Stacey Abrams Says ABORT THE POOR In Attempt To Tie Failing Policy To Inflation As GOP WINS Polling
Stacey Abrams Says ABORT THE POOR In Attempt To Tie Failing Policy To Inflation As GOP WINS Polling. Democrats know they are losing due to gas prices and inflation so Abrams threw out this hail mary and flopped.
Voters are rejecting democrats as polls have begun shifting wildly toward republicans and the gop. This is national level polling as well signaling Democrats are going to be swept away in a massive red wave.
its gotten so bad that even Obama is railing on Biden and Democrats over their culture war issues and told them to focus on kitchen table issues like the economy.
The midterms are only a few weeks out and anything could happen.
#democrats
#republicans
#biden
Become A Member And Protect Our Work at http://www.timcast.com
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Stacey Abrams, in a desperate attempt to tie abortion to the economy, says women who are pregnant are just worried about gas prices because they don't want to have babies and babies are expensive.
Simple answer.
If inflation's got you down, just abort your kid.
Which is kind of crazy, but I get it, man.
It's the economy, stupid.
And Democrats ain't winning there.
In our next story, George Floyd's family is suing Kanye West.
And it's kind of insane.
They're suing him because he claimed George Floyd died of a fentanyl overdose, while the Daily Wire just published proof.
That's the case.
In our last story, Starbucks in Portland is shutting down.
Why?
Crime is just too high.
Well, Starbucks, get woke, go broke.
If you like the show, give us a good review and leave us five stars.
Now, let's get into that first story.
Again, that's in aggregate.
That is, taking the summation of many different polls, Republicans have a 2.8 point lead.
That's apocalyptic.
When Democrats have a 5 point lead, they still lose.
Historically, this means it's going to be substantially worse than it would have been on average.
Democrats have a big problem.
They've been so hyper-focused on January 6th, MAGA Republican conspiracy theories, and abortion, that they have missed what Americans truly care about.
It's the economy, stupid.
Well, have no fear, Democrats!
Stacey Abrams has figured it out.
Simply tie abortion to the issue of the economy, and then you can say, look, I know you're worried about high gas prices.
And then, like Stacey Abrams said, you just tell your voters the only reason you are concerned about gas prices is because you're gonna have a baby you don't want.
So how about this?
You terminate the life of that baby, abort it, then you can save all that sweet, precious moolah for you, your rent, and your gas prices.
Now, I admit, there's a rock and a hard place for a lot of women.
I get the point Stacey Abrams is trying to make, but it is a bit dark to be like, abort poor people!
That's really what it comes down to.
Stacey Abrams is saying, in response to Barack Obama, that abortion, quote, abortion is an economic issue.
The point she is making is that many women are concerned about the price of goods because they're about to have unwanted pregnancies.
It is a very, very stupid argument, in my opinion, and it's a really disgusting one.
No, first, people care about economic issues because it impacts them whether or not they're going to have a baby.
It's the weirdest thing.
But you can see, They're desperate.
How do you convince people that all of the campaigning you've done so far on the issue of abortion is actually about the economy?
Tell them.
Under Democrats, you'll be able to abort those babies, and you won't have to worry about those extreme costs of raising another human life.
It's crazy because, you know, I don't think most Americans are going to agree with that position.
It's a very hard-left, weird, progressive position.
Most Americans are pro-choice, but that doesn't mean they fancy just aborting babies willy-nilly, especially to save money.
Many people want to have families.
But it's also just a really terrible argument that doesn't work.
Look, if you are saying that the reason women are concerned about the economy is because they might be pregnant, then you've got another argument that conservatives can easily respond with.
Marriage!
Perhaps if you had a husband who was working and you got pregnant, you wouldn't have to worry about the high cost of gas because you'd have a husband there to handle half the heavy lifting.
No.
I don't think most people consider abortion an economic issue.
I don't think most people think, you know what, I'm gonna lose money, might as well kill my kid as an actual solution to their problems.
If this is all you have to muster, I can only say I think the polling is going to swing harder for Republicans.
It's gas prices.
Come on.
Nobody's going to the pump and being like, oh, gas is up another dollar.
I wish I didn't have to have a kid.
I mean, I'm sure there are some people, but that's not the majority of Americans.
That's not the male vote.
You think dudes right now who voted for Biden are now all of a sudden being like, oh man, my wife's pregnant and she can't terminate, I'm gonna have to pay for it?
Hey, look, I'm sure some will, but I'm talking about the majority of Americans.
How many votes is Stacey Abrams seeking to gain by saying, Abort the baby!
Before we do, head over to TimCast.com and become a member in order to support our work.
As a member, you get access to the uncensored TimCast IRL show Monday through Thursday, right after we do TimCast IRL.
At 8 p.m., we wrap up at 10, we start recording this members-only uncensored show, which can get very spicy, yo.
You definitely gotta check out last night's episode with Ammon Bundy.
He talks about how the FBI was withholding evidence, how they were outright accused of prosecutorial misconduct, the judge dismissed the charges with prejudice against the Bundys.
So all those stories you heard about the Bundy standoff and everything, you gotta hear what Eminem was talking about.
It's crazy.
How he gets acquitted in Oregon, and then they try and charge him again in Nevada, and then the prosecutors, the feds, were withholding evidence.
So much so the judge was pissed.
There's a bunch of other crazy stuff in that story, but you gotta check it out.
You can also check out the Cask Castle vlog, which is very offensive.
Super excited for Rusty Cage and Blair White's cameos in yesterday's episode.
And we got sales from the Inverted World, and with your membership, our journalists will be able to keep working.
We got field reporters, and we're gonna make more shows.
New stuff coming every day.
So smash that like button, subscribe to this channel, share this show with your friends.
Here's a story from Newsweek.
Stacey Abrams fires back at Obama.
Abortion is an economic issue.
Now you may be saying to yourself, but Tim, you said Stacey Abrams said abort the poor.
Well, I'm going to play it straight, guys.
I'm being very hyperbolic.
She effectively did say this, however.
But let's read the story.
Stacey Abrams, the Democratic nominee for governor in Georgia, said abortion is an economic issue and asked to comment on former President Barack Obama's recent comments about Roe v. Wade.
In an interview last week on Pod Save America, Obama urged Democrats to relate to people's worries ahead of the midterm elections.
He warned people not to focus on what Donald Trump or other Republicans are saying, because that's probably not something that, in the minds of most voters, overrides their basic interests.
Can I pay the rent?
How high are gas prices?
How am I dealing with childcare?
Obama noted the Supreme Court's decision overturning Roe v. Wade, which stripped away constitutional protections for abortion, is another major issue in the midterm election.
Many young people, he said, had never gone through the experience of seeing us go backward on a big issue.
And it's a reminder that democracy is fragile.
That you have to tend to it.
You have to fight for it.
And this midterm election, I think, is going to be a moment in which, you know, that battle has to be joined.
And that means people have to turn up.
Going backwards?
Well, I'd say most conservatives view it as going forwards.
Asked about Obama's comments on MSNBC's Morning Joe on Wednesday, Abrams said the former president was absolutely right.
However, she emphasized that abortion is an economic issue.
Quote, Abortion has been reduced to this idea of a culture war.
But for women in Georgia, this is very much a question of whether they're going to end up in poverty in the next five years because women who are forced to carry unwanted pregnancies.
They're four times more likely to be impoverished within five years.
They're twice as likely to be on food stamps.
This is an economic issue and it's being reduced to this culture conversation.
Later in the interview.
Abrams was asked what she would do as governor to combat inflation.
While abortion is an issue, it nowhere reaches the level of interest of voters
in terms of the cost of gas, food, bread, milk.
What could you do as governor to alleviate the concerns of Georgia voters
about those livability daily hourly issues that they're confronted with?
Mike Barnicle said.
Abrams replied that having children is why you're worried about your gas price,
your price for gas.
It's why you're concerned about how much food costs.
No, Stacey Abrams, don't!
For women, this is not a reductive issue.
You can't divorce being forced to carry an unwanted pregnancy from the economic realities of having a child.
It's important for us to have both, have both and conversations.
We don't have the luxury of reducing it or separating them out.
A governor can't address the cost of education and quote, put money into the pockets of everyday working Georgians instead of giving tax cuts to the wealthy.
Women understand that having a child is absolutely an economic issue.
It is only politicians who see it as simply another cultural conversation.
Let me simplify what she is saying here.
As governor, she will fight to guarantee your right to terminate your baby if you can't afford it.
That is actually kind of horrific.
Abort the poor!
If you can't afford it, we'll kill it for ya.
Seriously?
Now, again, I can already hear all of the woke leftists being like, Tim Pool's pro-life.
I'm actually not.
I'm actually old-school pro-choice.
Not whatever this pro-abortion stuff is from Democrats.
If the baby is viable, meaning can survive on its own, then there is absolutely no reason to abort.
None.
You can remove the baby.
There may be some rare circumstances where, like, the woman is on the verge of death and you're like, what do we do?
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.
That's what the Democrats are actually talking about.
Their reasoning is, well, kill it because you can't afford it.
Who was ever able to afford a baby?
No, seriously.
I know a lot of people do plan to have kids.
And the issue is, if you're not making enough money and if you can't afford things, it's really hard to do.
I totally get it.
But the issue isn't to just go about terminating babies.
The issue is to solve a lot of these problems we're facing culturally that result in women who can't afford to have kids.
A woman should not have to choose between filling up her gas tank and aborting her child.
Now that seems like a left position, right?
Hey, that's where I've been for a long time.
So what am I in favor of?
I think the appropriate response of the Democrats is going to be like, as governor, I will work on programs.
How about this?
I will work with pro-life pregnancy centers to make sure that women who want to have kids, or are about to, will be able to receive assistance, either from the government, to the best of our abilities, which is not a whole lot, and these private organizations that are trying to aid mothers who are pregnant.
Let me just put it this way.
Pregnancy centers.
Pro-life pregnancy centers.
They'll give formula, they'll give bottles, clothing, carriages, strollers, whatever.
And they want to encourage women to keep their babies.
And they will do what they can to help them.
That's brilliant.
A bunch of leftists went and firebombed these pro-life pregnancy centers.
Why is it that, even at the very least, can't you offer both?
Can't you say, look, women have a right to their own bodies in the event that they become pregnant.
The state should not intervene unless the baby is completely viable.
And I know pro-lifers disagree with that, but I'm saying if there was a compromise, why couldn't you say that?
And then also say, but we're going to do everything we can to make sure we reduce abortions.
And that women who are stressing about a pregnancy, maybe the reason they don't want the pregnancy is because they don't have a lot of money.
So how about we alleviate that stress to the best of our ability so they don't have to get an abortion instead?
What Stacey Abrams is basically saying, she's suggesting abortions are a way to fight inflation.
That's what the Daily Mail says.
She's basically saying, if you're too poor, we should kill your kid.
I mean, that's extreme.
Alright, alright, let's tone down the hyperbole.
What she's saying is, if you can't afford a kid, you'll be better off if we abort it.
I mean, that's just crazy to me.
I'm sorry.
That's just, the Democrats have lost their minds.
I am not a pro-lifer.
I think abortion is wrong.
I seriously do.
But I have a libertarian cap.
I have a limit.
The government shouldn't be involved at a certain stage.
Especially when it comes to exceptions like rape.
But that means that if the baby is viable, they should not just terminate it.
So, middle-of-the-road, old-school pro-choice.
That's what they were with Roe v. Wade.
Now where are they?
Just abort, no restrictions.
Okay, whatever, man.
Uh-oh.
Here we go.
From The Nation.
Why the economy is the dominant issue for Democrats in the midterms.
Uh-oh.
Wages aren't keeping up with prices, and that's voters' biggest concern.
The Nation is screaming in your ears.
The issue is not abortion.
But I bring this story up to point out what everybody already knows and to explain the real reason Stacey Abrams is trying to say poor people should abort their babies.
Come on.
I don't think Stacey Abrams is outright advocating for poor people to abort.
She's desperately trying to make them think that what they've been fighting for is an economic issue.
Sorry, it won't work.
When you come out and say, vote for me, and I'll increase gas production, so your gas will be cheaper.
People go, sounds good to me.
If you come out and say, vote for me and I'll make sure you can get an abortion, because if you get an abortion, assuming you're a woman, and assuming you're pregnant, you won't have to spend money on the baby!
Dude, you're not addressing the economic issue for anybody!
Man, talk about an amazing statement.
Here we go.
Here we go.
I'm gonna take you back in time.
Let's talk about a solution to this problem.
The Washington Post says conservatives aren't just fighting same-sex marriage, they're also trying to stop divorce.
Stop Divorce, Scott Keyes wrote in 2014 for ThinkProgress at the Center for American Progress Action Fund.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Democrat think tank.
Here we go.
Let's bring it to a more modern one.
You can see that my name was highlighted there because this one's fantastic.
Are Republicans coming for no-fault divorce?
It was once very difficult for Americans to get divorced.
Could it soon be again?
Alright.
So on TimCast IRL, we had a conversation, and I basically said, along with many other people, that no-fault divorce is a problem.
It is making young men not want to get married.
What's the point of marriage?
It is a contract between two individuals, and there are stipulations to that contract.
Imagine if we created a no-fault contract breach.
It's like, I agreed to deliver you one pound of gold if you agreed to deliver me ten pounds of frankincense.
I don't know why I'm using those examples.
And then one day you're like, you gave me the frankincense, but I've terminated the contract.
Sorry.
How does that make sense?
It's like, we have an arrangement.
Getting married is you basically saying, we will not dissolve this, for better or for worse, till death do us part.
But with no-fault divorce, now it's like, you get married, then abruptly, one party to the marriage can be like, I'm out, and then you gotta split your assets and everything?
What was the purpose of the contract if everyone just loses out on a whim?
I bring this up in the context of the abortion thing because, hey, you want a solution to the problem, Stacey Abrams?
How about we eliminate no-fault divorce?
If you don't want to get married, don't get married!
It's really that simple!
If you do get married, you have now entered into a binding contract, and there needs to be fault to break the contract, right?
So, how about this?
Don't get pregnant if you are concerned about whether or not you can afford to have a kid.
Accidents happen, and so does assault and things like that.
And that's why I am personally pro-choice.
Although I don't think accidents are just cause for terminating the life of a baby, For me, and again, I know a lot of people don't agree on this one, and there's a very hard, there's no real middle ground here, it's a libertarian thing.
I just, you know, Luke made a good point the other day, Luke Rutkowski, that he's pro-choice, he's pro-life, but he's skeptical of giving the government more power to arrest people, and I'm like, I'm kind of there, you know what I mean?
I can say it's morally wrong, but I don't like the idea that in a true instance where a woman has to deal with a very heartbreaking moment or something, that we consult government for this.
I know pro-lifers disagree, respectfully, I just don't know.
I don't know how to bridge that gap.
It's just not there within my morals and ethics.
So call it wrong.
I'm trying, man.
I can tell you there's a solution, though.
Hey, don't hook up unless you're planning on having a kid.
It's that simple.
If you do, birth control, condoms.
It all exists.
Now, if someone does get pregnant, If you're married, there's that thing called shotgun weddings.
Women got pregnant, it's like, you better marry her because now you've basically sworn a pledge to take care of that child.
This is part of the problem.
Stacey Abrams could easily address this fact.
Pregnant women should have the man providing for her.
Let me put it this way.
Let's talk outside.
of no-fault divorce.
Stacey Abrams could have simply said to women who are pregnant, you don't have to worry about inflation because the man has to pay child support.
She didn't say that!
Where are we going?
So, here's a funny thing.
The Week writes this and then said, you know, who do they shout out?
They shout out me, Steven Crowder, and Michael Knowles.
Hey, how about that?
Poole suggested the policy discourages men from getting married.
Suggested?
It's a fact!
It literally does!
You hear it all the time when men are surveyed.
They say they don't want to get married because they're concerned that the woman can divorce at any point for no reason at all and they lose half their stuff.
There's no actual binding contract there, so what's the point?
Suggesting it?
I'm stating it as a fact because it's in a bunch of studies.
But anyway, they want to mention that no Republicans are actually calling for this.
Yeah, we were opining.
Media matters.
Thanks.
Thanks.
It's really funny.
But you can see how really threatened they are.
Here's my favorite.
Conservatives are coming for no-fault divorce.
After the fall of Roe, right-wing media have been ratcheting up their rhetoric against no-fault divorce.
Expect policy to follow.
I love this so much because they bring up me.
According to Poole, we have no-fault divorce laws to blame for the rise of prenuptial agreements.
Duh!
What?
Why not?
Are you joking?
You enter into a contract.
The government says you can't break the contract.
We pass a law saying you can.
Then people say, okay, well, I want a contract stating you can't break this.
Anyway, they say willfully ignoring how the court system has a long history of re-traumatizing and destroying the lives of rape and domestic violence victims.
My friends, I never said that wasn't a factor.
Those are faults!
If a woman is being abused, she should be allowed to get a divorce.
That's a breach of contract.
See, they're making up fake reasons.
Here's the best part.
To all of you who are friends of the TimCast IRL podcast, Monday through Friday at 8pm, you may be aware of co-host Ian Crossland, who, I don't know how you describe him other than a kind of normie, liberal-ish, hippie?
Here's a quote.
In the same episode on Poole's show, conservative commentator Ian Crossland adds, We live in this culture where no-fault divorce is the law of the land.
Dot dot dot.
If young folks know they're in an environment where divorce is not an option, I firmly believe they're going to be more careful about who they choose to marry.
What did they cut out with that dot dot dot?
Probably Ian saying something like, even though, look, I think no fault's probably right.
Women should be allowed to divorce whoever they want and abort all the babies they want.
But I think it's fair to say if young folks know they're in an environment where divorce is an option, they'll be more careful.
They cut out that middle part with the ellipses, and they called Ian a conservative commentator!
I meet people all the time, and they're like, I'm a big fan of your show, and I'm like, oh, which one?
And some people don't even know we have the show at night, which is a live conversation show, but hey, it is what it is.
Appreciate you guys watching.
Ian is like, he's pro-choice to an extreme degree.
Even I'm like pro-choice, and I'm like, yo, Ian, you're not getting it, and he's like, women should not be having to, and he's very, very, very pro-abortion.
Maybe not pro-abortion is the right word, I don't wanna put words in his mouth, but he's like, staunchly, women should be allowed to get an abortion without question, blah blah blah.
So here you go.
I bring this up because so long as we have issues like no-fault divorce, you are going to have women who don't have support for their babies.
Then telling them to just kill their baby, abort it, it's insane, man.
You need to consider that one reason many women may not want a pregnancy is because they're scared about how they will afford it.
Stacey Abrams is saying, why don't you kill it?
I got a solution.
How about the dude who got you pregnant has to pay?
I know we have those laws.
Maybe we need to deal with something like no-fault divorce, and you need to be more careful.
Again, I am pro-choice.
Meaning if a woman gets raped?
Yo, I am not about to force her, a little girl, a woman, or anybody.
I don't think this state has that authority.
You can't mandate.
Now people say, Tim, don't execute the innocent baby because of the actions of an evil person.
And I'm like, there is a third party here, the person carrying the baby with their own blood and body.
I know there is no simple answer.
I get it.
And you and I may disagree on this one.
And it's not a simple moral question.
I just do not, in my mind, every time I am asked this question, I do not see a scenario where I would respect the government coming in and saying, I understand you were victimized, but we are going to establish and maintain This victimization right now, because we don't want the baby to die.
I get it.
I don't want the baby to die either.
But I just do not see a scenario in my mind where the government can be like, your body is now beholden to another.
Even if it's temporary.
It is- I just- Sorry guys.
So, agree, disagree, you know.
I'll tell you this, at the very least, you know I'm willing to have the conversation, and I'm willing to try, but it's tough, isn't it?
Well, let's jump forward.
Here's the big news.
Democrats drop in the generic polls in the midterms.
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 that every single day right here on America on Trial with Josh Hammer.
Subscribe and download your episodes wherever you get your podcasts.
High gas prices are displayed at a Chevron in LA on October 5th.
Can I just stress this to you guys?
Regular gas, $8.35 in California.
$8.35 a gallon.
$8.35 in California $8.35 a gallon. How many people you think in California are probably
Screaming right now, and if you're not you deserve to pay it
There's a lot more going on, man.
There's a whole lot going on that I can bring up.
Tons of Democrats, 22 Democrats in the House are retiring.
10 Republicans are retiring in the Senate.
It's actually 5 Republicans and 1 Democrat.
But across the board, many more Democrats are bowing out.
55 members of Congress, 6 in the Senate and 49 in the House, will not seek re-election.
Mostly Democrats.
So this should be interesting.
The Senators, however, that's fascinating.
Republican Senators bowing out opens up a huge hole for Republicans.
And this is probably why you're seeing in the predictions from like 538 and others, Republicans not winning the Senate.
Because they've got more weaknesses.
Despite the fact that polls are showing Republicans are going to just massively win in a red wave, There are more Republican seats up for re-election in the Senate than Democrat ones, so here we go.
Let me show you some funny news.
Tri-City Herald, I found this one.
Benton County Democrat chair resigns after he's called out for GOP endorsement.
Okay.
What do you think it means when you get What do you think it means?
You get someone in Florida, a Democrat, who is endorsing a Republican, who's endorsing Ron DeSantis.
Uh-huh.
Let me tell you how bad it's about to get.
From Isaiah McCall, a Medium article.
I got emailed this.
I'm not super familiar with it.
I'm not super familiar with Isaiah, but he writes a great article.
A new world currency is shaping.
It isn't Bitcoin.
BRICS is bad news for America.
In his article, he writes about Saudi Arabia wants to join BRICS.
Oh boy.
He says, Did you know that Vladimir Putin has been watching videos of Muammar Gaddafi's death at the hands of a CIA-backed coup?
Oh, Gaddafi, that crook.
Except, wait for just a second there.
Did you also know that Gaddafi had wanted to create a gold-backed dinar for all of Africa?
And he wanted to stop trading oil in US dollars because he thought our global financial system was a giant Ponzi scheme?
Maybe that's something to do with the financial crisis.
Yeah.
Vladimir Putin is a bad guy, but he had his reasons, not to mention NATO walking Ukraine down the primrose path for pushing back against U.S.
hegemony.
No one will tell you this, I will.
Well, a lot of people will.
I'll tell you that, too.
But, shout out, Isaiah.
At the heart of these reasons are the U.S.
dollar.
Its corruption poster this night is debasement at the hands of quantitative easing, and the fact that it's no longer backed by anything of value.
The dollar's dead, and BRICS is coming in its place.
I hope you realize this.
He says Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa.
And now we're hearing Turkey and Saudi Arabia want to join.
This means the petrodollar may die.
And when it does, the United States will be hobbled.
I hope you realize this.
You better prepare.
The reason why you have cheap things, the reason why you can get computers imported
from Asia for dirt costs is because the U.S.
dollar, as Isaiah points out, is a settlement layer for the world.
When two nations want to trade, they sell their currencies for U.S.
dollars and then trade in U.S.
dollars.
That's the petrodollar.
When Gaddafi said he wanted to use gold, he died fast.
When Saddam Hussein started using euro, he also died fast.
But what happens now?
In March of, I think it might have been 2020 actually, we were on a 9 to 1 fractional reserve system.
I could be getting the numbers wrong, but basically the idea is, for every $9 a bank is holding, or no, wait, wait, is it?
90% I think is a better way to put it.
For every $100 they're holding, they could loan out, creating $90.
So, here's how it works.
You give a bank $100, They then create upon a docket $90 to loan to you.
You then bring that $90 to a bank and deposit it.
That bank now can create $81 on the financial docket and loan it out.
That's fractional reserve banking.
In March, we went on an infinite reserve, meaning banks could just create money and issue out loans without question.
Don't you think that many people around the world probably saw that and said, hey, how come the U.S.
is unrestrained in printing money and buying from us?
They're just stealing from us.
Now, Saudi Arabia says BRICS is the answer.
BRICS formed right after the 2008 crisis.
And a lot of people didn't take it seriously, but now they are.
Saudi Arabia recently told Joe Biden to go stuff it.
And now gas prices are going up, and this is where we're headed.
I love it, my friends.
I love it.
Ukrainians keep a wary eye on U.S.
midterm elections, fearing a loss of support.
Good!
Disgusting!
I like Ukraine.
I've cheered them on.
I don't like Russia.
I don't like Putin.
I have friends from Ukraine.
I talk to them periodically.
I fear for them and their families.
They've evacuated.
I want Ukraine to win.
But I don't want World War III and these videos coming out of Ukraine are nightmarish.
I don't think you've watched them if you support this.
These people sending money to Ukraine that is not involved in us, exacerbating the war, and for what?
So that I have to watch these videos when I read the news?
So that these people can writhe in agony on the ground, screaming and in pain?
For what?
And you say, oh, but Russia started it.
Ukraine is not a NATO ally.
Ukraine is not an EU member.
It is a border dispute with Russia.
And I feel for the Ukrainians.
But I will never support this war.
Because the U.S.-NATO could have backed off and said, we're not going to be sending anymore, it's escalated too much.
When U.S.
intelligence provided the information to Ukraine, so they blew up the flagship of Russia's Black Sea Fleet.
I'm like, this is getting too crazy.
Russia's not talking about nuclear weapons?
When we get footage of an incinerated city, children with their skin melted off, when they draft your children, when they draft you, Gen Z, I want you to remember this moment when you voted for it.
No, I'm not going to support it.
Fine.
Ukrainians keep a wary eye on the U.S.
midterm elections.
Too bad.
You can fight.
I respect it.
But we will not, we should not, be providing the cannon fodder for this proxy war.
We shouldn't be in it.
These people make me sick.
So by all means, if you're concerned about the price of gas, you can take Stacey Abrams' advice and abort your babies.
And then you'll have a little bit extra money right before they draft you and send you to Ukraine to go fight Russians.
Have fun!
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 8 p.m.
over at youtube.com slash TimCastIRL.
Thanks for hanging out, and I'll see you all then.
Last night, the news broke that the family of George Floyd would be suing Kanye West for $250 million for claiming that George Floyd died from a fentanyl overdose on a podcast.
The only problem for this family is that Kanye West was referring to a publicly available documentary by Candace Owens and the Daily Wire, which provides evidence to back up their claims That George Floyd did, in fact, die from a fentanyl overdose.
Here's the latest news.
We know the lawsuit was announced.
Yahoo Entertainment reports George Floyd's daughter announces $250 million lawsuit against Kanye West.
But I must say, bluster and BS.
Because now what we're hearing is cease and desist.
Is that all?
A cease and desist?
First of all, you can't defame the dead.
They're dead.
So Kanye West, he can't be sued by the family over saying something about George Floyd.
They're trying to argue that his statements undermine their mission and thus there's damages there.
So no surprise, a cease and desist letter comes first.
Okay, fine.
So Kanye goes, sure, bye.
Nothing happens.
I think it's a publicity stunt.
But the big news here, my friends, is the rebuttal from the Daily Wire.
CEO Jeremy Boring, as well as many of the personalities, posted clips showing evidence backing their claim it was actually fentanyl that killed George Floyd.
The medical examiner actually testified that if George Floyd was sitting on his couch and died, he would have ruled it was caused by fentanyl.
In his report, he said it was police action complicating, you know, drugs or whatever.
And he said that heart disease, the drug overdose, were contributing factors to the police action.
Now, I said the other day, I think that's fair.
The reason why I say that is because it's an opinion of a medical examiner who is saying that, well, actually, I should probably walk it back a little bit.
I had forgotten or had not heard that he actually said that the drugs alone would have killed him, period.
So, it's almost like saying...
That George Floyd was on the verge of death and would have died.
However, he died faster.
That's probably the way to assess it.
And actually, at this point, I think it's kind of a stretch for the medical examiner to say it was the police action if he actually, well, he literally did testify that George Floyd would have died from the fentanyl either way.
So at what point is it then okay?
Well, look.
It's the opinion of the medical examiner.
If he's laying it out that way, fine.
And I say it's fair simply because you can look at what he said and draw your own conclusions, which is an opinion.
And if you come to the opinion that George Floyd actually died because of the fentanyl overdose, I think it's a fair point.
And based on what he said, it stands to reason that if George Floyd had not ingested fatal doses of that drug, he would not have died.
And so I'll show you more evidence backing up what Kanye and the Daily Wire have already said.
First, here's the news.
CNN reports lawyers representing Roxy Washington, the mother of George Floyd's daughter.
CNN, just say baby mama, okay?
Have drafted a cease and desist letter to Ye, formerly known as Kanye West, over comments he made claiming Floyd was killed by a fentanyl overdose.
On the podcast Drink Champs, West claimed George Floyd was killed by a fentanyl overdose, despite a medical examiner's testimony that fentanyl was not the direct cause of Floyd's death, only a contributing factor when he died after being knelt on by a police officer.
Attorneys at Witherspoon Law Group told CNN the comments were especially damaging to Gianna Floyd, George Floyd's daughter.
Quote, she's a little girl that's been traumatized and is being re-traumatized by Kanye West.
Full stop!
Wrong BS!
Kanye West was simply citing the Daily Wire.
Bye-bye.
Let me tell you, my friends, I made this point last night.
When corporate press lies about me, and they do, Here's the game they play.
You've got news organizations A, B, and C. News organization A writes fake story.
Tim Pool does X.
I then send a notification, this is fake news, and you must take it down, which is a required first step, typically, when you're going after defamation.
You have to be reasonable.
They then go, oh gee, oh golly me, whoopsie, we made a mistake here!
And they take it down.
And you say, good, right?
No.
News organization B runs the story verbatim.
You then go to them and say, hey, that story's fake news.
News organization A already took it down.
They go, mm, we're citing them.
Sorry, have a nice day.
News organization C then copies B. And then around and around we go.
Good luck, you can't sue anyone.
You go to news organization C and say, that's fake news.
They'll say, we were operating in good faith.
There's no actual malice.
We read a news story from news organization B. News organization B says, hey look, we were only referencing an NBC News report.
Take it up with them.
And they say, we already took it down.
So when you go to court for defamation, the judge says, what do you want them to do?
They already took it down.
You say, okay, well now the next organization is publishing false information.
Well, they're not responsible for damages because there's no actual malice.
Welcome to how the modern lie machine and smear merchants work.
And I wouldn't be surprised to find out that many of these journalists collude this way on purpose, but I digress.
As it pertains to Kanye West, you can't sue him because he watched the news.
He comes out and says it, you got a problem?
Take it up with the Daily Wire, but uh-oh, then you're gonna have to litigate what they actually claimed, and they provided evidence.
Here we go.
They say, as of Tuesday, the episode of Drink Champs appeared to- Okay, hold on, hold on.
When CNN sat down with 6-year-old Gianna Floyd- Are you kidding me?
On behalf of an 8-year-old?
It's just- You can't- The law is plain.
Family members can't sue.
The attorneys have indicated they intend to also file a lawsuit for harassment, misappropriation, defamation, and infliction of emotional distress.
Oh, because Kanye West watched the news?
Get outta here!
CNN reached out to a representative of Ye as if Tuesday the episode of Drink Champs appeared to have been removed from YouTube and Revolt TV.
However, quote, it still exists that does not remove it from the universe, said Williams.
Too little too late, the harm has been done to our client.
A cease and desist letter provided to CNN was addressed to an attorney they believed was representing Ye.
However, they told CNN they were informed his attorney was not actually affiliated with Ye in the matter.
They're actively trying to make sure it's received, though they added there will be more pressure once the lawsuit is formally filed.
Regarding a separate legal effort being explored by attorney Lee Merritt, who has represented the Floyd family in matters in the past, Williams told CNN, the two legal have not been coordinating efforts.
Merritt told, you know what, I'm just gonna pause.
This is dirty, dirty politics.
It's a PR stunt, or it's just really stupid lawyers.
No, I think the lawyers know full well they've got no ground here, but I tell you this man, Let me tell you guys a story.
Let me tell you guys a story before I show you exactly what the Daily Wire is showing in their videos.
So you can understand the law.
Muse, the band.
They ripped off the concept of my music, Will of the People.
Maybe you saw it, maybe you didn't.
Maybe you're a fan of Muse, and because of that, you refuse to believe it.
We created imagery.
Artistic imagery in Will of the People.
It was an orange sky with men in hoods throwing ropes over statues and pulling them down while chanting, the will of the people, screaming, this is the will of the people.
On my birthday, I'm not exaggerating, literally on my birthday, Muse published, it's about a year later, a live version, live CGI, 3D, of men in hoodies under an orange sky throwing ropes and pulling down statues while chanting the will of the people.
And a lot of people were like, you can't sue over any one of these things.
Like, no, but quite literally I had a bunch of lawyers being like, wow, they like ripped off the concept, you know, in its entirety.
And based on that, I had a bunch of lawyers saying outright, it looks like they did rip off the creative work.
Obviously, I don't own the phrase, Will of the People.
Obviously, I don't own statues.
Obviously, I don't own statues being pulled down, or people in hoodies, or orange skies.
But when you take all of those concepts and package them under, quote, Will of the People, all of a sudden now, you've got copyright infringement.
And there's a reason why we explored a lawsuit and then didn't.
And it's mainly because going to war over this stuff is extremely difficult, takes a long time, and ultimately, what do you get?
And I just thought it wasn't worth it.
It cost us a lot of money.
It was very, very damaging.
We had a whole concept album planned out that we ended up cancelling because I don't have the money to go up against Warner.
I think it's Warner.
But, you know what a bunch of lawyers did tell me?
The first thing you get in a lawsuit like this is publicity.
That's maybe the only reason you'd really do it.
Because, were you damaged?
Well, yeah, of course.
Is it plain as day?
Maybe not completely, but when you look at it, a layman's gonna be like, these look like basically the same thing.
And I've even had other industry people and marketing people outraged, pissed off, because a lot of contracts, it says third parties involved in losing money on this.
And it's really just, okay, what was said was, maybe somebody who worked for Muse saw this and said, this is a great concept, and then pitched it to them, and Muse had no idea.
Fair point.
Either way, it caused us damage, it delayed our releases.
Seriously, we had a song two years ago, and now all of a sudden, you know, we're waiting, we're delayed again.
It's just, it's really frustrating.
But I decided not to do it.
I don't want to play these games.
Lawyer said, you will get mad press.
Everyone's going to write about it.
You know, Muse being sued or whatever.
And I'm like, whatever man.
Maybe it'll still happen because we're still looking at the damages.
And it's not just that.
As I mentioned, other third parties are losing out on money because of this, and they're pissed off, so we'll see where that goes.
But here's the point.
The lawsuit, in my opinion, against Kanye West is because he's a high-profile individual, and it's going to give them virtue signal points.
That's why they're doing it.
Because...
This is what Kanye West was referencing.
I give you now a two-minute clip posted by the CEO, co-CEO of Daily Wire, Jeremy Boring.
He said George Floyd's family is apparently suing Kanye West for $250 million over his reaction to real Candace Owens documentary, Greatest Lie Ever Sold.
Here's what the film actually has to say about fentanyl and George Floyd's death.
unidentified
They had to have the jury believe that it was a neck restraint, it was the knee on the neck, it was asphyxiation that killed George Floyd.
However, there was a ton of evidence that George Floyd consumed a toxic, lethal cocktail of fentanyl and methamphetamine.
Did it appear that Mr. Floyd said, I ate too many drugs?
Yes, it did.
Let's put it in perspective.
Three grains of fentanyl on the head of a lead pencil.
Enough to kill you, enough to kill me.
And so they had to continuously inculcate the public to believe that Derek Chauvin intentionally, premeditatedly murdered George Floyd.
and drugs had absolutely nothing to do with it, as Lindsay and the toxicologists presented that awful
They didn't say that the drugs had nothing to do with it, but they were contributing factors.
The reason why I said the other day that was fair is because the point they were making was that those things did not end George Floyd's life.
What the medical examiner was saying was that those things put him in an extremely weakened state where he's having difficulty breathing.
You add the knee to it.
One way to put it would be, as I mentioned the other day, the straw that broke the camel's back.
The camel can be walking very haggardly, but it's alive, and then you add that one last draw, and then it goes down.
And, look, man, I know a lot of people want the narrative to be that Fentanyl did kill him, and I do think it absolutely would have, even if the knee wasn't there.
You've got to understand, if somebody is coughing and gagging, and then you walk up and punch them in the chest, and they die, yeah, they may have been about to die, but You get charged for it.
Now, that doesn't really matter.
Because ultimately, it is an opinion to say it was actually the fentanyl that killed him.
And perhaps you could make that point.
I mean, you literally could make that point.
If there is a camel with a ton of bricks on its back, and it's struggling, and it's in a weakened state, and you add one grain of straw and then it dies, you can argue that a straw alone would never have killed him.
It was, in fact, the other way around.
My point is this, you can actually say fairly, the fentanyl killed George Floyd and the straw that broke the camel, the knee on the back was a contributing factor.
Because here's the question, as much as the medical examiner said that it was the knee that killed him and the fentanyl was a contributing factor, Can you argue that the knee was the contributing factor?
Can you say that actually, without the knee, he would have died from a fentanyl overdose?
Uh-oh.
That's exactly what the medical examiner did say.
Here we go.
unidentified
Do you recall describing the level of fentanyl as a fatal level of fentanyl?
I recall describing it in other circumstances, it would be a fatal level, yes.
In other circumstances.
Had Mr. Floyd been home alone in his locked residence with no evidence of trauma, and the only autopsy finding was that fentanyl level, then yes, I would certify his death as due to fentanyl toxicity.
Okay, he would certify the death as due to fentanyl toxicity.
If the medical examiner is saying this alone, if he was found dead, would have been the sole factor, then I would actually argue it is more fair to say the knee on the shoulder and neck is the actual contributing factor and the cause of death was fentanyl.
It goes on to say, because it's text, the police body cam footage also reveals George Floyd claimed that he could not breathe prior to being put on the ground.
He's saying, I can't effing breathe, I can't effing breathe, and the video clearly shows he's not on the ground, nor, in one of the shots, he's just leaning up against the car as they're trying to put him in.
George Floyd resisted arrest, then said, put me on the ground, put me on the ground, put me on the ground.
He said, I can't breathe, before he was on the ground, and, ladies and gentlemen, a symptom of drug overdose, chest pain, difficulty breathing, cessation of breathing, or shallow breathing.
George Floyd.
Man, I wish the dude didn't die.
You hate to see it.
But he was chewing on a speedball.
Fentanyl and meth.
And they found it in the car.
Agitation.
I mean, paranoia, confusion, disorientation, aggressive and violent behavior.
All of these things are signs of a drug overdose.
So, blue fingers or lips.
That's from what?
Not being able to breathe?
You know, I read about that.
I asked someone, I could be wrong about this, but I was like, what actually causes an opioid overdose death?
Overdose death.
And it's cessation of breathing.
That's right.
When you take too many opiates, you stop breathing.
So, what happened here?
George Floyd had a fatal level of drugs in his system.
The medical examiner said, well, in any other circumstance, that would have been fatal.
In any other circumstance?
Why not this one?
No, no, no, serious question.
Let's play that back, because I need you to hear this, so we can have this conversation, alright?
Here we go.
Here's the medical examiner.
unidentified
Do you recall describing the level of fentanyl as a fatal level of fentanyl?
I recall describing it in other circumstances, it would be a fatal level.
Yes.
In other circumstances.
Had Mr. Floyd been home alone in his locked residence with no evidence of trauma, and the only autopsy finding was that fentanyl level, then yes, I would certify his death as due to fentanyl toxicity.
Well, it's the medical examiner's opinion that 11 nanograms per milliliter of fentanyl did not kill him.
And only if they found him without trauma would they have assumed that did kill him, despite the fatal level being 3 nanograms per milliliter.
I believe that you can hear George Floyd say, I ate too many drugs.
What probably happened, in my opinion, is that when the police came up, Floyd panicked because he had serious drugs on him and he ate them.
Trying to avoid going to jail, and then it killed him.
Now, I think everything that happened with the police, there's a contributing factor there.
If they immediately called for a medic and got him Narcan or something, maybe they could have saved him, but he's resisting arrest, he's on drugs, he's fighting, they call for backup, and here's the craziest thing about the whole circumstance that I bring up all the time.
The prosecution against Derek Chauvin, the prosecution's own witness, outright said, Derek Chauvin was entitled to use more force than he already had used.
In fact, they said when he walked up seeing George Floyd resisting, he could have immediately pulled his taser and electrocuted the man.
But Derek Chauvin chose to use lesser force.
It's all lies, man.
I think the Daily Wire is correct.
I think they've presented evidence proving that.
And you know what?
You want to sue over it?
Good luck!
Now listen, here's the real issue.
Lawfare.
The Alex Jones precedent.
They'll just argue default against you.
They won't give you a chance to defend yourself.
And that's it.
And then they'll say you gotta give us money.
The system is completely broken.
It is broken.
That's why I keep saying civil war.
People don't realize.
We are watching this conflict escalate to a point where the law is gone.
A billion dollars because ten years ago Alex Jones made stupid comments that were opinions based on involuntary public figures?
I don't like what he said.
I think Alex Jones did very wrong, but a billion dollars?
Destroying his life and his company?
This is insane.
Look, I think you should be able to sue for defamation.
I think people shouldn't be able to lie and cause damages to people, but as a deterrent and compensatory damages, not to destroy their lives and company.
You know, these news organizations that have sued me, I don't advocate for them to be obliterated based on those single lies.
I think they're irredeemable institutions.
But I think they should compensate me for the damages they caused, plus punitive damages.
But I think they should keep functioning, burning it all to the ground.
And now we have the story of that guy.
What's his name?
Denschenko?
Not guilty on all counts.
And the media is saying, wow, the Durham investigation sure is embarrassing.
Federal prosecutors never lose this much.
Uh, Doy, have you realized something?
Federal prosecutors have tremendously high success rates in prosecutions.
You speak out against them, they will use this machine to come after you.
What they're realizing now is that people like Alex Jones, he has wealth.
He's dangerous.
People like Kanye West, he has wealth.
He's dangerous.
They need to use whatever mechanism they can against him.
But I would say that the judgment against Alex Jones is unjust.
It is wrong.
It is a corruption of our judicial system to an extreme degree.
And something must be done about it.
Now I say this, for the time being, we have an opportunity to elect a bunch of MAGA Republicans And once they get in, the tide may shift.
Not all Republicans are good, but hey, you got Marjorie Taylor Greene, you got the Carey Lakes.
This could get interesting.
Thomas Massey?
We might actually see pushback and laws passed and some real enforcement.
Maybe.
That's where we need to go for now.
But you know what?
Here's what I say.
I think Kanye's right!
I think the Daily Wire has presented their evidence and it looks like I mean, outright, the amount of fentanyl in George Floyd's system was... You know what?
I'm going to say this.
No, no, no.
The medical examiner is correct when he said that, you know, it looks like, in any other circumstance, that would have been fatal.
So, I think what he's saying is... His statement says this.
The knee on the neck and back of George Floyd was a contributing factor to his drug overdose.
It's right there.
How you conclude otherwise?
I don't know.
You fear rioters coming and smashing up your windows and killing your family or dogs or something?
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 1pm on this channel.
Thanks for hanging out, and I'll see you all then.
No!
Not Starbucks!
They're closing down in Portland?
But why?
Isn't Portland this bastion of leftist utopianism?
Hasn't it become a shining beacon for all of this country?
No?
What possibly could have happened?
Oh, safety concerns.
Starbucks shop in the Pearl District will close permanently on Friday, citing safety concerns.
It's the third Portland closure in three months.
Y'all have pandered to the psychopaths to the point where you can't even get your nasty burnt coffee anymore.
Okay, Starbucks coffee's pretty bad.
Not a fan.
Don't like it.
But their Nitro Cold Brew?
Yo, it is so good!
I got no problem admitting that.
I love the Starbucks Nitro Cold Brew.
It's just good.
That's reality.
And it's unfortunate, then, that you will no longer be able to get it in the Pearl District because Starbucks wanted to entertain psychotic woke ideology several years ago, and it's backfired to an insane degree.
But you know what I have for you today?
It's not just Starbucks.
It is also Wawa.
Crime drives popular Wawa chain out of downtown Philadelphia.
In these deep blue districts, Portland and Philadelphia, they are losing their conveniences and their luxuries because they support psychotic policies that allow criminals to run rampant, destroy everything, and now you don't get to have nice things.
As for the rest of us, I guess, we're gonna have to order our Starbucks Nitro Cold Brew from Amazon.
That's a reality, though.
And you know what?
To be honest, as much as we gloat and we laugh about the failures of the Democrat policies, you know, the reality is you will own nothing and you will be happy.
And we are on track for that.
I don't like Amazon.
I don't like them at all.
We use Amazon for a variety of things because... convenience.
Now not only do I go to a crappy, massive corporation that screws up a little guy, but I gotta drive there instead.
So it's a rock and a hard place.
We want to be able to get access to certain items for filming, for certain goods, and we order through Amazon.
Is there an easier way to do it?
No, there's not.
But that means we are all trapped in the curse.
Now, that being said, we here at Timcast are working hard to avoid companies that do these things.
But I don't believe in an absolute I don't think you go cold turkey.
I don't think it's absolute.
You've heard me say it.
I tell you guys, sign up at TimCast.com, but I also don't expect you to just cancel your Netflix, your Disney, or your Hulu, or whatever.
I think if you're truly committed, you could, but I think the average person needs certain, has certain needs they would like to meet, entertainment being one of them.
The answer to the problem is not to mandate everyone just cancel everything.
It's to build the alternatives.
So what we really need is an alternative to Amazon, an alternative to Starbucks, We'll see if we get there.
I've been working behind the scenes talking about opening up a cafe, so maybe we'll get there.
But let's talk about that in a second.
Let's first talk about Starbucks getting woke, going broke, closing three stores, and, I love it, Willamette Week, desperately trying to play it down because they're a leftist insane rag, and the last thing they need is for you to realize that the Democrats you're voting for are destroying your city.
But don't worry.
Keep voting for them, and you will own nothing, and you will be happy.
Here's a story from Willamette Week.
A Starbucks shop in the heart of the Pearl District will close permanently on Friday, October 21st.
You got two days to get your coffee while you still can.
The closure is posted on the coffee shop's door at the corner of Northwest 11th Avenue and Lovejoy Street.
Reached by phone and then in person on Monday, two baristas confirmed the impending closure to Willamette Week, saying management told them the closure is due to safety concerns.
Starbucks' corporate office did not respond to their request for comment.
It is perhaps yet another signal of a city reeling from homelessness, mental illness, and addiction.
Those social ills regularly confront workers at retail establishments like Starbucks.
But the closure of a location in the city's prime shopping neighborhood is significant.
This July, Starbucks announced a slate of 16 store closures in big cities across the country, citing safety issues, including two in Portland.
One in downtown Portland, another in deep southeast in the Gateway neighborhood.
At the time, union organizers accused the company of union busting.
While only 1% of stores nationwide are unionized, 19% of the stores that shuttered were union shops.
The Pearl storefront closing this week was not included in that batch of summer shutterings, and there's no indication it is part of a national wave of closures.
Let me explain to you the math here.
I love this.
While only 1% of stores nationwide are unionized, 19% of those that were shuttered were union shops.
Could it be not that Starbucks is union busting, but that there is a correlation Between leftists and policies that result in crime.
You getting it now?
Sure, it's easy to accuse Starbucks of union busting.
Fine.
Maybe that's the case.
But I can just as easily say, the people who are likely to unionize are also likely to vote in Democrats who will destroy the safety and sanctity of your neighborhood, resulting in corporate saying, we don't want to run these stores anymore.
When Starbucks said everybody can use their bathrooms because they don't want to be racist.
What happened?
People started going in their bathrooms to do drugs!
Huh.
About that.
So here's from Inquirer.
This story is from July 13th, 2020.
Starbucks will let employees close bathrooms.
Hmm.
Modifying policy prompted by 2018 Philadelphia arrests.
The policy modification came as part of an announcement that Starbucks would be closing 16 stores across the country, including one in City Center.
And there it is, my friends.
The correlation.
And it's only getting worse.
This is what they supported.
Now, look.
Starbucks didn't just react to what was going on.
They are an active component of the leftist insanity.
But you know what?
Fine.
So be it.
I don't care.
Y'all ain't gonna get your free Wi-Fi and your little... What are those little things there?
Like the eggs in it and the apple and the dip and the hummus or whatever?
Little crudités from Starbucks.
Yeah, well, you don't get to have nice things.
If you vote in policies that increase crime, allow rampant drug use and homelessness and mental illness to run rampant, if you're going to keep printing money thinking it's modern monetary policy, AOC says.
Then you will reap what you have sown.
Me?
You know, you know what I did this morning?
I got on my electric motorbike.
That's right, electric, because I care about the environment.
And I rode up to the main studio office, picked up a batch of Chicken City eggs coming in a variety of shapes and colors.
One of our chickens laying these weird oblong eggs.
Cracked them open, had fresh breakfast.
I didn't have to go to any crime-ridden city.
I didn't have to fight through hordes of drug-addicted homeless people or anything like that.
I minded my own business.
And that's what happens when you live out in the middle of nowhere.
That's unfortunate though.
Those of us that do move to the middle of nowhere, it's part of the reason why this bad stuff is happening.
We're not there to vote against the insanity.
And then as people of more sound mind leave these areas, the woke left insane cultists, the death and sex cultists, vote for the stupidest policies like, I think we'll save money by opening up our bathrooms to the public.
Then goes by a couple years and it's like, why are there people shooting up heroin in our bathrooms?
Then, a year later, they go, why is it no one wants to go to Starbucks anymore?
So brilliant, Starbucks, that you didn't see this coming.
Well, here we go, my friends.
It's also Wawa.
I love this story from NewsNation Now, because the image they used for Wawa says, Democrats use Obama's popularity on campaign trail.
Y'all trying to associate the crime and the shuttering with Obama and Democrats?
Maybe not intentionally, but here's the story from NewsNation Now.
A recent surge in crime in Philadelphia's downtown area, mirroring that of many other urban areas around the country, will leave visitors and residents with fewer shopping choices.
In September, a group of youths ransacked a Wawa convenience store in northeast Philadelphia, and that's led the company to close two of its downtown locations because of safety and security concerns.
That may not be the last closure.
Philadelphia Councilman Jim Driscoll told the Philadelphia Business Journal that a Wawa exec told him, we're seriously considering moving out of the city of Philadelphia in our strategic planning, or at least not to expand.
Bravo.
Wawa?
How about this?
You want my business?
We have Wawas out here.
We're fans.
We have sheets, too.
I kind of like sheets better.
But you want my business?
You will earn it when you come out and condemn the woke, psychotic policies that have resulted in higher crime.
Now, I've seen some people say, a lot of people like to mention that Democrat policies resulted in higher crime, but they don't give us any examples.
Oh, would you like some examples?
Let's talk about bail reform.
There was a guy in New York who was laughing as he was released, saying he keeps committing crimes and you keep letting him go.
Now hold on there a minute.
I think cash bail is wrong.
I think we've got people in prison for petty crimes that shouldn't be, and people that should be in prison a lot longer than they are.
Here's what I think.
In New York, somebody robs someone three times, you remand them.
They keep releasing these people because they don't want them in jail because of overcrowding.
It's a combination of policies that have resulted in this.
Fatherlessness, no-fault divorce, abortion.
You realize all of these things lead to degradation and a breakdown of social order.
I am not saying that we need enforced monogamy or to ban abortion or anything like that.
I'm saying it's a slippery slope.
You are sliding down it.
Why is it that we're seeing so much rampant homelessness, mental illness?
Well, man, shall we go back in time?
There's a lot to talk about.
I love this.
Leftists like to show this chart.
Which, uh, depicts, like, 1979.
And it shows wage and profit growth.
And they're like, wages remain stagnant while CEO pay and profits skyrocketed.
How could that have happened?
And they go, clearly it's the fault of Ronald Reagan.
And trickle-down economics.
And I'm like, uh, it's also women in the workplace.
I mean, I think women should be allowed to work and be in the workplace.
But that doesn't mean you can't point out the obvious.
When you double the workforce, supply meet demand.
Supply doubles, demand stays the same.
It crushes wages.
All of a sudden, there's a guy.
He's working at a company.
He's getting paid $40,000 a year in the late 70s.
Pretty good salary.
Not the greatest, but good.
And they go to him and say, look, you're expensive, and we've got someone who can replace you for $30,000.
Ooh, $30,000?
How can they afford that?
With a family?
Well, actually, the guy's wife works.
So, combined, they're making $60,000, and they actually have more money than you do on your $40,000 a year salary.
You can take a pay cut or you can get out.
Someone applies for a job and says, look, I've got a wife and three kids.
I need to make $50,000 a year.
And they go, this guy over here, he's willing to do it for $30,000 because his wife has a job too.
And they don't have kids, or they have one kid, and it's just like, okay.
The reality here, Is that, for better or for worse, and this is not a moral value judgment or anything like that, women in the workplace resulted in people having less kids.
It resulted in lower wages.
I'm not saying it's a sole factor.
I'm not saying it means women shouldn't be working.
No, no, no.
I'm just saying, consider that.
Now we need to look at that and say, if that's an issue, how do we rectify it?
Well, the response on the left, simultaneously, is maximize the supply of labor, but then force the companies to pay more.
It doesn't work that way.
You can't just force companies to pay more.
A minimum wage increase does have an impact.
It does.
It will help people on the short term, but that'll drive up inflation.
I was talking to an accountant.
He mentioned that when New Jersey raised their minimum wage, 20% of the companies, 30% of the companies he represented went out of business because they could not just abruptly increase all of the salaries of all their employees, all the hourly wages.
It was impossible.
So all of a sudden, they said, we don't have enough money.
We're closing.
That's what it does.
These leftist policies result in stores closing, as I mentioned.
It results in families unable to raise their own kids because both the husband and wife are working.
It results in a culture of lewd and lascivious behavior.
So women don't have husbands.
Husbands don't have wives.
And the kids grow up without fathers.
The kids grow up in bad neighborhoods.
You get crime, homelessness, all of this.
Destabilizing.
The family is very, very important.
So what do you see?
A bunch of people go into Wawa and ransack it and destroy it.
Crime explodes and then people who are afflicted vote for affliction.
That's reality.
The people who are impoverished will vote for policies that will make things worse.
This is not a moral judgment on poor people.
You know, Michael Bloomberg's response was, we should tax the poor because they buy things that they don't need and hurt them.
That was his policy position.
He said, tax the poor, quite literally.
He said, because we know what's better for them.
Only because you've destroyed the family.
Because you've destroyed, you know, American culture.
Do we have these problems?
Perhaps we can solve them.
I think the issue is many of these left activists have seen this and now they're excited for it.
Because this is an opportunity to knock everything down and then rebuild something new.
And it feels like that's what they really, really want.
Starbucks getting knocked down in this way?
I gotta be honest, the left was vying for this for some time.
They were throwing bricks through Starbucks windows.
Let me just stress this to all of you.
Leftists go around smashing Starbucks windows.
Did it work?
No.
There's a song.
Oh, a song that I used to sing.
Baby, I'm an anarchist.
And you're a spineless liberal.
But when it came time to throw bricks to that Starbucks window, you left me all alone.
They say it's from Against Me.
Big fan of that band, by the way.
And the lyric is, Baby, I'm an anarchist.
You're a spineless liberal.
We marched together for the eight-hour day and held hands in the streets of Seattle.
But when it came time to throw bricks to that Starbucks window, you left me all alone.
Liberals didn't want to do it.
And rightly so.
But that's the line.
I think it's actually kind of funny.
They've been singing songs about wanting to destroy Starbucks for a long time.
Well, I gotta say this, anarchists.
And the left ones.
The liberals really outdid ya.
See, they were smarter than you the whole time.
You complain about the liberals, but who got the Starbucks shut down?
Was it your brick?
No.
It was the policies that led to rampant crime and drug abuse.
And now, Starbucks has been shuttered.
Several of them, actually.
This is what, number 17, I guess?
There's probably substantially more, because this is just the Portland one we're hearing about.
So, when you marched for the 8-hour day and held hands in the streets of Seattle, and then the liberals said, no, no, no, don't throw the brick, and you went, uh, I'm gonna throw the brick anyway, you only hurt your own cause.
And it was those spineless liberals through their policies that destroyed Starbucks.
So, congratulations.
You know, I think there's a lot of problems with Starbucks.
I really despise Starbucks.
The only thing I like about them is their Nitro Cold Brew.
But, there are other companies we do buy from.
And, in fact, most of the coffee we do buy is a different company.
It's called High Brew.
I don't know anything about them.
I've got to look into it.
But, look, I get it.
It's really hard to be a perfect consumer.
I'm not gonna pretend to be a saint in this regard.
I do think, though, it is good when you're actively trying to do better.
So, you know, I accept it.
Like, to all of you who still have Disney or Hulu or whatever, it's like... I mean, I think it's the same thing now.
Yeah, maybe you can't just get rid of it outright because you do like watching these shows and you do want to support the things on those networks that you do like.
That just means that we, you know, Daily Wire, Timcast, other companies, we have to make stuff that you want to watch.
We put out an episode the other day of Cast Castle Vlog with Rusty Cage and Blair White, and I think it is probably the funniest one we've done yet.
However, I'm not going to pretend like it's at the same level of quality as major institutions.
I'm not going to pretend that we're making stuff that has the same level of quality as 30 Rock or The Office.
We have good jokes.
The people in the vlog are not actors.
They're just the employees who work here who are acting.
So it is what it is.
We're making stuff.
Maybe as we expand, we will get better and better at it.
But this is it.
You have to start somewhere and build something.
And our values are reflected in the things we produce.
We believe in the family.
We believe in the Constitution.
We believe in free speech.
We believe in the Second Amendment.
All of these things are reflected in the work we do at TimCast.com.
If you support the likes of us and The Daily Wire, we will push back on the absurdity and the insanity.
And maybe we can actually, at the very least, Create a space for people who believe in doing the right thing.
Donald Trump said, make America great again.
And what the left said was, he means racist.
It's insane.
Here's what I hear when Donald Trump said, Make America Great Again.
You know what I hear?
You know what I see?
I see families of all different backgrounds.
Be it Latino, Asian, Black, White.
Waking up for breakfast with their kids.
Having eggs and bacon.
None of that sugary stuff.
We don't need that.
And a glass of milk.
There's a good amount of sugar in milk, but it's okay.
And real organic grass-fed milk.
And this family, imagine, you know what?
They don't have to be white.
Okay?
The left makes that up.
Imagine it is a Latino and black mixed-race family.
Oh no!
That's what I imagine is America being great again means.
It means people of all different backgrounds smiling, going to work, coming home, not having to work their fingers to the bone, good jobs in America, sustainably sourced, environmental protections, All of that good stuff.
Within reason.
Environmental protections within reason.
A community of individuals of varying backgrounds and religions and faiths who recognize the value of the Constitution.
Live together, learn together, laugh together.
Wages going up, economic prosperity, unemployment down, and we were seeing these things.
That's why across the board, Trump was doing well in the economy.
But who was it who got angry with Trump?
White upper class voters.
The people the left claims to oppose.
The wealthy white people.
But they're the ones who are woke.
In the end, a major shift happened with black voters and Latino voters and Asian voters.
Working class voters.
The real working class diverse coalition moving towards the Republican Party, MAGA, and Donald Trump.
If you like Starbucks, you're allowed to.
I'm not a fan.
I think they're too cutthroat.
But you're allowed to have a Starbucks and go there and not have to worry about this stuff.
But the policies enacted by the left has destroyed these institutions and these businesses.
You know, I'm not going to shed a tear for Starbucks, to be completely honest.
You reap what you sow.
You support this stuff?
Then it's only funny to me.
They tricked you into destroying yourselves.
You know what I want to see?
More mom-and-pop coffee shops.
That's what I want to see.
More small businesses competing with Starbucks, competing with Walmart.
These are big chains that are destroying them.
I want to see Amazon being unnecessary.
Take a drive through any small town downtown and what will you see?
Empty storefronts.
It's sad.
You know why?
We used to walk down the street.
There's the butcher shop.
There's the coffee shop.
There's the milk shop.
You'd walk in, grab some meat.
You walk in, grab some milk.
You walk in, grab a coffee.
You walk over, get your shoes shined.
And all of these small businesses operating and taking care of each other.
Then megastores arrived.
They all got out of business.
Now the online megastore is here.
Everyone's going out of business.
And then you get less jobs.
You get people who have no purpose.
You get chaos.
The end result is fairly obvious, isn't it?
If we continue on this path, you will eventually live in a pod, you will eat bugs, you will own nothing, and they're hoping you'll be happy, but you'll probably just be really pissed off.
