All Episodes
Nov. 21, 2022 - Tim Pool Daily Show
01:22:56
TRUMP IS BACK ON TWITTER, Elon Unbans Veritas AND MORE, Leftists LOSE BOT Followers, Elon Says NO To Alex Jones

TRUMP IS BACK, Elon Unbans Veritas AND MORE, Leftists LOSE BOT Followers, Elon Says NO To Alex Jones Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Participants
Main voices
t
tim pool
01:20:39
Appearances
Clips
j
josh hammer
00:33
| Copy link to current segment

Speaker Time Text
tim pool
Today is November 21st, 2022, and our first story.
Elon Musk has reinstated Donald Trump to Twitter, as well as Project Veritas and many others.
The tides are changing in the culture war.
In our next story, Assistant Attorney General for Arizona is refusing to certify the election, citing problems with Maricopa County.
And in our last story, breaking down a viral meme.
Showing, before Elon Musk's takeover at Twitter, a bunch of women.
And after, a bunch of men.
Many implying it shows that women don't want to work hard or were driven away by Elon Musk.
If you like the show, give us a good review and leave us five stars.
But most importantly, share the show with your friends.
Word of mouth is the most important way to help podcasts succeed.
Now, let's get into that first story.
You probably heard the good news over the weekend.
Donald Trump has been reinstated on Twitter.
Now, whether or not he actually comes back, yet to be seen.
But Elon Musk has been posting spicy memes trying to coax Donald Trump off of Truth Social and onto Twitter.
I don't think Donald Trump can go back onto Twitter, though.
I don't know exactly what's going on with Truth Social, but my understanding is that Trump had that DWAC, SPAC, that Special Purpose Acquisition Company or whatever it's called.
And so, he's probably got some kind of fiduciary duty to not be on Twitter.
Again, not entirely sure.
We will see.
I'm sure there's something Trump could do.
And I personally think, politically, he has to get back on Twitter.
Since the reinstatement of Trump's account, we've been reminded of everything that was taken from us.
All of these crazy tweets going back 10, 12 years or so.
Donald Trump was a funny guy.
He was trolling the trolls.
He was trolling back.
And it was good stuff.
It was.
It was funny.
And then we can see all the crazy things he posted when he was president.
And by crazy, I mean, just like, maybe eccentric is the right word, not crazy.
But just, um, I don't know.
It's like, you know, I constantly say people need to throw a pie, right?
Like, just come on, shake things up a little bit.
Let's, let's, let's figure out how to fix this stuff.
Donald Trump certainly was that wild card.
And now, Elon Musk appears to be.
My friends, I have too much for you to go through.
This weekend was insane.
I think I got like 50 tabs pulled up of all the insanity.
You got CBS News coming out and being like, we're getting off of Twitter due to uncertainty.
And then like, not even a few hours later, they're like, okay, actually, we're back.
You've got the left screaming, they're losing followers, what's happening?
Well, the right is gaining followers like crazy, huh?
You've got dispatches from Mastodon where all of the leftists were fleeing to and they're like, what's happening?
Why am I getting suspended?
One lady was ragging on white people and got her account suspended.
And then the message was sent that she got was that she was racist.
And she was like, what's happening?
And they were like, hey, you can't post racist things.
It's just funny how this all works, doesn't it?
They're starting to realize that when they're not being shielded, they can't just say all this insane racist garbage.
It's kind of weird, right?
That's basically what's happening though.
Twitter always allowed the left to be racist and violent and would ban anyone else.
Mastodon apparently isn't even letting them do that.
But my friends, there's so much more!
James Lindsay restored.
unidentified
Project Veritas restored.
tim pool
Man, there's just so many accounts that are coming back to life, and probably more to come.
It seems like what's happening is... If, uh... Ooh, ooh, I know!
Let's use pop culture references!
Alright, pop culture references.
So, um... I know some people want to use that meme of the Avengers, when Tony Stark... No, no, no, I'm sorry, it was T'Challa.
He shows up on the battlefield, and Captain America looks over, and all the portals open, and all the heroes come out.
Nah, you know, I could say that, sure.
But I'm gonna go with Walter Peck from Ghostbusters.
You remember that?
Basically, Walter Peck is the EPA guy who comes down and he's like, SHUT OFF THIS CONTAINMENT UNIT!
And they're like, if you do this, we're not responsible.
And then they shut off the containment unit, and then all the ghosts escape and they're flying around the city.
Some dude tweeted that Elon Musk is the villain now.
And I'm just like, he's like Walter Peck in Ghostbusters.
Of course, that was all propaganda against Walter Peck.
In reality, he was just trying to stop a nuclear reactor from operating in the city.
Okay, I'm kidding, right?
I'm not actually comparing Elon Musk to one of the antagonists of Ghostbusters, but fair point.
Walter Peck saw some dudes running an unlicensed nuclear reactor in New York City, and he wanted it shut down.
To be fair as well, you don't just go and shut these things down, for obvious reasons.
But anyway, I digress.
The ghosts are running amok.
Containment field has been removed.
Let me show you just oh so much of what I have to show you.
And then, my friends, I will point out, Elon Musk is not perfect.
He's refusing to restore Alex Jones for personal reasons, despite it having nothing to do with Twitter or its rules.
And this is the problem.
So, Elon, I hope you hear this.
The problem with Twitter before that all of us were complaining about was not that our friends had been banned.
I mean, yeah, that's part of it.
But it was that Twitter was operating under arbitrary rules where no one knew what was safe, except that if you opposed the establishment, you would be removed.
What we want, a clear set of guidelines so that we can engage in political discourse fairly and honestly to the best of our abilities.
But Elon says, no, I'm not restoring Alex Jones for something he said years before he was banned from Twitter for something completely unrelated to Twitter.
Huh?
Did he break the rules or not?
Are the rules free speech or not?
No.
What's happening, it would seem, is that we are once again just living under the whims of a billionaire.
I'll take a win, I guess.
I'm not satisfied with oligarchy or the rules of a billionaire.
I'm happy that Elon is fixing many things, and if this is the best you get, well then so be it.
But I'd like to aspire for a little bit more.
And I believe if Elon is willing to make these moves, he can understand why he's wrong And this is not a technical question.
I'm sure Elon knows how to make a whole bunch of crazy stuff happen with rockets and computers and satellites.
No, he's wrong philosophically.
And politically.
So here we go.
The New York Times has the statement, but this was it.
Elon Musk tweeted.
Reinstate former President Trump.
This was on the 18th at 7.47pm.
He said, Vox Populi, Vox Dei.
Touche, good sir.
The voice of the people is the voice of God.
134 million people have seen the poll.
15 million voted.
And Donald Trump has won with 51.8% of the vote.
For this, Elon Musk reinstated Donald Trump's account.
Now there's an interesting point.
Here's the account.
You know him, you'll love him.
There's Donald Trump.
Apparently, Elon Musk was doing this as a bot check.
So we think.
Some people speculated on TimCast IRL that the real reason he was doing this is because previously, he made a poll about whether or not we should find peace in Ukraine to prevent World War III.
And overwhelmingly, people were like, no, we want war.
And he said, how is this possible?
Well, maybe it's that Elon Musk was biased.
But now that he has access to the internal systems, it seems like he decided to do a similar poll to see if he was right.
And after this post, he said it was amazing to see the bots attack it.
I wonder.
I really do.
I think that may be the case.
votes. I wonder. I really do. Maybe it really is that you and I, we are the
average, we are the majority, and Twitter is trying to manipulate us into thinking
we are not. I think that may be the case. And I've got more evidence to show you.
Now of course Elon Musk can't help but post spicy memes.
Here's one, a woman showing her butt to a monk and the monk is like, no, and the woman is Twitter and the monk is Donald Trump.
And then we have, okay, I don't have the other ones.
Okay, here we go.
The other memes are unrelated.
There was another meme where it's Lois Griffin looking like disheveled at a bottle of pills.
And it's like, Lois is Trump, you get it.
Take a look at this.
Scott Dworkin says, like everyone else, I lost a ton of followers since Trump was reinstated.
If you're staying on Twitter so this doesn't become a MAGA cesspool, reply with a heart and I'll follow you back.
Huh.
Jack Posobiec says, lol he lost his bots.
Okay.
Let's take a look.
This is my metrics.
It says followers for the last 30 days.
51,364.
It's weird to put a decimal in there.
What is it, Europe?
And let's see, I'm down 800%.
Wow, I was gaining a lot of followers.
That doesn't make sense.
Anyway, as we can see, in the past few days since Elon Musk started making these changes, I've started seeing a major growth in followers.
I gained 5,791 today!
That's crazy.
Is there anybody else?
I mean, you know, I'm like moderate with, you know, politically, I guess we wouldn't be considered left-wing because the left is a cult.
But, you know, we're in the moderate, independent, centrist kind of section.
Let's take a look at the more staunch conservative with Steven Crowder.
Ah, yeah, Steven Crowder lost some followers, but on Sunday and Monday, he gained 6,205.
Monday, 6,304.
Interesting.
Crowder, he's gaining so many.
Now, I don't know if this is bot stuff, but take a look at this.
Cenk Uygur of the Young Turks.
He's lost on Sunday, 823.
Monday, 712.
We have Hasan.
Lost today, 508.
He was gaining a little bit.
Now he's losing.
He was gaining more earlier.
And then Vashfi.
Just a random spattering.
He's been losing followers this past month.
unidentified
Hey it's Kimberly Fletcher here from Moms4America with some very exciting news.
Tucker Carlson is going on a nationwide tour this fall and Moms4America has the exclusive VIP meet and greet experience for you.
Before each show, you can have the opportunity to meet Tucker Carlson in person.
These tickets are fully tax-deductible donations, so go to momsforamerica.us and get one of our very limited VIP meet and greet experiences with Tucker at any of the 15 cities on his first ever Coast to Coast tour.
Not only will you be supporting Moms for America in our mission to empower moms, promote liberty, and raise patriots, your tax-deductible donation secures you a full VIP experience with priority entrance and check-in, premium gold seating in the first five rows, access to a pre-show cocktail reception, an individual meet-and-greet, and photo with America's most famous conservative and our friend, Tucker Carlson.
Visit Moms4America.us today for more information and to secure your exclusive VIP meet-and-greet tickets.
See you on the tour!
tim pool
I don't know if it's bots.
I'm sure some of it is bots.
What I think it may be is they are reactivating accounts, and more people are signing up, and leftists are leaving.
Early on, before Elon Musk bought Twitter, when he announced he was, we saw this shift.
That, I believe, was them Enron-style cleaning house.
This, I'm not entirely sure.
Now, it's not just Donald Trump.
Project Veritas has been reinstated.
I ran a poll, I said, should Elon Musk restore the accounts of James O'Keefe and Veritas?
150,000 votes, 97% yes.
Sure.
My echo chamber.
50,000 votes, 97% yes.
Sure.
My echo chamber.
What are you going to do about it?
But we're glad to see it.
Veritas is back, and James O'Keefe is... Oh, there we go.
145,000 votes.
96% yes.
Hear, hear.
And James O'Keefe has returned, and is promising a big expose.
A federal whistleblower is here.
Oh, there is so much more to go through.
Kanye West is back.
Testing, testing, seeing if my Twitter is unblocked.
It is.
Elon Musk says, don't kill what ye hate, save what ye love.
Oh, man.
He's just bringing everybody back.
And then we got James Lindsay's back.
You know, that's a notable one.
There's a bunch of others.
A ton of accounts.
ALX, a lot of people are pointing out, is back.
Then we have this.
Oh, there's just so much.
I love it.
CBS News restarts using Twitter after stopping for security concerns.
They couldn't last!
And then Elon Musk tweeted this.
Brokeback Mountain meme.
CBS News, why can't I quit you?
And then there's the Twitter on Elon Musk's cowboy hat.
Okay, Elon, did you make this?
Because, you know, what I think is happening is that people make memes and then Elon is seeing them and reposting them.
So, you know, touche.
There's the meme.
Oh, I love it.
Here we go.
So CBS News says they're going to leave.
Then we get The Atlantic.
Twitter is poised to die.
Its loss will be a loss for writers and readers, writes Summers Aaron.
It's funny that they tag the lady's Twitter account.
You posted this on Twitter, says Ian Milestrong.
Yes!
Dude.
Okay, maybe Twitter will die.
I don't know.
Maybe.
It could be.
And Elon is just riding the gravity bomb down, going, yeah!
As it all falls.
But for the time being, you know, calm down, dude.
It's Twitter.
Y'all are losing it.
Tim Young says, CBS News.
We aren't biased.
Also CBS News.
Now that Elon Musk reinstated Trump, we can't be on Twitter anymore.
Elon Musk responds.
So you say mainstream media is biased?
unidentified
Hmm.
tim pool
We'll have to fact-check that with the mainstream media.
Nope.
They say everything is cool.
You know what I think happened to Elon?
How he got red-pilled?
They lied about him too much.
And he's constantly going on Twitter having to correct them.
And then eventually he just said, I'm sick of this.
They just keep lying about everything.
That's all they do.
They're liars.
Rahim J. Kassam says, LMAO, Elon Musk, look at this totally organic and not at all coordinated attempt to destroy Twitter.
So he points out these two articles.
845 AM, Trump's terrifically stupid return to Twitter.
The next article, 846 from CNN, Twitter was already in disarray.
Trump's return will only make it more chaotic.
I wonder if the Atlantic thing was, no, that was from later in the day.
But yeah.
Now, it's a couple articles, right?
Elon says they just can't stop writing about Twitter, which is driving usage through the roof.
LMAO.
That's the game.
That's how it's played.
Now, what about our friends who abandoned the platform?
Here's one example of how funny it is.
Stuxx at Mastodon says, What's it with people reporting every single person they don't like?
Please stop with that.
This is not Twitter.
Please use features like mute or block if you don't like people, but stop reporting.
Otherwise, I'll start banning people who keep reporting for nothing.
I'm trying to keep things running with so many new people, and it's such a waste of time to hear whatever you don't like.
Otherwise, go waste Elon's time, not mine.
Nah, I don't know if this is real, just to point that out.
There was another post where a woman said, in all my years on Twitter, I've never been suspended, but this time they did.
And she wrote a tweet where she said she had to start reading, um, rich white cis men to understand, like, what was wrong with them or something, and then Mastodon suspended her.
Because it was racist.
Amazing.
I don't know how those laws work or whatever, but Mastodon apparently has to abide by German law.
Twitter informs you if you broke German law, but I don't know how that matters for me.
I don't care.
I don't care about German law, so whatever.
And then we have Nate Silver.
He says, Mastodon seems like a honey trap for hall monitor personality types.
Honestly, if Elon gets all the hall monitors to migrate to Mastodon, that might be his greatest contribution towards the betterment of humanity.
Now, I'm blocked by the hall monitor, but Elon Musk then laughs.
People then posted that tweet I just read, and it's an interesting point.
Noam Bardin says, We are closing in on 100,000 people on our wait list.
Late last night, we rolled out the first version of search and are fixing bugs.
The post team has been working around the clock and weekend.
So that is a Twitter for journalists.
Here's the point.
All the people that are leaving Twitter are the Just say, awful people to be around.
The Karens.
Like, all of the Karens are like, well, I'm going to leave then.
And they all go to Mastodon, and they all start reporting each other.
They deserve each other.
Y'all, if that's the game you want to play, that's the game for you.
Me, I kind of like a place where people are making edgy jokes and arguing and saying naughty words.
Apparently, there are some words that are now allowed on Twitter that are not allowed on YouTube.
How about that?
But, with all of the good that we're seeing as Elon Musk, Walter, packs the containment unit and releases the ghosts upon New York City, we have unfortunately this story.
From Slate, 2018.
A lot of people told me I should lead with this, but because there's so much news going on, you know, it is what it is.
This is the story that you need to share.
Alex Jones' insults to a reporter finally got him banned on Twitter.
That's right, my friends.
Alex Jones walked up to Oliver Darcy and called him a rat face.
For this, the video they posted, Twitter banned him.
Should he have been banned for that?
Well, they argued it was abusive behavior.
And I gotta say, a little crass, a little crude.
Going up to someone in public and yelling at them and insulting them, you're allowed to do it.
Alex Jones was not kicked out of the halls of Congress for doing so.
The police were not called.
He committed no crimes.
But Twitter said it was untoward behavior.
So they removed Alex Jones.
Is that why people should be banned, Elon Musk?
Because they insult other people?
Well, I mean, to be fair, the joke made by the Babylon Bee was insulting.
You can argue it was just a joke.
The Babylon Bee said Rachel Levine, a trans person, was man of the year, and this got them banned.
That was being mean, right?
But you like the Babylon Bee.
Some people like that Alex Jones was calling out a CNN reporter who lies.
Now, Elon, you talk about how the mainstream media is lying all the time.
Oliver Darcy is part of that mainstream media, and people want to see him called out.
Perhaps Alex Jones is a little crude in the way he did it, but is it against the rules to insult someone?
To post a video of you insulting them?
Yeah, I don't think it should be.
I mean, I wouldn't engage in that behavior nor encourage it, but... Rule-breaking?
Unfortunately, that has nothing to do with why Elon Musk will not restore Alex Jones.
Sam Harris, a deeply broken man whose brain has been shattered by Trump, says, Is it time to let Alex Jones back on Twitter, Elon Musk?
If not, why not?
Elon Musk says, Suffer little children and forbid them not to come unto me, for of such is the kingdom of heaven.
Kim.com says, Alex effed up with Sandy Hook.
He admitted that and apologized.
He also got a lot of conspiracy theories right.
If serial liars like Biden and Trump are allowed on Twitter, then Alex Jones should be allowed too.
Please reconsider in the interest of real free speech.
Elon Musk says, My firstborn child died in my arms.
I felt his last heartbeat.
I have no mercy for anyone who would use the deaths of children for gain, politics, or fame.
That is a deeply emotional story, Elon Musk, and with respect to your feelings, I apologize that you went through that.
I also want to stress that for the sake of logic, practical philosophy, morals, and ethics, I don't care.
I care about you as a human being.
I care about your story.
That, we understand.
But you expressing your personal angst and wielding that against someone who is not banned for that reason, I think is the element of corruption.
Look, We're way better off with Elon Musk running Twitter.
In fact, I tweeted, Twitter lit AF since Elon Musk took over, and the Musk himself clicked like on my tweet.
Thank you, Elon.
I appreciate it.
But I have to say, we're trying to constantly be better than we were.
And I do not think that the personal experiences of an individual and their pain Should allow for interference in policy procedure and the rights of speech.
I think this is what the Founding Fathers thought.
Yeah, I remember when... I've experienced some very serious hardship.
Nothing nearly as bad as that, mind you.
And look, with respect, I understand how horrifying that feeling may be.
But Elon, you must be stronger than this.
We do not need another platform ruled at the whims of a billionaire.
It just so happens this billionaire has the same sense of humor as we do, so we're good there.
Unfortunately, this billionaire also is just seemingly operating the platform the same as Jack Dorsey did, as to their feelings.
Alex Jones was not banned over Sandy Hook.
His comments about Sandy Hook took place about six years before he was banned.
Would you have banned him six years later?
Alex Jones apologized for this.
They want him to pay 1.4 billion dollars over the things he said.
That is unrelated to his use of the Twitter platform.
Completely unrelated.
This is the world I am fighting against.
A world where your bank bans you because you said something on Twitter.
This is the problem of cancel culture.
That Alex Jones would say something on his show years ago, and now he can't go on Twitter because of it.
No.
That is not the way we handle things.
And if that's the world you want, Elon, I humbly disagree.
I'll take the win.
I'll sit back as you let more and more people on the platform.
I will respect that perhaps your hands are tied.
Perhaps he can't let Alex Jones back on the platform because he'd get every non-profit going after him tenfold.
Maybe Twitter would get pulled from the app store.
Who knows?
Maybe he's really just blocked because you can only do so much.
I respect that.
Even Alex Jones said he should be brought on the platform because of all the problems it would create.
But Elon Musk should not be coming out and saying these things if that is the case.
So for now...
If it were the reality they couldn't bring Alex back, he could ignore these points.
He could say, some things are just too hard for me to do.
I hope you understand.
And we would all say, we get it.
That's all he had to say.
In fact, who knows what that really means.
If he said, I am doing my best to restore free speech, but I am limited in what I can do and what I can't accomplish.
And he said just that, I'd say, Okay.
Instead he said, I won't bring him back, too bad, and I don't like what he said.
I don't like what Alex Jones said at all.
I don't like what Nazis have to say.
I don't like what woke people have to say.
I don't like when people post my address and Twitter doesn't remove it.
That, I think, should be banned.
Despite the fact that it is free speech.
So there's limits.
But this This is the problem, my friends.
We live in a world of man.
I don't mean men, males.
I mean the world of humans and human fallacy.
And we like to believe that the courts are logical.
I love it when people say something to me like, but you can't do that!
That's illegal!
And I'm just like, bro, are you kidding me?
The only law you can't break are the natural laws.
And perhaps even then, we can't figure out a way to break them.
I mean, we're, you know, humans are smart enough to do a lot of things.
But the reality is, when it does appear that a law is broken, it's just that we didn't understand the natural law.
I'm talking about physics.
We're like, hey, this thing can't happen.
And then it happens, and we're like, wow, we were wrong about that.
It actually can happen, because it did.
I tell people the universe is perfect, as far as we can see.
There's no imperfections in the system.
It's operating.
It's operating very well.
Maybe there are glitches, and we just can't know about it, so it's imperfect, but from our perspective, it is.
The world of man is imperfect.
Elon Musk is imperfect.
He would come forth and he would uphold certain philosophies that we agree with, but then, when struck by something deeply emotional, there you go.
He will not abide by logic.
He will befall to the whims and the emotions of men.
Maybe we don't want someone who operates like a computer.
Maybe.
But maybe we need fair rules.
We need to know how to play the game.
Imagine if I was playing chess and the referee said, I don't think the white queen should be able to move more than five spaces in any direction.
No, it's just because I had a bad experience playing chess.
And you're like, well, hold on.
That's not a rule.
Like, you're creating a special circumstance based on your personal feelings.
How are we supposed to play this game?
How are we supposed to improve humanity?
How are we supposed to reach the stars, Elon, if you would have your emotions bar us from having conversations?
Again, what you've done, infinitely better than what Vijaya Gadde and Jack Dorsey were doing.
However, I think we need a rigid... We need rigidly defined rules.
This is not it.
So, maybe.
Maybe he just couldn't bring him back if he wanted.
Sam Harris, a deeply broken man, will wrap up with his final thought.
The prevailing opinion among free speech absolutists appears to be that this platform, in order to become healthy, must helplessly publish the malicious lies of any maniac at scale regardless of the consequences.
Good luck with that.
Oh, Sam Harris, you deeply broken man.
That is the worst strawman I've ever seen from someone pretending to be smart.
No.
Free speech absolutists recognize that people lie and people are wrong.
And wrong people are allowed to have free speech.
And smart people are allowed to have free speech, too.
josh hammer
But your opinion 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
Your view of things that we should restrict ideas means, as does Elon Musk's statements on Alex Jones,
stupid people do not deserve free speech.
And I reject that.
I reject it outright.
Free speech is a human right.
You assume, Elon, that Alex Jones intentionally lied and knew he was lying about what he said.
Maybe he genuinely believed it.
If someone believes that aliens are here, are they not allowed to express those ideas?
If someone believes that, say, Epstein didn't, you know, take his own life, then why would they be banned?
That person, on the other hand, if you get my drift, sometimes people are right but are accused of being wrong.
Then they get banned.
Which is why, we just say, we err on the side of free speech.
But Sam Harris has been broken by Trump.
Completely broken.
And it's personal.
That's what it is for Elon Musk.
But, look my friends, we're doing great.
I am grateful to Elon Musk for taking the huge risk he did.
44 billion dollar risk.
Serious risk.
I empathize with the feeling that he experienced watching his son die.
I don't know how excruciating that pain may be.
I watched a video, and it pains me.
It really does.
It was a man holding his son.
His son was dying.
I think his son died.
And it was on Twitter.
His adult son was dying, and the scream he let out is haunting.
I've personally witnessed people die.
The feeling you get, it's indescribable.
Most people don't know it.
Maybe not everybody gets it, I don't know.
The feeling that I got when I first saw someone die was a strange feeling indeed.
The feeling that I got when I saw a catastrophic injury to a person laying on the ground, I can't even describe.
The feeling of a person holding their son as they die must be 100-fold worse than that, or more.
I get it, man.
We have to be better than ourselves.
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.
The battle for Arizona is not over.
Despite the fact that many media outlets have already called the race for Katie Hobbs, the Democrat, Carrie Lake is only down around 17,000 votes, putting her within the margin of error based on the Maricopa County Election Supervisor Bill Gates' statement about how many ballots were not properly counted early on.
Now I'm not saying they have not yet been counted.
I'm saying the legal challenges are underway and the big breaking news is that the Assistant Attorney General in Arizona is refusing to certify the elections.
Why?
Because of problems plaguing Maricopa County.
We're now hearing that several other counties will not certify the results of their election either.
Democrat lawyer Mark Elias says that if they do not certify in a timely manner, then they will be sued.
So, I don't know exactly how this will play out, but it is far from done.
The interesting thing here is that with a lot of the lawsuits coming out of 2020 alleging impropriety, glitches, errors, etc., many of these suits were not challenging an amount of votes that would actually change the results.
They were questions of standing.
Do you have a right to sue on behalf of someone else if they're not here to make a claim for themselves?
Now, we are not yet in the position where this election has been certified, so we don't know.
Some reporting suggests this will be done and certified by December.
But if the reported error rate was 17,000 votes and Carrie Lake is down by 17,000 votes, it stands to reason they're within the margin of error to get standing to file a lawsuit and perhaps see something change.
Now, I'm not saying she won.
I don't know.
For the time being, the only thing that's happened is that the media has called the race for Hobbes.
It has not yet been certified, so we will see.
Another big, interesting component to this, of course, YouTube's rules around challenging elections.
Well, their rules are vague and nebulous, and so all I can do is say, I've got the sources here, NewsGuard certified, election officials are outright saying they will not certify, so we don't know exactly how this will play out.
For those that aren't familiar with what's going on, during the midterm elections in Arizona, people who were trying to vote in person were reporting widespread errors.
They were trying to put their ballots through the machines.
The machines would not count them.
The reason?
Some have reported that the printers were not printing with enough ink.
It wasn't dark enough, so the printer couldn't actually scan it.
These people were told to place their ballots in box number three, where they would then be taken and counted elsewhere.
It may actually be worse than we realize, with new reporting from the Daily Caller saying that the widespread errors in Maricopa County were worse than previously assessed.
Now here's what needs to happen.
For the time being, these are reported and not yet adjudicated.
As for any other election, I'm only talking about the midterms, and I'm only talking specifically about the races that are not yet certified.
So we don't exactly know.
And just because they said they're projecting Hobbs to be the winner doesn't mean she's actually won because they have not certified the election.
The media does not decide when someone won.
So, that means Gary Lake may actually take it.
I think it is slim that she actually will, based on legal challenges, win this one.
But there are questions about how we can run our elections better.
And the most important thing to realize is, when it comes to a lot of this, I do not think we need to argue any kind of fraud or anything like that.
We don't need to.
That implies intent of an individual to do something.
It may be the case that in certain circumstances there are fraud.
I think there is.
Does it affect the outcome of the elections?
Don't know.
This one's not yet certified.
I think the important thing is to say, okay, I'm not going to assume intent.
I'm going to follow the evidence to make a determination about what really happened.
And all that needs to happen right now.
We don't need theories about who did what.
What we need is to adjudicate the ballots on election day and figure out what happened and then determine if it was good, we're good, and it should be certified.
And if there are problems that do result in an amount of ballots that would change the outcome of the election, then we need to have that, well, adjudicated.
It needs to go before a court.
Kerry Lake's going to have to go get signatures and sworn statements.
But if that's the case, then so be it.
If that's the case, we've got a very, very serious problem.
So, let's read, and I'll show you exactly what's going on, and I'll break down YouTube's rules on elections for you.
Before we get started, head over to TimCast.com, become a member to help support our work.
As a member, you'll get access to exclusive members-only segments from the TimCast IRL podcast, and you'll also be supporting our team of journalists, writing all day, every day.
And also, come on by.
Pick up the news.
Check out the shows.
We've got a bunch of other shows like the Cast Castle Vlog, Tales from the Inverted World, and we're working on a lot more.
We're working on some brick-and-mortar shops.
I will elaborate on that later.
And we're also working on music.
So go to TimCast.com, become a member, click the Join Us button, but don't forget to smash that Like button, subscribe to this channel, share this show with your friends.
Here's the story from The Conservative Brief.
Which I will stress, for YouTube's censors, is NewsGuard certified.
Assistant Attorney General refuses to certify Arizona election until questions are answered.
They say.
The Assistant AG, Jennifer Wright, has said she will not certify the election between Carrie Lake and Democrat Katie Hobbs until she gets answers to the questions she said surround the voting in Maricopa County.
Quote, These complaints go beyond pure speculation, but include first-hand witness accounts that raise concerns regarding Maricopa's lawful compliance with Arizona election law, she told the Daily Mail.
Arizonans deserve a full report and accounting of the myriad of problems that occurred in relation to Maricopa County's administration of the 2022 general election, she said in the letter to Thomas Liddy, Civil Division Chief at the Maricopa County's Attorney's Office.
As the canvas is looming, and these issues relate to Maricopa County's ability to lawfully certify election results, the unit requests a response to the aforementioned issues on or before Maricopa County submits its official canvas to the Secretary of State, which must occur on or before November 28, 2022.
Now, full stop.
It was called by the media, not by the official government.
They've not certified this.
It may be that this is a challenge that doesn't go anywhere and the certification happens.
I don't know right now, but I can tell you one thing.
Simply by reporting on it, leftists will take this video and claim I'm denying the election or spreading election misinformation.
Ha ha ha.
I don't know.
For all we know, everything's fine.
We will wait to see how the Arizona government handles this one.
They're going to say, the way they run elections in Maricopa County is worse than in banana republics around the world.
And I'll tell you what, I believe at the end of the day that this will be turned around and I don't know what the solution will be, but I still believe I will become governor and we are going to restore honesty to our elections.
Now, the crazy thing here is that Carrie Lake had been talking about this quite a bit before 2022.
That there were issues with printers or things like that.
I don't know exactly what her full claims were.
I'm not going to get into the full details other than she had been highlighting that they were having problems.
We were all assured, now I don't live in Arizona, but we were told, they told the press, the press reported, that everything was going to be fine on election day and people would have no issues.
Instead, what do we see?
Videos of long lines, people saying that they're unable to vote, the machines won't take their votes, and many people leaving.
Now, that's an important issue right there.
My recommendation, Carrie Lake needs to start collecting sworn statement signatures from people who are unable to vote on Election Day.
This, I think, will help grant standing, and then we'll get an actual lawsuit, and maybe it's nothing, and maybe it's something.
Wright said that at least 60 locations had problems because of ballot-on-demand printers that had printer configuration settings that were non-uniform, meaning they could not be read by tabulating machines.
Based on sworn complaints submitted by election workers employed by Maricopa County, the BOD printers were tested on Monday, November 7th, without any apparent problems.
Based on sworn complaints received by the unit, not only have poll workers reported they were not trained and or not provided with information on how to execute checkout procedures, but many voters have reported the second voting location required the voter to cast a provisional ballot, as the e-poll books maintain the voter cast a ballot in the original voting location.
In fact, Arizona law specifically prohibits provisional ballots to be counted when a voter has signed multiple poll books.
In a video, Lake declared that she is still in the contest and that she has hired attorneys to make her case.
Quote, I am still in this fight with you for two years.
I've been sounding the alarm about our broken election system here in Arizona.
And this past week has confirmed everything we've been saying.
Well, we called for Katie Hobbs to recuse herself over a year ago.
They ridiculed us.
It turns out we were right.
The Fox was guarding the hen house.
And because of that, voters have been disenfranchised when we raise concerns.
I'd like to pause and consistently point out Brian Kemp was also in charge of the elections in Georgia when he ran for governor and won and the left called him out.
Not saying either is right or either is wrong or no one called it.
I'm just pointing out it happened with Republicans as well as it's happening with Democrats.
Katie Hobbs was in charge of the elections in the state.
She didn't recuse herself.
Neither did Brian Kemp.
I don't know about 2020.
I think what people need to understand about what happens in these elections is that there's massive organization on the part of Democrats.
Now you can argue.
You can argue that universal mail-in voting opens the door for fraud.
Fine.
But the issue that I see is ballot harvesting.
And I don't mean illegal harvesting.
In Arizona, it is legal.
Legal.
I'm not saying in all circumstances.
If you are registered as someone's caretaker or a family member, you can take their votes in.
That right there is legal.
Understand this.
Because a lot of people really want to believe they're invincible, they'll never lose.
But Sun Tzu, man, art of war.
Assume, you know, never underestimate your opponent.
What I think happens with Arizona and with every other state, how the Democrats are getting this massive return Mom goes to their kids and says, fill this out and I'll drop it off for you.
And that's legal.
That's allowed.
Republicans need to up that game.
We know this because Republicans are favored heavily on Election Day.
They go out physically to vote.
You can argue it's Trump's fault, whatever.
But a lot of people didn't trust mailing in their votes.
We heard all these stories with the post office.
The union endorsed Joe Biden.
So why would people hand their vote to them?
No, they went and dropped them off.
So, understand, Democrats have massive organizational power, and whatever your other arguments are, I'm listening, but understand this, that is the center of the battle.
That's the line.
You need to win on the ballot harvesting side.
She says, this movement started in Arizona and it quickly expanded to all 50 states.
It is a movement of mama bears and pop bears and students and Arizonans who love this country, who want secure borders, who want schools that prepare children for the real opportunities that are out there.
It's a movement of Arizonans who want safe streets once again and want the drug crisis to come to an end.
It's a movement of Arizonans who want prosperity and the pursuit of happiness.
The movement is stronger than it ever has been and I can promise you one thing, we are still in this fight.
Now, Mark Elias responding.
We saw reporting from Nicole Gregg, who says Mojave County Board of Supervisors are discussing
the possibility of delaying certification of the midterm election results in Mojave
as a sign of solidarity after what happened in Maricopa County.
Elias says, Let me be clear.
If any Arizona county fails to follow the law and to timely certify the election results, they will be sued.
The board members in Mojave should go ask their buddies in Cochise about how that worked out for them.
Well, here's reporting from just two days ago.
Cochise County Board delays 20 certifying 2022 election results.
The board overseeing a southeastern county I don't know what that means about the counting machines being certified.
I can only tell you that things are getting wacky.
And I'll tell you why.
I blame Google.
I blame Google outright.
YouTube, I hope you're listening.
I blame you.
It's your fault.
terrorists, who alleged that counting machines were not certified.
I don't know what that means about the counting machines being certified.
I can only tell you that things are getting wacky.
And I'll tell you why.
I blame Google.
I blame Google outright.
YouTube, I hope you're listening.
I blame you.
It's your fault.
You did not allow people to have conversations.
You did not allow the conversations to happen.
And...
And many of these judges did not allow for proper adjudication.
And this is exactly what I said was going to happen.
Verbatim, to the T. I said, if you don't allow people to have this debate, if you do not allow, if courts do not allow people to come in and make their cases, in 2022, no one's gonna believe it.
And now here we are.
I don't know what's going on with this election.
I think the big issue in 2020 was, as we've already seen.
Look, let me show you this story.
You are a criminal!
Judge sentences AZ woman to jail in ballot harvesting case.
A judge rejected her plea for just probation, saying he did not think she accepts responsibility for her criminal act.
What did she do?
She handed some ballots from acquaintances.
She's 66.
She's a little old lady.
She handed ballots from someone to another person to drop in a ballot box.
Illegal.
It's illegal.
That's it.
This is what's happening.
Now, here's the important point.
They say she pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor.
The judge, uh, uh, Nelson was not bound by, uh, the prosecutor called for her to get probation, but not bound by it.
The judge, I think, gave her 30 days.
They mention that, um, despite efforts by Republicans who have rallied on the possibility of widespread voting fraud, yada yada, there's no sign her illegal ballot collection went beyond the small town politics Fuentes was involved in.
This is Arizona, by the way.
Assistant AG Todd Lawson told Nelson at a hearing last week the case is about the security of elections that Fuentes deserved prison.
I believe this is, yes, Arizona, of course.
The issue was that they were acquaintances.
She was not the certified caregiver and that she was not a family member.
I think they, uh, let me just do a quick search to make sure I have this, uh, there we go.
Ballot harvesting, uh, since 2016, it's illegal to possess someone else's mail ballots unless they're a family member, housemate, or caregiver to the vote.
Meaning, someone can go to nursing homes and say, sign me as your caretaker.
Legal.
Legal!
People are wondering, how is it that Joe Biden got all these votes?
They can't believe it.
They can't believe it.
They're like, I know that I'm not in the minority.
I know we're the silent majority.
I know that people agree with me.
I've seen the polls.
How is this possible?
The people who are voting are voting legally, my friends, through ballot harvesting.
That is legal.
It's allowed.
And the people that are voting through ballot harvesting don't know and don't care, so you're right.
When it comes to politics of those who know, you probably are in the majority.
You are more knowledgeable about what's going on.
But the Democrats are going after low-information voters, and it's working.
It's legal.
It's a legal ballot cast.
Universal mail-in voter arrives in someone's lap.
They say, I don't know, I don't care.
Ballot harvester shows up and says, sign me as your caregiver.
Let me fill it out now.
You may want to argue about the whistleblower in Florida who claimed that he got paid $10 per ballot collected.
Questionable and in often circumstances illegal, but I will stress this.
Prove that in court.
I'm down to hear it.
For the time being, my focus is strictly, how do we win elections?
How do we make sure?
Well, it's simple.
You don't need to worry about someone's intent behind the scenes.
You need to worry about the fact that they are going door-to-door and asking people to fill out ballots, and those ballots are legally cast.
That's the advantage.
Please understand that.
But going back to blaming Google, I want to highlight their rules.
I think Google's to blame for this.
unidentified
100%.
tim pool
Here are their rules that are vague.
They say election integrity.
The content advancing false claims that widespread fraud, errors, or glitches occurred in certain past elections determined heads of government.
Or content that claims the certified results of those elections were false.
The policy applies to any U.S.
election.
The 2021 German federal election.
2014, 18, and 2022 Brazilian elections.
And that's not a complete list.
So I don't even know what the rules are.
Because they're not giving me a list.
Okay, well look.
I don't know what happened other than it has been reported across the board by NewsGuard-certified outlets.
Daily Caller, 92.5, Maricopa County's election dysfunction was more widespread than officials said.
Memo claims.
Quote, it seems very clear that the printer tabulator failures on election day at 62.61%
of the vote centers observed by 11 roving attorneys and the resulting long lines in
a majority of all vote centers led to substantial voter suppression, the memo said.
Okay, well, how about this? Maricopa County, Arizona officials apologize for vote tabulator
problems, say 7% of ballots affected.
That's 17,000 votes.
Hold on there a minute.
Let's take a look at what's going on in Arizona.
Why?
Well, I'll be.
About 17,000 votes is the margin for Carrie Lake's loss.
Well, projected loss, not certified yet.
So, YouTube, you are making it worse!
What is wrong with you?
People don't believe what's happening now because of you.
I've been saying it over and over again.
Ballot harvesting, in most places, is legal.
And that is the battle.
But I get people who give me dislikes and send me angry emails because they won't believe it.
And they don't believe it because people weren't allowed to talk about it.
So what happens?
People come out and say there's fraud or something.
YouTube then deletes all the videos.
The only thing anyone ever heard was that there was fraud.
Oh, they argue.
You're allowed to talk about these things if you're providing countervailing views.
No one believes it now because you suppressed the debate.
I argued this would happen.
And it's frustrating for me.
Let me tell you.
Let me tell you my conspiracy theory.
I think Google wants Democrats to win.
But I don't think it's as simple as you think it is.
Suppressing the debate convinces Republicans it's fraud when it's actually ballot harvesting, legally done, and then they don't vote.
I remember seeing the videos out of Georgia where the guy said, I'm not going to vote.
What's the point?
I've gotten messages.
People have super chatted on IRL saying, what's the point of voting?
Look at what happens.
And it's like, dude, that's what they're hoping you do.
They're hoping you don't vote.
They're hoping you stay home.
They're hoping you walk away from a polling location.
They're hoping that you believe you cannot win.
But the Republicans took the House.
McCarthy is promising to strip Schiff and others from their committee positions.
Well, there you go, man.
There it is.
That's called victory.
Now they're trying to claim Trump was a drag on the party.
He wasn't.
So look, the German elections, the Brazilian elections, I don't know what you're talking about.
Claims the U.S.
2020 presidential election was rigged or stolen.
You see what they do here?
What does that mean, rigged?
There's an article from Time Magazine called The Shadow Campaign to Protect the Election, where they talk about how tons of money was spent to, you know, ballot harvest and things like that.
Again, all legal.
Does that mean rigged?
Does that mean stolen?
What do people mean by that?
My understanding is that YouTube's rules are specifically about claiming it was fraudulent.
Illegal or something?
Well, I don't know.
I don't think that matters.
I think Trump lost.
And I think a lot of people just don't want to hear it.
And you can argue that Trump, that you think he should have won, or that you think there were glitches or fraud or whatever.
I'm telling you this, I don't care.
I think it was ballot harvesting.
I think it was legally done.
I think I argued extensively against these laws over and over again.
We saw it in Pennsylvania, universal mail-in voting by Republicans, no less.
And it gave Democrats the path they needed to win.
But I blame YouTube for all this.
Because I think we could have had these arguments, and I could be bringing people on and we could be having these arguments, but this is insane.
We have to do special members-only shows because YouTube doesn't allow anyone to actually make the argument.
I'll give you an example.
There was, I think it was David Pakman.
Progressive, you know, liberal type.
He had Mike Lindell on YouTube.
He said, Lindell, tell me exactly what happened.
And Mike Lindell laid out his entire theory on fraud.
And David just said, uh-huh, okay.
Wow, really?
YouTube allowed it.
I said, okay, hold on there a minute.
Because he was a little snarky about it, does that mean all of a sudden he's challenging it?
What does that mean?
I asked YouTube, they didn't give me an answer.
If a news organization says, what are you claiming?
YouTube will take them down.
I think it was Fox, I'm not sure.
Someone was airing a video of a Trump rally, and Trump made claims, and YouTube took the video down.
They said, well, you didn't offer countervailing views.
But I've seen progressives get away with it.
You need to understand, man.
I don't know about any old conspiracies.
I just know that ballot harvesting works, and Democrats take advantage of it, and it's all legal.
Universal mail-in voting, it's all legal.
You need to understand it.
Well, here's the latest news.
Arizona election official went into hiding over threats as Trump-backed Carrie Lake refuses to concede.
Why would she concede?
This is the craziest thing.
I expect anyone to file lawsuits and have the argument adjudicated.
Like, seriously, just that simple.
If Carrie Lake lost, she deserves to lose.
The media has called it for Hobbs, but there's ballot curing and other things that haven't happened yet.
We'll see.
I think it is very slim that Carrie Lake becomes the governor, and I know a lot of people don't want to hear it.
I'm a fan.
I think Carrie Lake is fantastic.
But I'm looking at everything.
We will see.
It's possible, considering what we've seen throughout the years with Maricopa, with the claims that were made, that they prepared a legal apparatus for something like this, if it were to happen.
Okay.
Then maybe they will get it.
And it'll be a legal battle.
I don't know, man.
We are not certified yet.
It's not a certified election.
They say, Maricopa County Supervisor Bill Gates, heck of a name, confirmed to a local Fox affiliate that he moved to an undisclosed location with a security detail.
From the Sheriff's Office.
Maricopa County, which includes Phoenix, is the state's most populous with more than 4.4 million residents.
Gates, a lifelong Republican, is one of the leaders of the Maricopa County Elections Department and has been a staunch defender of the county's elections.
He has rejected the false claims the 2020 election was stolen from former President Trump and has since become the target of violent threats and intimidation by right-wing extremists and attacks by members of his own party after Joe Biden's Arizona win in 2020.
I feel bad for this guy.
I don't like him.
I mean, he oversaw a huge problem.
Or he oversaw the elections, and he didn't, he failed.
The AP reported about 17,000 ballots were unable to be scanned at some sites, but were instead collected and counted by different machines at the county's main elections office.
Those ballots were collected in what was called Box 3.
That's weird.
County officials said every ballot cast was counted and that the voters had the option to visit any polling place, which included some without long lines.
Gates also partially blamed the long lines on Republicans and said they scared GOP voters away from placing ballots in Box 3 to be counted at election headquarters.
Okay, well, if he's outright saying—look, If he's saying they're counted, he's saying they're counted.
And it's really easy to figure out if they weren't.
I think it's fair and fine if we do a recount and we have, you know, a special elections team come in and review this and make sure it's fine.
Because if we don't go through this, then it's chaos.
I mean, it'll be outright chaos.
It's already bad enough people are questioning our elections.
How about we just go through this and make sure everybody understands.
If it was ballot harvesting, it was ballot harvesting.
If it was mail-in voting, it was mail-in voting.
If Carrie Lake did not win, then she didn't win.
But if you do not go through these and make sure everything was done properly, then no one's going to... you're going to have a confidence collapse.
And then the... governance breaks down.
We can't have that, man.
We can't have that.
So, as for this guy, you know, Bill Gates.
He's a Republican.
He's being attacked.
Well, clearly there are issues.
He should welcome.
He should be coming out right now and saying, Look, we did it.
We counted the bouts.
He's saying that.
However, let's go through it again, and you guys can film it, and we can do all of that, and I'm sure then everything would be a-okay.
unidentified
Right?
tim pool
Okay, why is it not happening?
I will stress this too.
The people who are getting violent are making it harder for Carey Lake.
I shouldn't say violent, but getting threatening.
Now, I'm not convinced.
You know, I know a lot of these threats, they're often fabricated or exaggerated.
But I will stress, if anyone is actually sending threats, because I've not seen any, they're just helping Hobbes.
So I wouldn't be surprised if it was Antifa or something.
False flag, who knows?
I don't know, man.
Quote.
This team, we have accepted our responsibility in this gate set on November 14th, according to AP.
But I'm not willing to accept responsibility for issues that were caused by others.
And it is clear to me that those lines were longer because leaders in one political party were spreading misinformation.
Now hold on there a minute.
Is he actually arguing that Republicans were hurting their own chances?
You see, I'm sorry, that makes no sense.
If he's claiming... Here we go.
Arizona's Republican Attorney General Mark Brnovich on Saturday wrote a letter requesting a report from Maricopa County on the problems with the printers and other issues.
Is he arguing that Republicans were spreading misinformation, thus suppressing their own vote?
How does that make sense?
If they needed the 17,000, they would have been like, everyone, please go vote, please go vote.
In fact, Carrie Lake told people not to leave and to fill out their ballots.
So what are they talking about?
I just think the whole thing is weird.
Whole thing is weird.
Oh, Time Magazine.
AZ County Board delays certifying election results.
I want the results certified.
But I want them certified properly.
Okay?
I don't know.
What I do know is that you've got people on the left claiming that McCain Republicans vote.
I can't remember who tweeted it.
They were like, turns out McCain Republicans do vote, and they don't take kindly.
And then they showed a video of Carrie Lake saying she didn't like John McCain.
Okay?
Is Bill Gates one of those McCain Republicans or something?
I don't know, man.
But Carrie Lake is saying she's not going to be bowing out.
Here we go, November 8th.
Arizona's final election results delayed after printer problems caused ballot difficulty.
You see, it's right there.
245,000 people had voted in person.
If Carrie Lake puts together even a few thousand signatures of people who say they weren't able to vote, plus the 17,000 that were put in box three, That's a margin of victory.
That means a court actually should view this as standing, and Carrie Lake should be able to sue.
They should have to go through the ballots, recount, plus provisional, plus curing, and it'll take a long time, but good!
Because if it goes to the court process, then they can definitively say, look, Carrie Lake had her day, everyone who claimed there was an issue was able to come out, we're going to make sure it doesn't happen again, and the votes said what they said.
I have a feeling they're not actually going to do it, though.
It's risky enough even trying to talk about this, because YouTube's insane.
So I don't know how this plays out.
I just know that the left will claim that this video itself, breaking down fact-based news reporting, is spreading dangerous misinformation.
That's what they do.
Dangerous misinformation.
They claim something's not true, and then there you go.
They lie about it and accuse you.
I hope Carrie Lake comes out on top.
I'm a fan.
I think she should be the governor.
I think she's substantially better than Hobbs.
I think Hobbs barely campaigned.
But it's going to come down to winning a political and legal challenge.
So my advice to Republicans?
You need to win.
Winning doesn't mean just going out and asking people to vote.
Winning means understanding there will be challenges, there will be questions, there will be manipulation, there will be dirty games, there will be big tech media companies that you knew were biased against you in 2016, and every year after that you knew they were biased against you, until now Elon Musk buys Twitter.
If you do not recognize these things, and think you can just convince your friends to go out and vote, that's all you gotta do, well then you're not gonna win.
Now, I was telling people over and over again, get your friends, bring them to go vote.
Call your family member, start knocking on doors.
I said, do what Scott Pressler does, register voters.
We missed the ballot harvesting stuff.
We should have.
Mike Cernovich has been talking about it.
Anybody who's been paying attention knows he's right there.
But with all that being said, Republicans still took the House.
Confirmed.
Lauren Boebert even won.
Frisch, I think, was running against her.
Conceded.
It is possible to win.
But you've got to stay apprised of the modern tactics that are being deployed.
Imagine a war.
One nation says, we are better fighters and God is on our side.
They run to the battlefield and the enemy has laser guns.
Well, all of a sudden, they've got this directed energy up and speed of light energy transfer just vaporizing people, and they're like, how are we losing?
Because they adapted their tactics to defeat you.
Will you do the same?
Adapt your tactics to win elections.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 8 p.m.
tonight over at youtube.com slash TimCastIRL.
Thanks for hanging out, and I'll see you all then.
In a powerful meme post, Lauren Chen hit around 46,000 retweets by posting two pictures, Twitter before Elon and Twitter after Elon.
Now why would these images garner so much attention?
The first image shows a Twitter office and every person, well almost every person, a woman.
You can see there's a few guys.
I see 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 guys.
Wait, I see 5 men in the picture.
Maybe I'm getting my math, maybe I'm not seeing it.
Wait, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6.
Okay, it's mostly women.
In the after Elon Musk image, I see one, two women.
And it's all guys.
All guys.
Now, there may be a woman back here.
But you can just see the four.
That might be a guy.
I can't tell.
So, the idea is that before Elon comes into Twitter, it's mostly female, once he takes over, the ladies are all gone, mostly men.
And then, I'm sorry, I had to hit this one in the head.
I said, Elon didn't fire women.
He asked who wanted to work hard.
LMFAO.
Yes, yes, I know, there's a typo.
It says, he asked who wanted to work hard.
He asked who wanted to work hard.
Oh, heavens!
The memes!
Well, here was the story, and you may have seen it.
Elon Musk sends middle-of-the-night email demanding extremely hardcore work culture at Twitter with long hours at high intensity.
So there, my friends, you hit the nail on the head with the hammer.
Elon Musk comes into Twitter.
He says to all of his employees, who wants to work hard?
Next thing you know, the image he posts, all guys.
Okay, okay, we gotta break this down and actually get into the science and the facts.
Because it is not fair to claim that it's that simple.
I certainly think many people want to view it that way, and my Twitter post is mostly joking, but still, it does say something.
Now, a lot of people are assuming, outright, that the photo on the left is, like, a Twitter team.
Elon comes in, says, who's working hard?
They all quit.
Then it's all guys.
They're two different teams.
On the left, with all the women, mostly women, is the communications team.
On the right, it's the engineering team.
So, the point is, as much as it might be funny to assume that all of the women instantly quit when they were told they had to work, the reality is, we do actually see a stark difference based on gender right here before our eyes.
And as much as some are trying to fact-check this to make it seem like it's not real, it is real!
But let's break it down.
Lauren Chen's viral tweet has a Birdwatch context post on it because it's gotten so many retweets.
It says, this is not a before and after of Twitter as is claimed.
The before picture is a group of people who worked on the Twitter comms team, seen here.
The after picture is a group of engineers posted by Elon Musk.
Now I was surprised to see this because Elon thinks Birdwatch is the solution to misinformation.
It's not.
This context?
Wrong.
Absolutely wrong.
And it doesn't actually get to the issue at hand.
Lauren Chen did not say anything other than Twitter before Elon versus Twitter after Elon.
This is real.
The before photo is actually from before Elon.
The after photo is actually from after Elon.
But it depends on what you mean from before and after.
So here's the post.
It's from November 4th.
So Elon Musk had already moved in, already started the purchase.
Julie Steele tweeted, Twitter is so special.
After four years, I'm leaving with the fullest heart.
Experiences I never imagined and unbreakable bonds with so many tweets.
My head is held high knowing that I gave it my absolute all.
Twitter comms.
We have so much to be proud of.
Time to fly even higher.
What Lauren Chen said is true.
They're fact-checking it, but it's true.
There's no political context in what she said.
The comms team is out.
My understanding is that Elon Musk eliminated the entire communications team.
There was some news article that said that, you know, we reached out to Twitter for a comment, but, you know, the Twitter communications staff were all eliminated.
Something like that.
So, this is the team that was around before.
And you can see that some of the photos have a lot more guys, but it is still mostly women.
Another image.
This one's all women.
The next one, you've seen it, mostly women.
And then lastly, there's one guy and then four women.
The communications team was overwhelmingly female.
Elon Musk, so we'll get into this.
Elon Musk comes in, starts making changes.
The existing teams start breaking down, people are quitting, people are getting fired, and people are leaving.
Afterwards, Elon Musk sends out the email saying, who wants to work really, really hard?
Weeding out many more of the remaining people, and once again you see mostly guys.
Now, you can argue it's that women don't want to work hard.
And guess what?
I don't know if work hard is the right way to frame it, because certainly raising families, being at home, is very, very hard.
But they don't want work in the masculine sense that, you know, men would view as being in the workplace.
Working hard and being in the workplace, I get it.
I'm trying to be careful here on the semantics, on the colloquial language breakdown.
What I mean to say is women don't want to be in the office.
Most of them don't.
I'm sorry, it's not most of them.
Around half don't.
Slightly less than the majority.
We also see a very stark difference between men and women.
Women are on the communications team.
Men are on the engineering team.
Can we ask questions about why that is?
Why is it that all the communications staff are female?
Maybe because there's, well, it could be the trope that women are more social and men are, women are subject-oriented, men are object-oriented.
I mean, this is like when you talk about the differences between males and females.
You just tell a room of people to sort themselves from tallest to shortest and what do you get?
Most of the men on one side going down to the women with some, you know, higher or lower ends of the bell curve.
Some men will be shorter, some women will be taller.
But here you can see it.
There are some women in the engineering team who want to work really hard.
That's awesome.
There are some men that want to be in the communications team.
That's really, really cool.
But it seems like there's a clear distinction between what men and women want to do.
But let's break it down.
Let's break it down.
While it may be disappointing to many of you to realize that it is just a meme post meant to be silly, and doesn't necessarily mean scientific evidence that women just want to leave and don't want to work hard, the reality is women don't want to be in the workplace.
That's true.
Raising kids, you could argue, actually harder.
You get no breaks.
You get no time off.
Some could argue it's actually nicer.
Because you're your own boss, essentially.
But the polls show it.
Pew Research Center.
I got a bunch of data here.
Public views on staying at home versus working.
Despite the fact that most mothers in the U.S.
work at least part-time, many Americans continue to believe that having a mother who stays at home is beneficial for a young child.
And this is what we've been seeing across the board.
Take a look at this.
From the New York Times.
Do millennial men want stay-at-home wives?
It's funny that they posted an opinion article whose title is a question when the answer is yes.
It is.
It's amazing.
Here's what they write.
Millennials generally defined as people born between 1982 and 2000 were supposed to be the generation that forged what has been called a new national consensus in favor of gender equality.
Indeed, in February, the prominent Columbia professor Jeffrey Sachs labeled the 2016 election, where an extremely qualified female candidate lost to a man with a history of disrespecting women, a blip on the road to an egalitarian society.
But the millennial category lumps together everybody from age 17 to 34, a group varied by race, ethnicity, religion, income, education, and life experience.
Don't think for a second they are united.
As a set of reports released Friday by the Council on Contemporary Families reveals, fewer of the youngest millennials, those age 18 to 25, support egalitarian family arrangements than did the same age group 20 years earlier.
To put it simply, my friends, The current younger generation wants stay-at-home wives.
A guy wants to work and he wants a wife who's gonna be at home to raise his family.
Now, when the did that become disrespectful?
It's the craziest thing to me.
Ladies, I don't care if you want to have a job.
If you're qualified for the job, do it.
Men, I don't care if you think women should be in the workplace.
That's cool.
And men, I don't care if you think women should be at home.
Why is it, tell me this, why is it disrespectful to say women should be in the home?
Men should be on the oil refineries.
Is that offensive?
Men should be in the industrial factories.
Men should be in the coal mines.
Is that offensive?
I don't get it.
Saying that a man should do a thing or a woman should do a thing, why is it offensive?
Here's my point.
I don't agree with that sentiment that men or women should do anything.
I believe in individualism.
But what is wrong with raising kids?
What is wrong with being good at taking care of a home and raising a generation of people?
When I see this thing from Twitter, And I assume that when Elon said, who's going to stay here and work hard?
I bet you had the remaining female employees.
Many of them were like, I don't want to do it.
Because it's only slightly more than half of women that actually think that women should be in the workplace.
It's slightly more than half.
Which is crazy.
You'd think that would mean there'd be way more women at home with kids.
So why aren't they?
This is what I don't like.
I don't like it that if you say, women are better at homemaking, that's somehow offensive.
I'm sorry, saying that women are better than men at a thing is offensive?
Okay, women are, should be in the workplace, but don't want to work the long hours, and tend not to like a more strenuous, high-paced work environment, and what?
Want more time off?
Need more time off?
What am I supposed to say about this?
Time off.
There's problems in all of this with how everything is phrased.
So let's put it this way.
Taking care of a home is the most important work.
A man can go out and hunt and defeat a bear with his own two hands, strangling that bear, punching the bear right in the mouth and jamming his arm down the bear's throat.
And the bear struggles to breathe and then dies.
unidentified
And the man stands up and goes, I have defeated this bear.
tim pool
For what reason?
What now will I do with this bear, says man who has no family, no kids, no one to care about.
He wouldn't even bother killing the bear.
He'll need support himself.
He's got nothing.
The man goes out and hunts the bear.
Okay, hunts the deer.
So that he can bring home and provide for a family.
But without the family, there's no point in doing it.
Now, you can support yourself and sustain yourself.
And men and women alike with no families, they do that.
I get it.
But why?
Who cares about what the man is doing?
The man is only doing things to support the family.
And if there's no family, the man may as well just go off and live in the woods or live in a cave by himself.
The most important job, in my opinion, is being in the house, taking care of the family.
And that's why society has so often preferenced women over men in terms of safety, to the detriment of the individuality and freedoms of some women for a long period of time.
Totally recognize that.
My point here is, I'm not surprised to see that when someone comes into a workplace and says, we're working overtime, we're working double time, who's in?
It's mostly guys.
It's mostly guys.
Record high.
Look at this from 2019.
56% of U.S.
women prefer working to homemaking.
unidentified
Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa.
tim pool
Wait there a minute.
Let's talk about what that means.
44% of women prefer homemaking to working.
I respect it.
I don't care if a woman wants to work in an office with a bunch of future ideas.
There's an image right here.
It's a woman and it says future ideas with blank post-it notes.
I don't care if a woman wants to work or stay at home, really.
But I will point out when Gallup shows that around half of women would rather be at home.
You think that's true of men?
It's not.
So I have to wonder how much of this is nuanced and we're not getting the full picture.
Take a look at this.
Number of stay-at-home dads at an all-time high.
unidentified
Wow.
tim pool
Look.
About 14% of dads with young children are out of the workforce, not actively looking for a job, and taking care of kids full-time.
Pre-COVID, it was 1-5%.
And this makes it sound like, with COVID, it's not by choice.
So when they say 40% of dads are out of the workforce, are the wives out of the workforce too because everybody lost their jobs?
The point here is, I couldn't find any hard data, any significant data, on whether or not men want to be at home.
And it may be because men don't.
Men want to work.
And what does work mean?
Leave the house, build stuff, object-oriented.
Women prefer a mix.
Around half object, around half subject, but maybe, hold on there a minute, When we take a look at this data from Gallup and it says 56% of women prefer working, I can then go back to cite Twitter.
In the comms department, working with people, talking with people, hey, it's a respectable position, absolutely.
But there's a preference there, isn't there?
We see this in the pay gap.
They say, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, the earnings gap.
That's how they get you, those lies.
For the longest time, they claimed, and this has mostly been debunked, that for every dollar a man earns, a woman earns 93 cents, or something like that.
Or what is it, like 77 cents or something like that?
It's all, actually, yeah, yeah, it's 77.
The real number is 93, and it's an earnings gap, not a pay gap.
What they're trying to claim is that a man and a woman apply for a job, and then the office says, a woman, I'll pay her less.
When in reality, it has a lot to do with the fact that women choose jobs that pay less.
Subject-oriented versus object-oriented.
Men are more likely to be petroleum engineers.
Good example.
Women are more likely to be nurses.
Women are more likely to be teachers.
Women are more likely to work in communications.
But the nursing thing is probably a bad example, because that one, you know, it's up and down.
But it seems like...
It seems like there's a clear and obvious difference between males and females.
And they try to make you think that it's not the case, but the data's all right there.
Americans continue to prefer sons over daughters.
This one I found particularly interesting.
According to a new survey, if people could only have one child, they would prefer to have a boy over a girl.
And this is what I think makes it all possible.
Now, I can't tell you why people would rather have a boy.
36% of Americans would rather have a boy.
28% would rather have a girl.
36% said they had no preference.
Slightly more people want boys.
Maybe because boys are easier or something?
I don't know.
You don't have to worry about a boy as much.
Girls have to be protected.
It's riskier?
I have no idea.
But I can tell you this.
This bias presents itself.
Even if it is a slight bias leaning in a slight direction, it presents itself.
What happens is, you will see many individuals express a desire for a boy.
Maybe it's a father, who buys a bunch of baseball gloves or something, not knowing what the gender is going to be, and then it's a girl, and then when the girl's born, they name the girl something like, Mallory.
Which is like a boy or girl's name because the dad really wanted a boy.
Oh, something like that.
That's probably not the best example, but a good example is that our media props up masculine things.
So, superhero movies.
The biggest blockbuster movies tend to be men with bulging muscles, saving people, saving the world.
You don't get a whole lot of big blockbuster movies about a mom raising a superhero, although that would be really, really interesting.
No joke.
I mean, you kind of had that one with, um... What was it called?
Brightburn or something like that?
But it was like the kid turns out to be, like, evil and just kills everybody.
But anyway, I digress.
We don't get, in society...
Movies and culture propping up the female experience for the most part.
Now what I mean is, obviously there's drama movies where there's interpersonal drama, obviously there's female perspective stuff, but the big blockbusters tend to be overly masculine.
So what happens?
With something like Avengers, Infinity War, you have that scene where, sorry, Endgame, where it shows all the female superheroes like walking together and everyone's like, woo, all the ladies!
Why did they have to do that?
They did that because you don't have to do it for men.
For men, an ensemble of men fighting against a villain is normal.
And for... Oh, that's Bocas over there, he's eating.
For women, it's not the norm.
So, what do you get?
A special scene where they're like, hey everybody, look, women can do these masculine things too.
We all really like Spider-Man, Captain America, Thor.
How many female-led Marvel movies are there?
And how much have people really enjoyed them?
Captain Marvel got panned quite a bit, but it made a lot of money.
Most of the big movies, male leads.
Then women start acting like there's no female leads.
When there are, there's like Alien and Hunter Games.
They exist.
Hunter Game, uh, Hunger Games, sorry.
Hunger Games was actually a good, was good in my opinion.
I think it really created a female perspective action hero in the right way.
I thought it was fantastic.
Katniss doesn't want to go to war, she doesn't want to fight, and she's willing to compromise with the evil to make sure that happens.
But her family is being threatened, they're under attack, and then she'll do whatever she has to to protect her family.
That's awesome!
The male version of many of these movies is, the man is a hero-soldier fighting for the whole world or something like that.
That's also why I liked Wonder Woman.
You can do female leads, and you can do it right.
My point.
Most of these movies create conflict.
Most of these movies are not about a woman dealing with the struggles of protecting her family from the norm.
I mean, to be fair, most of the action movies aren't about that either, but you still do have movies where, like, a dude fights a bear or something.
Anyway, here's the point.
Elon Musk comes in.
Women are leaving.
Men are staying.
Don't get me wrong, a lot of men are leaving, too.
And I think we can take a look at political polling and see exactly how this manifests.
45% of millennial men are Democrats.
of millennial men are Democrats. 55% are Republican. 70% of millennial women are Democrats.
And like, it's like 68%.
And then around 30% are Republican.
That's what we see.
You will see men quit when they're told to work hard.
Of course.
But you are more likely to see men stay.
Why?
Yo, it's right there in front of your face.
More men would rather be out working.
More women would rather be at home.
Period.
I am not insulting women.
I am not seeking to disrespect them.
I'm not saying their choices are bad.
I'm saying the data is there and thus it will manifest in public in these ways.
If half of women would rather be at home, then don't be surprised when a boss comes in and says, time to work double time if half the women quit.
And the men don't.
Men seem to prefer to be in the workplace.
So, viral meme.
Very, very funny post.
And a fact check on the fact checkers.
Lauren Chen is correct.
Before Elon, that was a team.
After Elon, that was a team.
She didn't really say much.
So, when it says this is not a before and after, it actually is.
The context could simply say, these are two teams.
The communications team and the engineering team.
Many on the communications team may still be there or may have been fired.
Here's what I think.
What she actually shows is communications versus engineering.
Surprise, surprise.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 4 p.m.
over at youtube.com slash timcast.
Export Selection