GOP Just NUKED Dems FROM ORBIT, New Investigation In Biden DOJ Sparks FURY Among Corrupt Democrats.
GOP Just NUKED Dems FROM ORBIT, New Investigation In Biden DOJ Sparks FURY Among Corrupt Democrats. Adam Schiff claims the new moves are an attempt to protect donald trump.
Swalwell is furious that after all these years he is getting the boot due to his relationship with a accused chinese spy. Republicans wil be investigating january 6th, the FBI's targeting of parents of school issues, and Dr. Fauci.
#democrats
#republicans
#biden
Become A Member And Protect Our Work at http://www.timcast.com
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
The Democrats are furious as Republicans announce an investigation into the weaponization of the DOJ and the removal of Schiff and Swalwell from their committees, but for good reason.
These people should be removed because they're deeply corrupt, and I break down those reasons.
In our next segment, this morning, the FAA grounded all flights because their NOTAM system broke.
The interesting thing here, they refer to their stakeholders.
That's World Economic Forum terminology.
That's cult-like stuff.
And then we got a bunch of other stories.
A guy in San Francisco hosed down a homeless woman.
It's brutal.
But people are starting to lose it.
And sperm counts are dropping, signaling, potentially, the end of humanity.
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.
Republicans are wasting little time in making moves and expressing their intent to get back at Democrats.
But it's not just revenge.
It's just cleaning things up.
Aside from this story, the House approving a subcommittee to investigate the weaponization of the FBI and the DOJ under Biden, we learned the other day that Adam Schiff and Eric Swalwell will be booted from the Intelligence Committee.
Ilhan Omar is also getting booted from her committees.
But of course, Swalwell and Schiff are furious!
Swalwell saying McCarthy's lying about him having been in bed with a Chinese spy.
Well, as the reporting goes, he was fully cooperating with the FBI on his relation to Fang Fang.
But hey, either way, it makes sense to not have him on the Intelligence Committee, right?
And as for Adam Schiff, hey, how about when he published the private phone records of another sitting member of Congress and a private American citizen?
But of course, they're outraged that Matt Gaetz, that Marjorie Taylor Greene, that any Republican would actually go after the January 6th committee.
Matt Gaetz says that they will be releasing 14,000 hours of footage.
He says they're going to get to the bottom of what was really going on.
And in fact, he's saying it was a Fed's erection.
That the Feds were actually involved in January 6.
Well, me personally, I'd like to know who Ray Epps is and what his involvement is.
And how come, despite the fact that he's on camera inciting the insurrection, Kinzinger and many other politicians, Democrats, defended the man.
Here's what's really happening.
Republicans are certainly getting revenge, but they're also cleaning things up.
Now, I don't know if they'll actually fully clean things up.
A subcommittee to investigate may mean nothing.
With Kevin McCarthy, you may get the worst of all possibilities.
Garbage sham investigations that ultimately lead nowhere.
As Ian pointed out on TimCast IRL, no investigation may actually be better than a McCarthy investigation.
What if the establishment Republicans are basically doing a deal where they're like, you know, we'll give a minor budget, we'll claim to investigate, not actually get any real power, file any real subpoenas, so it looks like we did the investigation, and then we'll come out and say, no, no, we were wrong.
Everything was on the level.
Well, I'll tell you, I'm a little optimistic.
Why?
They just announced they're going to be voting to abolish the IRS and abolish the income tax.
It's never going to happen.
But it's a symbolic victory that forces Democrats to vote in favor of the IRS and the income tax.
But the point is, the reason that vote's gonna happen is because the Freedom Caucus, not necessarily the entirety of the Freedom Caucus, some voted for McCarthy, but the holdouts, these holdout members of Congress and the Republican Party, were able to pressure Kevin McCarthy and say, if you want our votes, you gotta give us These things.
Thus, we're now seeing a floor vote, potentially, on abolishing the IRS.
Hey man, I will take it.
Force the Democrats to show the world they like the income tax, they like the IRS, they like the 87,000 new IRS agents that will be coming for you and your tiny bank accounts.
In the meantime, it feels good.
If that's it, That's all I get.
Fine.
Whatever.
I mean, I'd love real accountability, but hey, at least I can say right now that it certainly feels good.
I mean, it's fantastic that the House is going to be investigating the weaponization of the FBI and the DOJ, so let's talk about that and what it means.
But first, I'd like to revel in the outrage of the Democrats, but explain to you it's not just tit for tat personal revenge.
Adam Schiff and Eric Swalwell being removed, it's for real reasons, important ones that we need to discuss.
So when you hear someone say, ah, the Republicans are just doing that because they're mad.
No, no, no.
I'm going to show you the hard proof, and I'm going to break it down for you.
Before we get started, my friends, head over to TimCast.com and click that beautiful Join Us button.
Become a member to support our work directly.
Membership is what drives this whole machine.
It's the most important element of the business, but you can also share the video with everybody you know, because if every single person shared this video, we'd be bigger than the mainstream media overnight, and that's probably more powerful.
exponential growth. As a member, you get access to exclusive,
uncensored segments in the Tim Cast IRL podcast Monday through Thursday at 11
p.m.
but you also support our cultural endeavors. We're setting up a physical
location, a skate shop, a private club, a coffee shop, and we want to
set up and possibly even franchise out physical locations. You walk in
for a coffee, boom, there's Tim Cast IRL, there's Steven Crowder, there's Viva
Frying Barnes up on the TV so that we can get a foothold
in the culture, in physical spaces.
And this Saturday I'll be in Washington D.C.
at Freedom Plaza skating around.
No real event or anything.
I'll just be there.
Hope to see you there.
So smash that like button, subscribe to this channel, share this show with your friends.
Let's talk about what's really going on and why the Democrats are so angry.
Adam Schiff, yes, yes, he's particularly angry because he's being booted off his committee.
He tweets, the true purpose of the GOP's new Investigate the Investigators Committee?
To undermine the legitimate probes of Trump and 1-6, which implicate the committee's own members.
Kevin McCarthy sacrificed a lot to be Speaker, our democracy and national security most of all.
In his shockingly absurd statement before Congress, he says that the QAnon members of the caucus are forcing, of the party, forcing McCarthy to do these things.
Well, let's talk about what's really going on.
From WEARTV, ABC3.
Send it to the critics.
Gates claims videos prove FBI involvement in January 6th... Insurrection!
I love how they call it that.
Like, makes it so shocking.
Like, ugh!
Congressman Matt Gaetz and Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene held a press conference Thursday analyzing videos of the January 6th insurrection, claiming that the FBI assisted in the incitement of the Capitol breach.
Gaetz showcased a compilation of videos Thursday that he claims would expose the truth of what led many individuals to take part in the events of January 6th.
Gaetz went on to call the January 6th insurrection a Fedsurrection.
Interesting.
A video of an individual taking down fencing at the breach site was shown by Gates during his conference.
Gates claimed that some people, because of one individual's actions, may have been naive and drawn into a place they were not supposed to be.
Quote, Congresswoman Greene and I went to this specific location outside and we demonstrated how easy it could have been that an individual might have listened to the President's remarks, arrived at the breach site, seen that fencing was removed, and might have been drawn into a place they weren't supposed to and never intended to be.
Gates then goes on to claim that the individual addressed by Gates as the fence cutter is not listed on the FBI's wanted list where others who participated in the breach have been listed.
Interesting point, Matt Gates.
Interesting.
During Gates' showcase of aggregated videos, he goes on to say that an individual, Ray Epps, incited the events of January 6th, ushering much of the blame away from other individuals involved in the Capitol breach.
According to the New York Times, Epps was captured on video yelling to a crowd, quote, Okay, folks, spread the word.
As soon as the president is done speaking, we go to the Capitol.
The Capitol is this direction.
Epps has not been charged with his actions, leading some to believe he was protected by the FBI or other government agency.
He's there!
They tear down the barricades!
He tells them to do it!
He tells them to go to the Capitol, I mean to say.
Gates and Green both claimed in the conference the federal government along with Epps were responsible for the January 6th breach of the Capitol.
Prove it!
Quote, I do not believe that there would have been the same level of criminal acuity on January 6th of last year.
Very, very interesting.
involvement of the federal government gate said gate says towards the end of the conference that he expected and
expects criticism For his theory that the federal government was involved in
the January insurrection Very very interesting the story of course my friends is
from a year ago But it's important because many of these elements are being
brought back up notably right now DC Drano tweets
Republicans from met gates Republicans will release 10,000 hours of January 6 tapes that have been hidden
Bam!
Looks like the truth about Pelosi's Fed op is going to be exposed even further.
Maybe this is what we needed.
It's been a year.
Maybe this is what we needed.
Now, of course, Adam Schiff is arguing their investigation into this has nothing.
It's all about just protecting Trump and themselves.
OK.
Let me show you how fun this game is.
You ready for this one, my friends?
Upon learning that Matt Gaetz, he straight-up said this, he said they will release 14,000 hours of January 6th tapes, I did a little Google search.
unidentified
Hey, it's Kimberly Fletcher here from Moms 4 America with some very exciting news.
Tucker Carlson is going on a nationwide tour this fall, and Moms 4 America has the exclusive VIP meet-and-greet experience for you.
Before each show, you can have the opportunity to meet Tucker Carlson in person.
These tickets are fully tax-deductible donations, so go to momsforamerica.us and get one of our very limited VIP meet-and-greet experiences with Tucker at any of the 15 cities on his first ever Coast to Coast tour.
Not only will you be supporting Moms for America in our mission to empower moms, promote liberty, and raise patriots, your tax-deductible donation secures you a full VIP experience with priority entrance and check-in, premium gold seating in the first five rows, access to a pre-show cocktail reception, an individual meet-and-greet, and photo with America's most famous conservative and our friend, Tucker Carlson.
Visit momsforamerica.us today for more information and to secure your exclusive VIP meet and greet tickets.
I searched for release January 6 footage gates and Google says it looks like the results below are changing quickly.
Check the source.
Are they trusted?
Come back later.
Other sources might have more information on the topic.
You want to know what story does come up?
Fascinating.
From January 6, 2022.
Gates and Marjorie Taylor Greene, once again.
That's what I pulled up and just referenced.
I think it's relevant to what Adam Schiff is saying.
But funny that Google doesn't bring up the news about what Matt Gaetz just said.
So I tried another search.
Matt Gaetz, 14,000.
Once again, it looks like the results below are changing quickly.
Check the source.
Are they trusted on this topic?
Here's the Gateway Pundit.
Huge!
Matt Gaetz reveals Republicans will release the blah blah blah.
But that's a big ol' red exclamation point from NewsGuard.
Oh, Gateway Pundit.
Can't be trusted.
But Matt Gaetz literally said it.
He said it's going to happen.
Now here's where we're at, my friends.
From Axios, House GOP zeroes in on January 6th panel documents.
The Republicans are saying they're going to do it.
Perhaps the concessions that Matt Gaetz got and others will be enough to actually release this footage and show the world what really happened on January 6th.
Because there are a lot of questions that need to be answered that the Democrats and people like Kinzinger, Cheney, would not actually entertain.
They wouldn't answer.
Notably, there are several men who go up to a mag-locked door, meaning an electromagnet seals it shut, you can't open it.
They look up, and then someone deactivates the mag-lock, and the door opens.
How did that happen?
The other day I heard something interesting, too.
We had Taylor Hanson on the show.
He mentioned that some people weren't even being prosecuted, like large groups that were there.
Interesting questions.
And what about Ray Epps?
Apparently, in transcripts, he said that he orchestrated it.
No charges.
Because maybe he was supposed to.
Maybe the Feds wanted him to do it.
Now, of course, this is a big reason why Adam Schiff is angry.
I think a powerful reason is that, well, the House approves a subcommittee to investigate weaponization of FBI and DOJ under Biden.
But, but, but, I want to talk to you about why it is important that Adam Schiff and Swalwell be removed from their committees.
Reporter threatens legal action against Adam Schiff after Twitter files bombshell.
We're exploring legal options including defamation.
Paul Sperry told Brian Kilmeade.
A reporter indicated that he may sue Adam Schiff after internal documents at Twitter revealed the Democrat tried to get him banned from the platform.
Elon Musk and journalist Matt Taibbi's Twitter files entry last week revealed that Schiff lobbied Twitter to suspend journalist Paul Sperry from the platform.
Yeah, that's a violation of his First Amendment rights.
Adam Schiff is a deranged psychopath who lies in front of the American people because he wants control and power.
He is a deeply deranged man and he should be removed from any position of power.
He is violating the Constitution because a journalist said things he did not like.
Quote.
So Schiff didn't like the fact I outed his anonymous whistleblower as a partisan Democrat.
He's a holdover from the Obama White House working with the Trump White House.
And Schiff also didn't like the fact that I exposed the whistleblower's prior relationship with the key member of Schiff's impeachment staff.
And there it is.
There's more.
From the Hill.
Controversy on phone records intensifies amid impeachment.
This is a story from December 2019.
To put it simply, Devin Nunes, John Solomon's phone records were released by Schiff.
You want to make arguments about Nunes?
Fine, you make arguments.
I still think it's wrong, because he was in Congress.
But John Solomon is a private American citizen and a journalist, and Adam Schiff released his phone records.
This man is a deranged psychopath and evil individual who must be stopped.
And he is, thankfully, in the most appropriate way possible.
He's being stripped of power.
He's being removed from committees.
That's all I ask for.
That's the way you handle it.
You know, when it comes to things like January 6th, I always say this, my friends.
The violence doesn't work.
And the federal government understands this.
This is why, with Julian Assange, they character assassinate him.
They smear and lie about him and lock him up to prevent his work.
The most effective thing you can do?
Strip them of their power and let them wither away into obscurity.
That works.
And that is how you stop a deranged man like Adam Schiff.
So bravo.
Bravo to Kevin McCarthy.
Bravo to Matt Gaetz and everybody else.
But what about our good friend Eric Swalwell?
Byron Donalds tweets, I don't talk for Speaker McCarthy. It was wrong to kick Republicans
off committees. Don't cry now. Eric Swalwell tweeted, Breaking Byron Donalds admits on the
readout that Speaker McCarthy is kicking me, Adam Schiff and Ilhan off our committees purely
out of vengeance. Eric Swalwell responded to Byron saying, You strike me as an independent guy.
If the FBI repeatedly says that McCarthy's claims are bullish, don't you think you should have a
better reason than the Dems did it to kick me off Intel?
Otherwise, why shouldn't I throw you off yours when we retake the House? Don't know. Don't care.
Swalwell, you're a bad person. You're a liar. And you were associating with a Chinese spy. Allegedly.
You see, I did that.
Quote, Swalwell was completely cooperative and under no suspicion of wrongdoing.
An FBI official familiar with the investigation said, speaking to the Chronicle anonymously,
as the agent was not authorized to speak to the media. So your words are garbage because I don't
know who you are, anonymous trash. It was a defensive briefing.
Information was obtained where we do a duty to warn that he may be targeted by a foreign government.
Here's the news, my friend.
McCarthy tries to remove Swalwell from Intel Committee after China spy story.
House Minority Speaker Kevin McCarthy introduced a resolution on Thursday to remove Swalwell from the House Intelligence Committee over his ties to a suspected Chinese spy, Fang Fang.
The resolution will likely not pass in the Democratic-controlled House.
Democrats say they have no intention of removing Swalwell from the committee.
Axios first reported in December that Swalwell was one of the California politicians targeted by Christine Fang.
A Chinese national and suspected spy who started working with him in 2012.
Swalwell was not accused of wrongdoing and cut ties with Fang Fang after receiving an FBI briefing.
The resolution says Swalwell has not denied public reporting that a suspected Chinese intelligence operative helped raise money for Swalwell's political campaigns and other troublesome elements of public reporting.
Quote, I don't think that person should be on Intel, McCarthy told Punchbowl News, and I agree and I will tell you why.
Chinese spy Wants certain individuals with certain political opinions
to be working in government They then fundraise and support these people. We should
question why those people were chosen because that is Chinese influence in our government and
That's why we shouldn't allow it McCarthy said he did not know about swalwell's connection
with fang until it's funk fang and Axios.
Until the Axios story was published.
Swalwell told Politico that the Axios story would not cost him his seat on the House Intelligence Committee, adding that his interactions with Fong were something that congressional leadership knew about.
That's not a justification.
And in the end, it does get him booted.
So this is where we're at.
What needs to be done.
An investigation into the illicit activities of Joe Biden.
My friends, I hate to break it to you, but many of these stories, it may be symbolic.
Sure, Adam Schiff gets the boot.
Good.
Swalwell gets the boot.
Good.
Maybe they'll actually investigate the January 6th Committee themselves.
Maybe Matt Gaetz's 2022 conference will actually bear some fruit.
Now the Republicans have taken the House.
I don't know.
Voting to abolish the IRS?
It's fun.
It's funny.
We'll see if anything comes of it.
But a subcommittee to investigate the weaponization of the FBI and the DOJ, I'll take it.
I'll take it.
Hopefully it's got more teeth than we would expect.
Hopefully it actually has an impact.
The Postmillennial Reports.
In a Tuesday evening vote, the House voted to approve the creation of the Weaponization of the Federal Government Subcommittee.
The vote passed 222 to 211 along party lines, with two representatives voting no vote, one being Republican and one being Democrat.
It's really funny.
It's really voting no vote.
The Democrats are like, no, no, we shouldn't investigate the government.
Why not?
Seriously, why not?
What's their argument?
The Democrats are outright just in favor of authoritarianism.
The Democrats are exactly what they claim Republicans are.
They're fascists.
Following a closed-door meeting of House Republicans, Rep.
Steve Scalise told reporters that the new select subcommittee would serve to protect
every American's constitutional rights, according to ABC News. The subcommittee will dig into
abuses of power and weaponization of the government by the Biden administration and will demand
correspondence between the Biden administration and big tech companies.
A GOP source said that if government agencies and personnel do not comply, subpoenas are likely to be issued.
Yes, please and thank you.
That's the big news coming out right now.
One, that Adam Schiff was trying to get a journalist banned.
Thank you, Twitter files.
We have the Louisiana AG lawsuit.
They're releasing new information that the Biden administration tried to get Tucker Carlson and Tommy Loren banned.
I mean, this is outright authoritarianism.
The abuse of power.
Using private companies as a cudgel to target your political enemies.
That's what they were doing.
I think it's criminal.
I think it's outright criminal.
But let's not just talk about the private sector.
Let's talk about the overt direct actions of the DOJ.
The one thing I like to bring up over and over again.
That protesters are out in front of the homes of the Supreme Court justices despite it being illegal and no charges.
Yet they will raid the homes of pro-life activists for being, for entering, briefly, a Planned Parenthood building.
Well, they were obstructing.
That's not allowed.
Fine!
Fine, it's against the law.
Arrest them.
Nonviolent civil disobedience comes with a penalty.
But what about the people illegally protesting in front of the Supreme Court justices' homes?
I can already hear the left whinging, saying, you don't believe in free speech!
If you believed in free speech, You would defend the right of pro-life activists, but they were obstructing a Planned Parenthood.
Well, these other protesters are obstructing.
They're obstructing justice.
There's a law.
You can't protest in front of judges' homes.
Why?
If a judge cannot be free from political influence to come to the right conclusion, then there is no justice.
Makes sense.
Especially considering these are not elected officials.
They are appointed individuals who do a job.
Post Millennial goes on to say, House Republicans are set to investigate the politicization of the FBI, including discrediting the New York Post's reporting on the Hunter Biden laptop story in the lead-up to the 2020 election, as well as the Russian election interference allegations in the lead-up to the 2016 election.
I want y'all to realize something.
The last time Republicans had the House was just before 2018.
In 2020, Democrats kept the House.
And so we have seen, over the past several years, from 2018 to 2020, Democrats in the House.
From 2020 to 2022, can you believe it's been that long?
Democrats in the House.
We haven't had an opportunity for Republicans to get in and do anything.
I'm not optimistic on Kevin McCarthy.
That's why I'm a big fan of Matt Gaetz.
What he did was absolutely incredible.
Bravo, good sir.
And Lauren Boebert, don't get me wrong.
I don't want to count out all the other 2019 individuals, but Matt Gaetz standing up, voting for Trump, I loved it.
But I'll take what I can get for the time being.
If concessions were made, and we're seeing simple, symbolic victories, it's a start.
We gotta shift the culture.
You cannot expect someone like Matt Gaetz to be the one doing all the heavy lifting.
And I'll tell you what else makes me very proud.
When Donald Trump said, no, no, it has to be McCarthy, and Matt Gaetz just went, sad.
Bravo!
Bravo, stand up to Trump.
They're going to say.
Also set to be investigated is the Biden administration's use of the Department of Justice to investigate parents who spoke out at school board meetings and Biden's COVID czar, Dr. Anthony Fauci.
Hear, hear!
I'm loving it, my friends.
Let's go!
Ohio Rep Jim Jordan is set to lead this new subcommittee.
According to The Hill, the panel will include 13 Republicans and 5 Democrats.
Speaking during a House floor debate on Tuesday, Jordan said,
This is about the First Amendment, something that you guys used to care about.
And had actually hoped we could get bipartisan agreement on protecting the First Amendment,
the five rights we enjoy as Americans under the First Amendment, according to The Hill.
We don't want to go after anyone.
We just want it to stop.
And we want to respect the First Amendment of the Constitution.
That the greatest country in the world has.
That's what this committee is all about.
And that's what we're going to focus on.
That's what we're going to do, he later added.
Jordan has pushed back on claims that the subcommittee is a political ploy.
A ploy?
It's not a ploy when the Department of Justice treats parents as terrorists, he said.
It's not a ploy when the Department of Homeland Security tries to set up a disinformation governance board, because we all know the Department of Homeland Security can tell what's good speech and what is bad speech.
I'm glad to see it.
Jim Jordan, my friend, bring it on home.
But let's break down what he just said.
The going after parents.
It's crazy.
Remember that guy whose daughter was physically abused?
I'm trying to keep it family friendly.
In a school bathroom.
This parent showed up to a school board meeting because they were covering it up.
And he protested and they arrested him.
Well, apparently, I think what happened, the charges got dropped.
He gets released.
This guy was calling out how his daughter was attacked.
He won.
Nonviolent civil disobedience.
Stay true.
Understand.
We are not giving up.
Your speech matters.
It works.
Your vote matters.
It works.
Now, Glenn Youngkin, he is not perfect.
In Virginia, though, they were able to get rid of the Democrat because parents stood up and spoke out and said no.
Well, Joe Biden wasn't having none of that.
So the DOJ was weaponized to go after parents who simply said, my daughter was attacked.
Anarcho-tyranny.
It's kind of a nightmarish consideration.
This is the country you live in now.
We have to win.
When a man's daughter is attacked and the response from the federal government is to weaponize the DOJ against him because it makes him look bad.
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 Joe Biden is a deeply corrupt individual.
And he's out of his gourd, too, at this point, with his private business dealings with Hunter Biden and Burisma.
on trial with Josh Hammer. Subscribe and download your episodes wherever you get your podcast.
And he's out of his gourd to at this point with his private business dealings with Hunter Biden
and Burisma. Adam Schiff is one of the most psychopathic individuals I've ever watched on
in the news. Here's a guy who is releasing people's private records.
Here's a guy who is lying to the American people, holding up an envelope saying, I've got the proof that Donald Trump colluded with Russia.
He made that up.
Because he's evil.
And unfortunately, ignorant people march behind him in lockstep.
But now, with a slight turn in the power of the House, we are seeing a change.
Hopefully, this means something going into 2024.
It's already 2023.
Campaigning is already going to start.
It ain't going to stop.
And this means we have a chance to change things.
But it's not going to be just about politics.
We are not going to win simply by asserting we have better ideas and calling out corruption.
In order to win, what we will have to do?
Ballot harvesting.
Knocking on doors.
Grassroots activism.
Republicans are often late to the party.
There's this thing called Act Blue.
Democrats use it to fundraise.
It's an online web portal.
A portion of the donations go to ActBlue.
The majority, I think it's like a fee or something, goes to the politician or the cause.
The Republicans launched WinRed.
Basically the same thing, but they were way late to the party.
They launched, I think it was like a couple years after ActBlue.
Because Republicans don't get it.
It started to change in 2016 with the meme wars.
Many people who supported Trump memed him into the presidency by only, what is it like, 77,000 votes between three states or something like that?
Hillary Clinton.
They thought she was gonna win.
But they stopped her.
With modern tactics, The people who supported Trump were better at campaigning online than the Democrats were, and they learned their lesson.
All of a sudden, a wave of censorship.
We have to shut down their ability to communicate.
It was pure evil.
Now, they may justify their actions as, but it's better for you.
I choose dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery.
I choose the threat of conflict with freedom over being locked in a box because it's safe.
I think of my chickens locked in their little cage.
Chickens outside, just to my left.
Yeah, they're not allowed to leave.
We let them come out sometimes to graze in the fields and boy are they excited to do it.
But their life is in a coop.
Surrounded by a large fence, they can't leave.
Yeah, they could probably try and find a way to escape, but they don't know any better.
Those are chickens.
I owned them.
They are a source of food for me.
They are not human beings.
Human beings should not be treated as chickens.
You get my point.
They're treating us like livestock.
The intelligence agencies, if they were to justify their crackpot actions and evil, it is that we are too stupid to run our own lives, and it's safer for us to be locked in the narrative box.
Otherwise, there could be real conflict.
Yeah, you know what?
Roosters fight sometimes.
And that's why we decide we must remove them, so they don't fight and don't injure themselves.
Humans are different.
No human can decide for the rest of us, but they think they can.
They think they know better than you, and they think they know better than everyone else.
The Bill Gateses of the world, the Bezoses of the world.
They think they know what they should do to control you.
Now, truth be told, there are smarter people than others, but humans aren't massively smarter than each other.
Some people are smarter, but comprehensive ability is not the same thing as knowledge, and you can have a really great mind to calculate and solve problems, but if you don't know everything, you can't properly solve it, which means decentralization is likely the best option.
It avoids authoritarianism.
It avoids the prospect of genocide.
Doesn't guarantee it.
It avoids the risk of failure.
By allowing the best ideas to move forward, by allowing a decentralized system, bad ideas disappear, good ideas emerge.
It's not always perfect.
So I do think it's fine to have some governance, but the system that we have right now, lying to the American people, mass medicating the American people, Weaponizing the DOJ against anyone who would threaten your system.
You have become the evil you are claiming to protect us from.
That evil must be stopped.
I know.
I think about what it would be like if everything went awry.
What if humans can't properly organize?
What if we do march ourselves off a cliff like a bunch of lemmings?
I know, I know, Disney faked the whole thing.
My answer to that is, it's unfortunate, but so be it.
I think I have faith in humans more than they do.
We've seen it time and time again throughout history.
Dictators who think, if only I were in charge, I could solve these problems.
Well, the great writers of American history have created a character, Dr. Doom.
He's a villain for that reason.
He believes that only he can save humanity.
He genuinely believes it.
He's wrong.
And that's the point.
These dictators and these despots often believe they are the only ones who can do it.
But why would we believe they any smarter than the rest of us?
And that's what's scary to me.
I believe the computational power of all humanity combined is better than the computational power of a committee or an individual.
And this means that some people have bad ideas, and those bad ideas will flourish, and that's scary.
But it typically means the bad ideas get stopped by the good ideas, and the good ideas progress, and that's what we've seen over the past several hundred years.
It's actually what we've seen throughout the course of humanity.
There have been periods of dark times.
But we've consistently proven that we can figure it out.
These social solutions tend not to work.
The practical and technological tend to be.
What we do need, in my opinion though, is a cohesive social structure.
And right now we are watching our social structure decay.
That's why we need accountability.
Hopefully we'll get it.
There's no guarantee that this 118th Congress can actually pull it off.
But maybe enough can be done to expose the machine that come 2024, executive power returns to the hands of those who seek to correct the system.
And then things get better.
We can secure our borders.
We can bring back jobs.
We can improve health care.
If that's going to happen, it's going to be up to you.
We've got to do our part.
Speak up or forever hold your peace.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 6 p.m.
over at youtube.com slash TimCastNews.
Check it out.
Thanks for hanging out, and we'll see you all then.
There are a lot of things that make me feel like it's all coming crashing down.
I mean, you've got Joe Biden's corruption, you've got the weaponization of the DOJ, you've got the economic collapse, and then I wake up and hear, All U.S.
flights are grounded because the NOTAM system went down.
And I'm like, I don't know what NOTAM is, but apparently nobody can fly anymore.
So they restored this at around 9 a.m., so they say.
I'm recording this slightly just after, so we're waiting for the update.
But the interesting thing about this story is not necessarily, in my opinion, that the entire grid went down.
I mean, that actually is very important.
But if the grid goes back up and we can fly again, it was a minor hiccup.
These things happen, right?
I noticed something very interesting.
A tweet put out by the FAA.
You can see right now, breaking news, they have just lifted their ground order on all flights.
I don't know if they have the tweet listed right here.
I do have it pulled up separately.
But when I was looking at the story, I noticed something.
The FAA tweeted, cleared update number two for all stakeholders.
I saw that and I went, no, okay.
I'm not going to swear.
For all stakeholders.
No effing ish.
They say the FAA is still working to fully restore the Notice to Air Mission system following an outage.
While some functions are beginning to come back online, national airspace system operations remain limited.
I do not trust these people.
Do you know what stakeholder means?
It's the new nomenclature.
It's a new word.
It's a woke terminology.
Stakeholder capitalism.
World Economic Forum ideological garbage.
I mean, the idea itself, the way they describe it, ain't all that bad.
They're basically like, businesses need to consider everyone involved in the process, not just the profit motive.
And I'm like, I hear ya.
You know, the idea is like, if you're pumping oil out of the ground, and then selling it to a dude who wants oil, are you really considering all factors?
Are you considering the people who live in the area?
Are you considering the animals?
Are you considering the damage you may be doing?
We can't just keep going that route.
And you know what?
I dig it.
That general concept.
I'm like, that's a good point.
The only problem is, they're liars.
And they're using what sounds like a nice idea to implement their control.
It isn't about you.
It's not about the stakeholders.
It's about them.
And I have proof.
Now, of course, I'm going to read for you what happened with the FAA because it's kind of crazy to hear that every single flight got grounded.
Must suck to be in an airport right now.
Maybe you waited a week after the holidays before going home because you were like, well, you know, I don't want to get caught in the rush and now you get jammed up for a night.
Not the biggest deal in the world.
There's another story.
That's completely unrelated, but related by a word.
A single word.
Stakeholder.
And that's the Musician MIA.
She was recently booted from a festival because her opinions are offensive to the festival's stakeholders.
And this is the important point.
You may be saying, Tim, what does a musician concert have to do with the FAA?
Stakeholders.
They said they were booting her because it was offensive to the stakeholders, but they didn't ask a single stakeholder.
They didn't ask anyone.
It was them.
It was those who ran the institution, the organization.
They use your name They say it's for you, as they beat people over the head with a cudgel.
And that's the point.
When the FAA comes out and says, notice to all stakeholders, that's when they're talking to you.
You're a stakeholder.
Why?
Because they want you to think that you're involved.
But then when it comes to making administrative and executive decisions pertaining to stakeholders, it has nothing to do with you, and everything to do with them, because don't forget, you will own nothing, and you will be happy.
And you know what?
They're not wrong.
Take away someone's knowledge of freedom and liberty and they'll never imagine what it could be like because it won't exist to them.
Some of these ideas, these philosophies, they were developed over a long period of time and many of these crackpot World Economic Forum weirdos Want to do away with those.
You know, we're sitting here... Look, I gotta be completely honest.
Watching that movie WALL-E, and seeing morbidly obese people carting around drinking Slurpees, and I'm like, that is NOT a positive future.
But what's the alternative?
You get someone like Michael Bloomberg saying, you shouldn't be allowed to drink large sodas, so we're gonna put a tax on those sodas.
Poor people make bad decisions, so let's take their money and decide for them.
And there it is, my friends.
It's some kind of communism.
Stakeholder capitalism makes no sense.
Capitalism is the free exchange, the free market.
And I believe, for the most part, I'm not a staunch laissez-faire capitalist, but for the most part, a decentralized system does fix itself.
They want to talk about stakeholders and all the problems that are affecting our planet and how we need to consider everyone else.
Okay, let's talk about horse poop in New York City.
The turn of the century, 1900s, they said there's gonna be too much poop, too many horses.
Has anyone considered that your desire to ride a horse around in New York and transport goods is gonna leave poop everywhere?
So they lost their minds!
And then what happened?
The car got invented.
And then the poop was gone.
And there was no poop anywhere.
No, for real.
The horses would be walking down New York, and they'd take a dump right in the street.
It's like, here's a solution.
Strap a bag to the horse's butt.
And then when it walks, it poops right in the bag.
That's what they do now.
Sometimes.
You go around Chicago, you see piles of horse crap still lying around, and I guess they just hope the rain gets rid of it.
But that was the point.
They said, we need to consider everyone because we can't just have piles of horse crap everywhere.
So they wanted to implement these policies, but then human technology and capitalism changed the game.
Humans developed a way.
That's what capitalism does.
Now they want to get rid of it.
I think it has more to do with them wanting to control you, them wanting to create the vision of their future, and wield you like a weapon in the direction they so desire, instead of letting you decide for yourself and for the decentralized structure to take its course.
Okay, but we'll talk about that first.
Here's the news, because to be honest, it is very crazy to hear.
I woke up and it's like everyone's like, every plane is shut down.
All flights across America have been grounded until at least 9 a.m., full stop.
As of the recording of this video, they've announced the flights have been restored.
The problem is with the Notice to Air Mission system, which pilots use to access flight paths and communicate with air traffic controllers about hazards.
So far, 3,500 flights have been delayed by the outage, with more delays expected throughout the day.
Crazy.
The system went down sometime before 630 a.m.
on Wednesday.
The cause of the failure is unclear.
President Biden told reporters that he had spoken with Transport Secretary Pete Buttigieg and ordered a full investigation.
Oh, that's confidence building!
Apparently, they're saying it's not a cyber attack, but not like I'd believe them if that was the case.
Departures from Newark Airport, New Jersey, one of the major New York City airports, and Atlanta-Hartsfield-Jackson, one of the busiest in the world, are resuming, according to the FAA.
Other departures from different airports are expected to resume at 9 a.m.
Let me tell you why I don't trust these people, especially when they espout things like notice to all stakeholders.
Remember when AOC said she wanted to get rid of airplanes and farting cows?
Uh-huh.
That's where we're at.
So when the planes stop working, do you think I'm gonna believe them that it was all just an accident?
Now, what I see here is It's possible not all things are possible.
What I mean is, when we did away with the horse poop problem by inventing cars, we found a technological solution.
The combustion engine.
The horseless carriage!
But from that came CO2 emissions.
Okay.
Well, we need new technology, then.
Okay, well, now we have electric cars.
Really good ones.
They're not completely emission-less.
The vehicles themselves are, but the energy still has to be produced somewhere, which generates emissions.
We can find solutions.
Ian on TimCastIRL often brings up carbon capture for graphene production.
I mean, look, whether you're producing graphene or not, Ian, you're a little obsessed, you can still capture carbon from the atmosphere and use it for whatever you need to use it for.
I mean, trees capture it from the atmosphere.
But maybe when it comes to airplanes, that could be the most efficient form of travel.
Maybe we build a massive global network of maglev trains.
That would be really cool.
They could even theoretically be faster, depending on how you build them.
Because they could, I mean, I don't know if they could be faster, but a direct line I don't know.
I'm not the expert on this, but maybe there are technological solutions.
I don't want to believe there are no solutions.
I believe there are, and shutting down airplanes just isn't it.
If you want to talk about stakeholder capitalism, how about this?
How about you just go regular capitalism, and you invest in solutions.
You find a way to make air travel better, more efficient.
They don't do that.
AOC just says, we need to build trains to Hawaii.
She didn't literally say that, but she was like, we can't fly around.
Take a look at this tweet from the FAA, my friends, October 28th, 2021.
The FAA will host an inclusive language summit on November 10th, and we want to hear from you.
Join us as we discuss changes to aviation terminology that embrace diversity and inclusion.
Learn more about the event and how to submit comments here.
Okay.
Yeah, okay.
Yo, dude, if you're hiring pilots on diversity and not meritocracy, I'm gonna be a little scared to fly.
But maybe that's the point.
They want people to fly less.
You know what we're starting to see?
The expansion of private charter.
I've talked about private jets quite a bit.
Here's something you guys need to understand.
Private jets have become particularly expensive.
They used to be cheaper.
Private jets used to be slightly more expensive than first class.
So it's not... People don't get it.
You assume that someone buys a $10 million jet to fly around.
That ain't it.
Often some of these people will finance a jet and it's like $5,000 a month.
In fact, some of these jets are from the 80s and they're still flying on them.
And those can cost about a million bucks.
So someone finances it, they're spending $5,000 per month.
Don't get me wrong, a lot of money.
But if you're making $500,000 a year, we're talking about the 1%, but we're not talking about multi-millionaires.
You can afford this.
Not necessarily to own it because you might want to put your money elsewhere, but private charters used to be like 10 or 20k.
I know, I know.
I'm not saying it's cheap.
I'm saying it's not as expensive as people thought it was.
You assumed it would be way more expensive.
Now they've got new companies coming out with smaller jets the size of like a small SUV.
And it's crazy.
A round-trip flight for four people, comparable to first class on a private jet.
Granted, it's super tiny.
It's like being in an SUV.
There's no bathroom.
You know, there's one pilot.
It is what it is.
But they are getting the cost down.
I'm bringing this up because technology is improving.
And that's capitalism, baby.
This one company we've had an exchange with, Verijet, I'm mostly referring to, they talk about reducing emissions, making private travel comparable to the cost of first class, easier, faster, no security.
But think about it.
They're talking about how they want to get rid of planes, like when AOC does the Green New Deal stuff.
Yo, this company is using capitalism to find a solution there.
Now, you don't gotta, you know, some people were like, they're a woke anti-emission thing.
It's like, fine, whatever, dude.
If they're making it cheaper to fly private, here's what happens.
You book the flight, you walk into the airport, no security, the plane is sitting right there, you walk in the jet, you take off way faster, way more efficient, less emissions, comparable cost to first class.
That's capitalism!
Not this stakeholder garbage.
Stakeholder garbage is like, we've decided to have 800 people on one plane, and it's cheaper!
Let me talk about stakeholder capitalism.
Is stakeholder capitalism newspeak for economic fascism?
Yes!
Let me show you why.
Over at AdvanceESG.org.
ESG advocacy for everyone.
You gotta watch out for these evil cultists, man.
This is April 26, 2021.
They say, in state capitalism, the government is the key stakeholder acting as a steering force in the marketplace and can intervene when it deems necessary.
As such, business interests are subservient to interests of the state.
Well, that's bad.
In shareholder capitalism, the owners of the business are the primary stakeholders, whose principal goal is to increase business profits.
Short-term profit maximization is the key driving force, and all other considerations are of lesser importance.
I gotta be honest, that's also bad.
Stakeholder capitalism.
Well, what's this?
Envisions that all stakeholders, the owners, the customers, the employees, suppliers, essentially anyone who is impacted by business decisions, matter equally.
The key characteristic is the emphasis on improving society and increasing the well-being of everyone rather than to generate a financial return.
This form of capitalism focuses on long-term value creation and ESG parameters.
In this system, individuals, private businesses, and public corporations can still innovate and compete freely while also being protected and guided to ensure that the general direction of the economic development for the greater good.
Well, that sounds absolutely wonderful, doesn't it?
Until you stop and ask yourself the question of, who is doing the guiding?
This morning, I'm listening to A Perfect Circle, Audioslave, and All That Remains.
Yeah, Phil was here last night.
He's hanging out.
Big fan.
And I'm playing these 2000s hard rock and metal music.
And M.I.A.
was... She's good.
She's good.
But I'm listening to A Perfect Circle, man.
Judith is a masterpiece.
You can't change my mind.
Here's what she says.
Field Day London, how dare you?
I'm literally an artist who has been given a medal for speaking up.
Now you're gonna pull my show because of your stakeholders?
Your stakeholders are not happy I point out hypocrisy in a tweet, but are happy if I support war, murder, sex, and drugs?
Look at what they say.
They're in an email.
When we made the offer on the 27th of October, we did so in good faith and with the belief that this would be a great
collaboration for all parties.
Since then, there have been some online comments by the artist, which could be viewed as quite contentious,
and for a festival like Field Day that now makes continuing with this very hard,
after discussing it with AEG, the consensus in light of un-electivity, blah blah blah blah blah.
Let me get to the part where, um...
I'd like to be clear.
On behalf of everyone involved on our side, there is no judgment here.
Maya's politics—the detail of what she says—is really not our business.
The concern, however, is that, as we know, people are ready to judge us based on our actions.
And in this case, therefore, a booking may be viewed as an endorsement of our views.
Blah, blah, blah.
Worth noting that the majority of the festival conditions outlined in the subject were not subject to no—blah, blah, blah, blah.
Here we go.
In light of her online activity.
Festival stakeholders.
She keeps saying that.
Stakeholders.
Stakeholders.
Because they're stakeholders.
Contentious blah blah blah blah blah.
That's the language.
Stakeholders.
In light of her unliketivity, like what accidentally launching a missile on an innocent village or me scamming a billion dollars from people or running a sex scandal?
No, it was your little tweet.
How naughty.
Festival stakeholders want musician to be boring puppets.
Well, that's where we're at my friends.
That's the game.
It's all about whether or not the stakeholders agree.
The interesting thing, however, is that they don't ask their quote-unquote stakeholders.
It's still just the state.
The difference?
What they're doing is they're saying, in state capitalism, the state is the primary guiding force.
In stakeholder capitalism, it's everyone.
You know what they're really saying?
It's a global effort.
People around the world have a say.
What they're really saying is it's still the state, but it's a much bigger picture.
It's more like the IMF or the UN or something.
So MIA gets the boot because they're deeply offended and worried about what their stakeholders might think.
It's crazy, right?
Spineless cowards.
M.I.A.
has been speaking out and calling out the hypocrisy, as many have, and this is what we get.
She tweeted, "'Tweets are dangerous' to the point I might have to get a job at Twitter soon, Elon Musk."
Well, that's strange.
What were the tweets in question?
Is it that she was questioning Big Pharma?
Well that's strange.
What were the tweets in question?
Is it that she was questioning Big Pharma?
That's right.
And the stakeholders are quite mad.
They can't allow that.
It's in consensus.
The consensus is that in light of online activity, we cannot continue the offer, I'm afraid.
We have not taken the decision lightly, but must consider the wider risk to the festival and its stakeholders.
And there it is.
Again, did they ask?
Pretty sure fans of M.I.A.
aren't going to complain all that much about her tweets.
But they decided.
And that's where we're heading.
So it's funny.
I wake up this morning and I'm looking at it and I'm like, the stories aren't seemingly related.
But then I saw the tweet from the F.A.A.
and I'm like, what?
The F.A.A.
noticed to all stakeholders.
That's the new language.
The new nomenclature.
The Foundation for Economic Education.
Is that F-E-E?
Is that what it is?
They say, leaders of the world economic forum are seeking to implement a great reset of capitalism, whereby global stakeholders cooperate to achieve shared goals in the true spirit of not letting a crisis go to waste.
Do you know what this really is?
It's Chinese-style communism.
It is.
The state has a communist office in every business.
Guiding force.
But that's state capitalism.
If it's done on an international scale, now it's stakeholder capitalism?
No, it's the same thing.
They love what China's done.
They created a system where they can use the components of capitalism to create a kind of more rapid development, but still manipulate and control it under the guise of helping you, the poor people.
So where do we go from here, my friends?
It's kind of scary, because every day I hear people saying that they're not going to speak up.
I'm like, we're losing.
Another reason to believe that we're holding out.
We may see some tremendous victories, but they are shaping the culture all around us.
Take your political victories.
The Republicans barely won.
There are some funny things happening.
The U.S.
is resistant to these forces, but it is being crushed slowly over time.
If people refuse to speak up because they're scared of losing their jobs, then you've already lost.
That's it.
I was talking to a buddy of mine.
And I was telling him, you know, he was saying like, look man, I can't lose my job.
I just can't do it.
And I was like, bro.
You are sitting in your house as an angry mob goes door-to-door smashing windows, and you think that if you just shut up, they'll skip your house.
They won't.
Sooner or later, they'll throw a brick through your window, too.
And they were like, well, you know, if I come out now, they'll come right at me, and I'm like, okay, sure enough, this is funny.
They recently got hit with some kind of scandal, and now they've got the woke mob all angry at them, and I was just like, Okay, congratulations.
You said nothing, and it still happened.
Because you can't do anything about it.
It's an angry mob marching through the street, smashing windows.
You need to call up your buddies and say, we need to protect our houses.
Instead, what y'all are doing, and I'm not saying all of you, I'm saying the people who refuse to speak, are just like, close the blinds, turn the lights off, and just pray they don't come for us.
For now.
Okay.
Ain't nothing doing, man.
That's your decision.
I'm not gonna tell you how to live your life.
I got out of the city.
We got chickens.
We're gonna get some goats.
We're building a new headquarters.
But we speak up all the time.
And this Saturday, I'm gonna be in D.C.
at Freedom Plaza skating.
Asserting my presence.
Ain't nobody gonna make me go hide anywhere.
Ain't nobody gonna tell me what I can or can't do.
Don't know, don't care.
People are like, but Tim, it's dangerous.
I don't care.
Dude, I am not going to live that way.
I will not live cowering in fear.
But what if some... Y'all can be worried about your families.
I recognize that.
I totally get it.
But I'm gonna go out and do my thing.
I know, I get it.
I don't have kids.
People say it all the time.
You don't have kids, you don't understand.
You're right.
Fair point.
I'm gonna go out and do my thing.
I'm gonna go out.
I'm gonna go skate.
And ain't nobody gonna tell me otherwise.
Hope to see you there.
10 a.m.
Saturday, DC's Freedom Plaza.
They can whine and complain and they can push their cult garbage however they want.
It's not stopping me.
I'm gonna live my life and I'm gonna skate.
And you know what?
I want a cleaner future.
I want people to care about each other.
But I don't want crackpot Klaus Schwab being the global dictator and his weirdo friends.
That is not how we want it to happen.
We want people... We want people to not want war.
We want people to be responsible and good stewards of the Earth.
We don't want crackpot World Economic Forum Davos group people dictating it for us while lying to our faces because they will fly in private planes, because they will have widescreen TVs, because they will eat imported Italian ice cream for breakfast, and then say, I'm allowed to have beachfront property, but you should consider the stakeholders when you try and live outside your pod.
Eat your bugs!
Yeah, sorry, I'm not interested in that.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 1 p.m.
on this channel.
Thanks for hanging out, and we'll see you all then.
Have any of you stopped to consider that your use of your gas stove could be harming the stakeholders in your neighborhood?
I mean, the indoor pollutants alone are causing a decline in the cognitive function of the people you live with.
federal agency is considering a ban on gas stoves.
We saw it reported across the board.
CNN, The Washington Post, The New York Post.
But apparently, my friends, it's all fake news.
Snopes saith, is the Biden administration banning gas stoves over climate change concerns?
False.
Well then, Snopes hereby proves that CNN is fake news.
Or is it?
My friends, you are not just looking at a story that is some crackpot climate change agenda.
You're looking at a PSYOP.
Basically, the way it's broken down is quite simple.
Right now we have a statement from the Consumer Product Safety Commission saying, no, no, we're not banning anything.
Despite the fact that many politicians and news outlets reported it.
David Harsanyi on Twitter, senior editor for The Federalist, points out, they release these trial balloons.
A bunch and a bunch of senators and lawmakers defend the idea.
When it backfires, Democrat columnists will mock people for reacting to it.
Amazing.
CNN reported this.
Wednesday, January 11th, 9-12 a.m., updated that they were planning, they were considering, a ban on gas stoves.
Now they're coming out and saying no.
Maybe it's just a mistake, to be completely honest.
Maybe some guy misspoke in a Bloomberg interview and said, we want to ban gas stoves, and they're like, what are you, nuts?
You can't do that!
Reverse!
Reverse!
But not before a bunch of leftists and Democrats, people like AOC, came out and said, actually, it's a really good idea, we should get rid of natural gas.
Very interesting.
Very interesting.
I think it's an element of a PSYOP, as was mentioned.
You will be mocked if you say you believe this story was real, despite the fact that CNN said it was real.
Let's read the story from CNN Business.
They reported.
And then I want to stress, too, this is NewsGuard-certified CNN definitively reporting that a federal agency wants to ban gas stoves.
Just because they've come out now and said, no, that's not true, doesn't mean they didn't intend to do it.
CNN reports, a federal agency is considering a ban on gas stoves, a source of indoor pollution linked to childhood asthma.
Interesting.
In an interview with Bloomberg, a U.S.
Consumer Product Safety Commissioner said gas stove usage is a hidden hazard.
Quote, any option is on the table.
Products that can't be made safe can be banned.
Agency Commissioner Richard Trumka Jr.
told Bloomberg.
The report said the agency plans to take action to address the indoor pollution caused by stoves.
The indoor pollution?
What, like when I burn my bacon and the smoke alarm goes off or something?
Or are you saying that there's natural gas being released?
We can smell it when it is.
The CPSC has been considering action on gas stoves for months.
Trumka recommended in October that the CPSC seek public comment on the hazards associated with gas stoves.
The pollutants have been linked to asthma and worsening respiratory conditions.
We don't use natural gas here at TimCast.
We use clean electricity.
Clean all the way from the coal plant that generates it.
Anyway.
A December 2022 study in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health found that indoor gas stove usage is associated with an increased risk of current asthma among children.
The study found that almost 13% of current childhood asthma in the U.S.
is attributable to gas stove use.
Okay, I mean, that's bad.
Let people know and they can decide for themselves.
Trumpka told Bloomberg.
The agency plans to open public comment on gas stove hazards.
Options besides a ban include setting standards on emissions from the appliances.
35% of households in the United States use a gas stove.
And the number approaches 70% in some states like California and New Jersey.
Other studies have found these stoves emit significant levels of nitrogen dioxide, carbon monoxide, and fine particulate matter.
Without proper ventilation, can raise the level of indoor concentration levels to unsafe levels as deemed by the EPA.
Oh heavens!
Quote, short-term exposure NO2 is linked to worsening asthma in children, and long-term exposure has been determined to likely cause the development of asthma.
A group of lawmakers said in a letter to Chair Alexander Hohenzerich, Adding, it can also exacerbate cardiovascular illness.
I want to stress, as much as we get the point they want to ban gas stoves, as much as we get the point, they definitively reported this.
And we can jump over to our good friend, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
Ronnie Jackson says, I'll never give up my gas stove.
If the maniacs in the White House come for my stove, they can pry it from my cold, dead hands.
Come and take it.
Ronnie Jackson, of course, being somewhat facetious.
AOC says, Did you know that ongoing exposure to NO2 from gas stoves is linked to reduced cognitive performance?
You can read more about it here, and a link to Vox.com.
Okay.
May 11, 2020.
Gas stoves can generate unsafe levels of indoor air pollution.
Yeah, I don't doubt them, and I don't really care.
The issue is, they wanted to ban it for this reason, and now they're lying about it.
Creepy.
There's a secret pollution source in 40 million homes.
The U.S.
may try to ban it.
The hidden hazard of gas stoves, indoor air quality exposure, and asthma is finally getting attention.
This story from just the other day at 3.49 p.m.
The U.S.
may try to ban it.
So sayeth multiple news organizations.
But let's throw it to our good friends over at Snopes.com who say false.
No.
Now hold on there a minute.
Now hold on there a minute.
Here's the game Snopes plays.
Is the Biden administration banning gas stoves over climate change concerns?
False!
It has nothing to do with climate change.
It has everything to do with NO2 and cognitive performance.
This is the PSYOP.
This is the game they play.
This is how they reinforce the cult.
Those of us that read the news and pay attention saw them definitively tell us they wanted to ban gas stoves.
They laid out exactly why.
But the cult members don't read, don't know anything, and they're gonna follow the pundits who then say, no, they're not banning that.
It's fake news.
The fascists are lying to you.
And that's where we're at now.
And they'll show you this article from Snopes.
And this is what Aunt Edna and your liberal relatives will start saying to you, I read on Snopes!
That was fake news!
This is the game that the fact-checkers play.
You'll say something like, you guys, for those of you that watch all my content, you've heard me explain it before, bear with me for those that aren't familiar.
Donald Trump goes on to the balcony at Mar-a-Lago and does a perfect front flip, landing in a superhero pose on the ground.
And then everyone's like, I can't believe it!
Donald Trump just did a front flip off his balcony onto the ground.
Boom!
Here's video of it.
We filmed it.
He's got, his hair is flowing.
He's got, eyes are glowing.
And then Snopes runs the story.
Did Donald Trump front flip off his balcony landing in a superhero pose?
On Sunday morning?
False!
Though Donald Trump did do the superhero pose and did front flip, it was actually Sunday afternoon!
You see, it was 12.01 PM.
Thus, technically, it was the afternoon.
They add the thing at the end to make it false.
Is the Biden administration banning gas stoves over climate change concerns?
And they say false.
It's not about climate change.
Why would they add context no one asked for?
The stories being run and the commentary isn't about climate change.
It's about pollutants.
It's about Biden wanting to ban it.
Period.
Biden administration.
They added nonsense to the story that no one brought up so they can slap a false label on it.
President Joe Biden's administration is planning to ban gas stoves over concerns surrounding climate change.
False.
The U.S.
Consumer Product Safety Commission, a federal agency, is not currently considering a ban on gas stoves, though a commissioner said anything is on the table if they can't be made safer due to concerns over harmful indoor pollutants that cause health and respiratory problems.
You know, I don't care.
I just don't like being lied to, right?
If you want to ban gas stoves, you need only come out and be like, we want to ban gas stoves.
The CSE also said that no regulatory guidelines are currently in place and adding any would
involve a lengthy process.
You know, I don't care.
I just don't like being lied to.
Right.
If you want to ban gastos, you need only come out and be like, we want to ban gastos.
And I would say, OK, why?
I don't care!
You know, we had Chef Andrew Gruhl come hang out, and we asked him, like, electric versus gas.
I gotta be completely honest.
I personally prefer electric stoves.
I do.
I know.
I can hear everybody yelling.
I was at an Airbnb, and I'm cooking up my bacon, and, like, the flame is moving, and the bacon's cooking uneven, and I'm like, what's going on?
It's just natural gas.
Get out of here.
I got the electric stove.
Evenly heats the whole pan.
I love it.
Plus, none of that indoor pollution.
So I don't care.
I really don't.
I think it's stupid.
If you want to slowly phase out natural gas stoves, whatever.
If you want to get off natural gas in the homes, so be it.
Whatever.
Just don't lie to me and play these stupid games.
And I feel this is true for all of you as well.
I feel most people are probably going to be like, look man, I'm not going to cry about a gas stove.
I will debate you.
I like my gas stove.
Whatever.
It's the lying that's the problem.
Win your arguments.
Here we go.
Look what they say.
A January 2023 rumor about a possible ban on gas stoves in the U.S.
worried consumers, particularly as noted in conservative media outlets.
Some social media users claimed that U.S.
President Biden's administration was considering a ban over climate change concerns.
Yes, Liz Churchill ate on Twitter.
The Biden administration is going to outlaw gas stoves because of climate change.
Here's Jill and her gas stove.
That is not accurate.
The U.S.
Consumer Product Safety Commission is not considering new guidelines for regulating or banning gas stoves.
Full on lies.
Okay, you know what?
Fine.
Who am I going to believe?
CNN?
The Washington Post?
The New York Post?
Or Snopes?
It's all just silly, broken, garbled nonsense.
Now maybe it's not anything deeper or more nefarious.
Maybe Snopes is just putting out fake news because Snopes is fake news.
Maybe CNN and Washington Post and New York Post are all fake news, but considering the ideological disparity between the New York Post and the Washington Post, I kind of think it's probably true that they wanted to do this.
And the reality is, a prominent official came out and said they wanted to do it.
That's it.
And now we have this statement.
Ari Natter says breaking.
The chair of the Consumer Product Safety Commission says the agency has no plans to ban gas stoves after Commissioner Richard Trumka's remarks ignited a political firestorm.
This from 10.52am today.
They wrote.
Over the past several days, there has been a lot of attention paid to gas stove emissions under the Consumer Product Safety Commission.
Research indicates that emissions from gas stoves can be hazardous and the CPSC is looking for ways to reduce related indoor air quality hazards.
But to be clear, I am not looking to ban gas stoves and the CPSC has no proceeding to do so.
CPSC is researching gas emissions in stoves and exploring new ways to address any health risks.
CPSC also is actively engaged in strengthening voluntary safety standards for gas stoves.
This spring we'll be asking the public to provide us with information about gas stove emissions and potential solutions for reducing any associated risks.
This is part of our product safety mission.
Learning about hazards and working to make products safer.
So my question.
Why is AOC coming out on the side of banning gas stoves?
One person responded saying, real question, if we all have to switch to electric, will there be any government assistance to do that?
AOC says, the way we are handling New York City isn't to force people to switch what they already have.
Folks can keep their appliances, and new buildings in New York City will have gas-free stoves.
As for federally, any proposal from the CPSC would go through quite a lengthy review and input process.
Okay.
They said, that sounds good.
What if the gas-free stoves cost more?
Will there be a genuine effort to improve the engineering to cut costs and just be real with the public?
That'll be a struggle at the beginning and a sacrifice.
Will honesty about the real immediate cost come out?
AOC responds, yes, keeping out for tax credits and rebates for gas-free appliances that may roll out this year.
The Inflation Reduction Act that was passed last year contains funding for a lot of different climate-related rebates for people, not just EVs.
Serious question, says one person.
I live in an area where the power goes out fairly frequently due to storms.
My gas stove gives me a way to cook for my family and a source of heat if it's a winter
You can't possibly think that the planet can sustain an infinite number of people.
No.
But I believe in human ingenuity because we've seen it proven time and time again.
It's insane to me that these people would look back at history and see every single problem humanity faced solved by intelligence and human rationality, and they'd be like, this is the one time humans can't solve a problem.
I just don't buy it.
Now, of course, they'll come out and say, banning gas stoves is the solution.
We are!
No, no, no, no, no.
The solution to the problem is a technological advancement.
Now, you can argue that electric stoves are that advancement, but we didn't, like, make horses illegal.
We just made cars.
Now, of course, there is a challenge.
People have stoves, they don't want to fix them.
Well, gas prices are going to go up.
And maybe there is a way to get people on electric stoves, fine.
But what about people who have power outages?
I think the reality is, there's better ways to do things, but decentralization and diversity of technological appliances is probably the right way to go.
Now look, AOC is not saying you should take your stuff away.
They're phasing it out.
But what happens when the city starts saying, eventually, there's not enough gas customers to sustain gas lines in the city, so we're getting rid of them, and then you get a notice?
It will happen.
I'm not against progress and development.
And there is a question to be said about these massive systems we have and the problems surrounding them.
I'll give you an example.
In New York City, they have these big nitrogen tanks and they blast nitrogen underground.
Now, I don't know exactly... I've not talked to the city about it, but what I was told by locals when I lived there was that the underground cables get so hot they start melting.
So they blast nitrogen underground to cool the cables down.
You walk through New York, there's no power lines anywhere.
You walk through smaller cities, there's power lines everywhere.
Because New York put them underground, they get too hot, they melt, they gotta cool them down by blasting them with nitrogen.
Yo, that's not a sustainable system.
Eventually it'll all come crashing down.
You've got to make changes.
And I'll fully admit I'll be the first person.
If everybody's using something like... I'll put... I read this article about our power lines.
Effectively a 120 year old machine that's like never been updated.
We could probably do a better job, right?
When I was in Ukraine, years and years ago, I had garbage cell service.
But actually, it wasn't that bad.
I was getting like 1.2 megabits per second up using 3G.
And I thought it was weird.
I was like, how come we don't get that on 3G?
I think it was CDMA.
I was like, how come we don't get those at bandwidth in the United States?
Simply put, the United States builds a cellular network using preliminary technology.
We roll out cell tech, we then implement it, and we get a good 100 kilobits per second.
Bear with me if you're not familiar with what this stuff means.
Basically, you get 0.1 megabits.
We're all happy with it.
Ten years later, we still have the system in place and nobody wants to spend the money to update it because our phones still work.
Then, over in, say, Ukraine, they're like, we're gonna build the exact same system, but over the past ten years there's been major updates.
Our system will run ten times faster because of certain tweaks we can make.
So you end up looking at these other countries and you're like, why is our internet slower?
Because we built it first!
How do we then overhaul these machines and these systems?
Serious question.
Because if it ain't broke, don't fix it, right?
But we gotta do things better.
So I have no problem with saying, personally, I like electric stoves more than gas.
I don't care to have gas.
Not interested.
But not everybody feels the same way.
There's a real question about if you're going to, as the government, force people off of these things, to do more than just tax rebates, you can't force people to stop.
How do we alter these systems en masse?
It's an interesting question.
Ultimately, I think capitalism solves the problem.
Eventually, someone will be like, my stove is obsolete.
Hey, guess what?
You're going to have to buy a new one.
And then you're gonna have to plug it in, I guess.
I don't know what kind of amperage they use for the electric stoves, but probably a little bit more than normal to heat things up.
Same thing with cars.
The bigger challenge I see is not that they're asking you to cook with electric versus gas.
The bigger challenge, the bigger problem I see, first and foremost, is that they're lying, they're manipulating, and they treat people like they're idiots, instead of actually being for, of, and by the people.
But I think there's challenges in widespread implementation.
I think there's challenges in trying to get everyone to go electric when, as this person mentioned, their power goes out.
But more importantly, I think the scarier thing is the smart component of all these new devices.
One day, you'll go to cook some eggs, and your stove is going to say, I'm sorry, John.
I can't turn on.
Energy costs are too high.
You've over-consumed.
Your carbon emissions for this month are 326% above average.
That's what I'm worried about.
You're going to go to your car, and your car is going to, you're going to sit in it, it's going to be like 20%, and it's going to be like, cannot charge over your emissions allotment.
That's where we're headed.
Now, to be fair, maybe, you know, people do overconsume.
There was this interesting thing I was reading about.
I forgot what the law is called.
But when you increase the supply of gas, it doesn't necessarily make gas cheaper.
It typically does, but the idea is people drive more.
So they just start driving more and more and more because of the abundance.
And so the challenge is, how do we properly maintain energy consumption and have some stability in our economy?
What I can say is it's fascinating to see the PSYOPs in real time.
They do want to ban your gas stove.
They've talked about doing it and everybody reported on it.
They're now walking it back because they realized there was a massive backlash.
In New York, they have already done this.
In other states, they're already doing it.
You can't get new gas stoves.
That's where we're headed.
That's why they announced it.
I don't care about gas stoves.
I don't like it.
Just stop lying.
Anyway.
What a stupid waste of our time.
Anyway.
Well, I'll leave it there.
Next segment is coming up at 4 p.m.
over at youtube.com slash timcast.
Thanks for hanging out, and we'll see you all then.
People are starting to lose it, man.
This story's brutal.
Gallery owner who casually hosed down homeless woman camped outside his upmarket San Francisco business defends himself, saying she had been violent and neighborhood had tried to help her for 10 days.
I'm gonna come right out and just say, like, I don't believe this guy, when he says that this homeless woman was being violent, at the very least, I don't believe she was being violent to him at the time that he hosed her down.
She may have been violent.
She may have been.
And, uh, that I can believe.
No, no, no, what I mean is, look at this, look at this still.
Dude just straight up hosed down some homeless woman.
You know what?
I gotta say, people are fed up.
They're fed up.
Cities like San Francisco, there's poop all over the ground.
But I gotta add something, dude.
Now, I don't know this guy.
Collier Gwynn, who runs Foster Gwynn Gallery, came under fire for his actions.
We'll get into the story.
I gotta say, dude, I'm gonna go ahead and say it is a safe bet that you vote Democrat.
Sorry, I just think it's a safe bet that you do.
Maybe I'm wrong.
Maybe I shouldn't pass judgment.
Maybe you are one of those guys who wants to vote for a better city, but you live there as a holdout refusing to give up hope.
San Francisco is a hive of scum and villainy.
I think San Francisco's got a lot of great stuff going on for it.
I've been there several times.
There's good food.
There's good people.
There's a Starbucks across the street from a Starbucks just off Market Street.
Makes no sense, but sure, whatever.
No kidding.
I went to Starbucks and there was a huge line.
And then I was like, man, this sucks.
And then someone said, go across the street.
And I was like, huh?
And literally across the street was another Starbucks.
Not exaggerating.
Literally walked across the street, another Starbucks.
Crazy!
This city's busted and it's broken.
And all these people who live here keep voting for the same people for the same policies, and this is what you get.
I'm willing to bet this is actually a story of a guy who's sick and tired of a homeless person sleeping in front of his building and nothing being done about it, and he snaps and just spritzes her down.
Not the solution, dude.
Spraying someone down.
That person's there because of failed policy, but you don't get to.
In San Francisco, vote for this over and over and over again and then get mad when it negatively impacts you.
Now, again, I don't know that this guy voted Democrat.
I'm just saying.
You know, I go to the casino.
I understand the odds.
You go to play roulette, fun game.
You want to put chips down on black or red.
Now, the average person says, it's 50-50.
You got half black, you got half red.
There's zero and double zero, depending on your casino.
That gives the house its edge.
So, anyway, my point is, not to get into the whole casino stuff, The amount of people in San Francisco who vote Democrat is so high, you'd be stupid not to bet on the idea that this guy votes Democrat and then gets mad about it.
But again, I don't know.
I don't want to falsely accuse someone.
Daily Mail reports, the owner of an art gallery in San Francisco who was caught on camera spraying a homeless woman with a hose pipe has defended his actions.
In footage shared on social media, Collier Gwynn, who runs Foster Gwynn Gallery in the Financial District, leans against the gate of a restaurant and continues to spray the woman despite her yelping with discomfort.
Local businesses were quick to condemn his actions, while scores of enraged social media users left dreadful reviews online, causing the gallery's rating on Google to plunge to just one star.
Discussing the incident, which took place on Monday, Gwynne said,
I've been here for 40 years. We have tons of homeless people, but they haven't been in a
situation where they get that violent 10 days of the neighborhood within 10 days of neighborhood
trying to do something. We have been able to get them taken to a shelter, which they leave
immediately. Can confirm.
I worked for a homeless shelter.
Often, the people don't want to be there.
They're told what to do.
They're told when they got to be in.
They're told what they got to wear.
People want freedom.
They don't want to be told what to do.
Emily Mills says, I feel for you.
Darren McKeeman tweets, I just went down and confronted him during an interview with the Chronicle.
And he defended himself.
Here's the video.
Oh, is the audio not coming in?
Okay, the audio's not coming in.
I'll fix that later.
Anyway, he said basically the same thing we already read.
We've been in a situation, 40 years, homeless people, violent.
There it is.
There's the clip where he's just leaning up against a fence, legs crossed, just spritzing her down.
Yo, there was a story a couple years ago of some lady in Sacramento.
She had like a hair salon and she had to shut the salon down because I guess what happened was a homeless person was sleeping in her doorway and she was like, people gotta come in the building and they were taking a dump right there in front of her building.
Like she'd walk up and there'd be like crap everywhere.
You keep voting for it.
It's funny because I tell people, like, you gotta vote.
Ballot harvesting is huge.
We gotta get this.
We gotta win.
You can vote.
Donald Trump is proof.
Seriously, like, Donald Trump won.
And then there's people saying, like, voting doesn't matter.
There are people on the right being like, we can't vote our way out of this.
And it's just like, dude, look at California.
They keep voting for the same thing.
So if your argument is that voting does work, but we can't convince these morons to vote for their own interest, I hear you.
Ballot harvesting is the answer.
Ballot chasing, whatever you want to call it, legally, securely, just go tell people, fill it out, let's fix this stuff.
It will work.
Because you look at people in California, and I tell you, these people are going to keep voting Democrat, they're going to be like, I'm sick and tired of the homeless problem, I'm sick and tired of the feces in front of my store, but I'm going to vote Democrat!
I think I'll vote Democrat to solve this problem.
I'm from Chicago, man.
Let me tell you, you've got gangs, you've got crime, you've got violence, and then people every two years, every four years go, you know, the gun violence has never been worse.
I'm gonna vote Democrat to solve the problem.
And you're like, dude, I don't know if the Republicans have the answers to these problems, but I can tell you this, try something different.
Maybe if you keep sticking your hand on the electric stove and burning yourself, you might want to consider not doing that.
They keep doing it and then you get this absolute control and this is what happens.
They don't want to solve the problem because they'll campaign off of it.
The reporter from the video said, I've listened to her talk to the people and saying, no, this is the way I want to live.
My idea of cleanliness is not your idea of cleanliness.
Quinn replied, that's fine as long as she knows what she's saying.
After admitting to being the man in the hosepipe video, Gwyn also tried to defend his actions, claiming that Gwyn had become psychotic and was turning over garbage cans.
I said, you have to move.
I cannot clean the street.
Move down.
She started screaming belligerent things, spitting, yelling at me.
At that point, she was so out of control, I spray her with the hose and say, move, move.
I will help you.
Maybe.
I mean, maybe.
I mean, for real.
But either way, there's a video of a lady sitting on the ground and he's hosing her down.
Here's what I think happened.
I think dude just got sick of it, like so many other people, and he says, that's it, I'm spritzing ya.
It's not appropriate, man.
If you've got a broken system, and these people just keep supporting it and funding it, my advice?
Get away from the cities.
Go out somewhere else.
I gotta tell you, my friends.
I warned y'all to go buy chickens.
But you didn't listen!
Some of you did.
Now, a carton of eggs, $9.
Anyway, that's my point.
Get away from this stuff.
Get away from it.
Go to a different city.
Is it hard?
Yes, it may be.
But if you wanna live, Around this, and so be it.
But I will also say, if this guy is a Democrat voter, stay.
Stay.
For you have reaped what you have sown.
And you deserve it.
You deserve what you vote for.
I'm not saying to be a dick.
I'm not saying to be mean.
I'm saying, if you vote for these things, then these things happen to you, why would I complain?
I am not going to live in this perspective that you don't want it.
Dude comes out, votes Democrat.
I'm not saying this guy did, I'm just saying people will vote Democrat, the homeless problem gets crazy, they won't speak up, they'll revel in it, and then I'm supposed to be mad about it?
Nah.
Let me tell you a story about San Francisco, my friends.
So I go, I did some guest segments for Discovery.
Check out the one we did on how powerful are modern nuclear weapons.
That's me hosting it.
It was good fun.
And I don't know which episode I did.
I did a bunch for Discovery.
It was a lot of fun.
I like those guys.
And I leave, and I'm like, thanks for having me.
It was fun doing this.
I'm gonna go and grab some food.
And I went to some Mexican restaurant.
And I'm wearing a hoodie and jeans and a beanie and a backpack.
And I walk into the front door, and it says, please wait to be seen, and I'm standing there.
And the hostess just keeps walking by, not saying anything, and I'm like, what's going on?
So then I'm like, okay, I guess if I want food, I'll have to walk in.
So I walk into the store, and I'm like, excuse me, and she goes, what?
And I was like, uh, can I have food?
And she goes, oh, uh, yeah, yeah, have a seat.
What I think happened was, she probably assumed I was just another homeless guy trying to use their bathroom or something.
I mean, I was just wearing a hoodie, a beanie, and a backpack, and she's like, oh, here we go.
Instead, I ordered a big meal and I tipped very well.
I don't blame him for thinking that, I guess.
But the problem is, these people live in these cities.
They vote for this.
Deep down in their hearts, they say, my city is broken.
These policies don't work.
Instead of speaking up and saying, this is untenable and it must be stopped, they go, I'm a good, virtuous citizen.
I'm good and virtuous.
This bad man, bad man with hoes.
Okay, fine.
Live in your squalor.
Live in your lockdowns.
Surround yourself with human feces, if that's what you want.
I will leave.
But I tell you, I warn the red cities and the red states, you better prepare for the mass exodus of people like this who will come to your city or town and vote Democrat.
That being said, I think what we saw with Florida and Texas is quite the opposite.
People showed up and voted heavily in the other direction.
So, let me just end by saying, my friend, dude, Mr. Gwynn, I get it.
It's bad, okay?
But don't hose people down like this.
That's just so awful.
This is not the solution, but I can understand the frustration.
Ain't no reason to spray someone down with a hose like this.
It's not the most violent thing in the world.
Someone got wet.
Makes them uncomfortable, I guess.
But, uh... Look, if y'all are gonna keep voting this way and you're gonna live in it, then you'll reap what you have sown.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up in a few minutes right here on this channel.
Thanks for hanging out, and we'll see you all then.
Everyone's favorite big-ditted science teacher is in trouble.
Facing a potential lawsuit, not personally, but the school.
And if that happens, the individual Kayla Mew, who wants to wear the big Z-cup breasts, will not be allowed to do it.
In the wake of this news, about the attorneys speaking out on potential legal action, the Canadian school district is going to implement a dress code, after shop teachers sparked outrage by wearing massive fake breasts.
Doesn't it feel like everything is just coming crashing down?
This is, my friends, diversity, equity, and inclusion.
I saw a funny post where they were like... I can't remember who tweeted it.
They said ChatGPT, the chat AI bot, won't let you... If you ask it to write a story about why Drag Queen Story Hour is bad, it says, I cannot write that because Drag Queen Story Hour is good.
And then if you ask it to write about why it's good, it'll say, it promotes diversity, equity, and inclusion, and allows people to under- blah blah blah.
It's all falling apart, man.
This is their diversity, equity, and inclusion?
A shop teacher- did I say science teacher?
A shop teacher wearing big Z-cup fake breasts to school.
Okay.
I'll tell you where I think the end result of all of this is.
We're gonna be living in the pods, eating the bugs, plugged into the Matrix, and, uh, there's gonna be, like, you're gonna go into your virtual Metaverse meeting, and you're gonna be sitting there, you as, like, some normal dude, your avatar, will have a button-up shirt and a tie, and you'll be sitting there being like, what's this meeting about, when a carrot will walk in!
And the carrot will sit down, and the carrot will be like, alright everybody, let's get serious here, we got a very serious meeting, and then you're gonna look over and the rabbit is gonna be staring at the carrot, and the rabbit guy is gonna be like, now Jim, hold on there, sales figures are not as bad as they're projected to be, if you incorporate the eastern regional numbers, and then you're gonna look over, and in's gonna come in Shrek, and Shrek's gonna sit down, and Shrek's gonna be like, I'm actually fairly optimistic when you look at the east coast numbers, and you're gonna be sitting there being like, What is this?
That's where we're going.
When everybody chases after whatever identity they want, whatever, you're gonna be plugged into the metaverse, and it's not gonna be the way Mark Zuckerberg imagines it, where you've got everybody sitting there laughing, and they have no legs.
I'm not kidding.
Like, in the metaverse, you have no legs.
And they all look like just avatars of people.
It's gonna be like Godzilla sitting next to King Kong, and they're gonna be arguing over which basketball player has the better prospects of getting drafted, and you're gonna be like, I don't know what reality is anymore.
In the meantime, it's affecting the physical world.
From Fox News, parents at Oakville Trafalgar High School in Canada are considering pursuing legal action to stop transgender teacher Kayla Lemieux from wearing Z-cup prosthetic breasts to class.
Rishi Bandhu, an attorney and parent of a child at the school, spoke out about the issue, saying teachers should be required to adhere to the same dress code as students.
The dress code for students says you can't show your nipples.
In which case, Kayla Lemieux will be able to wear the massive fake breasts, but you gotta put something over the nipples so you can't see them.
Bantu said parents ask the Halton District School Board to apply the same dress code for students to teachers, explicitly state any exceptions to the code, and allow parents to discuss the matter at school council meetings.
He added the school board has interfered with the rights of parents by reportedly denying them the opportunity to bring up the issues at meetings.
In our view, it's just illogical and absurd to suggest the teachers would be held to a lower standard than the students in terms of their attire.
That's your argument?! !
Yeah, because they're in Canada.
It's in Canada, right?
This is a Canadian teacher?
Yeah, in Canada.
Bro, you're not going to win.
You're not going to win.
You live in a psychotic, woke dictatorship.
You cannot question this.
You must accept it.
Welcome to your new life.
At the very least, the school district will implement a dress code, so it seems like the argument worked.
Those big ol' nipples better get covered up, Kayla!
The new professionalism policy, which includes a dress code, must be made and implemented by March.
TimCast.com reports, the dress code for students prohibits clothing that exposes or makes visible genitals and nipples, but did not apply to the staff in school.
According to a report from the Star, the controversy sparked protests outside the school and even bomb threats after photos appeared online in September showing the trans teacher in class.
Yo.
These are not prosthetics, okay?
These are kink toys.
This is kink stuff.
What they're doing in school is not sex ed.
They're not affirming anybody.
It's kink.
That's what's happening to these kids.
The end result, in my opinion, it all just falls apart.
It all crumbles down.
This idea of diversity, equity, and inclusion is not people of all different backgrounds holding hands, swinging back and forth, and singing Kumbaya.
It is the weirdest crackpot nonsense like I described.
The carrot and the rabbit arguing over sales projections in your metaverse, and then like... I mean, just imagine this!
I talk about Godzilla and King Kong arguing over who's gonna get drafted.
And it's like, behind those avatars, it's like a regular person.
But you take a look at this Kayla Lemieux story, and it ain't gonna be a carrot and a rabbit.
There's gonna be like a, a, you know, what was the name of the the woman with the red in Who Framed Roger Rabbit?
Whatever, whatever her name is. She's like, you know, people are gonna have avatars of her. People are gonna have
duplicate avatars.
You're going to be sitting in a meeting at one point and there's going to be like three women with breasts so big they can't see over them because that's what people will identify as.
And you're going to be like, they all look the same.
People are going to share avatars.
It's going to be bonkers nonsense.
That's where we're going.
The system, we are not heading towards a legitimate system of holding hands under the sun.
We're heading towards static chaos.
You ever look at a TV when there's no signal and it's just static random numbers?
That's how you generate true random.
Random number generators actually aren't random because there's a code to simulate randomness.
But static actually is random.
I was reading about how we can actually get a real random number generator using static, and there you go.
That's my point.
I want you to imagine that.
The chaos and absurdity.
And that's where we're headed towards.
Chaos isn't always bad.
When I play Magic the Gathering, I'm a big fan of chaos.
It's fun.
It adds that zest and spice to life.
But you need order to be maintained so that we can survive.
So, my view is that chaos needs to be slightly below order.
More chaos means more fun and more excitement, but order means higher likelihood of survival and progression.
What we are headed towards now, chaos has taken over.
There is more chaos than order, and thus the system is inching towards breaking apart.
An ordered system is, say, like steel beams holding up a platform.
A chaotic system is those beams placed randomly, and then the structure just crumbles because it's not properly supported.
I think that's where we're going.
Kids are going to grow up around this stuff, and they are.
You and your friends who refuse to speak up, I'm not saying, I don't mean everybody, but the people who don't speak up, you are helping create this world and this universe by not doing so.
And thus, as time goes on, don't be surprised when you're 50 years old and you're looking around and you're just like, I don't know what is anymore.
We're still.
Don't be surprised if you're 50 and you're sitting in the rubble of society eating an old can of beans Saying to yourself, like, man, remember when we had eggs?
Remember when we had food?
Yeah.
You know, it's a completely unrelated story, but egg prices are nearly nine dollars amid bird flu outbreak.
I know it has nothing to do with the big ditty teacher, but my point is, it's all falling apart, man.
I know you can't blame the big ditty teacher for the bird flu outbreak.
My point is, We built this beautiful system, and it supported too many people, to be completely honest.
We had food for everybody.
Everybody here.
Now, because of our penchant for freedom, we have entertained the illiberal, the intolerant, the chaotic, and the destructive.
And that's actually burning the system to the ground.
Not too different from a cancer, you know?
Or a virus.
A woke mind virus, eating and gutting and destroying the cells.
And that's really what I think is happening with the woke mind virus.
What's happening is, the idea gets planted in an institution, starts converting that institution to produce more of the woke mind virus, and then instead of producing something meritocratic and valuable, it produces more woke garbage, which eventually destroys the system that it has infected.
Maybe it serves a purpose.
Maybe it is the hardship that will lead to some kind of social Darwinism.
I don't mean social Darwinism in terms of people dying.
I mean social, uh, cultural Darwinism.
That bad ideas that cannot defend themselves must be destroyed.
And thus, stronger institutions will emerge from the ashes.
The worrying thing is that I feel like the end result of all of that is going to be dictatorial, and I'd like to just live in a classically liberal world where we tolerate people who have a penchant for the uncommon, but we recognize the order necessary to progress and survive.
It doesn't seem to be the way we are going.
Instead, You got big-tittied teachers arguing for their human rights to wear big titties in school.
Okay.
Well, the direction we're heading in is collapse.
I think humans will survive.
I don't think it's the apocalypse.
I think bad things will come, and we're seeing it.
Nine dollar eggs.
I know, I know.
Bird flu, bird flu.
But it's not just about that.
It's about inflation.
The system is struggling to maintain itself.
The end result?
Have fun.
I recommend getting a homestead, buying some goats, cows, and chickens, or whatever.
You know, we want to get a cow, but we were told that it produces like 10 to 12 gallons of milk per day, and it's just...
What?!
That's too much milk!
That's way too much milk.
I wouldn't mind drinking fresh, raw milk from a cow.
That sounds fantastic.
Maybe we'll get some little goats.
I'm told the fat continent of the goats is a lot better.
But we do have a lot of chickens.
And not only are chickens a source of food and protein, but they're hilarious.
But my friends, there is a shortage of something else much more alarming.
And you can already see it on the screen for those that are watching.
Sperm!
That's right!
The most precious resource this country has to offer.
Sperm!
It's running out!
The Spectator writes, how worried should we be about falling sperm counts?
I'd argue significantly worried.
Because, um, it's not just about underpopulation or population collapse, it's about can we even recover from population collapse.
Now, in my view, endocrine disruptors are one of the leading culprits of the decline of sperm.
And I was kidding about it being one of our most important resources, but you kinda need it to make more people, so probably an important thing to have.
I want to show you this right here.
This is a bottle of natural spring water from Saratoga Still.
Got it off the internet!
It's in a glass bottle, and it's natural spring water in a glass bottle.
I also have my coffee here, and this is in a metal container of sorts.
Because we've gotten away from plastics to the best of our abilities.
And I'm looking actually towards getting away from all foods with plastics in general to get away from the endocrine-disrupting phthalates and PCBs.
I'm just saying, man.
We got rid of protein bars with gunk in them.
Our protein bars are now the ingredients like beef, salt, pepper.
Beef, honey, salt, pepper.
Ooh, some honey.
I'm thinking that these plastics will be looked on in 50 years like asbestos.
Because we're destroying ourselves.
Here's the article from The Spectator.
They say, here's a jolly thought to start the year.
Humanity is on its way to extinction due to a drastic decline in sperm counts.
Men's reproductive health is in such a perilous state that it won't be long until nobody can
conceive a child unassisted.
I gotta be honest.
It kinda sounds like it's on purpose.
The End.
That, anyway, is the argument that's become perennial.
Every year or so, most recently, just at the end of 2022, a new sperm counting study emerges and reignites the fears that we're biologically condemned to extinction.
How anxious should we be?
Here's the story so far.
In 1992, a seminal study was published in the British Medical Journal that claimed to show evidence of decreasing quality of semen during the last 50 years.
It was a meta-analysis, a review paper that gathered together all relevant studies that measured sperm since 1938, lining up their results to discern any trends.
The conclusion was the average sperm count had fallen from 113 million per milliliter, the standard unit in the field, in the early 20th century to 66 million by the end of the 1990s.
That's like half.
The study was torn to pieces.
There simply isn't a fair comparison, other researchers noted, between the 1940s and 90s equipment for measuring sperm count, the latter being far more accurate.
Not only that, but there was very little data available for the first 30 years of analysis.
Samples from a mere 184 men were included.
So the comparison across time was murky.
Critics reanalyzed the data and found no evidence of a decline in sperm count overall.
The debate went quiet while more data accumulated.
Then, in 2017, researchers put fresh data together and published a new meta-analysis.
Looking at 244 data points beginning in the 1970s, average sperm count had dropped from 99 to 47 million by
2011, approximately a 50% decline.
Shanna Swan, one of the authors of the 2017 meta-analysis, wrote a book,
Countdown, that made apocalyptic claims about declining sperm counts.
She claimed that the phenomenon threatens human survival, and that extrapolating the line from her study meant that sperm counts could reach zero.
Yikes!
Like the study from 92.
The 2017 analysis had its critics.
Some of their arguments, though, were rather weak.
For instance, a few researchers noted that even though sperm counts had dropped, the current average would still be considered normal under standard medical guidelines.
It's not until the number falls between 15 million per milliliter that you have a serious problem.
It's not a great argument.
Imagine if someone said sea levels have been rising dramatically, but we shouldn't worry because major cities are not yet underwater.
Such daft thinking is based on a failure to look forward in time.
Not only that, but if the average is so much lower now, the proportion of men with a medically low sperm count must be far greater than it was.
The other night, Luke passively mentioned a news story we never got into.
He said something like, only, what was it, like 1 in 400 sperm donors actually make the cut at this point.
Because not only are sperm counts lowering, but the quality of sperm itself is like, not good!
They're just like, not functioning well.
Alas, politics also set in.
Since the meta-analysis appeared, some commenters have been happy to help spread panic about the coming fertility crisis.
This caused an equal and opposite reaction.
One group of researchers fretted that the studies might be co-opted by men's rights and alt-right activists.
And the science could become racialized, implying imperiled white male fertility.
It's a rather silly form of criticism, but it contains an element of truth.
The meta-analysis included very few studies from non-Western countries, rendering it impossible to make claims about a worldwide decline in fertility.
This brings us to the newest addition to the debate.
The same researchers now published an update to their 2017 analysis, including 44 more data points, many of which are from a more diverse array of countries.
It's still bad news.
Not only do they find, using the same methods, that the sperm count decline is happening in non-Western countries, too, but they find the decline has become even more precipitous since 2000.
Yikes again.
Here's where it's helpful to look at some details of how the individual studies in the meta-analysis were done.
The best kind of study is a prospective study.
You take sperm samples from a group of, say, 20-year-olds in, say, 2001, then wait a decade, and take samples from a group of people who are 20 in 2011.
That generation on generation comparison is really what we want to know.
But because it takes so much time and effort, it's the rarest kind of study.
Far more studies are retrospective.
For instance, looking at samples given to one sperm bank over the same time period and comparing it to counts within the same year, blah blah blah.
There are many more studies of this kind.
Many more data points come from one-off studies.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
They're going to say, if you thought that was all very tangled, wait until we get to the issue of practical consequence of this drop in sperm counts.
We know that the fertility rate, at least in the developed world, has declined massively since the mid-20th century.
But it's not known to what extent.
If at all, this has anything to do with fecundity.
That is, how much is it due to a drop in the biological ability to have kids?
As opposed to social or economic factors, such as greater education and employment for women, less child mortality, high cost of housing, and so on.
And here's the final question.
If we agree sperm count really is declining, then what's causing it?
Swan is convinced that it's largely due to environmental pollutants.
Specifically, the chemicals given off by some plastics, known as phthalates, which can disrupt our hormones.
I said it!
PCBs, etc.
There's some unclear evidence for this from animal studies, though not much for humans.
One prospective study that tested the donor's urine for phthalates found that they were able to explain about a fifth of the overall decline in sperm count.
Other than phthalates, higher rates of obesity and poor diet are plausible.
I gotta be honest.
I do think endocrine disruptors are playing a huge role in this.
But I kind of think it's because people are getting chunkier and bigger, and it's making their overall health worse, and the body is struggling to produce.
I'd be willing to bet that if you also compared the sperm counts with also, say, standard blood tests, you might find a correlation between low sperm count and bad blood.
High blood pressure, high sodium, high cholesterol, etc.
I think it's fairly obvious.
Despite that, however, I do think endocrine disruptors are playing a big role because we've known this for some time.
I should say we've thought it for some time.
Stories have come out for a while.
Even Alex Jones yelled, they're turning the freaking frogs gay!
What was that, like 14 years ago or something?
He said that became a meme.
Maybe it was like 10 years ago.
But there are a lot of stories about pesticides, about plastics screwing with our endocrine systems.
In frogs, it was causing ovaries to become testes, and testes become ovaries, and that's what Alex Jones was talking about.
He was talking about something called atrazine.
Now, since he reported on that news, they've come out and said, actually, we were wrong about atrazine.
We don't think it's actually causing it.
Whatever.
The point is, there are a lot of chemicals in our food.
A lot more chemicals that never used to be there.
Petrochemicals.
Things we did not used to ingest.
And now we are.
Plastics are being found in our blood.
Plastics are going in the ocean, breaking down, being eaten by small animals, being eaten by fish.
Then we eat the fish and we get plastic in our blood.
Now nature has an answer.
Many of these plastics are being eaten by bacteria, who's adapted to break down these particles and convert
them into bacteria bodies.
Sort of recycling them back into the system.
But that doesn't eliminate plastics as a whole.
And that means we have produced a pollutant that is negatively impacting us.
We learned about the problems of asbestos.
If asbestos is in your building, it's not that big a deal until you start to remodel.
Because once you're breaking it out and pulling it out, fibers are getting in the air and all of a sudden, mesothelioma.
So we don't like those things.
We want to get rid of them.
I've seen a lot of buildings that has asbestos, I've seen a lot of buildings for sale that has asbestos, and it's bad for us.
I think we're going to look back on plastics and say, a lot of good things came of plastics.
It made a lot of things more feasible.
Probably a bad idea in the long run to put it basically everywhere.
But I'm looking in this room I'm in right now, and there's plastic everything.
Now for us, at least the food we consume, we've moved away.
We personally.
Most of our food is still wrapped in plastic, but I like to go to the deli and get wax paper covered food.
Not perfect!
But I like to get fresh food.
I like to get water in glass bottles.
I like to use my own water filtration system to get out the gunk.
It's not looking good.
There may be a depopulation agenda.
Maybe it's on purpose that sperm rates are declining.
Maybe it doesn't matter because it's happening anyway.
Either way, take care of yourself.
Think locally.
What can you do to better yourself?
Exercise.
Cut the sugars.
Focus on getting good at anything.
Just start doing stuff.
Try and eat food that's not coming out of plastics.
