Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

June 24, 2022 - Tim Pool Daily Show

01:25:55

BREAKING: ROE V. WADE OVERTURNED, Clarence Thomas Opens Door To END Gay Marriage Next

BREAKING: ROE V. WADE OVERTURNED, Clarence Thomas Opens Door To END Gay Marriage Next Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Participants

Main voices

tim pool

01:22:47

Appearances

Clips

josh hammer

00:31

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Show episode speakers

Speaker	Time	Text
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		Alright, so this is a, uh, typically I don't film these actually live.
		I don't do the live streams on this channel, but this news is so big, that's what we're doing.
		This streaming setup that I use here for my Tim Pool YouTube channel is not set up for live streaming, but we have to do it.
		Normally, I do 10 a.m., 1 p.m.
		on my other channel, but this news is so huge, and there's so much here.
		We've got to break it down, and this is one of the biggest stories of our generation, one of the biggest stories of the past two generations.
		Roe v. Wade has been overturned by the Supreme Court.
		We knew this was coming, but it extends beyond just what we expected.
		First, let me say a bold move.
		Overturning Roe v. Wade on a Friday morning.
		Churches have been warned about the night of rage.
		Over 20 pro-life targets have been vandalized.
		Pregnancy centers, which just provide resources for expecting mothers, have been firebombed.
		And now we have threats and more fear of terror.
		The worst possible day to release this ruling would be on a Friday.
		And a Friday is atypical for the Supreme Court.
		In the majority, Justice Alito basically laid it down.
		There is no constitutional guarantee of a right to abortion.
		It goes back to the states.
		The big news right now, as far as I understand, Having read the concurrence from Clarence Thomas and with statements, I've reached out to some lawyer friends.
		Clarence Thomas is outright saying it is incumbent upon the court to review other Court cases, notably Oberfell, to correct those errors.
		That is basically saying, next in line will be the overturning of gay marriage.
		Not that it will happen.
		Not that this does.
		This ruling will do that, but that they should.
		I'm hearing that other networks and outlets are saying they will not be overturning gay marriage.
		That's not the case, but I think that's just an attempt at toning things down.
		Clarence Thomas basically said these were decided in error and they must be corrected.
		Now, he does say, as does Alito, this will not impact anything outside of abortion.
		But the argument made here and presented forward by the Supreme Court basically says married couples' rights to contraception The right to privacy in adult activities and gay marriage were decided in error.
		I can actually read this stuff for you.
		We've got protests erupting already in front of the Supreme Court.
		Fear of widespread rioting and vandalism and acts of terror throughout this weekend.
		We have the breaking news from TimCast.com.
		My friends, if you haven't already, head over to TimCast.com.
		Become a member.
		Please help support our work and I'll tell you why.
		We got journalists working 24-7 to get these stories out and make sure they are as true and correct as possible.
		As a member, you get access to exclusive segments from the Tim Cast IRL Podcast.
		We're gonna have that live show up at 8 p.m.
		Normally, I don't do these segments live, but this is historical!
		This is one of the most important days of our lives in terms of politics.
		This will go down in history.
		This date will be a major turning point.
		And I don't just mean for abortion.
		I'm also talking about the political conflict in this country and what this could mean for it moving forward.
		So we got a lot to talk about.
		Hence, doing this live.
		Go to TimCast.com, become a member, support our work.
		We're working on documentaries about gun control, the Federal Reserve.
		These are in preliminary stages, and they're very expensive.
		So the more of you who do sign up to support our work, the more capable we will be in producing and expanding more.
		Smash that like button right now.
		Subscribe to this channel.
		Hopefully this stream is working, and I don't know if it is, because I've never done a live stream with this rig right now, but I just had to go for it.
		Here's the breaking news many of you have already seen, but let's go through this and let's go through some of the more pressing statements made in this opinion from TimCast.com.
		The Supreme Court has voted to overturn 1973's Roe v. Wade handing abortion laws back to the states.
		The 79-page opinion was written by Justice Samuel Alito with a separate concurring opinion by Justice Brett Kavanaugh.
		Alito wrote that the Roe court usurped the power to address a question of profound moral and social importance that the Constitution unequivocally leaves for the people.
		Roe was egregiously wrong from the start, Justice Samuel Alito wrote.
		Its reasoning was exceptionally weak, and the decision has had damaging consequences.
		And far from bringing about a national settlement of the abortion issue, Roe and Casey have inflamed debate and deepened division.
		It is time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people's elected representatives.
		The ruling stated, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote that it is time to reiterate his view that the Due Process Clause does not protect a right to an abortion.
	In their dissent, liberal justices Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, and Stephen Breyer wrote, Whatever the exact scope of the coming laws, dissenters write, one result of today's decision is certain.
	American women who have today lost a fundamental constitutional protection, we dissent.
	From row to sorrow, it is truly sad.
	Whatever the exact scope of the coming laws, the dissenter's right, one result of today's
	decision is certain.
	The curtailment of women's rights and of their status as free and equal citizens.
	Chief Justice John Roberts did not join the majority.
	It did not, surprisingly.
	In a concurrent opinion, he wrote that he would not have overturned Roe.
	Instead, only upholding Mississippi's law banning abortion after 15 weeks.
	In Dobbs v. Jackson, women's health organization, the Supreme Court was hearing Mississippi's appeal of a lower court ruling that found the state's 2018 law banning abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy was unconstitutional.
	The law, HB 1510, the Gestational Age Act, banned abortion after 15 weeks except in cases of medical emergencies or severe fetal abnormalities.
	There were no exceptions for cases in rape or incest.
	The day Mississippi's law went into effect, Jackson's Women's Health Organization, which provided abortions through 16 weeks, filed a lawsuit, along with one of their donors, Sasheen Carr-Ellis.
	The lawsuit named State Health Officer Thomas E. Dobbs from the Mississippi State Department of Health and Kenneth Cleveland, Executive Director of Mississippi State Board of Medical Licensure.
	The abortion provider won in lower courts and injunctions were issued to bar the law from being enforced based on the decision in 1992's Planned Parenthood v. Casey.
	Casey struck down the trimester limitations from Roe and instead prohibited states from banning abortion prior to fetal viability, which is typically considered around 24 weeks into pregnancy.
	Mississippi went on to appeal to the Supreme Court and asked them to overturn both Roe and Casey.
	Oral arguments took place in December of 2021.
	Now, let's talk about where this gets particularly interesting.
	In the arguments, I believe it was Clarence Thomas who asked the petitioner, where does it say, or asked the pro-abortion side, where in the Constitution does it say you have a right to abortion?
	The response was the 14th Amendment, equal access under the law.
	Clarence Thomas said, look, when I look at the Constitution, I see the Second Amendment.
	It says the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
	Doesn't say abortion.
	Brett Kavanaugh came in and said, why is this not an issue for legislators, for Congress?
	And you know what?
	I think they're right.
	This is tough.
	This really is.
	I think there needs to be some degree of privacy.
	Most of you know that I lean more towards the traditional pro-choice, which really doesn't exist in modern politics, and that is pre-viability.
	The baby can't survive on its own.
	There's a question of the woman's right to privacy.
	There are important questions pertaining to when life begins and when life is protected.
	It would seem that the Supreme Court's view right now is, You have a right to life and liberty, and just because you're not born, you are still alive, that life must be protected.
	The left takes an approach that, in my opinion, I just don't understand.
	You know, look, I understand there's a difficult moral question around choice, pro-life, etc.
	But I do not understand the argument that life begins after birth.
	That makes no sense.
	My perspective comes down to a procedural, to authority, the rights of what the state can and can't do.
	So, the Supreme Court has basically said they're not prescribing any morality on abortion.
	They're simply saying it's not in the Constitution.
	This is where things get interesting.
	I gotta say, many on the left were 100% correct.
	They said, if Donald Trump wins, Roe v. Wade's gone.
	Many of us, I mean even me, I was like, oh come on!
	They said, if Brett Kavanaugh is confirmed, Roe v. Wade is gone.
	And I'm like, come on.
	I didn't believe it.
	I really, really, truly did not believe it.
	I did not believe that Brett Kavanaugh, that any of these people would have the spine to stand up and say no to this.
	I mean, look at the Bruin ruling.
	This is the gun control issue.
	Brett Kavanaugh came out and said, no, no, the Supreme Court says that, or I'm sorry, he says the Constitution does allow you to require permitting.
	And I'm like, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
	Infringed is defined as curtailed, undermined, or limited.
	Telling a person they need permission from the government to get a weapon sounds like an infringement to me, but that was Kavanaugh.
	I didn't think the ruling would come down today and it did.
	But the left was right when they said this was on the line.
	The next thing they said was Oberfell is next.
	This is the Supreme Court ruling that guaranteed nationwide the right to gay marriage.
	I also didn't believe it, but here we are.
	Now this one, I think, is starting to step a bit too far in terms of cultural issues, but if we're dealing with questions of law, then I'm sorry, I just don't know.
	Look, for a lot of people, we feel that, you know, former Democrats, post-liberal, If you're going to allow a man and a woman to form a union, to have certain tax rights and benefits, that should be extended to all people.
	There are serious questions about the slippery slope.
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 momsforamerica.us today for more information and to secure your exclusive VIP meet-and-greet tickets.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		See you on the tour!
		Let me break that down.
		First, let me explain.
		Over on Twitter, I said, let me just add another holy And I posted this statement from Clarence Thomas in concurrence.
		Let me actually just read for you what he wrote, and this one is huge.
		Clarence Thomas, concurring, writes, The court today declines to disturb substantive due process jurisprudence generally or the doctrine's application in other specific contexts.
		Cases like Griswold v. Connecticut, the right of a married person to obtain contraceptives,
		Lawrence v. Texas, the right to engage in private consensual acts,
		and Oberfell v. Hodges, the right to same-sex marriage, are not at issue.
		The court—so let me just stress, he says, the cases like Griswold, Connecticut, Lawrence, they are not at issue.
		The court's abortion cases are unique.
		See ante at 31, 32, 66, 71, blah blah blah.
		And no party has asked us to decide whether our entire 14th Amendment jurisprudence must be preserved or revised.
		Thus, I agree.
		That nothing in the court's opinion should be understood to cast doubt on precedents that do not concern abortion.
		Okay.
		Nothing in the court's opinion.
		He goes on to say, for that reason, in future cases, we should reconsider all of this court's substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Oberfell, because any substantive due process decision is demonstrably erroneous.
		We have a duty to correct the error established in those precedents.
		After overruling these demonstrably erroneous decisions, the question would remain whether other constitutional provisions guarantee the myriad rights that our substantive due process cases have generated.
		For example, we could consider whether any of the rights announced in the Court's substantive due process cases are privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States protected by the 14th Amendment.
		He goes on to say, to answer that question, we would need to decide important antecedent questions, including whether the Privileges or Immunities Clause protects any rights that are not enumerated in the Constitution, and if so, how to identify these rights.
		That said, even if the Clause does protect unenumerated rights, the Court conclusively demonstrates that abortion is not one of them under any plausible interpretive approach.
		Moreover, Apart from being a demonstrably incorrect reading of the Due Process Clause, the legal fiction of substantive due process is particularly dangerous.
		At least three dangers favor genociding the doctrine entirely.
		So while he is saying outright, this opinion does not address Griswold, Lawrence, and Oberfell, in the future we should because they're in error and should be overturned.
		Now, Reading complex legalese and statements, not my expertise, I called a lawyer.
		I said, tell me I'm wrong about this.
		Because we're hearing reports, Fox News is saying, no, no, no, it doesn't cast doubt.
		Yes.
		Let me stress, there's kind of a two-handed approach happening here.
		It would seem that Thomas is saying this case should not cast doubt on those rulings.
		However, we should reassess those rulings because they are an error.
		It sounds like what he's saying is, he's trying to have it both ways.
		That this ruling, no no no, this ruling's just an abortion.
		No one's asked us to opine on those, but I'm gonna do it anyway.
		I don't know if we'll actually get to that point.
		So I talked to the lawyer buddy.
		He said it's certainly fragile, but it doesn't mean that's actually going to happen.
		It's just that on these grounds, as it pertains to Roe v. Wade, there's questions about these other rulings.
		To put it simply, the Constitution, if they don't guarantee it, you can't say it's a right.
		I find that particularly interesting and it makes sense.
		It should go to legislators and not to the Supreme Court to just decide that something makes sense, therefore it is.
		But there are very serious questions then.
		For a long time, the Supreme Court has legislated from the bench on many issues.
		And it is worrying.
		But many of these issues, I think, are good things.
		I mean, you look at interracial marriage.
		The idea that you could ban that, to me, is insane.
		These miscegenation laws, you couldn't even cohabitate with someone of a different race.
		Where would we be as a country if that remained?
		Is that up to question now?
		I mean, that falls under due process, doesn't it?
		There's nothing in the Constitution that says this, that you have a right to marry someone of a different race, but are we going to see that cast doubt?
		I am not okay with that.
		I'm also not okay with these questions being raised.
		I don't know, man.
		As a legal issue, there are very important questions that need to be answered.
		But let me tell you this.
		When I mentioned before that I've evolved substantially in the past several years on the question of moral jurisprudence and the courts, I've come to realize that there's no such thing as set law.
		What I mean is, Seamus Coghlan of Freedom Tunes.
		We have him on TimCast IRL.
		You're probably a fan.
		You've probably seen him.
	He's much more conservative than I. He's very Catholic.
	He's very pro-life.
	And he said, the left has proven the slippery slope fallacy is a fallacy because it's actually a cliff.
	You go off and you go straight to the bottom.
	He's not wrong.
	The issue is, there is no position by which you stand and say, this is the moral line.
	When we said and we decided that there is a constitutional right to marry who you love, regardless of the law, Many people said, well, that means this, that, or otherwise.
	And we said, no, no, this is our line.
	We agree on this, but not that.
	When Oberville was being decided, many people on the right said, this is a slippery slope.
	What's next?
	Kids in school?
	They're going to be taught about this stuff?
	Okay, maybe.
	But the left said that's not the case.
	My attitude was, no.
	There's a big difference between saying someone can get married to someone they love and schools should be teaching about it.
	But the reality is, it's not digital, it's analog.
	It is not a point-by-point progression, it is a slope and a wave.
	What that means is, it's not a slippery slope, it's progression and advancement and development.
	When you do have a ruling like Obergefell that guarantees gay marriage, then you invariably get parents saying, my kids need to learn about this, don't they?
	Shouldn't schools be teaching about Obergefell and these changes?
	And thus, yes, in schools they do begin teaching about that stuff.
	Now for me, I don't have an issue with that.
	I have an issue with kids in sex ed when they're not ready and parents don't have a right to, you know, don't have access or being denied their right to consent to these kids' access to sex ed and things like that.
	But what then happens is someone says, okay, if you're saying I have a right to marry whoever I love, what about siblings?
	And it's actually now there.
	The issue is, it's not a slippery slope, it's degrees.
	And when you say one thing is okay, then someone else will then entertain.
	If your argument is such, then your principle dictates incest would be allowed as well.
	Morally and principally, that would make sense, wouldn't it?
	But not really.
	Like, we're not okay with that.
	In fact, we want exceptions in the abortion rulings based on those issues.
	So I've come to realize that I don't care for the idea of a slippery slope.
	I acknowledge it as a fact no matter what you do.
	No matter what.
	So if you say gay marriage is okay, you will get arguments in the next degree.
	But just because those arguments exist doesn't mean we allow them to move beyond our moral acceptance.
	So while I would personally say, yeah, you can make those arguments, but no, we do have a hard line.
	We do recognize that's where we said enough.
	We get it.
	Two people love each other and shouldn't be denied based on gender or whatever.
	But now you're talking about siblings?
	Now you're talking about a dad and his daughter?
	Sorry, you're crossing a moral line.
	If we don't stand and defend moral lines, they erode and they cease to exist.
	We've got a statement from Barack Obama who is encouraging more protests.
	From TimCast.com, former President Barack Obama issued statement condemning overturning of Roe calls for people to protest.
	Tweeting, Today, the Supreme Court not only reversed nearly 50 years of precedent, it relegated the most intensely personal decision someone can make to the whims of politicians and ideologues, attacking the essential freedoms of millions of Americans.
	Across the country, states have already passed bills restricting choice.
	I like how they call it choice.
	If you're looking for ways to respond, and he says PPFA, USO Women, Many other groups have been sounding the alarm on this issue for years and will continue to be on the front lines of this fight.
	Join with activists who have been sounding the alarm on abortion access for years and act.
	Stand with them at local protests.
	At a local protest, volunteer with one of their organizations.
	Knock on doors for a candidate you believe in.
	Vote on or before November 8th and every other election.
	Because in the end, if we want judges who will protect all and not just some of our rights, then we've got to elect officials committed to doing the same.
	This is a major play to try and save themselves from the wet red wave coming in November 2020.
	I get it.
	This is the play they've got to make.
	I'm gonna add, because this is a segment being done live, I don't normally do them live, smash the like button, share this video wherever you can, share it with your friends or whatever.
	I'm gonna read superchats.
	So if you haven't already, send in your superchats.
	I will be reading superchats in about maybe 10 or 15 minutes.
	This will be a slightly longer segment.
	I want to get into where I fear we are heading.
	We have this story from the post-millennial.
	DHS warns Catholic churches to prepare for Night of Rage.
	The Department of Homeland Security has shared intelligence with the Catholic Church about a planned night of rage that has been threatened to be unleashed by pro-abortion groups if Roe v. Wade is overturned by the Supreme Court.
	The document, labeled an urgent memo, was released to all clergy by the Diocese of Stockton, California, and states that a DHS agent informed that an extremist group has been calling for attacks on churches the night that the ruling is released.
	It is a Friday night.
	I want to stress this point.
	I covered riots, conflict, and unrest from 2011 until about 2017 or 2018 when I started shifting more into podcasting.
	And it was because, full disclosure, I'd become too recognizable and it was impeding my ability to do the work.
	I can tell you this.
	When major news breaks on a Friday, that is when riots are at their worst.
	If the news was released on a Monday, the activists have a hard time, the extremists have a hard time gathering support throughout the week.
	By Wednesday, the story is old news.
	By Thursday, people are tired.
	And by Friday, people want to go party.
	But riots would still happen.
	When the news breaks on a Friday, it's fresh.
	People are screaming.
	The news cycle is dominated, and the riots are worse than ever.
	Tomorrow, I believe, will be substantially worse, but I legitimately fear very serious acts of terror will be undertaken tonight.
	So please, take care of yourself, be prepared, plan ahead.
	Please stay safe.
	Be careful.
	If you're a church, if you're a pregnancy center, They're going to say at the Post Millennial, while the threats are not specific, DHS agent Jesse Rangel informed the church that large groups with cells nationwide have already been discovered casing parishes, including those in California.
	As such, the diocese issued a critical notice for clergy and further instructed them to develop a plan should you see or hear anything suspicious.
	Make sure you have ushers and or security available during your services and perhaps identify who among you your volunteers and parishioners are law enforcement.
	These threats and intelligence were noted by pro-life activist Lila Rose, who was the founder of Live Action.
	Or is it Live Action?
	I think it's Live Action?
	Live Action?
	I don't know the context of the word.
	I'll stress one more time, too.
	For those that are watching right now, if you superchat, many of you may be, um, disagree with some of my positions and things that I've stated.
	I'll address as many as I can in the superchat.
	So, uh, get your superchats in.
	They do help.
	But most importantly, share this wherever you can.
	Sharing really, really does help.
	Rose expressed her concern that the threats represent the most coordinated and aggressive domestic terror in our nation today, all because extremists are angry that they may not get to kill children in the womb on demand without limit.
	She decries media for not taking these threats more seriously.
	I do, and I think it's very, very important we point these out.
	We have this story from the New York Times.
	As Roe v. Wade has been overturned as of now, 13 states have officially Banned abortion.
	The New York Times.
	Here we go.
	Idaho, Utah, Wyoming, North Dakota, South Dakota, Missouri, Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas, Mississippi, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Texas.
	Thirteen states have so-called trigger laws, which were passed in a year since the Roe decision.
	And explicitly note, they would outlaw abortion within their borders if the Supreme Court allowed it.
	In a few states, Kentucky, Louisiana, Oklahoma, South Dakota, the bans would take effect immediately.
	In other states like Idaho, the ban would go into effect 30 days after the Supreme Court struck down Roe.
	Other states may require certification from state's attorney general or a legislative council for the ban to become law, a process that could take weeks.
	All of these states make exceptions to the ban in the life or health if the woman is in danger, but many do not make exceptions for pregnancies that are a result of rape or incest.
	Five states have a pre-row abortion ban that could be enforced.
	Again, that's Arizona, Wisconsin, Michigan, West Virginia, and Alabama.
	Five states have decade-old abortion laws on the books that were invalidated by the Roe decision, but could be brought to life again through enforcement in each state, though, sorry, remains unclear.
	Okay, so we have a very real threat of terror, of violence, of rioting, and I have to say that I'm...
josh hammer ▲ ● ▼		Hey guys, Josh Hammer here, the host of America on Trial with Josh Hammer, a podcast for the First Podcast Network.
		Look, there are a lot of shows out there that are explaining the political news cycle, what's happening on the Hill, the this, the that.
		There are no other shows that are cutting straight to the point when it comes to the unprecedented lawfare debilitating And affecting the 2024 presidential election.
		We do all of that every single day right here on America on Trial with Josh Hammer.
		Subscribe and download your episodes wherever you get your podcasts.
		It's America on Trial with Josh Hammer.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		I think it's going to get bad tonight.
		I think it's going to get bad tonight.
		A lot of people are saying defend churches.
		You're right.
		Absolutely defend churches.
		Stand up, please.
		We don't want violence, but already we're seeing protests outside of the Supreme Court.
		Many of these people don't even know what they're arguing for.
		They don't know exactly what Roe is about.
		They don't know what their position is, and that's the scariest thing.
		During my time covering these protests and these riots, there's one thing that we would hear a lot.
		Protesters would chant, Yes, the Spanish anti-capitalist chant.
		And you have to wonder why they were chanting it.
		Many of the people marching in New York City didn't know what they were even saying.
		I remember this one story I have to tell where a guy was going, And so I actually said, I walked up, what are you chanting?
		And he's like, oh, I'm just chanting.
		I'm like, what did you say?
		He's like, oh, I don't know.
		They didn't even know they were chanting anti-capitalist.
		Anti-capitalist.
		It was just gibberish to them.
		There's also chants in Spanish like, um, El Pueblo Unido, Hamasera Vencido.
		I'm probably getting that wrong.
		These people don't even speak Spanish, most of them.
		Some of them did.
		But I'm like, do you know what you're saying?
		They're like, no.
		And I'm like, you're marching with groups and you don't even know what you're saying.
		That to me was a worrying wake-up call, but as a reality, I often understood.
		These people don't know what they're protesting.
		We are going to see rage.
		A night of rage, not because of abortion, but because people want rage.
		It's scary.
		So, you know, look.
		We just had this landmark ruling on gun rights.
		Supreme Court said you have a right to keep and bear arms outside the home.
		But we did not get nationwide constitutional carry.
		Kavanaugh reaffirmed a state's right to ban, to require permission.
		And that means you live in New York, you live in these states, you still can't keep and bear arms.
		Not until you get permission.
		No.
		25 states have constitutional carry.
		Let it be.
		Let it be known.
		My prediction here, states that have constitutional carry will see substantially less riding and damage than those that don't.
		And I think it's fair to say, cheap shot.
		It's the blue states that don't have constitutional carry for the most part, and it's the blue states where the blue voters live who are going to go out and burn down their own cities that are blue.
		It's the funny thing to me.
		Now in DC, maybe it's gonna get bad.
		But like New York, Los Angeles, California, we're gonna see Democrats riot in Democrat cities where they defend abortion.
		It's just silly.
		So I'm just like, okay, whatever.
		We got armed guards.
		We have armed security, and we ourselves are armed.
		I'm not super worried about what's gonna happen out in the middle of nowhere.
		West Virginia's gonna be okay.
		I have zero fear that any one of these whack job leftist terrorists are gonna make their way to West Virginia.
		The churches in West Virginia will probably be okay, but I will say, if you're a church, just please keep your eyes and ears open.
		Work with local law enforcement.
		Be prepared.
		Now, for the churches that are in urban areas, that's the scary thing.
		Because you're not able to keep in bear arms.
		And they will likely come after you.
		The warning has been issued.
	So please, do what you can to protect yourselves.
	I genuinely mean that.
	I hope tonight is safe and everyone is safe.
	I hope there's no violence.
	But I legitimately believe there will be violence.
	So here's what I'll do now.
	You know, typically, as I've stated, I don't do these segments live.
	Typically, I do these segments for about a half an hour.
	We got Super Chats that, uh, I don't normally have an opportunity to do here, so, uh, let's take your Super Chats for those that want to get in your comments.
	I've got this weird thing on my screen.
	It says, warning, the stream's bitrate is lower than what I need or something.
	Okay, maybe I'm streaming it.
	I did not set this thing up to stream properly, so... Hopefully it's working, I guess.
	Um, but it's giving me some warning.
	But I'm gonna read your Super Chats, and, um...
	I'm gonna- I know, look, a lot of people are superchatting things that are unrelated.
	Just a superchat.
	I appreciate it.
	I really do want to read potential arguments.
	Arguments that people- if you think I'm wrong.
	Or points I may have missed.
	So I'm gonna try and focus on those and statements pertaining to Roe v. Wade and Casey in the Supreme Court.
	Maplesyrup3219 says, Clarence Thomas has gone fully based.
	Yeah.
	He has.
	I think Clarence Thomas is a genius.
	I genuinely do.
	I think he understands the law.
	I think he understands it better.
	And I think he is one of the most fair and clear-minded justices we have.
	It's remarkable.
	When you see Sotomayor, I think it was Sotomayor, In the Maine ruling, there was a ruling that in Maine, if you're providing tax dollars to private schooling, you can't discriminate on the basis of religion.
	And she said, now our separation of church and state is being dissolved.
	And it's like, there isn't one.
	That's the opinion of the founders, but nothing codified.
	There's no legal separation.
	It's just something we try to do so that we don't discriminate.
	But the Supreme Court ruling in Maine, Separate a church and state.
	They basically said, the state has no right to discriminate on the basis of religion.
	But they don't even know the law themselves!
	Clarence Thomas sees these rulings and he's like, no, no, no, this is what the law is.
	And why?
	Dare I say, Clarence Thomas is the smartest man in government.
	I'm a big fan.
	Now, I may be concerned about his statements on Oberfell or Lawrence or whatever, But if the man's correct on the legal issues and the legal precedent, I don't know what else to say.
	What we need to say then is we need codification through legislation and not through the Supreme Court.
	That's the defense.
	Let's read some more.
	Draft N says the best externality about Roe vs. Wade repeal is how many people must realize that government rights were never a thing until the progressives needed to gaslight the whole country.
	That's right.
	The government doesn't grant you rights, it protects your existing rights.
	That's why in the Second Amendment where it says, the right of the people to keep and bear arms.
	Full stop!
	I don't care about anything else.
	That is a statement asserting it does exist, period.
	Disagree with it, amend the Constitution.
	Outside of the well-regulated militia or otherwise, it literally says the right of the people to keep and bear arms exists.
	There you go.
	Let's read some more.
	Miguel Olvera says, this is a great victory for humankind.
	Please pray for the justices.
	They're likely in serious danger.
	I am legitimately and genuinely worried.
	Hopefully everybody stays safe.
	All right.
	All right, let's, uh, let's, let's, let's... Yellow Fluffy says, whoa, this is a treat like old times.
	Let's see what we got.
	A lot of, a lot of comments.
	I appreciate the super chats for the support, but I'm gonna try and look for, um, statements on SCOTUS.
	Daft N says, this means the foundation for a right to health care, a right to a living wage, and a right to a home, and all these other nonsensical statist power grabs has been broken, and the progressives must start from step one.
	True facts.
	Healthcare cannot be a human right.
	You cannot mandate someone provide their labor to you.
	That's called slavery.
	The state can't force it.
	Access to healthcare?
	Sure, I get that.
	But for the state to give money by taking money from us?
	No.
	It makes no sense.
	This ruling reaffirms this argument that these things are not human rights.
	You do not have a right to a living wage.
	It'll be interesting to see where this goes.
	Alright, let's see what we got.
	People, uh... Alright, alright, alright.
	Matt says, uh, that's for going live.
	Appreciate it.
	Raymond G. Stanley Jr.
	says, Ree!
	Time y'all, Ree!
	That's right.
	We are going to be live at 8 p.m.
	at youtube.com slash TimCastIRL.
	We're going to have Seamus, who's pro-life, a Catholic conservative.
	It's going to be really interesting to hear his thoughts on these.
	And I want to stress, make sure you subscribe to TimCast.com, support our work, really, really do.
	I hope you guys will support us there.
	Subscribe to this channel.
	Subscribe to TimCastIRL.
	Because the conversation we're gonna have tonight is not just going to be about this ruling.
	You've heard my thoughts on it.
	You've heard the news.
	It's going to be about the active rioting that will likely be taking place tonight as we are live.
	I hope not, but I'm just being a realist.
	You know what I mean?
	Tonight, the IRL headline will likely be riots over Roe v. Wade, and we will be discussing these things in real time, showing what we can.
	I hope there's no riots, and I hope we just have an expanded conversation.
	I genuinely and literally mean that.
	I hope that tonight, people wave signs, they yell, and they go home.
	The night of rage is here.
	SparkyWires, thanks for the super chat, I really do appreciate it.
	Orville Redenpiller says gay marriage being banned after this is a slippery slope.
	You see, this is the point I was making about there's just degrees.
	Slippery slope.
	You don't need to say it.
	When Roe v. Wade is overturned, the next argument in line will be Oberfell.
	And otherwise, it's a fact.
	Tracy M. says the federal government does not belong in marriage decisions.
	It should be up to individual states.
	It's interesting, because I don't see the argument against it.
	States are the ones who pass the laws.
	You know, I was talking to someone about why isn't, you know, there's no federal murder law.
	The federal government doesn't have jurisdiction over these issues, the states do.
	In which case, it extends to basically everything else.
	And then likely, we could theoretically go back to a pre-Loving v. Virginia, which I don't want to see.
	Now, I think we're well beyond those times.
	I don't think miscegenation laws will ever come back.
	Culture changed.
	But I think it's possible those same arguments would reach that interracial marriage decisions.
	So I'll stand corrected.
	You know, I'll put it this way.
	I don't think it goes there because our culture is just well beyond this.
	Even Obergefell.
	You know, I was talking to, called up a lawyer, and they told me, look, it's fragile, Obergefell.
	But to get the Supreme Court justices on board in that direction?
	Man.
	You're dipping far, far back.
	I'm not sure, but Roe v. Wade was.
	The issue is Oberfell is not really culturally challenged as much.
	Roe v. Wade has never, never settled.
	The pro-choice and pro-life have always fought this.
	Oberfell, even Donald Trump came out and unfurled a rainbow flag.
	But we'll see, we'll see.
	Michael Lopez says civil war would break my heart, but fascist dictatorship would break my spirit.
	I hope there is a third option, maybe if Trump does things right this time.
	Yeah, man.
	Mark Shapcott says 60 million Americans to him.
	Imagine how strong the U.S.
	would be today.
	How many of those babies would have had children since Roe?
	The U.S.
	would be a superpower.
	Roe was the fall of the American empire.
	Yeah, my friends, but I also want to point out, I don't like the political argument there because the people who would have been born would have been born to liberal parents.
	Conservatives are not likely to have abortions and they're more likely to have kids.
	Liberals and progressives are more likely to abort, less likely to have kids for those reasons.
	GN says, Obama inciting violence.
	Create a select committee.
	Yeah, man.
	Yep, yep, yep.
	Alright, let's scroll down.
	Bro Cody says, liberals need to calm down.
	We're not coming for their abortions.
	We just want common sense abortion control.
	I get it.
	I get it.
	Punksnotdead says, saw your billboard off I-88 today and got a bad picture of it.
	If you want it, keep up the good work.
	Really do appreciate it.
	Katie says, are you going to do a segment on the Senate passing the gun control bill or just do a segment here?
	This is tough.
	You know, let me level with you guys.
	I did a segment this morning.
	It was very serious and the viewership just tanks to zero because Roe v. Wade was overturned.
	One of the most significant historical moments of our lifetimes.
	So instead of doing my TimCast segment at 4, 4 p.m., I did a live stream now because this is the biggest issue.
	I don't know if it will be the best plan in terms of timing for making posts or anything like that, but I think this is it for my morning show.
	I'll put this up as the podcast with the questions and everything.
	I don't think I'll have any more segments for the Tim Pool Daily Show, which is a podcast on iTunes, Spotify, and we'll just get ready for our TimCast IRL live stream at 8 p.m.
	tonight.
	So, stay tuned for that.
	During IRL, we'll talk about gun control because it seems like the House is going to codify the gun control bill and I'm livid.
	I'm really pissed off about it.
	Really pissed off.
	All right, Jay Gez says, it's a shame that such a morally gray issue is being treated as the simplest black and white issue by both sides.
	It is tough.
	It really, really is.
	We've had many conservatives who fall in the traditional pro-choice camp, but are finding themselves against the left because the left is just pro-abortion.
	Yo, I— With all my heart opposed.
	Abortion at beyond viability.
	And I think there need to be restrictions.
	And I look at Europe.
	12 weeks is typically where they end it.
	I am not a fan of abortion at any capacity.
	I am not a fan of abortion at one week.
	Period.
	However.
	I have libertarian qualms.
	I have questions that are deep moral questions about government's ability to make certain mandates about a person, you know, giving their body to somebody else.
	The viability question is that if the baby can live, you shouldn't be able to just kill it.
	If the baby can't live, there's a question about how we handle this, and I gotta be honest, I am not the arbiter of morality, and I often don't have strong moral positions on these things because I just don't know.
	I really don't know.
	I really don't, man.
	I try, but I am not a priest.
	I am not a philosopher.
	I am not a genius.
	I am just a dude who reads the news and tries to understand the facts as presented, and I want to hear the arguments.
	I typically fall in the pro-choice camp, which is, within a certain period, it's at the woman's discretion because it is a very difficult question to answer.
	But at Viability, I have very serious questions about it.
	So, as long as the left wants to advocate for abortion up to nine months, they will not have my vote.
	And if that means I end up voting for the pro-life banning abortions, that's what you're going to get.
	And it's like, the crazy thing is, you know, we had the progressive on TimCast IRL say to me, he's like, you're siding with the pro-life, you want to ban abortion?
	And I'm like, no, I don't.
	I don't want to ban abortion at all.
	I don't know how I feel about Roe v. Wade being overturned from a state's issue.
	I get it.
	But I will tell you this.
	The left came out, and they started championing abortion.
	That freaked me out.
	The left came out, praising it.
	No, I was always told, and I always believed, it's a bad thing.
	But sometimes, there are questions beyond our... There are deep, moral ethical questions that we have difficulty answering.
	Safe, legal, and rare.
	Safe.
	Doctors should be able to perform it.
	They shouldn't worry about their harm.
	There should be safe procedures for the women.
	Legal, meaning the government should not be intervening in certain circumstances.
	And rare, it should not be happening.
	It should be in limited circumstances.
	Limited.
	Very limited.
	The idea that the left would come out and say that a woman can abort a baby that could survive on its own is outright just saying, kill it.
	No dice.
	I will never stand with that.
	So if I'm looking at Seamus Coghlan, and he says we should ban it outright nationwide, I'll be like, okay.
	And then we're looking at someone on the pro-abortion side saying we should be able to kill it whenever we want.
	I'm like, Seamus, I'm gonna sign your paperwork.
	Because the idea that a baby could live and then you would justify the woman's choice when you could deliver the baby.
	The Democrats tried codifying a bill that would allow the termination of the life at any point if the woman was in danger.
	My question was, simply to the progressives, if the woman's life is in danger, And the baby is viable, meaning it can live.
	Why not just deliver the baby?
	I don't think that's a trick question.
	I think it's a legitimate and simple question.
	You know, there is one thing I didn't pull up that I should pull up, and it's that Mike Pence praises Supreme Court's abortion as his saying life won, and goes on to say, let me read this, he says, By overturning Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court of the United States has given the American people a new beginning for life, and I commend the justices for the decision.
	By returning the question of abortion to the states and to the people, the Supreme Court has righted a historic wrong and reaffirmed the right of the American people to govern themselves.
	At the state level in a matter consistent with their values and aspirations.
	Uh, he, uh, Pence also called on abortion opponents to continue their work to ban abortion access in all states.
	Having been given the second chance at life, we must not rest and must not relent until the sanctity of life is restored to the center of American law in every state.
	Calling for nationwide.
	But, at the state level.
	That's huge, man.
	Some people say, I see the, I see the comments, Tim Pool, fence-sitter, you betcha!
	And it's because I don't think I'm smarter than you, I don't think I'm better than you, and I don't, I don't think I can decide for you, I just don't know.
	I don't know!
	I do not want to be a judge.
	I do not want to be a politician.
	I do not want to be a priest.
	I do not want to be an arbiter of morality.
	Some things, I think, are true based on the Constitution.
	My position on guns changed not because I had an epiphany that, like, I want guns.
	I did not go out, shoot guns, and be like, this is fun!
	My position changed because people made the point.
	Tim, we have rules in this country, the Constitution.
	We all agreed to them when this country was founded.
	Not everyone did.
	But that's too bad.
	The Constitution prescribes what the government can and can't do.
	And then I said, you're right.
	I don't have the right to unilaterally and arbitrarily change the rules in the Constitution.
	Personally, I don't think people should have nuclear weapons.
	I think that's scary.
	But as Clarence Thomas said, 2A defends your rights to all arms, not just the ones that existed in the 18th century.
	Now, I don't know if they went on to actually say you get nukes, but my position is simply I do not have the right to supersede your rights.
	So when it comes to abortion, I typically fall in a weak moral position.
	Because I don't know.
	I don't know.
	When the left comes out and says, you can kill a baby if the mom's sick, I'm just like, what?
	That makes no sense!
	And then they lie.
	I think it was, what was her name?
	Kathy Tran in Virginia, who said there's no restrictions up to the point of birth.
	It's Colorado, no restriction on abortion.
	Nine months, baby's about to be born and they kill it?
	Sorry, I'm not playing that game.
	They come out and tell me, Tim, that's exceedingly rare, that doesn't happen, don't know, don't care.
	It's rare, it doesn't happen.
	That's insane.
	Just because you think it doesn't happen, and that may be correct, doesn't mean you should make it legal.
	Let's read some more, let's read some more.
	And maybe I'll keep this going for another 15 minutes or so.
	Heavy Duty says, I live here outside of Los Angeles and I'm not sure if the violence will reach over here, but if anyone is here in the country of LA, contact me to set up a protection group for our churches.
	Guys, I want to say this, protect your churches, please.
	Your pregnancy centers, protect them.
	I don't care if you're pro-life, pro-choice, whatever, please no violence.
	If you are protecting your churches, please get legitimate security training, talk to your law enforcement, Here's what we don't want to see.
	If you have a church and you have armed guards in your church, please make sure they are trained to the best of their abilities.
	The last thing we want are far-left lunatics romping around banging on doors and getting shot.
	If a psychotic leftist tries to attack, defend yourself with every legal option available to you.
	But my point is, it will be bad for everyone if anyone loses their lives, left or otherwise.
	You don't want it, you don't, we don't want it.
	We don't want it.
	But I'll tell you what.
	If they come a-knockin' with firebombs and weapons and they seek to end life, I fully expect and respect anybody who would seek to defend themselves from these violent assaults because it's the left that has been aggressing.
	Hopefully, though.
	It doesn't come to that.
	What I'm seeing on Twitter are many people on the left that are saying the right is gearing up for violence.
	Why?
	They won!
	It's a lie.
	Alright.
	Gunn-Griffin says during the first Civil War, the war was not militia versus government.
	Lee was the commander of the Union Army, and Sherman commanded Louisiana War College.
	The war was fought by American-Mexican vets and West Point graduates on both sides.
unidentified		That's right.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		That's right.
		Honestly, I don't know.
		I didn't think we'd come to this point.
		If the Supreme Court does take another look at those other cases in the future, do you
		think that guarantees they would be overturned or could some cases be refined, clarified,
		but still stand?
		Honestly, I don't know.
		I didn't think we'd come to this point.
		I'm not a legal expert, so when the ruling came down and I was reading the concurrence
		from Thomas, I called a lawyer.
unidentified		Thank you.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		I'm not a lawyer.
		Maybe we can make a last-minute phone call and get a lawyer in for IRL tonight.
		I think we might be able to do it.
		We should probably do it.
		I'll make a phone call once I wrap this stream up.
		Let's grab some more Super Chats and keep it going for another 10 or so minutes.
		Brian says, with Clarence being based, hopefully the infringements on 2A will finally get corrected.
		I agree, but Kavanaugh is not based.
		I've disagreed with Kavanaugh on a bunch of stuff.
		I've talked about this.
		I was reading about Kavanaugh when he was getting confirmed, and my understanding is that he took the position that the government can spy on metadata.
		I'm not a fan.
		I'm not a fan.
		Not a fan.
		Not a fan.
		People are saying, Viva Frye!
		I don't know if Viva's close enough to where we're at, but I'll reach out.
		It would be amazing to get Viva and Barnes right back on the show right now.
		It would be really amazing.
		There and back again.
		Texas AG just announced abortion is illegal in Texas.
		Well.
		Greg Berho says, Obama calling for protests without saying peaceful after years of leftist violence is a call for violent protests.
		I agree with that.
		I do.
		Caleb Sherd.
		If we do go into an authoritarian regime, there will be pockets of resistance living in Texas.
		I believe secession is the only way forward.
		America has fallen and needs change.
		But I'm also millennial, so maybe I'm biased.
		Yeah, man.
		I hear you.
		OP says, if they support aborting even at nine months, ask them why they don't support aborting people after they're born.
		I got news for you, man.
		They've already talked about it.
		In Virginia, you saw the statement from Governor Northam when he was governor.
		He said, the baby will be delivered, it will be made comfortable, and then a decision will happen between the doctor and the mother about what to do next.
		Wow.
		Yeah, that's really, really creepy stuff, man.
		You know, I don't know where all this leads to.
		It's impossible to predict, right?
		All right, let's see.
		Sage News Live says, I would like to debate you on this.
		Are you up to it?
		I don't debate people!
		So tomorrow, in New York City, we will be at the Festival of Ideas at the Beacon Theater.
		Go to festival.minds.com.
		And I'm on a panel with Tulsi Gabbard, James O'Keefe, Ben Burgess.
		And this Ben fella, I'm not super familiar with him, he announced why he was debating me and James and Tulsi.
		And I'm like, I wasn't aware I was debating anybody and I'm pretty sure I'm not debating anybody.
		I was like, you know, somebody asked me, I'm like, it's a panel discussion.
		I'll have a conversation with anybody.
		And I say anybody, I'll put it this way.
		There are some people who are grifters, legitimately, who are proven to be, and when you invite them to have a conversation, all they do is try and WWE the show.
		TimCast IRL tries to be serious.
		We try to be serious but also make jokes and laugh and have a good time, but you can be serious and you can be funny.
		What we don't try to do is WWE style like, oh, SmackDown, you know, whatever nonsense.
		I'm not, I'm not, I'm not into that.
		So there are some people who want to come on the show and all they're really trying to do is generate clicks.
		Sorry, I'm not interested in that.
		Andrew Biko says, My hard line.
		Marriage is an institution for couples that can naturally reproduce and care for their young.
		Marriage was never about love.
		It's about reproduction and wealth transfer.
	That's correct.
	It can change.
	But the issue there with marriage is that it provides legal protections.
	And so perhaps you could argue the state should not give any protections based on marriage.
	And then I would agree with you.
	If the state said, There's no alimony, there's no child support, none of that.
	I'd be like, okay.
	Then, you know, then marriage should not be under, you know, there should not be gay marriage.
	But the government does mingle Abrahamic tradition with state.
	You know, the left wants to talk about the separation of church and state, I gotta tell you right now, then end marriage protections.
	Because marriage is an Abrahamic institution.
	Not completely, obviously other cultures have marriage that function similarly, like with dowry and stuff, like it used to.
	But it is an institution of the church that you go in and swear before God your religious vows.
	If you want to create something under the state, it should not be through the church.
	So there is an intermingling there.
	All right.
	Daftun says, I share concern with gay marriage overturns, but a consistent cohesive legal structure is more important than an inconsistent arbitrary one.
	And sir, you are correct and I agree.
	We need to understand the laws by which we are living and the rules by which we agree.
	Otherwise, this country falls apart.
	Hank the Hokage Hill.
	Hey Tim, not having a good day today.
	Dog of 11 years just died.
	But this news helps a bit.
	Rip Owen, 2011 to 2022.
	I'm sorry to hear it, man.
	One of the most brutal and painful moments of my life.
	More than once.
	Watching your dog pass.
	It's sad, man.
	It is brutal.
	And the pain never goes away, for those that know it.
	And I know it's just a dog.
	I know sometimes with loved ones, it's with people.
	It's even worse.
	But that pain of losing a dog, you know why the pain of losing a dog can be so much worse sometimes?
	You know, people can let you down.
	And there's often times that I've heard of people dying, and I've been sad.
	And I mourn the loss of human life.
	But watching more than one dog die was so much more brutal, in some ways, than some people.
	And the reason is, my dog never let me down.
	He was faithful, he was loyal, he stood by my side and my family's side, ready and willing to defend us at a moment's notice, listening, providing love and never questioning, and that loyalty being ripped from your heart.
	But that pain is a good thing, you know?
	Whenever you think back and you feel that pain, I appreciate it.
	You know why?
	Because the pain, the stronger it is, is a representation of the strength of the love you had for your pet, for your loved one.
	And it's a good thing, man.
	I think, you know, you feel the pain.
	It's, you know, you hear that and you're saddened by it because you don't want people to hurt.
	But I like the pain.
	And I'll say it one more time.
	When I remember my dog and loved ones that have passed and I feel that pain, I remind myself that the stronger the pain is, the more it is a representation of the power of the love I felt for them.
	And so I appreciate it because the worst thing in the world would be a loved one dying and you feeling nothing and not hurting at all.
	That pain is a good thing.
	It reminds you of why we protect those we care about and why we stand by their side.
unidentified		Alright.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Let's grab a few more Super Chats.
		Fairfrozen says, Lawyers in Virginia area.
		DUI guy and Law and Number both have YouTube presence.
		Both were huge during Dep Herd trial.
		Hit them up and invite them.
		They might be available.
		Both are lawyers.
		We do have D.C.
		area lawyers, a couple of them, that I'm going to reach out to, people we've had on the show before, prominent individuals that I think can provide us with a really good breakdown of this.
		Not just lawyers, too, but legal experts.
		So people who might not work in law, I'm sorry, aren't practicing lawyers, but have extensive background in research and understanding law, too.
		So we'll see what we can do.
		High Council says, How the hell is marriage not a secular institution?
		It's been one for 200 years.
		Also, Thomas opened the door to end the right to privacy and contraception.
		Marriage isn't children.
		How come infertile can get married or the elderly?
		I agree.
		What I'm saying is marriage in the church has traditionally emerged in this practice, and we need to separate it.
		That's my point.
		If the goal is to codify gay marriage and the right of infernal and all of these things, then we need to assert marriage beyond the Abrahamic institution, and churches should be separated from it.
		That means churches have a right to deny anybody for any reason, because the state should not interfere with the practice of religion.
		There's also equal question in what the church of Satan can do then.
		Fine!
		I get it.
		Okay.
		I'm not arguing against that.
		A lot of people are like, Satanists should open up a religious school in Maine, and then have Drag Queen Story Hour as a religious practice so the state's forced to pay for it, and I'm like, okay!
		You're not hearing me arguing about it.
		I'm just saying, parents should have a right to choose.
		The parents can choose to go to your private school or not.
		DJ Linkle says, look up the Battle of Athens, Tennessee, 1945.
		That's right.
		Ryan E. says, salt mines are open!
		Thank you, Ryan.
		I appreciate it.
		Grim Reaver.
		Perhaps the perfect compromise between sides is that the government withdraw from the topic of marriage and childbirth, child rearing, and education altogether.
		I'm saying maybe that's the answer.
		Orgook Silverbeard says, I live in Central PA and turn 21 in six days.
		I'll be carrying in church, but sadly my job prohibits associates carrying on property.
		I might not agree with it, but I will follow it grudgingly, mind you.
		I hear you, man.
		So, the Festival of Minds is tomorrow.
		I'm really excited for this.
		It's going to be a lot of fun.
		I've actually spoken with her family in the past.
		I was a big supporter of her campaign.
		I think she's fantastic and she represents what we need.
		From the, you know, post-liberal side.
		She's become better on gun rights.
		She just defended the two-way decision from the Supreme Court.
		Mad respect to Tulsi.
		And so I'll be excited to meet her.
		I'll be on a panel with her talking about media manipulation.
		The festival's gonna be safe because we got crazy security.
		And it's the Beacon Theater.
		It's a historic theater.
		I think we'll be okay.
		But it's interesting to say nonetheless.
		So I hope to see you all there.
		There's a VIP event for those that get VIP tickets.
		If you can't afford it, on the website at festival.minds.com is a free ticket option.
	If you can't afford it, you can submit and let them know you really, really want to come.
	And we're hoping to pack the house.
	It's 3,000 seats.
	It's not just about selling tickets.
	It's an expensive event to put on.
	I'm not involved in any organization at all.
	They just asked me to be there.
	But I hope we can make the statement in Packing the House that people care about these ideas and want to have these conversations.
	All right.
	Austin Thomas says, Tim, I live in the Tampa area and there are, it's okay to say gay billboards scattered across the state.
	Are you sure billboards can't be political?
	Political means advocating for politicians or against politicians.
	You can make statements.
	So when we did the Taylor Lorenz thing in Times Square, we couldn't advertise anything on it.
	Mandy Diaz say, the pendulum is starting to swing.
	This has been a long time coming.
	Protect your houses of God, everyone.
	I'm in Orlando, so I think I'm good.
	Janos says, hi Tim, glad to catch you live from Poland for once.
	SCOTUS did you a solid.
	They'll draw protests away from the event.
	That's true.
	Maybe people are gonna be, actually, really good point.
	They're gonna be driving down to Washington DC at a time when I'm leaving DC!
	So, uh, when everyone from New York is going to DC to protest, I'll be in New York!
	Away from DC.
	We're really close to DC.
	I live relatively close to where, um, to where Brett Kavanaugh lives.
	So that's scary stuff.
	Let's grab just one more Super Chat.
	The Meaning of Nerds says, Hey Tim, I remember a few weeks ago where you talked about buying and releasing shows through Timcast that are struggling with getting their breakthrough.
	I emailed you about that sometime back, but not sure you received it.
	Let me know.
	Yeah, what we're trying to do...
	Two-fold.
	We're looking for shows that show good work ethic, a smart mind, a good body of work, but aren't that big yet for two reasons.
	One, I'd love to bring under the Timcast umbrella prominent shows, but they're very expensive.
	Two, I don't need to.
	You know, people who are prominent are prominent.
	Good for them.
	But there are people who are good who need assistance, and I think it's a really great business opportunity to find that diamond in the rough and then be like, look, we're going to kick you in the butt and advance your career by five years by launching your show.
	It's a very smart idea.
	We make money on it.
	You make money on it.
	We're very, um, I make the joke that over at Timcast, we're very, um, socialist and communist because we do excellent pay structures.
	Cause I'm not, I'm not in this for the profit.
	My show, Timcast IRL and Tim Pool Daily make great money.
	I'm doing all right.
	And it's all thanks to you guys.
	So when we bring people on and have them do their own shows, obviously we got to cover our costs and we want to make a profit, but I want to see the people who do the work, make the bulk of the money.
	All right.
	Denny Decibel says... All right, we're getting one more in.
	Tim, you're wrong about separation of church and state.
	Look up David Barton of WallBuilders for details.
	He is a U.S.
	historian.
	All right.
	Will do.
	Will do.
	I am entirely open to the fact that I'm wrong because I think I'm wrong a whole lot, my friends.
	Thanks for tuning in to this special breaking news edition of YouTube.com slash TimCast.
	I gotta be honest.
	I might start doing more of these live because, to put it simply, it's easier.
	It's easier and it's better normally I put these videos up at 4 p.m.
	But this was a major breaking historical moment.
	So I Appreciate all of you tuning in we had like 27 28,000 people tune in 25,000 Wow Absolutely amazing.
	I really do appreciate it guys Rivaling almost Tim cast RL Subscribe to YouTube.com slash TimCastIRL.
	We're going to try to get a lawyer on.
	I believe Seamus will be on, who is a Catholic conservative, to give his thoughts on this.
	I'm going to try to get a lawyer to come in.
	We do have guests scheduled.
	This should be very, very interesting.
	So, thank you all so much for supporting the work we do here.
	For subscribing to this channel.
	If you could, please share this video anywhere you can.
	It really, really does help.
	And I will see you all at 8pm.
	Thanks for hanging out.
	Yesterday, I think we got one of the biggest stories in modern politics, and it was the DOJ, it was the FBI raid on former Trump DOJ official Jeffrey Clark.
	Now, he appeared on Tucker Carlson to talk a bit about what had happened, and it's one of the, I guess, most troublesome and worrying stories.
	And it had me thinking about, are we entering the Stasi period?
	Are we entering the SS period?
	Has the Enabling Act already happened?
	Are we beyond Weimar Germany?
	How bad is it really?
	And the question is, is there going to be a civil war or is there going to be an authoritarian, fascistic takeover?
	It's funny that so many people on the left claimed that fascists were taking over because of Trump, and it's actually the Democrats that are raiding their political opponents.
	For those that didn't see the story, and you should, and you should share this, Jeffrey Clark was a Trump DOJ official.
	Donald Trump made claims about the 2020 election.
	Jeffrey Clark was one of the few people who said, OK, let's take a look into it.
	On the left, they're saying that he was trying to help Trump with his schemes to overturn the election.
	It's quite amazing how the framing has transformed.
	In the early days following the 2020 election, there were a lot of questions about the constitutionality of certain voting procedures because there were lawsuits.
	Now, in my view, those are legal questions that have yet to be answered, and they should be.
	Texas filed a lawsuit against Pennsylvania and several other states.
	The Supreme Court refused to hear the case, so they've not been resolved.
	Many of the lawsuits that were filed were dismissed on standing, not merit.
	Standing means the court said, you don't have the right to file.
	Merit would mean, is the argument true and correct?
	No, I don't agree with Trump's narrative on voter fraud.
	I don't.
	And a lot of people, I've had a lot of discussions with Congressman Troy Nails on the show.
	I'll put it this way.
	When the procedures are changed through either an executive making a decree that must be challenged because it needs to go through the legislature.
	That's what Texas was suing for.
	When Republicans and Democrats team up in Pennsylvania to push universal mail-in voting, which is later deemed unconstitutional, which happened.
	That is procedural.
	And that's where they get you.
	Tricking you into thinking... Look, I'm just gonna say this, man.
	I know a lot of Trump supporters, they don't want to hear it.
	They don't think Biden got the votes.
	And I just... I gotta tell you, man.
	They filled the Venice skate park with sand.
	Okay?
	The Venice Beach skate park was full of sand.
	And I knew skateboarders who don't know, don't care.
	They don't want to talk about politics.
	They don't care about politics.
	But what do you think happened when they showed up to their skate park and it was full of sand?
	Do you think they went, I'm going to take it up with the mayor?
	Or do you think when they said, why is this happening?
	And the response they got was, it's Trump's leadership during COVID.
	They told you couldn't leave your home.
	They took away your movies.
	They took away your sports.
	They got people to vote for Joe Biden.
	There's a lot of questions.
	You know, there's the 2000 Mules documentary.
	Yeah, I think there's questionable things that need to be investigated.
	But here's the issue.
	There's a supercut video.
	Someone tweeted it to Harmeet Dhillon, a lawyer, showing Democrats repeatedly saying over the past 20 some odd years that the elections were stolen from them.
	And that's it.
	They say it, nothing happens.
	You had members of the House trying to stop Donald Trump's victory, trying to stop George W. Bush's victory, claiming it was being stolen, and it was wrong.
	I mean, George W. Bush and Gore, I mean, Bush v. Gore or whatever, I think it's crazy.
	The Supreme Court intervened, and then they said it was unfair, it was biased, blah, blah, blah.
	You know, I don't care about who you think should have won.
	I'm done with this.
	For one, we should focus on the midterms coming up right now.
	Two, we should focus on 2024.
	And a lot of people want answers.
	I can respect that.
	We did not get clarification because the lawsuits were never, the merits were never heard, the arguments were never heard.
	And that includes constitutionality and fraud.
	Okay, fine.
	I think we need to make sure we have confidence in the elections.
	But this story is something else.
	Joe Biden is using the Department of Justice to crush anyone who opposes the Democratic establishment.
	And this is one of the scariest stories.
	I'll tell you, man.
	Enrique Tarrio, chairman of the Proud Boys, former.
	He gets out of jail.
	We have him on the show.
	What happened?
	What's going on?
	What happens?
	They charge him with seditious conspiracy.
	I'm like, wow!
	And that's crazy!
	Alright, maybe, I guess.
	But, we'll see what happens.
	Innocent until proven guilty.
	I don't think that, and again, I could be wrong, but I just don't see it.
	I mean, the Proud Boys?
	They're a bunch of doofy dudes.
	It was like a joke made up by Gavin McInnes, but okay.
	I see that and I'm like, I don't trust it.
	Innocent until proven guilty.
	Show me what evidence you have.
	Peter Navarro.
	He comes on the show, a former Trump administration official.
	He comes on TimCast IRL.
	He gets charged with contempt of Congress and shackled.
unidentified		Wow.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		We've had Steve Bannon on the show.
		He's also been arrested and charged.
		We had Jeffrey Clark on the show.
		Now, Jeffrey Clark was not a booked guest.
		He came down with another person we had booked.
		And we ended up having him on the show to talk about legal issues surrounding copyright.
		Nothing overtly political, but we did talk politics for sure.
		And now I'm just sitting here, I'm looking at this like, You know, we've talked with these people.
		These are not violent insurrectionists.
		Peter Navarro, a Trump administration official?
		Steve Bannon, a former Trump administration official?
		Jeffrey Clark?
		The Feds are going after Trump supporters.
		Yo, this is, um...
		This is that moment, you know, and I've been talking to friends.
		At what point do you question whether or not you are safe in your own country?
		And if you have questions over the election, you're allowed to.
		The Constitution prescribes for how we deal with these issues.
		In 1876, there was a committee that decided the presidential election because there was a fear of civil war.
		Today, we have the reckless behavior that brings us towards Civil War.
		You see, after the Civil War, the South lost.
		There was Reconstruction.
		There was still conflict.
		Juneteenth is the holiday in which it was, I believe, two or three years after the end of the Civil War.
		After slaves were supposed to be freed, people still kept them in Texas.
		So federal authorities had to go and free them.
		And that was the day slavery finally ended.
		And that's why they say we're supposed to be celebrating this day.
		And I respect it.
		You know, we need, uh, we celebrate freedom.
		Slavery was bad.
		I totally respect that.
		However, the Reconstruction period was not good, and it lasted a long time.
		In 1876, the election was contested.
		Accusations of fraud.
		Alternate slates of electors were being sent.
		So, Democrats and Republicans came together and said, we cannot have another Civil War.
		What do we do?
		They came to an agreement.
		A committee agreed on who would be the president, thus effectively ending Reconstruction.
		It's kind of crazy.
		Democrats have consistently challenged the electoral vote.
		In 1960, Hawaii sent alternate electors to the government, even though the state had been certified for the Republicans.
		Richard Nixon ultimately said, I'm gonna go with the unofficial results from the Democrats.
		Well, it was because there was a court case.
		The courts heard the case and said, OK, in the end, by the deadline, Democrats get it.
		So the Nixon's like, OK.
		In this instance, the courts didn't bother hearing these cases.
		Well, I think they hate Donald Trump.
		This is the scary reality that I think will fracture confidence in our elections.
		Donald Trump, many say, that his victory in 2016 made them realize the elections are legit.
		You can win.
		You know, growing up, my generation, at least the people I knew, no one believed the elections were real.
		I'm not kidding.
		I can't name a single person in my generation, growing up, I shouldn't say, you know, the other people I know, obviously, who genuinely believed the elections were real.
		And what I mean by that is, there's varying degrees.
		Most of my friends on the South Side of Chicago, more punk rock, were just like, the game's all BS.
		It's all lies, cheating, and stealing.
		And this varies in some people thinking it was just the Illuminati controlling things because, you know, people believe conspiracies.
		But other people just believe that it is a money game.
		It is a wealth game.
		And it's a big club and you ain't in it.
		I mean, George Carlin said that.
		It's a big club and you ain't in it.
	Same big club they used to beat you over the head with.
	And so the idea is, if you're not in the club, if you don't have access to the money, you're not getting on the ballot.
	You're not in the party.
	The establishment owns the system.
	You take a look right now with Robbie Starbuck.
	He's as Republican as a Republican gets.
	They kicked him off the ballot.
	This is shaking confidence in the elections.
	I want people to go out and vote.
	I want to see that red wave in November.
	I'm not really confident though.
	Seeing this, you look at the polls right now, and Civics has this poll.
	Which party better represents the interests of the people or your interests?
	And among the younger generation, it is neither.
	The number one polling is Democrats, followed by neither party.
	Followed by Republicans.
	Republicans just sold us out on gun control.
	They voted, 15 Republicans voted in favor of funding red flag laws and expanding background checks and all this other garbage and they lie about it.
	Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia, I hope she's as famous as we can make her because she is a Republican in the second most Trump-supporting state who sold us out.
	I'm not going to forget it.
	But I'll tell you, right now watching what they're doing to Trump supporters, I am not confident in the elections moving forward.
	I think the United States is broken beyond repair.
	I don't know if that means civil war, but it certainly means something bad is going to happen.
	Very bad.
	The SPLC put out that study, that survey that we talked about on IRL, showing that the younger generation, a third and up, believe in political assassinations and revolution.
	And that's only going to get worse.
	And you know what?
	It really does make sense when you look at the housing market, when you look at wealth distribution.
	Let me show you this right here.
	CNBC financial analyst Jim Cramer, who's worth over $100 million, says Gen Z is broke because they buy too many $14 margaritas at his Brooklyn bar and don't invest enough cash in the stock market.
	It's amazing.
	He says he called on them to invest and to not use excuses like they need to pay off their student loans.
	Kramer claimed he invested $100 every month when he was living in a car in his 20s and said it made him the multi-millionaire he is today.
	Oh, please.
	This is the perfect example of what's happening and why young people are breaking from the system and why the system is going to implode.
	And I blame people like Jim Kramer.
	It is the Gen Xers and the Boomers in the intelligence agencies, the administrative state.
	It is those same people in high levels of politics, government, and industry.
	I am not saying every Gen Xer.
	I am not saying every Boomer.
	I am saying, of the Boomers and Gen Xers who hold power, they are gluttonous, egotistical narcissists.
	And again, among them, not even all of them.
	Elon Musk?
	Eh, I'm a fan.
	But what I see here Is that for young people, the system is broken in every way.
	If you are anti-establishment, you are watching Trump supporters be systematically crushed by the state.
	Either placed in solitary confinement, having their homes raided, and your questions go unanswered.
	Your legal demands are unheard.
	And so we see the rise of the Mises Caucus.
	We'll see what happens if the Libertarian Party can actually accomplish anything.
	But at this point, I believe the demoralization of a generation is reaching the climax.
	A demoralized generation is a generation that will rip this country to its core and burn it to the ground.
	Which is likely why you see so many people on the far left and Antifa and all that stuff.
	I think their ideology is bankrupt.
	But I think for the most part, they have zero faith.
	When I look at Antifa and these far leftists, I see people who have lost all confidence in the system, and so they flock to whoever will offer them any kind of emotional reprieve.
	When I look to you, the people who watch my videos, and the people we have on the show, I see those who are struggling and fighting every day to maintain confidence in that system.
	And then I see this.
	And I don't know if that confidence can be maintained.
	Quite possibly one of the stupidest things the FBI, the Democrats could do is start arresting Trump supporters and officials on these nebulous and BS political hit job terms.
	But maybe it's what they want.
	Here's what I think.
	You've got people like Pelosi, Adam Schiff.
	They are narcissistic sociopaths.
	They want power and they don't care what happens.
	They don't care if the ship sinks.
	They want to gut it and steal the expensive silverware and find China and jump ship before it all comes crashing down.
	That's why this happens.
	Jeffrey Clark, according to many conservatives, simply wanted to investigate the claims made by Trump.
	That's it.
	He didn't really even do anything.
	And the FBI raids his home.
	Peter Navarro says he's not going to testify to a non-adversarial political committee, so they put him in shackles.
	We're frogs in a pot, and I can't believe that people would dare claim that things are going to be okay.
	At what point, when the DOJ is arresting Democrats' political rivals, do you not stop and say, we're about three years out from Nazi Germany?
	I love how people will also say, you know, God wins the law.
	You can't just, you know, talk about Nazis.
	Sure, okay.
	Stalinist Russia.
	Or maybe it's a more akin to the Spanish Civil War.
	I don't know how it will play out, but I'll tell you, the reason I think civil war is simply because I feel like people on the right won't just roll over and they're armed.
	But it could very much just be Weimar Germany, Stalinist Russia, it could be Cambodia, Pol Pot, could end up being Pinochet, I don't know.
	The political system is broken, and I don't think there's a repairing it.
	Watching Republicans sell us out on gun control is remarkable, because they expect us to vote for them.
	The Senate has passed the Safer Communities gun control package in a late-night vote with 15 Republicans.
	So why have a Republican on?
	I don't know.
	I might not vote.
	I might just vote Mises Caucus.
	Libertarian.
	In November.
unidentified		2024?
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		I don't even know if I'll vote for Trump.
		Maybe.
		Maybe that is the answer, though.
		You know, if they're using the weight of federal government against Trump, the best thing we can do is just put everything behind making sure he wins.
		I don't know.
		It may end up being Ron DeSantis.
		And he's good.
		But I don't know if he's going to handle this properly.
		Part of me wants to say, after this, the Republican Party doesn't deserve your support in any way.
		And not like I felt like they typically did, but this?
		Okay.
		You want a red wave?
		I don't care anymore.
		If the Republicans are going to sell us out the same way Democrats are, then what's the point?
		Seriously.
		If we're not going to get answers that we're asking as it pertains to politics, what's the point?
		If the DOJ is going to start arresting those who challenge the system, what's the point?
		Complete demoralization and the Republicans don't deserve to win.
		If the Republicans in Tennessee boot Robbie Starbuck off the ballot, what's the point?
		I don't know, man.
		And it's hard to claim there's a reason to hold on.
		I keep telling people, you gotta vote, get this red wave, but why?
		So that we can put a speed bump in the way of Democrats as they continue to crush everything and then the Republicans piss on your face and tell you it's raining?
		Shelley Moore Crapido of West Virginia, a Republican in the second most Trump-supporting state, just voted on this gun control bill.
		The DOJ is arresting Trump supporters.
		Meanwhile, everything they said in 2016 went without a hitch.
		That they claimed the election was stolen over and over again with no issues?
		That Donald Trump sought to call out Joe Biden's quid pro quo?
		And they impeached him instead?
		The corrupt have taken over the system, and I'm watching the corrupt masquerading as Republicans claim to represent you, and at this point I'm just like, maybe the mold has reached the entirety of the system, and I don't know if there's any saving it.
		It is what it is.
		If there's anything that has rocked my confidence in the system more than anything else, it is the DOJ, the FBI raid on Jeffrey Clark.
		I don't know, man.
		Maybe Trump wins, and he does drain the swamp, but he didn't do it the first time.
		So it's particularly demoralizing.
		The only thing I can really say is, for now, the best thing you can do is vote in primaries.
		Get rid of these people.
		And it takes time.
		But maybe, it doesn't have to go the dark route.
		Maybe what it means is, these boomers, Silent Generation and Gen Xers, who spit in our faces, they need to be voted out.
		We need the energy of the Mises Caucus in the Republican Party.
		But maybe it's time we break that binary.
		Maybe it's time we just say, we gotta get the Mises Caucus guys in.
		I don't know.
		You vote Libertarian, the Democrats end up winning, right?
		So what do you do?
		If that's the case, and that continues to be the case, our generation, once we're in our 50s, 60s, and we're the ones holding the reins, this country is going to be gutted and ripped apart.
		Perhaps that's what they want.
		I don't know.
		I tend to view it more like, you know, Adam Schiff is a narcissistic sociopath who just wants power.
		And he's willing to burn everything to the ground to get it.
		And so we sit back as he wields the power of the federal government against his opponents, as does Nancy Pelosi, Adam Kinzinger, and Liz Cheney.
		And we need these people removed from government, recalled, banned from holding office, whatever it takes.
		I don't know, man.
		I covered the Jeffrey Clark thing on my main channel yesterday.
		Didn't get as many views as other subjects would.
		Because people like the flashy clickbait headlines more than the story that's probably the most damning and important.
		The 2A ruling was good at the Supreme Court.
		The fight is not over.
		But we are in a civil war.
		And I'll tell you, it may not be a hot civil war.
		Maybe a cold civil war.
		It may be escalating towards hot civil war, and I certainly hope not.
		Or it may just fizzle out, and then you will live under the boot of an authoritarian dictatorship.
	Because it looks like we're already there.
	Anyway, hey, whatever.
	I'll leave it there.
	Next segment's coming up at 1 p.m.
	on this channel.

▲