Elon Musk Warns TWITTER ABOUT TO DIE, Says Its A Plane Crashing, Corporate Press COVERS UP FBI PsyOp
Elon Musk Warns TWITTER ABOUT TO DIE, Says Its A Plane Crashing, Corporate Press COVERS UP FBI PsyOp. FBI Agents DENIES PsyOp despite evidence proving it.
Democrats and the intelligence agencies are working hard against Elon Musk and Twitter could implode.
Republicans arent doing much either to stop this but if Elon Musk steps down as CEO or the platform collapses we would suffer a huge defeat in the culture war.
#elonmusk
#twitter
#democrats
Become A Member And Protect Our Work at http://www.timcast.com
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Today is December 21st, 2022, and our first story.
In a Twitter space, Elon Musk likened Twitter to a plane crashing.
Engines on fire, the controls don't work, and warns this could be the end.
But he's hopeful, thinks he can turn it around.
However, as he noted in our next segment, he will resign as CEO.
But if we don't have him in charge, are we going to get these explosive revelations or just go back to the status quo?
And in our last segment, it's a sad story.
A transgender individual took their own life, but their parent, a Democratic state senator, is blaming everyone else, saying that because they won't affirm these individuals, it's causing these problems.
But I'm gonna throw it back and say, maybe if the individual was affirmed and had a community but was still unhappy, the problem might be on your end.
If you like the show, give us a good review and leave us five stars.
Share the show with your friends.
Now, let's get into that first story.
Perhaps it was too good to be true when it was announced that Elon Musk was going to buy Twitter and free the plebs from the clutches of censorship.
And since then, we've learned a whole lot.
There's been crazy psyops going on behind the scenes.
The federal government actually paid Twitter in exchange for censorship services.
Now, of course, the mainstream media saying that's not true, but I'll break down those lies and I'll back this up with receipts.
But we saw a lot of people return to the platform.
We saw Elon Musk do, in my opinion, a very good job.
Despite the bad things that have happened and some bad policies that were reversed, Elon Musk taking over Twitter is a light, is a beacon of hope in an otherwise dark world.
But I have bad news, my friends.
Ars Technica reports, Elon Musk blames Twitter cost cuts on $3 billion negative cash flow.
Musk says he'll resign once he finds someone foolish enough to take the job.
That's right, my friends, the stark warning in the middle of the night from Elon Musk, where he basically described the platform as a plane nosediving with both engines on fire, about to crash, and the controls aren't working.
And that's a sad reality, but it's still good news.
It's still good news that Elon Musk was able to get into this platform and release these files.
In the meantime, they're coming after him.
They're accusing him of, well, they're saying he's tanking Tesla.
He's hurting the shareholders and he needs to just go back to making the electric car.
I think the reality is that Elon Musk actually took a stand and risked everything, and now he will pay the price for it.
Unless he wins.
As much as it is a scary thought to think Twitter could implode, I've often gloated at the idea and said, so what?
Who cares?
If the machine is just churning out narrative garbage from the establishment, then so be it.
But I have to say, with Elon Musk taking over the platform, things genuinely improving, the suspension of some of these intelligence asset journalists, I'm now kind of like, no, no, no, no, we don't want Twitter to collapse.
I mean, I'll put it this way.
I'd still probably laugh because, you know, it is what it is, and you can only take so much so seriously.
But right now, We need Twitter to succeed, especially as Elon Musk is exposing psychological operations being illegally carried out on the American people.
So we're going to call out that machine.
As bad as it sounds, though, Elon Musk isn't saying this is the end.
He's saying it could be the end.
He's warning of Twitter's possible death.
But he turns it around at the last minute and says, you know, I think we're going to make money.
I think we're going to break even next year.
And I think we can pull this off.
The questions that remain.
How is it that with triple or quadruple the employees, Twitter was solvent?
Serious question.
How is it that last year, I think their net revenue was like $600 million.
And then as soon as Elon Musk comes in, the revenue drops to negative $3 billion.
Something doesn't make sense.
And many of us have to wonder, Is it that the intelligence agencies in the U.S.
have been propping up these machines, have been subsidizing them, so that they can control the narrative?
And it turns out these aren't actually private businesses at all.
In fact, they've been run passively by the government.
Then you learn that the Deputy General Counsel for Twitter was a former FBI agent involved in the Russiagate hoax.
And the answer becomes, well, Perhaps.
Perhaps the reality is that this whole machine was not capable of running, and as Elon Musk said, was on the fast track to bankruptcy since May.
But maybe it was being propped up because the intelligence agencies knew how valuable it was to wield a private sector weapon which was de facto government controlled.
And now that Elon Musk has taken it over, they're gonna nuke it.
And they're going to nuke Elon Musk's net worth in the process.
Unless he can turn it around.
He says he's looking for a new CEO.
So let's read the news and talk about exactly where we're at.
Because as bad as the news is, Elon Musk is optimistic, and so are some of his investors.
Before we get started, head over to TimCast.com to become a member and support our work.
At TimCast.com, you can click that Join Us button.
When you become a member, not only will you get access to the TimCast IRL Uncensored Show, and last night was a lot of fun, Debating libertarianism versus more government intervention.
It was a great conversation.
You'll also be supporting our general efforts.
One thing that I think we have as an advantage is that we are not just delivering a product.
You don't just sign up for Timcast and get a video.
You get everything we're doing.
We're launching a physical location so that people can hang out.
I'm hoping that we can have four.
I'm aiming for ten, but maybe four locations by the end of next year.
Scout them out, set them up, and then we will have our own physical locations, coffee shops where you can hang out.
Because we need people to come together and share ideas in physical spaces.
It's not just that we're working on non-profits.
We're working on a fact-checking non-profit that's not gone anywhere.
And when you support this business, the things I care about, the things I want to buy, I want to buy good work.
I want to support people who are going to report the news.
We've got a reporter right now with Carrie Lake documenting this trial.
That's what I care about.
Become a member at TimCast.com to support our mission.
And then you'll get access to entertainment and we are seeking to produce more to make it a better experience for you.
So smash that like button, subscribe to this channel, share the show with your friends.
If you can't be a member, sharing the show is the most powerful thing you can do.
Elon Musk defended his financial stewardship of Twitter, arguing that the social media platform would have faced a negative cash flow situation of $3 billion a year were it not for his controversial cost-cutting efforts.
Now hold on there a minute.
This is actually, they got it wrong.
I think he actually said it's $6 billion negative, and he saved about $3 billion, and they're still looking at a negative cash flow of $3 billion, but he thinks he can get it to break even.
The billionaire entrepreneur who bought the social networking company for $44 billion in October, after previously attempting to pull out of the deal, gave a snapshot of its dire finances during a Twitter Space's online forum on Wednesday.
Quote, We have an emergency fire drill on our hands.
This company is like, you're in a plane that is headed towards the ground at high speed with the engines on fire and the controls don't work.
That's the reason for my actions that may seem sometimes spurious.
What's fascinating is that he actually points out that they have to spend billions because of the debt that they've taken on to buy the platform.
He said, the court, the platform had been of course to spend about $5 billion in 2023.
Overall costs at Twitter in 2021, the last annual period for the company reported before being taken private, were $5.6 billion, during which time it made a net loss of $221 million.
Okay, so I was wrong.
I was actually looking at another data analysis that said it was net, it was cash positive.
But that's what I wondered.
How do they have $221 million negative?
The money's got to come from somewhere, right?
They go on.
Musk predicted that Twitter's net cash outflow, if you didn't make any changes, would be about $6 billion to $6.5 billion next year.
This is partly because the company has been loaded with $12.5 billion of debt to help fund the acquisition, which required about $1.5 billion a year in annual debt servicing payments amid rising interest rates.
Not good, since Twitter has $1 billion in cash, he said.
So that's why I spent the last five weeks cutting costs like crazy.
His remarks suggested the company was on track to make about $3 billion in annual revenues next year.
That would suggest Twitter was on course for revenues as much as $2 billion lower.
In 2023, then the 5 billion it achieved in 2021, which mainly came from advertising.
Many marketers have pulled out of the platform since Musk's takeover because of moderation
concerns. Full stop. I got the clip here. Alex on Twitter says key moment in this Twitter space
with Elon Musk.
In this clip he explains the current financial situation at Twitter and the reason for his actions lately.
Now aside from the fact that he makes the funny comment about it's a plane about to crash with its engines on fire, he points out the advertisers actually have one simple concern.
ROI.
He's right.
Now, I take a look at Twitter, I've done some advertising, and here's my problem.
Elon, I've tried to advertise twice, just a t-shirt, and y'all shut me down.
So I gotta call shenanigans.
And, look.
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.
And they said, no, it's political, you can't do it.
Rejected the ad.
I said, okay, fine, we'll do Roberto Jr.
It's a shirt, and it's a rooster with his wings out, and it says, stand your ground.
That's it.
And I said, be like the noble rooster.
Stand up for what you believe in.
And they allowed it, and then after a couple thousand, rejected it, shut it down.
Why?
Whatever, man.
Don't take my money.
I said I was going to advertise on the platform.
But what he said was, they have one complaint and it's a return on investment.
Now hold on there a minute.
What do you mean, Elon, they want a return on investment?
They were advertising on Twitter before you bought it, so why would they stop advertising on it if ROI was their concern?
Perhaps Elon is saying that to try and appease people and make it seem like everything's okay.
And the real issue actually is moderation.
Or maybe, Twitter was being propped up as a narrative machine to control the flow of information and dictate policy in the United States.
I mean, I can't say definitively.
I can say that was a component for sure because we know that the FBI was involved and of course the mainstream media is trying to lie about it.
And I'll break down those lies.
With the changes we are making here on massively reducing the burn rate and building subscriber revenue, I now think that Twitter will in fact be okay next year, Musk said, adding that he had spoken to advertisers who were urging him to show how Twitter could provide a return on their investment.
The Tesla and SpaceX chief executive had previously indicated he plans to transform Twitter into an everything app, where users might be able to send funds or shop, for example, in an effort to generate new revenue streams, including payments and subscriptions.
A brilliant plan.
However, an attempt to launch a new premium subscription service, Twitter Blue, has been rife with challenges.
Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
Okay, late on Tuesday, Musk said he would resign as Twitter's chief as soon as he had found someone foolish enough to take the job.
Bowing to the result of a poll of the platform's users he conducted at the weekend.
Musk also indicated he would continue to run the company's software and server teams after stepping down, suggesting he will remain closely involved in day-to-day operations and product development at the social networking site.
Well, previously it was reported Elon Musk says Twitter in fast lane to bankruptcy since May.
But it's not all bad news.
I think we enter this one worried, and then we come back out and say, okay, things are actually a little bit more optimistic.
As TimCast.com reported it, that's us, Musk saved Twitter $3 billion by cutting costs like crazy.
This company is like, you're in a plane that is headed towards the ground, so you know the quote.
Let's talk about journalism, my friends.
Let's talk about good journalism.
Now, Ars Technica, how do they frame it?
They frame it as Elon Musk blames Twitter costs, caught costs on $3 billion negative cash flow.
Fair point, that's what he said.
How did I frame it in this video?
Elon Musk warns of Twitter's death as it is a plane crash headed towards the ground.
I think that's also a fair assessment, but admittedly, it's a bit negative of an assessment.
The reporters over at TimCast.com decided to frame it more positively.
Well, Christopher Bertman wrote it, and that's his editorial choice.
Musk saved Twitter $3 billion by cutting costs like crazy is also true.
I'm not bringing this up to say anyone did anything wrong.
I chose to use Ars Technica that said they have a $3 billion negative cash flow because that's true.
I chose to launch this video by saying he's warning of the death of Twitter because that's true.
And I'm doing it When I look at this story from TimCast.com, it's accurate.
But my view is, when it comes to my opinion and analysis, Twitter needs your support and we should not let Elon lose this one.
And so we have to figure out how to support the platform.
That means the most urgent reporting, the most urgent framing, is that Twitter could actually die unless things get turned around.
The story is the same, but it's interesting how that works, right?
I have this story from Reuters.
Because I want to give you a white pill.
I don't want to just come out here and say the world's ending.
Investor in Musk's Twitter buyout expects to make up to five times its money.
Aaliyah Capital Partners, one of the biggest investors that joined Musk's $44 billion acquisition, said on Tuesday it expects to make up to five times its money despite the social media company's problems.
They're going to say that it's been hemorrhaging money, blah, blah, blah.
Elon's going to step down.
Quote, we believe Twitter will produce a return of four to five times in just a few years with comparably limited downside risk, Aaliyah Chief Executive Ross Keston said in a statement.
Okay.
If that's true, Aaliyah, why don't you throw more money to cover that $13 billion in debt?
A Miami-based manager of wealth of rich families put $360 million alongside Musk in a Twitter bio.
Okay.
Maybe they can't afford it.
360 million ain't anywhere near 13 billion.
But they're optimistic.
So we'll see.
I'm fairly optimistic.
We will see.
In the meantime, I'll tell you why we need this to succeed and why we should be optimistic.
Because we have this from CNN.
Elon Musk claims the FBI paid Twitter to censor info from the public.
Here's what the Twitter files actually show.
Says establishment shill Oliver Darcy.
It shows, basically, that the FBI was going to Twitter and saying, why aren't these people getting banned?
Why isn't Alex Berenson getting banned?
And then they got banned.
And they said, oh, here's a reimbursement for the effort you put in to cover the costs of what you did for us.
We're not paying you to ban.
We're just reimbursing you for the costs of, you know, acquiescing to government demands.
Oh, shut up, man.
You know, Oliver, You had an opportunity.
Guy interviews me back in like 2018 about censorship on Twitter, and I said banning the alt-right was bad, free speech is important, blah blah blah.
I don't like their views, but we gotta be careful about how we shut speech down because we need to debate these ideas to shut them down.
And then eventually this dude gets a job at CNN.
And it's like, it's like almost as soon as these journalists get hired by the corporate press, they just get on their knees and suckle at the government teat and say, just tell me what to say, government agencies.
Here we go.
Let me read for you about the false framing from the corporate press.
Elon Musk is misleading the public again, says Oliver Darcy.
The embattled billionaire, perhaps seeking to distract from the chaos he has wrought at the social media company, is making grossly misleading claims about Twitter and the FBI.
And those claims are being blindly amplified to millions by Fox News and the rest of the powerful right-wing media machine.
It's amazing, Oliver.
You've become a D-tier personality among only those stupid enough to believe you.
I hope it was worth it.
I tweeted that at him, and then he was like, bro, that was like three years ago.
That's the amazing thing.
It's like three years ago, we did a big raise, and I was like, hey, by the way.
And then he didn't even cover it.
I love it.
Because he's an establishment shill.
But yes, three years ago, I said, FYI, you're a media reporter, here's a story in media.
Since then, Oliver Darcy has grown continually worse and continually lied to people.
For what reason?
I don't know, I can only assume he's like crossing his fingers being like, I hope I get to be in the CIA like Anderson Cooper was.
Here you go.
In those files, Schellenberger published a redacted screenshot of a 2021 email showing that Twitter's Safety, Content, and Law Enforcement division had instituted a reimbursement program for its work responding to information requests from the FBI.
The document indicated that Twitter had received $3.4 million in reimbursements at the time.
Hey, wait a minute, what's that?
The FBI had to reimburse Twitter for the costs incurred from Acquiescing to their requests?
Isn't that called paying someone?
Oh, I see the game he's playing.
Oliver Darcy is trying to twist, say, pay-as-in-profit for services rendered.
What Elon Musk said was that the government paid Twitter millions of dollars to censor info from the public.
Uh-huh.
They did.
What's your argument, Oliver?
He says, The money Twitter collected had nothing to do with censoring anyone.
The money was simply given as reimbursement for processing of legal requests similar to how a journalist might have to pay a fee for a government agency processing a FOIA request.
As Alex Stamos, the former chief security officer at Facebook and partner at the cyber consulting firm Krebs Stamos Group, wrote, it's absolutely nothing to do with content moderation.
It's just, you know, The FBI requested the whereabouts of Billy Baldwin and RSB Network and said, you know, things like, why aren't these getting banned?
We have some takedown requests.
And oh, by the way, here's some money to cover the costs of doing these things.
Let's take a look at Legal Information Institute at Cornell.edu.
47 U.S.
Code Section 230, Protection for Private Blocking and Screening of Offensive Material.
I'd like to give a shout out to Vivek Ramaswamy, who appeared on the show last night and brought this point up, and I want to bring it to you now.
They say... Okay.
You get the point.
I'm not going to read all their findings.
and other interactive computed services available to individual Americans
represent an extraordinary advance in the availability of educational
informational resources to our citizens. These services offer users a great degree
of control over the information that they receive as well as the potential
for even greater control in the future as technology develops.
The internet and other interactive... Okay, you get the point. I'm not going to read
all their findings, but I'll take a look at the policy.
Particularly Section 230, Subsection C, Subsection 2, Subsection A. I know, we really
get down in there, don't we?
Section C, Subsection 1.
No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.
Section 2, Civil Liability.
No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be held liable on account of A. Any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict access to or availability of material that the provider or user considers to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected.
And there it is.
The end run around the Constitution.
The game that they're playing with us.
If Twitter exists under government protection, To remove constitutionally protected speech and the FBI covers the cost of these removals.
The government is still in violation of the Constitution, but they are playing a dirty game to bypass the courts.
This is absolute corruption.
Now, what I really love about the Elon Musk leaks is that when you take a look at The Intercept, these are hard leftists who love the Twitter file leaks when it shows something beneficial to them and their agenda.
But then when it goes to, say, you know, free speech and censorship of conservatives, then all of a sudden, no, no, no, none of that's true and Elon Musk's a bad guy.
Twitter aided the Pentagon in its covert online propaganda campaign.
Internal documents show Twitter whitelisted CENTCOM accounts that were then used to run its online influence campaign abroad.
So let's put it simply.
The FBI was paying Twitter, reimbursing them, covering the costs, getting privy access to run psychological operations on the American people, and formally request the takedown of what they say simply breaks the rules.
Yeah.
Twitter is a subsidiary of the federal government.
You have to understand that at this point, they will be coming for Elon Musk.
He has done too much to expose the machine.
He has done too much to expose the dirty games they play.
And they can't tolerate it.
So they'll have to come after him in any way possible.
How?
Well, in a lot of ways.
From Bazinga.com, Tesla has lost $250 billion in market cap since Elon Musk took over Twitter.
I think the game they're playing is, Elon, give up Twitter, stop playing the game, play ball, go back to Tesla, Tesla be rich!
Right?
This is Trump 2.0.
Elon Musk may not be the president of these United States, but he's certainly in a similar position to Trump.
Trump enters the establishment fray.
He walks up and he says, OK, we're shutting it down.
No more war.
No more illegal immigration.
Bring our jobs back.
We will save this country.
The machine came to him and said, no, how about you play ball?
And Donald Trump said, no.
To a certain degree, he said, yes, don't get me wrong.
John Bolton, that was a mistake.
I think Trump thought that he was going to play a little bit of their game, but then try and do things he wanted to do.
And they did not want to do these things.
So they lied.
They cheated.
They stole.
They beat the figurative crap out of the guy.
He lost a ton of money, and then ultimately, he bows out.
Now what's he doing?
Hey, he's hucking NFTs on Twitter.
Hey, he sold them all.
Congratulations.
But that energy is just down.
Elon Musk.
He saw the Babylon Bee get suspended.
But it was more than that.
He knew that there was something dirty afoot.
So he said, okay, fine, I'm gonna buy this.
Boy, did they start panicking.
They just got in crying, oh no, but all the evil things that I'm doing, the corrupt activities, they're gonna be exposed.
Yeah, they're corrupt as they come.
So Elon Musk takes over the platform, and then they start ripping it apart.
All of a sudden, the revenue's gone.
Advertisers just don't want to be here anymore for some reason.
Why?
Probably ESG.
Think about it.
These companies, these big advertisers, they need capital.
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.
So these companies abruptly just decide, I guess we won't buy ads on Twitter anymore.
It makes no sense.
Then you get intelligence assets like Schiff, who repeats the lie over and over again that hate speech has increased on Twitter.
It's not true.
But you know what?
Like Oliver Darcy, here's a man who's proud of the fact that he's influential among only the stupidest people on the planet.
It's unfortunate.
I wish stupid people were not stupid.
I wish people, you know, actually researched things and understood what was going on.
But this is what you get.
The weaponization of ignorance.
The people who think Adam Schiff is a good guy, who for some reason get lied to every single day, get those lies proven to be lies, and then they just keep believing it.
Don't ask me why.
Now Elon Musk is getting defensive.
CNBC reports Elon Musk tries to explain why Tesla shares are tanking.
As Tesla shares sank 8% on Tuesday, reaching a new 52-week low, Elon Musk tried to blame macroeconomic factors.
Critics point to his acquisition of Twitter as a distraction.
Yeah, let me just tell you, all the stocks are down.
It's not just Tesla.
Meanwhile, Tesla has been offering discounts and incentives to improve sales in China, fighting to improve efficiency in new factories in Texas and Germany, and facing supply chain issues and soaring energy prices in Europe.
I don't think the reason Tesla shares are going down is just because of Elon.
I think it's mostly macroeconomic factors.
I think Elon plays a role.
Confidence says a whole lot.
People have pointed out that the cost of shares compared to the actual earnings of the company are really, really high relative to other companies.
Fine.
But ultimately, I'll tell you.
Elon Musk is doing everything that the Great Reset people would want.
I mean, except for Twitter.
Everyone's praising Elon for all these great things, and I'm like, dude, he's running businesses in China.
You don't get to run a business in China unless you're under the boot of the Chinese Communist Party.
Elon Musk has praised China.
Elon Musk is building Neuralink.
He is far from perfect.
He's building electric cars, and saying, you know, he's doing more for climate change than anybody else.
You're gonna be driving one of these Teslas in ten years, and then all of a sudden the car's gonna shut off and be like, you've used too much energy today, Steven.
Your car will be disabled.
Please walk, and your car will return home.
Okay?
Or, better yet, you'll just live in the pod and you won't have the car.
The car will be too expensive.
But maybe then all the rich folk will keep the car.
Elon Musk should be the darling of these agencies.
But he's not.
I think Elon has a different idea for what the future will be.
I don't think his idea is perfect.
But I think he believes in more individuality.
He believes in a larger population, and he's right about that.
So I like Elon Musk.
Despite the fact that he's doing things that are bad, he's right.
We need more people.
This planet needs more people.
I do believe our cities are too dense.
I do believe our people are misguided.
But we need more people so there can be more specialties.
If right now, 90% of humanity disappeared, You probably wouldn't get running water or indoor plumbing.
This is the sad reality of life.
The ancient Romans, they had indoor plumbing.
Then the Empire collapsed, the Empire fractured, and the Dark Ages emerged, and then people just took dumps out their windows.
No joke, they built castles where there'd be a toilet, and it would just fall straight down.
And then someone would have to come and shovel and clean it.
I guess technically that's indoor plumbing, but very rudimentary.
Now, how was it that they did indoor plumbing in ancient Rome, but then they lost technology?
Well, the reality is you need a large, cohesive structure of humans who each specialize in something.
To build a computer, someone needs to know how to make the touchscreen glass, the aluminum or the plastic for the base, the chips, the wiring, the materials.
Well, you might get conductivity problems, but you're gonna need some kind of plastic baseboard or something.
Yeah.
Plastic makes it possible.
How about that?
How does someone even make plastic?
It's tough.
If our population continues to collapse, we will lose access to this technology.
And if we want to colonize Mars and the stars, we need more people.
Elon Musk gets that.
But for some reason there's a large, I don't know, what do you want to call it, cabal, of powerful individuals who are just like, there's too many people on this planet and we need less.
And thus, you get TED Talks from high-profile individuals like Bill Gates saying, less people now.
No, he's not literally saying less people.
He's saying population growth reduction, so eventually less people.
Okay.
I don't think the problem is the amount of people.
I think the amount of people is good.
The problem is too many people do nonsense.
Too many people are those morons who follow people like Adam Schiff.
Yikes.
How do we get past that hurdle?
That's a big challenge.
There are people like Adam Schiff who use the will and power of those who are too ignorant to do research to empower themselves and corrupt the system.
So the problem isn't overpopulation.
The problem is people like Schiff, people who are lying, people like Oliver Darcy, who lie, who know they're lying.
They know they're lying.
Oliver Darcy came out and he was like, Elon Musk is openly banning journalists.
Bro, he knows they got banned for doxxing.
He just omits it.
Maybe the dude is just one of those morons marching in lockstep.
Okay.
In that capacity, I understand what people like Bill Gates are like.
We need less people!
But my attitude is just, yo, just educate them.
Do not give them an option to stand with lies and deception.
Fire them from these companies.
Stop it.
But it's not easy.
It's a constant battle, it's a battle we will remain in, because there will always be people who are greedy and manipulative.
The only way you get rid of those people, well, you can try and be like Stalin, but it just doesn't work.
Not everyone's going to agree, and so this will always be our struggle.
To fight against those who are ignorant or intentionally lying to people, to corrupt a system, or to impose a totalitarian dictatorship.
Why?
Because they want everyone to just do as they're told.
I like decentralization.
I want to see us travel the stars like Star Trek.
Or, I don't know, maybe like Stargate, but that means we gotta send a Stargate somewhere, but how cool would that be?
What if we don't actually live on big ships?
What if we dispatch autonomous machines with, I don't know, some kind of portal generator?
Drop the portal on a planet that's habitable, and then open it up, send matter on through.
Maybe.
That'd be cool.
Or we can just build the faster-than-light engines or something.
The only way that's gonna happen is if we solve these problems.
So, Elon may not be the guy.
But, maybe.
I don't know.
We'll see.
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 will see you all then.
Ladies and gentlemen, it is with a heavy heart that I must report Elon Musk has announced his resignation.
The Daily Mail reports Elon Musk will resign as Twitter CEO after humiliating defeat in his own poll as soon as he finds someone foolish enough to take the job.
Well, it's a sad story, but we do have some deeper revelations and good reasons for Elon Musk not to resign.
But if he's determined he will, then so be it.
The big news coming out of the new Twitter files is that, remember when I said, like a couple weeks ago, that the U.S.
government was running psychological operations on Twitter in the Middle East?
And this is actually a story from back in, like, 2011.
Yeah.
The new Twitter files exposes the US government running PSYOPs in the Middle East.
Duh.
I mean, we knew that for like 10 years.
But it's cool to see modern confirmation, or I should say contemporary confirmation.
We knew the story was happening.
Now we have the internal communications showing it.
That is why.
I think Elon Musk should not resign.
I don't care about some dumb poll.
Dude, you are helping the country and the world.
Now, perhaps there is someone he could bring in.
Perhaps there is someone we can trust to be the CEO.
Maybe there's someone with experience who ran a social media platform that never sold your data, never ran psychological operations, but touched our hearts and contributed to our fond memories of the internet.
But who could such a person be?
I just don't know if such a person exists.
Tom Anderson?
The CEO of Myspace?
Ah, yeah, yeah, yeah.
I don't know if Tom Anderson could actually be the CEO of Twitter, but here's what I gotta point out, because this is fun and funny.
I... Please, Elon Musk, please hire Tom Anderson to be the CEO of Twitter.
Don't know, don't care, just do it.
Complete Tom's story arc, bring him back.
So Elon Musk tweets, Should I step down as head of Twitter?
I will abide by the results of this poll.
Of course, he lost that.
Elon Musk tweeted yesterday, I will resign as CEO as soon as I find someone foolish enough
to take the job.
After that, I will just run the software and servers teams.
Tom Anderson at myspace Tom posted a picture of him from.
2000.
And it says, male, 30 years old, California, online now.
And it is that iconic photo of Tom in front of that whiteboard.
I don't know if Tom Anderson could actually do the job.
I don't know if this man has the expertise to actually run a modern social media platform.
Dude, it's been like 16 years.
Tom Anderson sold MySpace for I think it was around like 500 million dollars and then said, I'm out!
And it was probably the smartest thing he could have done.
You see, back then, during the MySpace era, many of you youngsters may not have used MySpace.
Ah, MySpace.
When you could embed MP3 files and songs were playing, you could code your own profile.
It was so fun.
People would go to your profile and then they would see confetti and, you know, hear the Hamster Dance song or whatever.
Sometimes you'd hear a song and you're like, that song is really good.
Like, what band is that?
You had to find the mp3 online, then you had to directly link to it, and it would play.
Those were the days, man.
Tom Anderson was not running a platform where we desperately needed good guidance.
Tom Anderson was not running a platform where we were scared that if he left, someone bad would take over.
Myspace wasn't that big.
I think it had like 30 million users or something like that.
And so when the opportunity came along, he made the smartest decision of any CEO in the tech space.
He said, I'm out!
You either die a hero or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain.
Mark Zuckerberg starts Facebook.
Boy, is he a villain.
Jack Dorsey, right there.
Elon Musk?
Hey, I think he's alright.
I like Elon Musk, but certainly the left views him as a villain.
But Tom?
Everybody likes Tom.
If Elon were to appoint Tom Anderson, I don't see the right or the left being upset about it, and you get a guy who will probably just run the platform.
It's possible he gets co-opted by the Feds or something like that.
I don't know.
But I think considering that Tom is a neutral party who was in the tech space, could probably do it.
Granted, it's been 16 years.
I don't know if he's got the experience.
Dude sold his shares, took half a billion dollars, and then went around taking pictures around the world.
Smartest guy in tech, I gotta say.
He gets to be free and live because he started this thing.
That's fantastic.
Well, he had shares in it.
I think it's an opportunity.
I genuinely, genuinely believe it.
This is my shoutout.
Everybody should shout this out.
Well, if you agree.
MySpaceTom should be the CEO of Twitter.
That's just my, my, my, I know a lot of people are probably like, no, no, it should be like, like Lex Fridman, or it should be like, you know, Jeremy Hambly or something.
And I'm like, yeah, okay, you know, I can see arguments for why you might want certain people like that.
Lex Fridman is this, you know, politically neutral-ish, milquetoast fence-sitter guy.
Hey, look, y'all call me a milquetoast fence-sitter?
No, no, I gotta hand that crown off to Lex Fridman.
That dude is the milquetoast fence-sitter.
And I don't mean that as disrespectful.
I mean, like, he's a middle-of-the-road guy who does these very neutral interviews.
So, and then Jeremy Hambly's a culture warrior.
And I'm only mentioning him because he tweeted like, you know, let me do this.
And you have a lot of people that are probably culture warriors.
Nah, I say no to all of those guys.
And I think, Tom, I think bring Tom back.
How amazing would it be to see him sitting down with Elon and him just talking about the MySpace days, where tech went.
I wonder what his view will be, having dipped out for this long.
But I'll tell you why it's important we get someone good.
Maybe Tom isn't the right guy.
Because I don't know if Tom can handle the politics of this stuff.
He, you know, he was in this space when it was much, much, much smaller.
Just because he was a neutral party then doesn't mean he would have remained a neutral party as the Feds came in and started manipulating and taking control of these platforms.
From the Daily Mail, Twitter colluded with Pentagon to run network of fake accounts around the world, including AI-created deepfakes, despite publicly claiming to delete government-backed propaganda.
Yeah, and this is why it's so important, in my opinion, that we get a real CEO.
That's why I think it's important that Elon Musk stays.
I guess Elon Musk doesn't wanna.
Here's the reporting.
Surprise, surprise!
with the Pentagon to promote fake accounts in the Middle East, which praised US policy,
it has emerged, despite the social media company insisting that it made concerted efforts to
detect and thwart government-backed platform manipulation.
Surprise, surprise, they were in on the game the whole time and just spitting on your face.
The collusion spanned at least four years from 2017 to 2020, and saw top Twitter executives
liaise with military intelligence on a covert online psyop campaign.
accounts including one that claimed the US drone bombings in Yemen killed only terrorists.
Wait a minute.
You're, uh, you're saying it was Middle Eastern accounts you're saying?
Uh-oh.
That's a PSYOP on the American people.
What we are witnessing right now, my friends, is seditious conspiracy being revealed.
Period.
The Pentagon, the individuals in military intelligence, that seek to manipulate and lie to you are engaged in sedition.
I am not trying to be cute nor exaggerate.
The US government lying to the American people is subverting the Constitution, the governing documents of this nation.
That's sedition.
This is a country that was supposed to be of, for, and by the people.
But when the military-industrial complex and intelligence agencies began lying to the American people, that's effectively a coup.
When did it occur?
I don't know, man.
It probably goes back to, you know, 1913 or something like that, World War I, Woodrow Wilson, all of that stuff.
When the U.S.
started getting entangled in foreign wars and international endeavors and things like that, The intelligence agencies begin to emerge, probably as a way to house the conspirators.
It could be JFK!
But I think the fact that JFK died shows that there were people who were just none too happy with what he was doing.
So, you know, I'll put it this way.
Tucker Carlson did that segment on his show, where he's like, we asked someone in intelligence, you know, a source, and they said the CIA did play a role in the killing of JFK.
Well, a lot of people believe that was the case.
There's that famous quote, I guess, from, what is it, Richard Nixon or something?
He said, like, I wanted to be present, I just wasn't willing to kill for it, in reference to Lyndon Johnson.
So maybe.
It could be that JFK was the last true president.
I don't think so.
I think it's more likely that the machine was rigged, but he began defying the machine, not too dissimilar to Donald Trump.
He found a way to break through, did, got the reins, and then they were just like, we ain't playing this game.
You know, like, we got war in Vietnam.
You ain't doing nothing about that.
So here we are.
It has been exposed.
U.S.
intelligence is engaged in psychological operations on the American people.
Like with the Hunter Biden laptop stuff, we knew that too, right?
So this expose is just another grain of sand in that heap.
What do we do?
We now know.
What is Mitch McConnell saying?
unidentified
He's going up and he's like, the Republicans agree that Ukraine is our biggest issue that we have to support.
I think people like Mitch McConnell and Kevin McCarthy are probably sitting there in government, in high-ranking positions, and they're either former intelligence, they're intelligence assets, the intelligence agencies probably go to them.
I've said this for years, mind you.
Barack Obama says, when I get it, we're gonna end this war.
Get our troops out of the Middle East.
And then they elect him.
And then he walks in the White House and he's like, I am now here to be President of these United States and end this war.
And then the intelligence agencies walk in and go, Mr. President-elect, here's the intelligence on the Middle East.
And he goes, oh, I guess instead of doing that, I'm gonna blow up kids.
Too many of them.
Instantly, just like that.
It's difficult, I guess.
I don't think that these intelligence agencies, many of these people, are explicitly evil.
I think many of them want to protect the United States.
I think their view of the United States is just warped and twisted, and it's a harsh reality.
I'll tell you what I think.
I'll tell you what I think.
I think that the intelligence agencies genuinely want to protect America.
But not real America.
Whatever America has become.
That they've helped it become.
This authoritarian state with NSA spying, with lying from the highest levels, with psychological operations against their own people.
You're trying to protect that?
You know what I want to protect is real America.
Of, for, and by the people.
So I think these intelligence agencies, they come in and they say, Mr. President, congratulations.
You won.
Here's what's going on in the Middle East.
We need active measures for these reasons.
We can't pull our troops out for these reasons.
China will come in.
Russia will come in.
Here's where we'll lose.
These are the moves we have to make.
And the President says, you're right.
You're right.
Because either that or what little we have will be supplanted and destroyed.
I certainly think, though.
That's a weakness.
And that weakness breeds people like Joe Biden and the Democratic establishment, where now it's basically zombified.
Evil people seeing the exploitation in the path to power, get into the intelligence agencies, and then with zombie-like corpse faces say, trust me, This is the way to save our country.
And then the president is going, yeah, makes sense to me.
And then they slime out of the room and go, now we'll get more money for ourselves.
The assumption is that the people coming in and waging these PSYOPs are good, honorable people.
But I think that ship has sailed.
I think there are good, honorable people in the intelligence agencies.
But I think they are contorted and twisted as they move through the halls.
Like those weird nurses in Silent Hill.
To put it simply, I don't think everybody's always evil, I don't think everybody is evil, but I think there's a banality of evil.
All right, you want to get out of here, Windows update.
I think there's a banality of evil.
That certain people are in the intelligence agencies at a young age, they get in, they're bright-eyed, and then they're told, look, you know, as much as we'd love to have unfettered free speech, we have to control these certain narratives, otherwise Russia is going to take over.
And then there's a compromise made.
They say, yeah, I get it.
I get it.
So what do we see with Twitter?
A combination of things.
Those in power want to retain power.
They're scared of losing it.
There are people who control the machine who think they're the only ones who can control the machine.
And me, I'm sitting here like, yo!
I'm not all that concerned if the U.S.
isn't some great empire policing the world.
I'm not all that concerned about the liberal economic order.
I'm not all that concerned about their new world order.
And what I mean to say is I'm concerned they exist.
I'm just not concerned with the U.S.
running these things.
But let me ask you, and you can comment on this one, because I think it's an important question.
It's a question I've asked a lot of our guests, because I'm on the side of, hey, I don't want intervention.
I don't want war.
You haven't justified it to us.
So the argument is, if they were to publicly come out and explain what they were really doing, it would subvert our national security.
So, we can choose to live in our comfort, where we have, I don't know, cold brew on demand, where we have air conditioning in the desert and in Miami.
We can choose to live in comfort, or we can choose to live responsibly, but potentially under the boot of a unipolar Chinese communist world.
Man, I wish the answers to these questions were simple, but they're not.
And I do think it is fundamentally naive of many people, many libertarian and anarchist types, who don't seem to understand how national security plays a role in why this country does what it does.
My issue is this.
I don't trust you, intelligence agencies.
Sorry.
I think there's a possibility there are a lot of good people desperately holding on so that we can maintain A good standard of living?
But I just don't believe that's the case.
I want to believe that's the case.
I want to believe that the people who are working in these intelligence agencies are like, dude, I'm just a guy like you and I'm trying to save this country if only you knew.
But that benefit of the doubt will not be extended to people who are lying, cheating, and stealing and spitting on me when I say I want something better for this country.
If I come out and say the working class need jobs and we're watching factories be outsourced, I do not believe you're doing anything to save us.
I believe that this country is being extracted and has been for decades.
So I will not give the benefit of the doubt to these people.
I do not want a Chinese unipolar world.
I do not want Russia to take over.
Not that I think they could.
I want Americans to have good jobs.
I want factories here in the United States.
I want new technology, green technology, fusion.
I want the U.S.
to be the leader.
But you know what I see?
A porous border on the South.
Millions passing through, not protecting America.
I see factories being shipped overseas.
And I see the U.S.
dumping its money, extracting from our savings, for Ukraine.
And none of it has been adequately explained to the American people, so I will only assume The zombies have taken over.
And what's really happening is that the once noble profession of working in national security is now a bunch of zombies mindlessly chattering about as they extract this country and sell us off to the highest bidder.
That's the sad reality.
And I have to wonder, you know, sometimes They say that, you know, when I had Bannon on the show on Monday, I said, you know, James Lindsay said they're gonna take back the machine and they'll try.
And Bannon said, try!
They're gonna!
They got Elon!
It's happening!
And I'm like, you know, don't be so blackmailed, Bannon.
Why do you think that's the case?
Why is this show allowed to exist if they're in total control?
No, I think we're slipping through the cracks.
I think the dam is starting to burst.
And I believe there's a possibility that the United States can regain its former glory.
No, I think what Donald Trump was talking about was the vision of the Founding Fathers.
I don't care what you think about Donald Trump.
I don't necessarily trust the guy, but I'm going to err on the side of his vision of making America great was more likely, was more akin to the Founding Fathers' vision.
The Founding Fathers, I think, were good moral people.
Yeah, we talked about this last night over at TimCast.com with the debate on liberty versus government.
You definitely should check it out.
Me and Luke are yelling at each other.
It's fun, though.
You know, we have these debates all the time.
It's a good show.
Here's the thing I'll say, too, because, like, you know, we're yelling, and I'm like, yeah, you're a pathetic straw man.
Like, we have these debates, but we're friends, you know?
That's why we have these debates, because we disagree, we agree, and we're the side where we can have heated debates and then grab a beer afterward.
That's what it's supposed to be.
You know, but I think so many people are so jaded by the intelligence agencies that they're just saying this government is bad, it's got to go.
And I'm like, there's a national security component to this, and it's not so easy to just say dismantle the system.
Anyway, I kind of lost my train of thought on where I was going with the members only thing, but definitely check out that debate we were having.
It is very interesting as it pertains to all of this.
I don't think we have all the answers.
Oh yeah, I'm sorry, the morality of the Founding Fathers.
Yeah, Luke said, I said, the Founding Fathers were good moral people and that was good government.
The United States government today is bad.
The Founding Fathers' government was good.
And he said, we could debate that, they had slavery.
And I said, yes, they did.
But the government that they set up was good.
The slavery already existed.
The Founding Fathers said, we are making a government of, for, and by the people.
Eighty years later, a bloody war was fought, bringing about the end of slavery.
Not the sole reason, but a large component.
Now, of course, in other places, in other countries, slavery ended.
My point is, they planted the seeds to say these things must change.
I don't think every cultural practice in 1776 was moral.
What I'm saying is, they created a government of, for, and by the people.
And Frederick Douglass came out with one of the best quotes ever.
When he challenged the American people to stand by the words they themselves had written.
That all men are created equal.
Do you really believe it?
He said.
The thing is, the Founding Fathers really did.
Thomas Jefferson had slaves.
It was a cultural institution and it was wrong.
And we got rid of it.
He wrote in the initial draft of the Declaration of Independence against slavery.
But they were scared that if they included that they would lose the support of some southern states, colonies, and thus they would not be able to fight for independence and win.
In fact, I believe Quebec was actually asked to join because they were a British colony as well.
It would have been the 14th and they said no, outright, would not do it.
So, the 13 colonies it was.
People don't realize that.
The 13 colonies were not the only colonies of the British Empire.
The British Empire had tons of colonies all over the place.
Not every single colony declared independence.
So Thomas Jefferson said, fine, took out that provision, complaining about slavery, and that was that.
That was that.
So there were bad practices.
But the government itself, how it was laid out, and what it prescribed, ultimately led to the greatest nation in the history of the planet.
We need to go back to that.
We'll see.
In the meantime, maybe Tom Anderson will be the CEO of Twitter.
So I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 1 p.m.
on this channel.
Thanks for hanging out, and I'll see you all then.
A Democratic Senator from Kentucky is very angry, and I believe they have a right to be angry.
The story is, Kentucky Senator Karen Berg slams rivals for marginalizing my child and exacerbating culture wars after transgender son, 24, took his life.
Devastated mom blames vile anti-trans hate that took its toll.
The reason why I say this individual, Karen, has a right to be angry is because their child has died.
And I think anybody who loses a child has a right to be angry.
But I think it's important we discuss who they should be angry with or who we should be angry with.
And it's time to have a very hard discussion about what's going on with transgender youth in this country.
The first thing I'll say is, I'm very libertarian.
I'm not completely libertarian.
You've heard me argue with libertarians.
But I lean more towards the liberal, the traditional liberal, and the libertarian live and let live.
If there is an adult human being who wants to live a certain way, ain't nothing to do with me.
You live your life.
I wish you the best.
I hope for your happiness.
And I am saddened when anyone loses their life.
I'm not even in favor of the death penalty.
Like some of the worst people in the world.
But there's a whole other discussion there.
I'm not going to waste words.
I'm going to come right out and say it.
I believe this Karen Berg has a right to be angry after losing her child, but I do believe that she is politicizing this and putting the fault on those who actually tried to save her child.
You see, here's the issue.
This transgender activist, Karen Berg's transgender son, meaning biological female, was affirmed Had a community and a career and still was unhappy and still took their own life.
Again, I wish this for no one.
For no one's child.
No person.
But we're trying to solve these problems.
We want to stop suicides.
We want to stop the pain.
And that means having a hard discussion.
One that many of these, uh, let's just call them predators, will probably try to latch onto in an effort to smear me for even bringing it up.
But I will say it again.
This Democrat is angry with Republicans, is angry with those who are questioning whether or not people should receive transgender-affirming treatments, as they call it.
But this individual's biological female child was affirmed Did have a community, but still committed suicide.
Ask yourself why that is.
Why, after giving this person everything they asked for, it still was not enough.
Now, of course, the Democrat senator—this is a state senator, I believe—is saying, no, you didn't accept my transgender son.
But people don't accept everybody for a variety of reasons.
That's an impossibility.
And so here's the issue at play and then we'll read through the story and we'll talk about what's going on with actual groomers.
I'm not talking about in general LGBT people.
I'm talking about groomers targeting children and destroying lives.
This is the story of someone who, instead of listening to the voice of reason, many of us decided to just affirm whatever it is their child said, but it didn't do a thing.
It's a sad story.
Let's read, and we'll break this down.
A Kentucky state senator has taken a hit at politicians who used trans issues as a battlefield to fight culture wars after her own transgender son took his own life.
Now, this is a biological female that we're talking about.
Democrat Karen Berg blamed vile anti-trans hate and the lack of acceptance for her son's suicide.
It was an argument she also addressed to the Senate in February, when she warned the world is coming after them, referring to trans people like her son.
Berg's son, Henry Berg Brasseau, a passionate LGBT activist, died on Friday after taking his own life at the age of 24.
Berg Brasseau was honored by his mother on Tuesday, in which he said a lack of acceptance took a toll on Henry, after politicians tried to exacerbate the culture wars.
This is an excuse.
I will say it.
The mother is at fault.
That's a bold thing to say.
Because we never want to blame someone and, you know, whenever someone takes their life or something, we say, it's not your fault, you know, you couldn't have controlled this.
No, no, no.
I'm not playing those games.
Okay?
I am not trying to be disrespectful or mean to Karen Berg.
I feel for her.
I respect the anger.
This person lost their child.
But if we don't confront this, if we don't call out exactly what it is, It will keep happening.
And I'll tell you what it is.
An individual was suffering an identity crisis.
I can understand and respect that people are suffering when they experience this.
I can empathize.
Me personally, I don't have that.
I couldn't imagine the pain, the mental anguish, of not feeling like you fit your own body.
I do not believe the appropriate answer is to surgically or medically modify an individual's body because they're suffering from some kind of identity crisis.
The easiest way to explain it is anorexia is not okay.
Someone thinks they're fat but they're not.
Someone has some kind of A body dysmorphic disorder and they want to remove their hand.
This is a real thing.
I do not believe we should affirm any of these things.
What we should do is help these people accept their circumstances.
Instead, what is happening is that activists have decided what we should do is just tell anyone suffering an identity crisis that we will just agree with you.
And then here's the problem.
This individual, Henry Berg Brousseau, died after taking his own life.
But there's a bunch of tweets that I want to show you.
State lawmakers have advanced an onslaught of anti-LGBTQ bills to restrict where and how we can freely and openly be our true selves.
This is Michael K. Lavers.
But let me show you, so here's photos of the individual in question.
Heeman Wright says, Henry was our beloved colleague and friend and brought light to everyone around him.
In his honor, we must come together and speak out against injustice.
We must fight for our transgender family.
There are no words to describe how much we miss him.
One person told a story, I ran into Berg Brosseau a few months ago at a party in DC.
I immediately recognized him as someone I've looked up to for years.
From across the room, I yelled, you're from Kentucky and saw his face light up.
I'll miss that smile.
We all will.
There's a lot of reasons people take their own lives.
Often, you can't see it coming.
You think everything's okay.
My question is simply this.
Could it be unrelated to trans issues why this person took their life?
Perhaps.
But I think it's more likely that this was the issue.
Now, it's entirely possible Berg could have owed someone money, suffered heartbreak, or some hardship.
Okay.
But if the mother wants to make this political and say that it's because of a lack of acceptance, then I will rebut and say, you cannot make the world accept you, period.
Everyone will choose to reject or accept someone for any reason.
In some parts of the world, in most parts of the world, they're racist, and the color of your skin will determine whether or not they accept or reject you.
You can't change that right now.
Over time, we can genuinely find people become more accepting in certain respects, but mostly this is a product of the West and the United States.
I mean, China is still extremely racist and they're not giving that up.
So I don't think it's fair to say that you can make everyone accept you.
The question then becomes, why is it that a person with so many friends, with a career Being featured as a prominent activist.
I mean all of these things should fill someone with fulfillment.
Should grant them that feeling.
It wasn't enough.
I'll say it again.
I don't know why this individual took their own life.
It could be for any reason.
But if the mother wants to make a political, then I will say this.
You had a child suffering an identity crisis, and instead of saying, let us help you navigate through this, you said, we will just agree with whatever you say, despite the fact that it is you who is suffering because of this.
Somebody wants to remove their hand.
Somebody wants liposuction.
Somebody was anorexic.
We intervene.
We sit them down.
We surround them and say, this cannot go on.
Why, in this case, do we do something different?
So this individual was given as much as they could get.
I mean, they can physically change their body with drugs and with surgery, but they will never be a biological male.
They will still have less muscle mass.
They will still have less muscle collagen.
They will still be shorter.
And then ultimately, I think what happens is, with everyone around you lying to you, how much of that could you really take?
Unless you have a stronger sense of self.
We hear a lot that trans people are at high risk of suicide.
I don't like that.
I would like that to stop.
I have a friend who died, I don't know if it was suicide or not, who was trans and it's painful and it sucks.
But perhaps the issue is we should tell these people It's never going to happen.
The people around you who are telling you that you're handsome, who are telling you that you look a certain way, they're lying to you.
Not every single trans person, mind you, but a lot of them.
When a person enters a room, and I'll put it this way, there are people who pass, and that means that, you know, for a large amount of trans people, They're considered lucky, I guess, by other trans people.
A trans woman could be walking down the street and someone might be like, I didn't realize that person was biologically male because they passed.
They're more effeminate.
But there are a lot of trans people.
Like that video of the Supermam.
You remember that?
It is a large, I believe around six foot tall, biological male who looks nothing else, like nothing else but a biological male, getting angry and threatening violence because someone kept saying, sir.
Because they didn't understand.
They don't know.
They don't know what's going on.
There's a viral video from Starbucks of a transgender female, that is a female that is transgender, has facial hair, but biologically female, saying that their work is too hard, there's too many customers, and that they were being misgendered.
Even with facial hair, the average person knows you are not male.
And this is the challenge, I think.
Do you think these people... Do you think that they don't know they're being lied to?
Many of them do.
They know that when they look in the mirror, they are not in the body that they want, even after all of this.
Some people can make it.
Some people don't.
And so I think the challenge is, we live in a society where everyone comes up to you and they say nice things to you, but you know it's insincere.
Or at the very least, you feel it is.
I think the solution to this issue was not to blame Republicans or anyone else.
But to look within yourself as to how this came to be that your child went through this.
I think that there are many people who are genuinely dysphoric.
Gender dysphoria is real.
And they're suffering because of it.
But I also think for many of these people it's social pressure.
And that's why we see so many young girls identifying as trans.
Because they're being told that the masculine traits in society are the ones you want.
You want to be the hunter.
You want to be the hero.
You want to be the CEO.
You don't want to be the caregiver.
You don't want to be the nurse.
You want to be the doctor.
The nurse.
Nurse is lowly.
You don't want to be the mother.
You want to be the breadwinner.
And so, it's not about the physical body.
It's about social acceptance.
And I think because of that, many young women are suffering.
I'm not a scientist.
I'm not a doctor.
Just my personal thoughts.
Ultimately, I want to help people.
But let's read more about what's going on.
We have this from NYC Council Member Eric Botcher.
He said, Benjamin Ryan.
He is the science reporter for the New York Times, NBC News, Guardian.
to my apartment building and gained entry. My super called the cops and two of them were
arrested for trespassing. This is pure hate unmasked. If they think this is going to
intimidate us, they're mistaken. Our resolve is strengthened. They're writing things like
okay groomer on the sidewalk. Benjamin Ryan. He is the science reporter for the New York Times,
NBC News Guardian. He says, I wasted a lot of energy on Twitter, recently trying to explain
to people that the term groomer has been hijacked as an anti LGBTQ slur this year.
No one wanted to listen, they just wanted to call me a groomer.
Benjamin's lying, and I can prove to you that he's lying because James Lindsay brought the receipts.
The reason why people are calling him a groomer is because Marxists lie.
Because these people have consistently lied.
They lied about Jussie Smollett.
They lied about the Covington kids.
They lied about Kyle Rittenhouse.
They lied about Donald Trump and Russiagate.
They lied about the pull rope at the NASCAR race.
Yeah.
They lied about everything, basically.
And now he's coming out and saying they're trying to call all LGBTQ people groomers.
No.
We're calling people targeting children groomers.
Why are you lying?
James Lindsay points it out, he says, What alternative term do you suggest for this description
of Drag Queen Story Hour in a major education curriculum, inquiring minds want to know?
In it, they actually state, what they are doing with Drag Queen Story Hour is creating family-friendly, in the sense
that it is accessible and inviting to families, but it is less sanitizing for us than it is a preparatory
introduction to alternate modes of kinship.
They outright say they are grooming alternate modes of kinship.
And they end off by saying, we're leaving a trail of glitter that won't ever come out of the carpet.
They are outright saying, family friendly just means accessible and inviting to families with children to prepare them for alternate modes of kinship.
Yeah, we call that grooming.
He responds, teaching children that gay people exist and gay families exist is not a form of grooming.
Grooming is the manipulation of children to prepare them to be sexually abused.
Well, that's strange.
It quite literally says they are preparing them for alternate modes of kinship.
Yeah.
To be abused.
Right?
See, why did he take this story, which is about adult men simulating sodomy in front of children, and then come out and claim, we're just teaching people that gay people exist?
Because they're lying to you.
Because Benjamin Ryan is, in my opinion, I can only assume, he is running cover for pedophiles.
Now you can ask yourself why that might be.
I'm sure the average person, the reason why they're calling him a groomer, is because he's protecting them and lying on their behalf to shield them from accountability.
Even when James Lindsay says, here's the proof, here's an academic paper saying they're doing it, he goes, no.
No, just teaching kids that gay people exist.
But that's not what we're saying.
That's not what James Lindsay is saying.
We're saying, no, they've explicitly stated they're trying to prepare children for alternate modes of kinship.
They are grooming them.
Why lie?
I don't know.
You tell me why a guy would defend pedophiles.
You tell me.
I want to tell you about the reality of this stuff.
Following the statement, the story about this individual who took their own life.
Colin Wright says don't listen to gender activists when they tell you we're not performing extreme medical
experiments on children Here's one of jazz Jennings surgeons quote taking jazz on
as a patient for surgery We knew it was going to be a one-of-a-kind surgery. We don't
have the experience of having said we've done 50 of these I was just not expecting her to have complicate a complication
as severe as what she did have jazz Jennings was a little kid and
The family got a TV show and said that their child was trans and they put the child in hormone blockers
The hormone blockers ultimately prevented the development of physical matter.
Body parts, as it were.
So when Jazz wanted to get surgery to have a pseudo-vagina surgically grafted, the doctors were unable to do it.
Now I'm going to draw an inference here.
Jazz Jennings eventually became morbidly obese and remains morbidly obese, though trying hard to work the weight off.
Jazz was supposed to go to I think Harvard and then announced abruptly that she would not.
In this article from Women's Health from 2020, Jazz was a bit lighter in terms of weight.
Following this story about complications in surgery, Jazz became morbidly obese, then announced she wouldn't be going to school, and family members said she can't be alone right now.
I've read the stories about what they call bottom surgery.
And they're horrifying.
There's a viral video of a trans woman crying about how painful it is, and it's permanently painful because what they're effectively doing is cutting open a hole, surgically grafting intestinal matter into the wound, and then you have to use a tool to crank and keep the wound from closing.
Because they use colon, intestine, some people often say that it smells like feces forever.
Yeah, it's horrible.
And I wouldn't wish this on anybody, so I couldn't imagine how hard it must be for these individuals.
We want them to be safe.
We want them to be happy.
But I can only imagine that Jazz Jennings became severely depressed and morbidly obese as a result of what this surgery did to Jazz's body.
Now, I can't speak for a trans man, someone biologically female, But I can say that there are many posts online from trans individuals talking about how much they regret it.
Detransitioners giving speeches and saying they were lied to, they were manipulated, they didn't understand, their life is ruined.
So perhaps, the reason why suicide rates are so high is because these people are suffering from an identity crisis and they need help.
But instead, they're being affirmed.
And then when life gets bad for a variety of reasons, they feel like there's no way out.
I don't have all the answers.
I just hope that anybody who's experiencing this and suffering, you know, calls a hotline, finds a community, finds friends, and just works through it.
There are many people who detransitioned who are living full lives.
They may have regrets, but they have found their voice, and they have found their inner peace, and it is possible for everyone.
The last thing I want to see is more people lose their lives because every single life, every single one is unique and has that spark of the divine.
This is why I'm not in favor of the death penalty.
No matter how awful a person is, there's something that terrifies me about snuffing out the fire of life from an individual.
Even when it comes to war or violence or just the most horrifying person imaginable.
Within me, I do not have it to be the executioner.
Other people may make decisions, I get it.
Other people may say some people are so evil, you know, child predators for instance, that they must receive the death penalty after what they do to these kids.
And for me, I'm just like, it's scary to me.
I understand why you feel that way, but if we have them locked in a box, they're not a threat.
I just, I can't, I cannot see snuffing out that fire of life.
And, um, I don't know, maybe that's just me.
Maybe I shouldn't treat these people as special.
They've forfeited their position by being monsters.
As for these individuals who are suicidal, that's the scarier thing because these are these are people who are either victims or completely innocent for the most part.
I'm just saying that for the most part because sometimes people are criminals and we're trying to protect the fire of life within them.
I feel that these trans activists are snuffing them out and that is what truly bothers me.
To see this story about a state senator blaming everyone else Well, here's my view.
I believe that, ma'am, your transgender son was suffering, and it is those you are angry with who are trying to save your child.
But instead of being a parent and leading and protecting your child, you just said, do whatever you want.
And this left your child suffering.
And that even after you've affirmed them, and even after they found a community and a voice and prominence, they still were unhappy.
Why?
Why weren't they fulfilled?
My fear is that many of these people come to regret transition.
I don't have all the answers.
I can't speak for adult individuals who choose to live their lives the way they do.
But I will also point out, at a time when we're seeing Europe and Canada propose medical assistance in death, even for healthy individuals, shouldn't the response on the left simply be, if they choose, they choose?