lies.
There you go.
What you need to do is try and get a balanced approach.
A balanced news diet.
But you need to question this machine.
How is it that after I showed you this?
Let's play this again.
USA Today had 23 articles with fabricated sources.
I should say the reporter fabricated sources.
23 articles either were misattributed or fabricated.
And they're rated the most credible by NewsGuard.
That NewsGuard would use USA Today as a fact-checker.
That USA Today is an approved Facebook fact-checker.
How do you know?
It's tough, isn't it?
Now, I will say this.
When I'm reading the news, if I see an outlet with a red exclamation point from NewsGuard, I will ask why.
And I will check.
And typically, It turns out, they're not that credible.
But it doesn't always mean their stories are wrong.
I think Breitbart gets a red exclamation point, even though a lot of their reporting is actually good.
USA Today fabricated news?
They get a green checkmark, so it's not perfect.
It is a basic bias check.
I know NewsGuard's biased.
I know their establishment shills.
But at the very least, I'll say, okay.
If it were me choosing my own sources, that would probably be a heavy bias.
Let me only use sources we agree on.
The establishment says this is credible?
Okay, then I'll only use those sources with some very rare exceptions, like Project Veritas.
They've rated Project Veritas as a red exclamation point, even though Veritas just publishes videos showing people saying things.
So I take issue with that.
But I will use them, and then come at me, bro.
That's the point.
When I reported on Hunter Biden and his dealings in Ukraine, it was based off of two NewsGuard-certified sources.
So I get these people emailing me saying, how do you answer this claim, Mr. Poole, that you said this thing, which is Russian disinformation?
My response is, I don't know.
Ask NewsGuard.
They certified it to be true and correct.
Not the story individually.
But what am I supposed to do if NewsGuard gives me a green checkmark and says the platform is credible?
They're playing a dirty game.
We know that they publish fake news and they get away with it.
So this is the best we can do.
But let this story be more evidence, another grain of sand in the heap, that they do lie to you.
And only rarely do they get caught.
We try to catch them every time we can and we call it the lies and the fake news.
NewsGuard doesn't.
No, they're just—if you're establishment and you toe the line of the appropriate media narrative, then they'll give you that green checkmark.
So we'll see what happens at TimCast.com.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 1 p.m.
on this channel.
Thanks for hanging out, and I'll see you all then.
Just the other day, Elon Musk participated in a hands-on meeting with Twitter employees about his intentions, his politics, just generally answering questions as he is set to take over the social media juggernaut.
And according to some Twitter workers, other Twitter workers are suffering from Musk Derangement Syndrome.
Employee says I think it's funny because the dude also says I guess it's the the opposite of Musk fanboy syndrome I love it.
Whoever this guy is Bravo or or lady could be this person Apparently the Twitter employees are particularly triggered because Elon Musk said all lives matter Yeah, I guess he said that.
Project Veritas has leaked the entirety of the 48-minute conversation.
I believe it was 48 minutes.
And already Slack messages are being leaked as well.
And boy, is it fun to watch the cult members squirm.
Elon Musk did not come in and say, I'm going to attack your ideology.
I guess technically he did because they oppose freedom.
They oppose other people having rights.
So if that's the case, someone coming in and saying, I'm gonna let people speak.
I'm gonna try to be inclusive of everybody.
I think the funniest thing about this is the response from Twitter employees who think they know better than the richest man in the world.
Let's read about musk derangement syndrome, but I'll give you a quick anecdote.
I have sat before many an individual, my friends.
Some of them are particularly wealthy.
I have sat before some of the wealthiest people on the planet.
And you know my attitude is when I'm sitting next to a dude who's worth billions of dollars?
Tell me more.
Tell me more.
Explain to me how you did it and tell me how it works.
Now, not always the richest people on the planet, just successful people in general.
If there is someone that I can see has done something I did not or cannot or could not, I simply say, tell me more.
It's partly how I'm successful, because I'm willing to admit, one, when I can't do something, when someone else is probably smarter than me, and when I can learn from them.
You take that to heart, you will succeed, because you will absorb that information, and it gives you an advantage.
Chance favors the prepared.
So I sit down with someone who's worth a billion dollars, and I say, I think I know a lot, but explain to me this thing, like how you did this.
And they say, A, B, C, 1, 2, 3.
And I go, let me write that down.
A, B, C, 1, 2, 3.
And I use that.
Elon Musk has a proposal for how to fix Twitter.
How to save the company because their revenue is below their costs.
So maybe layoffs.
And these Twitter employees are like, he thinks he knows how to make the company work.
Remarkable.
Here's a story from the New York Post.
Elon Musk's all-hands meeting with Twitter employees on Thursday reportedly failed to convince some workers who remain fiercely opposed to the billionaire's $44 billion takeover, according to an engineer who attended the gathering.
A Twitter engineer who spoke on condition of anonymity said Musk's remarks on topics ranging from potential layoffs to remote work to aliens had renewed skepticism among some colleagues who fear that Musk's presence would mean for what it would mean for the social media firm.
I love that in this very important business meeting he's talking about aliens.
Elon, big fan.
It seemed.
Like, some of my colleagues were experiencing Musk Derangement Syndrome again.
I guess it's the direct opposite of the Musk Fanboy Syndrome, the unnamed Twitter engineer told Business Insider.
For me, the meeting motivated me and took me back to my North Star of doing something well while I'm at Twitter.
The engineer said, Musk doubled down on his commitment to buy Twitter during the all-hands meeting despite a recent stall in negotiations due to his concerns about spam bots.
However, Elon Musk also won that fight.
Apparently, Twitter has unleashed access to the firehose.
You know what this means?
I think there's only three companies who have access, and this, power.
The firehose is the stream of all tweets coming onto the platform.
With that access plugged into some kind of machine learning algorithm or AI, you could probably map the world and society, at least for those who are using the platform.
But considering polls, like when we do scientific polling, we do like 500 to 2,500 people.
Imagine if you had 300 million people all spewing their garbage and you could track keywords.
Yeah, knowledge is power.
Some workers have been opposed to the acquisition from the start, citing Musk's penchant for confrontation on Twitter.
The engineer said Musk only briefly spoke about bots during the meeting, and made it sound like it was a given that he was purchasing Twitter.
Interesting.
I'm not worried about his online presence reflecting poorly on Twitter as a company or its price share, the engineer said.
If he took Twitter public again after making it private, it would maybe be an issue, but so far I think it's only benefited him.
Musk's potential plans to overhaul Twitter's business are another source of concern among employees.
The Tesla CEO purportedly pitched bankers on his plan to cut costs while raising financing for his acquisition bid.
Musk also came out firmly against remote work at Tesla, sparking speculation about what stance he would take for Twitter.
I don't care about remote work at Twitter.
People are flipping out about those comments, and what makes sense, the engineer said.
Many people don't live in San Francisco or near another Twitter office.
What requires a bigger conversation is what we're going to do about people who join the company as remote workers.
Elon!
Fire them all.
I'm going to say that again.
Elon, fire them all.
I have no problem with remote work for some people.
But we here at Timcast strongly encourage people being on site, for the most part.
However, Many people can do their jobs from remote locations.
And so we're kind of like, you should report to work, but just get the job done.
So we're fairly lax. It's like a hybrid.
You know, it's how a lot of media companies work.
The reason we want people here on site is to build culture and community
so that people can share ideas.
So that if someone in the newsroom sees a story and says, hey, look what I saw, instantly we're all hearing about it and we can check into it.
There is a benefit to remote work, however, in that we don't homogenize our worldviews.
And that if somebody in the newsroom says, I saw this story and publishes it and everyone sees it and says, oh wow, someone who's remote might be like, hold on there, what are you talking about?
They might fact check it.
Well, apparently, we have some leaked communications, my friends.
Libs of TikTok says more from Twitter Slack channels.
Twitter employees big mad, because Elon Musk said, all lives matter.
So here's the Social Water Cooler channel with 2,862 members.
All the users' names are redacted and their images are as well.
Quote, all lives matter.
The next person says, one billion.
The next person says, yikes.
You ready for this one?
This person goes, yes, we need to get half the world that lives under a dollar a day on Twitter blue so they can pay three dollars a month.
You morons!
Elon Musk did not say every single person will be giving three dollars per month.
Thanks, Elon.
Where can we find those extra 800 million users?
Maybe you can lead the growth team?
Haha, we're so smart and we're so much smarter than the richest guy on the planet.
Bro, Facebook has like 2 billion users.
Twitter has 300 million.
What are you doing?
Well, banning from everyone, I guess.
Someone said, he literally just all lives mattered.
I don't think Elon actually said all lives matter, or maybe he did.
I think they're implying that he said something akin to all lives matter.
I mean, I haven't seen any mainstream sources report that he actually said that.
Now, I suppose if you go through the whole leak, I watched the leak that Veritas put out.
I didn't watch the entire 48 minutes, full disclosure.
Maybe you'll see that he did say it, but you know, I don't know.
Someone said, as a conservative libertarian, All Lives Matter is offensive, though.
But I'm not going to get bent out of shape over it.
How is it offensive?
Y'all, you know what?
That was a Twitter response.
Let me tell you about Twitter.
Let me tell you about why what Elon Musk is doing is important.
Here's why they're freaking out.
The Post Millennial Reports.
Twitter suspends popular anti-woke account after complaint by drag kid's mother.
The video is accompanied by the caption, quote, Pride March goer defends the practice of drag kids getting tips by saying it's a thing in drag culture.
It's the same thing you do with strippers.
Oh.
Okay, that's the problem.
Is that what you're defending?
We don't want kids going to strip shows.
Myth-informed Milwaukee has been banned.
Suspended.
Libby Emmons for the Post Millennial Report's popular account MythInformedMilwaukee was suspended from Twitter after the mother of a trans child complained about a video the group posted to their feed.
The objection to the man on the street style video was that the man referenced Desmond is Amazing, a biological boy who has been socially transitioned and performs as a drag queen.
Desmond was vaulted to fame when video emerged of him performing in drag with and for adults.
Libby!
Libby Emmons, you've come on TimCast IRL.
You know he wasn't performing drag.
He was stripping.
Libby.
We have Libby on the show all the time.
Libby's great.
He wasn't just performing drag.
He was stripping.
I'm gonna say that again.
Desmond is Amazing, little boy, was stripping on stage.
He was on stage, a bunch of men were waving money, and he was pulling off his clothing.
That's called stripping.
To pull a Joe Biden.
You know the whispering.
The video was accompanied by a caption that read, Pride March goer defends the practice of drag kids getting tips by citing it's a thing in drag culture.
It's the same thing you do with strippers.
Yes, that's what we're saying.
Thank you for saying it.
The tweet further explained the video showed another attendee defends public BDSM in full view of children.
Quote, I'm down with the kink with what they said.
They're down with the kink with kids.
I'm not reading that.
It was at the beginning of the clip that an image of Desmond is Amazing was shown.
The man in the street overlaid a news article and a photo of Desmond prior to showing the interviews.
The clip that was disputed was only on the screen for about three seconds.
That image was from a news article, was not particularly or apparently proprietary to person whose image was represented.
In response to the video, the mother of Desmond is Amazing claimed there was a copyright violation in posting the video.
And that violation was that an image of a child was shown.
In a recent Twitter policy, a new guideline was revealed in which a person has ownership of their image regardless of copyright and can request that image be removed.
Really?
So you mean I can go to anyone who ever criticizes me and have that video removed on copyright grounds?
Well, well, well.
What a terrifyingly stupid policy.
Absolutely stupid, but, you know, I suppose that'll only result in more hyperpolarization.
Desmond's mother stated the infringement of copyright was due to the posting of photographs of my child in makeup and costumes.
This is my original copyrighted work that I produced, and or work I legally own the copyright to.
In her defense, she provided a link to a website showing her young child in provocative poses, costumes and garish makeup, entertaining at pride parades and performing with adults for the entertainment of adults.
The child is shown in sexualized poses and outfits, which the mother claims proudly to have produced herself.
Okay.
The photographs span a range of ages, from Desmond's toddlerhood to teen years.
There are additional links on how to book Desmond for appearances, as well as to provide funding for further projects of this nature, and various social media accounts detailing Desmond's journey.
I did not give this person permission to use the copyrighted work or works I own the copyright to, she complained to Twitter, from her position as owner of Haas House of Amazing LLC, which reps the minor child in his performance at Entertainment Endeavors.
These copyrighted works are not available We've had something similar happen to us over here at TimCast.
One of my videos was flagged.
I don't know if it was exactly Desmond.
I think it may have been.
It's been a while.
But we won.
of Desmond was from a news article, which was then shown in a video clip.
Additionally, she said, I did not sign a release for them to use the likeness of my minor child
blah blah blah blah blah.
Twitter suggested that MythInformed could reach out to Desmond's mother and ask for the strike to be lifted, and that this would presumably restore the account.
However, since she was the complainant, it was unlikely that an agreement would be possible in this case.
MythInformed appealed the decision with the help of attorney Ron Coleman, and that appeal is pending.
They have launched a give-send-go to help with legal fees.
The DMCA is meant to protect legitimate copyright in creative works, Coleman told the Post Millennial.
Not restrict free speech.
And while the improper use of DMC takedown notice to censor straightforward news reporting is bad enough, it's a real problem when such abuse results in the suspension of a popular social media account like MythInformed Milwaukee.
Rebel News' Ian Miles Chong brought the matter to the attention of Elon Musk, Twitter's new incoming owner, saying he hopes someone can bring this to Elon Musk's attention.
This is what Twitter does.
The policy to remove people is not a legal standard.
It is Twitter's standard to get rid of ideology they do not like.
Quote.
We believe the DMCA claim is very weak and clearly falls under fair use, Brian Edward of MythInformed told the Postmillennial.
In no way were we trying to get information on Desmond or harass him.
As his mother claims.
And the tweet wasn't even about Desmond.
It was simply a report on Pride in the words of Pride attendees.
MythInformed is a not-for-profit that hosts the event Better Discourse, which brings the divide between cultural opponents and paves the way for open and forthright dialogue.
This ban is one of many recent notable bans of accounts that have reported on Pride, showing attendees speaking in their own words.
You know what it is?
When regular people get access to what's going on at Pride, all of a sudden they don't like what's going on at Pride.
What works.
When big corporations come out and say, we support pride.
And then regular people are like, sounds good to me.
Big parade.
Then you show them videos of pride and you see 45 year old morbidly obese men walking around naked and shaking their butts at people.
That's an exaggeration, mind you.
But you do have morbidly obese older men.
That's true.
You can see those videos.
But there's also a video of a pride parade where a man in a thong walks up to a cop, gets very close to his personal space, and starts twerking and shaking himself at him and laughing.
I mean, that's just wrong.
Don't do that.
Don't get in people's faces and do these things.
That's what they're doing.
The cop backs away, clearly not happy with what's going on.
Now, I've been to many Pride events.
Some of them have been fine.
They've been like festival tables and people have given out buttons, and I'm like, whatever.
And I've also been to Pride parades where people walk around naked, engage in overt acts of sexuality.
I don't want to say, you know, adult acts themselves, But they've done things that are, like, simulated.
We'll put it that way.
I mean, twerking, for instance, is bad enough, but simulated adult sexual activities.
When parents, you know, suburban moms, see this stuff, yeah, that's when they freak out.
This is why they need to remove it.
It's one of the reasons why Twitter is so freaked out, the employees that Elon Musk is taking over.
Because these videos will not be removed once Elon takes the reins.
I'm assuming he will.
Right now, I believe the issue is that in order to get financing, he needs evidence of the amount of bots.
Twitter was denying him this data, and so the financiers were like, we're not going to do it.
Twitter has given up the firehose access to Elon Musk, so it seems like it is a done deal, and we will have an Elon Musk Twitter coming soon.
I wonder.
I wonder if the culture war issues actually play that big of a role in what's happening in this country.
Now, in 2018, I thought the culture war would result in Republicans winning in Congress, in the Senate, in the House.
And it wasn't.
It wasn't enough.
Right now, the economy is so abysmal, it seems like a red wave is all but inevitable.
But with issues like this, you have to wonder why Twitter and other big tech platforms are so quick to ban it.
It wasn't just MythInformed, there was another reporter who was suspended, I think more than one, for simply going to pride and asking people their thoughts.
Think about that.
Libs of TikTok reposts exactly what they do, and the left is freaking out.
Why?
We have viral videos from Zoom classrooms where teachers say, we can't let parents know what we're doing.
Because of these Zoom classrooms, parents actually started hearing what was being taught to their kids, and they did not like it.
There's a culture revolution underway.
That's the easiest way to put it.
There's a political civil war underway at the same time.
So call it what you want.
At the highest level of government, you have the DOJ going after right-wing groups and allowing the left to blatantly violate the law.
Say, protesting in front of a Supreme Court Justice's home.
In schools, they're indoctrinating your kids, and lying to you about what's going on, and trying to pass laws, and in many circumstances actually passing laws, Let's say, teachers cannot inform parents about what's going on with their kids.
Florida pushed back.
The left recoiled by calling it Don't Say Gay, a lie.
Now you see why it's so important that free speech exists?
If Twitter were to ban enough prominent conservative, libertarian, moderate accounts, those who push back on on wokeness, regular people would believe the narrative and the lies.
Twitter desperately wants to keep people inside the matrix and Elon Musk is breaking them out.
And he needs to.
We need this.
Because you'll end up with stories like this.
Ezra Miller is hit with fresh restraining order after pressing up against non-binary child 12, accusing youngster's mom of being a witch, and brandishing a gun after accusing the woman of cultural appropriation.
Ezra Miller is clearly unwell, and he is hiding behind all of this woke garbage to justify his actions.
He's been accused of grooming Brainwashing and kidnapping!
Well, I don't know if kidnapping fits, but that's what people have been saying.
Because the kid he was grooming is now 18.
This is what's happening in this country.
People like Ezra Miller.
And when we come out, be it liberal, moderate, conservative, or whatever, libertarian, and say, yo, this is grooming.
Leftists, the establishment media, and Democrats say, there is no such thing.
Grooming is a slur.
It's not really happening.
But this is your evidence.
Why are they so afraid to show what's going on at Pride?
I say this.
I have an idea.
Here's my recommendation to all of you out there.
If you have a Pride event coming up, something simple you can do.
Bring your phone, a portable battery, and live stream the Pride event.
Don't argue with people, don't insult people, don't talk to people.
Just live stream.
And I'll tell you what.
When YouTube or Twitch, do it on Twitch, when they inevitably take your stream down for breaking their rules by showing explicit activities, then you just say, Twitch is banning Pride.
Because if you didn't ask any questions, you didn't say anything, you didn't insult anybody who just filmed Pride, and then they ban you for it, well, that means they have a problem with Pride now, doesn't it?
You see, this is the thing.
Libs of TikTok is reposting what these people post themselves.
Mythicist Milwaukee is just showing what these people do.
It's fascinating that Desmond is amazing.
The little boy being abused, in my opinion, by his mother.
She produces this media!
And then she gets angry when anyone shares it.
How laughably absurd.
Twitter, of course, sides with her because they want more of that to happen.
That's a difficulty.
You know, when we try talking about these drag kids who are being abused, it's sometimes hard to find these photographs, like the one of Queen Lactatia, a little boy, Lactatia they call him, standing next to what is essentially an adult nude male.
And the little boy is touching the male's arm in a suggestive pose.
These people are pedos and it's disgusting.
We need Elon Musk to get into Twitter so that we can start exposing this.
