Epstein CONSPIRACY CONFIRMED, New Report Says Epstein Tried BLACKMAILING Bill Gates
Epstein CONSPIRACY CONFIRMED, New Report Says Epstein Tried BLACKMAILING Bill Gates
Become a Member For Uncensored Videos - https://timcast.com/join-us/
Hang Out With Tim Pool & Crew LIVE At - http://Youtube.com/TimcastIRL
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8sqEPWOV7j4&t=2s
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Make sure to go to TimCast.com, click join us and become a member to support this podcast and all the work we do, and you'll get access to exclusive uncensored segments from TimCast IRL and way more.
Now let's jump into the first story.
Several years ago, a poll was conducted that found only 16% of people believe that Jeffrey Epstein actually took his own life.
Epstein, of course, the controversial pedophile and financier who was found dead in his jail cell.
Well, new revelations are coming to light.
The Wall Street Journal reports Jeffrey Epstein appeared to threaten Bill Gates over Microsoft co-founder's affair with Russian bridge player.
A lot of powerful people were associated with Jeffrey Epstein.
Jeffrey Epstein apparently had a large clientele list.
That list has not been released.
Ghislaine Maxwell, his second-in-command, is in prison.
But all the pieces are starting to come together with this story from the Wall Street Journal that I say, in my opinion, confirms the Epstein conspiracy theory.
I know it's just a tiny morsel of the evidence that we seek, but I think it's very, very big.
To put it simply, Jeffrey Epstein was accused by many people, or was believed by many people, that he would blackmail powerful individuals to gain money and power.
And it appears that's what he was trying to do in this instance with Bill Gates, which we'll get into in just a second.
But I wonder, if Jeffrey Epstein was able to build up his empire in the way most people believe he did, that he would get compromising information on an individual, pressure them into doing a favor for him, and one step at a time, that was the method by which he gained massive amounts of wealth.
I believe around $600 million to his name, but who knows about what else he controlled.
Then sure enough, one day he turns up dead.
But not just that one day.
There was actually an incident before that.
Before that, he was in a jail cell found in the fetal position with marks around his neck, and many people believe that his cellmate attempted to end him.
But they say, according to the news, a probe found there was no wrongdoing here, and that this was just Epstein trying to take his own life.
The cameras cut out.
The guards fell asleep.
And then for the first time in 14 years, a man died in the Metropolitan Correctional Center.
I believe, MCC.
I believe it's called.
So, no.
Nobody believes that the guy who is widely believed to have been blackmailing the most powerful people in the world one day just decided he would end his own life.
Nobody believes it.
But this story right here?
Well, I said maybe a tiny morsel.
I think it is the keyhole through which we peer through and see inside.
The conspiracy theory is likely true.
Epstein was likely doing this.
Let's read the story and get a view into what he had done.
The Wall Street Journal says, Jeffrey Epstein appeared to threaten Bill Gates over Microsoft co-founder's affair with Russian bridge player.
Epstein discovered that Bill Gates had an affair with a Russian bridge player and later appeared to use his knowledge to threaten one of the world's richest men, according to people familiar with the matter.
And I believe, too, that Bill Gates split up from his wife.
I wonder if this all plays a role.
The Microsoft co-founder met the woman around 2010, when she was in her 20s.
Epstein met her in 2013 and later paid for her to attend software coding school.
In 2017, Epstein emailed Gates and asked to be reimbursed for the cost of the course, according to people familiar with the matter.
Well, if you believe the Wall Street Journal's sources, then we can believe this story, but take it all with a grain of salt.
But I'll say this, the general idea is that for no reason, Epstein contacts Bill Gates and says, remember this young woman?
Can you pay me back for the coding courses that I paid for?
Now why would that make sense?
Why would someone, completely unrelated to the circumstances, because he's basically saying, you're going to give me money because I know about this young woman.
They're going to say the email came after the convicted sex offender had struggled and failed to persuade Gates to participate in a multi-billion dollar charitable fund that Epstein tried to establish with JPMorgan Chase.
The implication behind the message, according to people who have viewed it, was that Epstein could reveal the affair if Gates didn't keep up an association between the two men.
Quote, Mr. Gates met with Epstein solely for philanthropic purposes.
Having failed repeatedly to draw Mr. Gates beyond these matters, Epstein tried unsuccessfully to leverage a past relationship to threaten Mr. Gates.
Said a spokeswoman for Gates.
It's unfortunate that this young bridge player is getting dragged into all this right now.
And now, the information that was being leveraged against Bill Gates is being revealed.
And I don't care about a person hooking up with another person.
I mean, if he's cheating on his wife, that's between his family and all that stuff.
But, uh, simply put.
Simply put.
Bill Gates meets with Epstein.
Epstein says, I want money.
Bill Gates says, no.
Bill Gates then, I'm sorry, Epstein then abruptly emails Bill Gates and says, why don't you just pay me back for the software coding lessons of this young woman?
And how did he know about that?
The implication was clear.
Epstein was accused in 2006 of sexually abusing girls as young as 14 and pleaded guilty in 2008 to soliciting and procuring a minor for prostitution.
He spent time in a Florida jail and registered as a sex offender.
After the Miami Herald reported on dozens more women who said they were abused, he was arrested in 2019 on sex trafficking charges.
He died later that year in jail while awaiting trial in what the medical examiner ruled was a suicide.
Gates, 67 years old, a technology advisor for Microsoft and one of the largest shareholders, said he met with Epstein a few times only to discuss philanthropy, which he regrets and calls a mistake.
Let's play a little clip of what Bill Gates had to say about this.
unidentified
And that, in other words, a number of meetings.
What did you do when you found out about his background?
I bet Bill Gates was very mad that he was being asked these questions.
Well, let's talk about this young woman at the center of the Bill Gates allegations.
I think there's more to it.
They say.
Mila Antonova, the Russian bridge player, declined to comment on Gates and said she didn't know who Epstein was when they met.
I had no idea that he was a criminal or had any ulterior motive.
I just thought he was a successful businessman and wanted to help.
I am disgusted with Epstein and what he did.
Interesting.
The new details about Epstein and Gates reveal a layer of complexity to their relationship and shed new light on how Epstein operated.
In the years between 2008, his 2008 conviction, and death, Epstein packed his days meeting with politicians, businessmen, academics, and celebrities.
He provided favors and sought to use the connections for his own purposes.
And when the relationship soured, he could turn against people.
Gates, with a net worth in excess of $100 billion, and one of the world's biggest philanthropists, was among the most well-known names in Epstein's calendar.
Perhaps it's this.
The question, I suppose, for a lot of people is, was Epstein the ringleader or was he the puppet?
Some people believe that Epstein was not the ringleader.
Some think Ghislaine Maxwell may have been because she's more well-connected.
Her family is wealthy and Epstein was like a high school teacher or something.
Or perhaps it really was just Epstein.
I honestly don't know.
You guys can comment, let me know what you think.
Was there someone behind the curtain?
Or was it just Epstein playing hardball with politicians and collecting information and trying to control them?
I would probably lean towards there was something more.
And there's someone else.
Because what would Epstein seek to gain?
Why would he do these?
It just doesn't seem some high school teacher turned financier who starts blackmailing powerful individuals.
If you were attempting to blackmail powerful individuals, would you do it yourself?
You know, it reminds me of that scene from The Dark Knight, when the accountant meets with, I can't remember the guy's name, Morgan Freeman, the character.
He meets with him and he says, he's like, what are you building for him now?
I want one million dollars a year for the rest of my life, and blah blah blah, and then Morgan Freeman says, so let me get this straight.
You believe that your client, one of the most powerful and wealthiest men in the world, is secretly a vigilante who beats criminals to a pulp in the dead of night?
And your intention is to blackmail this person?
Good luck!
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.
If you were Jeffrey Epstein, and you wanted to blackmail Bill Gates, does that make a whole lot of sense to you?
You're some dude, just some guy who is a fraction of the net worth of someone like Bill Gates, and you want to go up against every single powerful governmental individual and politician and try and blackmail them?
No wonder he had a private island!
He couldn't set foot in a major city, most likely.
They'd probably... Something would happen.
He'd get quote-unquote mugged.
Unless there was someone else behind the curtain, and he was just the messenger.
And maybe that someone else behind the curtain, we don't even realize, was removed from the picture.
And after that person fell, Epstein was next.
Now, I don't know for sure.
I'm just saying.
I'm speculating.
They say, starting in 2011, Gates had more than half a dozen meetings scheduled with Epstein, including dinners at Epstein's New York townhouse, documents show.
But I also remember when Jordan Peterson went to an event and someone said, can I get a picture with you, Dr. Peterson?
And he said, sure.
And the person unfurled a Keck flag in front of him and Peterson just smiled.
He had no idea what they were doing.
And everyone said, aha, look, here's him with a Keck flag.
He's far right or something like that.
You get an invitation from somebody.
I've gone to dinners.
I've had politicians be like, you know, we've got property if you ever want to visit.
I've gone to congressional offices.
What if it turns out one of these guys is a criminal?
You know, what am I gonna say?
I wouldn't play the game that Bill Gates did, you know, to be completely honest.
Look, if someone came to me and said, you once went to, you had several meetings with this individual trying to be a really bad person, I'd be like, I don't know.
That, that, it happens.
What am I supposed to do?
Know the secret lives of every criminal?
Dude, get out of here.
I don't play those games.
You know, it may turn out that your neighbor has been, like, beating dogs, you know, in the woods or something, and then people are gonna be like, he lives next to you, and you hang out with him, and you're like, I had no idea he was doing this.
That being said, Bill Gates, I don't think, is a good person.
So, the amount of benefit of the doubt that he gets from me is rather low.
Rather low.
My point is simply, innocent until proven guilty.
That being said, when Bill Gates started smiling, when he said, well, he's dead, so, you know, I'm very proud of the work that we've done.
You gotta be careful.
What did he mean by that?
You gotta be careful.
You gotta be careful.
What does that mean?
Well, he's dead, so you gotta be careful.
Was he smiling?
Because the real message he was conveying was, the lesson here for all of you is be careful when you threaten me.
You know, what do you, I mean look, if Epstein really was just some dumb guy trying to blackmail people and it was working out for some time, sooner or later, the bill comes due.
These people, their people are going to come after you.
With Bill Gates' wife leaving him?
You know, I wonder.
I wonder if she found out Epstein had something to do with it.
Because look, Bill Gates apparently said no to this.
And if that's the case, maybe Epstein followed through.
Because what's a threat if it's hollow?
If Epstein's looking at this saying, like, if I don't reveal this, people are not going to believe me on any of these other issues.
So he might be thinking, well, if I can't get Bill Gates, at least I can use him to make an example for anybody who would defy me.
Who knows?
They say the same month two men met in France with an official on the Nobel Prize Committee, spent much of the day together.
Gates has said he learned to play bridge from his parents, and the card game became one of his favorite hobbies.
Gates played with Antonova, another devotee of the game.
She attended a university in Russia between 2000 and 2005, according to her LinkedIn profile.
She later founded a bridge club in the U.S.
before taking on several roles as a software engineer in the Bay Area, her LinkedIn profile shows.
In a video posted online in 2010, Antonova talked about meeting Gates at a bridge tournament and playing against the former Microsoft co-founder.
I didn't beat him, but I tried to kick him with my leg, she said in the video.
There she is.
This young woman met Bill Gates.
Antonova had an idea to start an online business to teach people how to play bridge.
Yada yada yada.
Boris Nikolochuk, a Gates confidant and top science advisor at the time, who also knew Epstein, introduced Antonova to Epstein to help her raise funds.
Nikolochik said when he first met Epstein, it was in the capacity of Gates's scientific advisor, etc, etc.
Antonova and Nikolic met Epstein at Epstein's townhouse in November 2013, where she presented her proposal to Epstein, who provided feedback documents show.
She was looking to raise $500,000 for the venture, which she called BridgePlanet.
Its mission was to promote Bridge by creating quality tutorials for beginners and advanced players.
On November 9th, Antonova wrote an email to thank Epstein for the meeting and reviewing the proposal.
Epstein ultimately didn't invest in the project, Antonova said.
The next year, November 2014, Antonova stayed briefly in an apartment in New York City provided by Epstein.
I didn't interact with him or anyone else while there.
Alright.
Now, I don't know nothing about this Antonova lady, and far be it for me to besmirch her good name.
Um, I just find it odd that Epstein would be like, let me give you these things for no reason.
Let us have a private meeting and then, uh, sure.
Here's an apartment you can stay at.
Now, it's entirely possible Epstein trying to meet with Antonova and giving her an apartment was not because she exchanged any favors with him.
It could be that she exchanged information for which he was very grateful.
Or it could simply be that this is how he cultivates sources.
So if you're someone like Epstein, and again, my point is this, we don't know that Antonova did anything wrong or even knew anything was going on.
I'm not saying that she in any way had any relations or exchanges with Epstein.
Epstein may have been providing her the apartment because he's trying to get things from her.
I will say this.
Somehow, Epstein appears to have found out about the affair.
So, it would seem to me that likely what happened was when Antonova was hanging out with Epstein, they talked, they laughed, they had drinks, and he mentioned some names, fished for information, knew that she knew Bill Gates, knew how they met, and probably thought, I bet there's something here.
She then mentions something, and he says, okay.
Now maybe this.
Maybe Bill Gates never even had an affair with Antonova.
Maybe it was a lie.
Maybe the real threat was when Epstein messages Bill Gates, he's effectively saying, I'll make the claim anyway.
And what can you do about it?
I don't know about Antonova.
I guess, apparently, they did have an affair.
I mean, whatever.
After she failed to secure funding for Bridge Planet, she decided to become a software programmer and asked several people to lend her money for a programming boot camp.
Epstein agreed to pay, and he paid directly to the school.
Nothing was exchanged.
I don't know why he did that.
When I asked, he said something like he was wealthy and wanted to help people when he could.
Maybe he was cultivating a source.
Maybe he wanted more information from her.
Or maybe she gave him one or two things.
Maybe the one thing she gave him was information on Bill Gates.
Maybe the other thing she gave him was a good time.
I don't know.
Uh, I'm not trying to besmirch, as I said, the good name of this, uh, young woman who is running a bridge planet thing.
And, you know, I don't, I don't, I think a lot of people may draw those conclusions.
Well, he was meeting with Gates.
Epstein also had multiple meetings scheduled with other people close to Gates, including Nicolochick.
I'm saying that's wrong.
It's Nicolich.
Nicolich.
Former Microsoft executive Nathan Myhrvold and Gates Foundation staffer Melanie Walker, the documents show.
Mr. Epstein was a regular at TED conferences, and he was a large donor to basic scientific research.
That is how and why Nathan knew him, and that's exactly where their association ends.
I should never have associated with him, and now I am thankful that he never invested in my endeavors.
Uh, Nikolic, there you go.
Why was I adding an extra O in there?
Nikolocik.
A spokesman for Ms.
Walker declined to comment on her meetings with Epstein.
At the time, Epstein was trying to set up a multi-billion dollar charitable fund with JPMorgan that would potentially pool money from some of the world's wealthiest people.
Epstein proposed that JPMorgan set up the fund with a minimum $100 million contribution per individual and pay him millions of dollars in fees, the document shows.
In addition to the fees, the disgraced financier saw the fund as a way to rehabilitate his reputation according to the people he told of his thinking.
It hinged on securing support from Gates, the documents show.
So I wonder, I wonder.
When it came to Epstein's death, in this story from Insider, they say almost half of Americans now believe the conspiracy theory that sex offender Jeffrey Epstein was murdered.
They say that 45% of Americans baselessly believe that Epstein was murdered according to a new poll.
Baselessly?
That's up from 34%.
Only 16% believe he died by suicide.
So how about you run a much better headline, my friends?
How about you say 84% of people either don't know or think Epstein was murdered?
How about that for a headline?
In the death of Jeffrey Epstein, Wikipedia page, we get this.
Discrepancies.
Epstein's death was the first death ruled a suicide at the MCC in 14 years.
Michael Baden and 60 Minutes questioned whether Epstein, who was almost 6 feet tall and weighed 185 pounds, could have been able to hang himself from the lower bunk.
Photos taken after the death also show bottles and medicine standing upright on the top bunk.
Baden also questioned why Epstein did not use other materials available in his cell as a ligature, such as wires and tubing from a sleep apnea machine, which were stronger and longer.
They say a psychological reconstruction report of Epstein's death compiled by the Bureau of Prisons five weeks after his death suggests Epstein's identity appeared to be based on his wealth, power, and association with other high-profile individuals.
The report further attributes his suicide to lack of significant interpersonal connections, loss of status, and the idea of potentially spending the rest of his life in prison.
I don't believe it.
I think you'd be silly to think that all of these things come together.
Now, a lot of people, some people think he faked his death or whatever.
I don't know about all that.
If he did fake his death, I doubt Ghislaine Maxwell would be in prison right now.
No, I think the most likely scenario is, if you're blackmailing powerful, wealthy politicians and billionaires, it's only a matter of time.
You can't keep yourself safe.
But who knows?
We don't know yet.
What we do know is, this morsel of evidence suggests Epstein was in fact blackmailing Powerful individuals at the very least Bill Gates and if it was just Bill Gates, maybe that's enough Maybe that's why Bill Gates laughed and said well, he's dead now So you got to be careful Sounds almost like he's saying you screw with me and you die.
I Don't know.
Maybe I'm giving Bill Gates too much credit.
Maybe he's just some really rich dude and it's about it But who knows?
I don't.
Somebody out there probably does.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 1 p.m.
on this channel.
Thanks for hanging out, and I'll see you all shortly.
Welcome, ladies and gentlemen, to your Monday afternoon white pill.
Bud Light is ready to buy back unsold cases of expired beer that sat on shelves as consumers revolted.
Over partnership with Dylan Mulvaney.
Oh boy.
We're heading into month two of the ongoing boycott against Bud Light, and I gotta say, I don't think it's a boycott anymore.
I think it is brand collapse.
I do not see Bud Light re-emerging from this one.
Now I think with most companies, with tremendous resources, they will find growth.
I do not think Bud Light will win back the people they've lost.
So.
What's a beer company to do?
Well, of course, their initial plan here was to attract new customers as it was.
I love this.
They were like, you know, we're trying to get rid of that frat boy image and find new customers.
Well, congratulations.
You have burnt down your original consumer base.
You're going to find no one to replace it.
You see, Ted Cruz and some others, they're launching a probe into Budweiser for having Dylan Mulvaney, who markets to children, sell beer.
I think the whole thing's really, really funny.
Actually, the post from Dylan Mulvaney is still up about the Bud Light thing.
And I'm sorry, this whole, it was not intentional.
We didn't know about it.
I don't believe it.
When you look at Dylan Mulvaney's post, the original post supporting Bud Light, it's a commercial!
This does not appear to be some one-off thing.
We just sent a can to Dylan Mulvaney.
No, no, no, no, no.
Dylan Mulvaney was promoting a giveaway, a sweepstakes of some sort.
This looks like direct paid sponsorship, outright planned, all of that.
They knew exactly what they're doing.
And now they are reeling from this to the point where they're going to buy back their own expired beer!
Hey guys, Josh Hammer here, the host of America on Trial with Josh Hammer, a podcast for the First Podcast Network.
Look, there are a lot of shows out there that are explaining the political news cycle, what's happening on the Hill, the this, the that.
There are no other shows that are cutting straight to the point when it comes to the unprecedented lawfare debilitating and affecting the 2024 presidential election.
We do all of that every single day right here on America on Trial with Josh Hammer.
Subscribe and download your episodes wherever you get your podcasts.
A lot of people are pointing out Bud Light, Coors Miller, all of these other brands have done pride promotions, and they make the claim like, see, this is why it's fake, because no one cared before.
No one cared before.
For two reasons.
The first, it was an ancillary proposition.
It was outside of the center of focus.
It was a subculture and nobody cared.
We watched our football games, we watched our sporting events, and we enjoyed an ice-cold Bud Light with some buffalo wings.
What a good day those days were, you remember that?
Sitting in a recliner chair with your friends, Super Bowls on, a big ol' case of Bud Light.
You got spinach artichoke dip, you got buffalo chicken dip, you got buffalo chicken wings, maybe some pizzas.
And here's the thing, Bud Light was the easy beer to grab for people who want to enjoy a light beer.
Want to get a little tipsy, maybe?
Now, typically, you know, me and my friends, we get a variety of beers, as you probably did.
But then something changed.
And they started putting this Dylan Mulvaney stuff in front of you.
And they said, this, this, this.
And you said, please stop.
And they said, no, no, more, more, more.
And you said, you know what?
I've had enough.
Nobody cared when these other brands did their marketing to subcultures.
Nobody bats an eye.
But when they make it mainstream, when they tell you it is what you must accept, they say, we've had enough.
Dylan Mulvaney was the straw that broke the camel's back, but to be fair, I think Dylan Mulvaney's more like a steel I-beam thrown onto the back of a camel.
Which, of course, the camel can't carry.
In fact, actually crushes the camel and leaves behind only a splattering of the poor camel's remains.
The weight of the Dylan Mulvaney campaign on the culture war was metric tons in equivalence.
It's one thing to do an ad that offends some people.
It's another thing to hire one of the most off-putting, offensive, and annoying individuals.
Let me clarify what I'm saying.
I mean not to disrespect Dylan Mulvaney.
I am saying those as fact statements.
That when you ask people what they tell you is, they find Dylan Mulvaney annoying.
Some people have outright said they find Dylan Mulvaney disgusting.
I am not saying that I do.
I am telling you, if you want to understand why it is Bud Light is seeing such a massive collapse in sales, What I have found is the most powerful emotion is that people feel disgust when they look at Bud Light now.
It's interesting.
Take a look at this.
We'll go through a lot of this data.
Bud Light distributor issues public plea to bring back angry customers.
Look man, I don't know you.
This guy, he's an independent distributor who sells beer.
He's got a hundred employees and he's freaking out.
A beer distributor in Montgomery, Alabama, speaking out against Bud Light's decision to partner with Dylan Mulvaney, in a one-minute video ad running on about ten stations in the state, saying, you know, there's a quote, he says something, We at Bama Budweiser, an independent wholesaler, employ around 100 people who live here, work here, and our children go to school here.
We do not, as I said before, did not support this issue with Dylan Mulvaney.
There was one single can made, it was not for sale, and it wasn't properly approved.
I don't care, buddy!
I am offended by your statement.
I don't care if you're an independent wholesaler, liquor store, or otherwise.
I ain't buying your beer.
And you know what?
I gotta be honest.
I've had more beer than I've had in a decade in the past couple of weeks because we wanted to make the point.
One local brewery out here, Harvest Gap Brewery, shout out, they have stud light.
And I think they're just making fun of Bud because it's like, it's a, it's like a, it's a dude on a horse Like a manly cowboy looking guy smiling and I'm like, I think they're saying something about Bud Light with their stud light.
We have the cans, I'll bring them up later today on IRL and we'll crack them open.
I think it's really funny.
I'm not gonna say what they're doing, this local brewery, but it really does feel like an indirect jab at Bud Light.
But this is what really makes me angry.
There was one single can made.
It was not for sale.
That's not the issue, dude.
And you know what?
If you don't want to bother to look into why people don't want to buy this beer that you sell, then you do not deserve sales.
If he came out and said the promotional video with Dylan Mulvaney trying to promote a sweepstakes or some kind of contest was a marketing plan that we disagree with, then I'd say, sorry to hear, buddy.
Instead, he comes out with the lie that the media has kept pushing.
It was one single can.
Lie, lie, lie.
Here you go.
I'm not gonna play the video.
Here you go, we'll stop it.
This was not a video of Dylan just showing a single can.
This is Dylan Mulvaney putting down multiple cans saying, Happy March Madness, just found out this had to do with sports, and not just saying it's a crazy month.
In celebration of the sports, Bud Light is giving you the chance to win $15,000.
Share a video with hashtag easy carry contest for a chance to win.
Good luck Bud Light partner.
Hashtag Bud Light partner.
This was not just one can that they had made.
And the media is lying to downplay and make it seem like it is unreasonable to be upset.
What they're saying is Bud Light made an influencer can they gave out and everybody's losing their mind.
Bud Light, as it appears with this video, Did a paid promotional sponsorship with Dylan Mulvaney to market their chance to win Easy Carry contest.
It looks like Bud Light didn't just do a can, they paid Dylan Mulvaney to promote their beer.
Dylan Mulvaney's following likely is overwhelmingly children.
Comments on this post have been limited.
Look at that.
TikToks, if you look it up, the average age of a TikTok user is under 21 years old.
Young people, Gen Z, typically are using Instagram and TikTok.
Dylan Mulvaney's audience primarily is on TikTok, which suggests a large portion, if not the majority of those being targeted by this ad are under the legal drinking age.
Bud Light came out and said, no, no, we're following all the rules, all the rules, following all the rules.
Yeah.
But, that's not stopping Ted Cruz and others from launching a probe.
Take a look at this.
Wall Street Journal ran this story, how Bud Light blew it.
It's from just the other day, yesterday morning.
And they have this chart here.
Costly promotion.
Weekly sales volume in the U.S.
changed from a year earlier.
Coors Light was on the decline.
And then after the Bud Light drop-off, Coors skyrocketed.
Miller skyrocketed.
And now they're both enjoying a high point in their sales.
With Bud Light down nearly 30%.
Now why would they... Why would I go out now and buy a Bud Light?
I hope everybody looks at this Dylan Mulvaney video and just sees exactly why people don't want to buy Bud Light.
I don't like Dylan Mulvaney because I think Dylan Mulvaney is an evil person.
And I really do mean it.
I'll show you another video that exemplifies this.
I don't know if I have the tweet pulled up.
I might.
No, I don't.
But I'll show you a video in a second.
Dylan Mulvaney to me represents algorithmic destruction.
The algorithm promoting things that regular people do not like.
And I think this is apparent to anybody if you go outside.
I got some friends.
And, uh, they say things like, man, you know, I could talk to my friend and they're texting me like, why are you friends with Tim Pool or something like that.
And they're like, it's the weirdest thing ever.
Then we go out, and what happens?
We're hanging out in D.C., MGM National Harbor, which is in Maryland, basically just south of D.C., it's the D.C.
metro, and what do they see?
People coming up to me and giving me fist bumps, saying, hey man, big fan, watch your show every night, and they're like, that's so weird.
No one says anything bad, everyone just seems to come up and like, security guard is like, yo man, love the show, dude, appreciate it, keep up the good work.
I appreciate all of that support from you guys when you're out there, you see me and you say, what's up?
My point is this.
That moment proves that the online activism is fake.
Now the reason I bring this up, and forgive me for bringing up kind of like a personal thing, I'm not trying to humblebrag or anything like that, I'm making the point That to the average person, when they tell you, when the internet tells you, when the media tells you, Dylan Mulvaney is popular, you must follow and like Dylan Mulvaney, it's wrong, it's a lie, it's an algorithm.
Certain ideas are being promoted and propped up by people who have no business promoting it and propping it up.
You go out into the real world and what do you discover?
Strangely, people don't seem to like Dylan Mulvaney.
Why?
Well, I believe one journalist wrote that it's this off-putting Audrey Hepburn act coming from a man.
Well, they didn't say man.
They said from a male person.
And it is off-putting to the average person.
To me, I think the behavior, the fake smile, is nails on a chalkboard.
It's grating.
It's like, oh, make it stop.
But what I've heard from a lot of people is disgust.
And this image, I think, exemplifies it.
Dylan Mulvaney, many people are disgusted by this behavior.
It's a combination of the clothing, the attitude, the speaking.
It's not just annoying, it's disgust.
I am not saying I feel that way, okay?
I feel like it's mean.
You're allowed to be mean, I'm just saying.
I'm like, look, I don't like Domo Veni because I think Domo Veni is trying to exploit the algorithm for fame and getting surgeries and stuff to just fit the mold so they can put on this performance and get followers and make money.
I think it is manipulative.
I do not believe it is genuine.
Women do not put on high heels and hike in the woods.
Hiking heels?
Like, that's not real.
It's a caricature to insult trans people and women.
I despise the whole thing.
But I think, from what I've heard from regular people, Is that this image of Bud Light and this image of Dylan Mulvaney makes them think of... It disgusts them.
And so when they go to a liquor store and they look in the shelf and they see Bud Light, they see Dylan Mulvaney's face, they experience disgust, and they walk away.
I've heard that from a lot of people.
They've said, I don't know, man, it makes me sick.
And I'm like, really?
Because at first I wasn't saying that.
At first I was saying, I think people find Domovania annoying, and so they're like, ah, I don't want to buy that beer.
But when I actually started asking people, they're like, I don't know, it's gross.
And I'm like, interesting.
That's a different experience.
Me, it's nails on the chalkboard.
Me, I'm just like, I don't want to buy that Bud Light.
Screw Bud Light.
But I hear from a lot of people that are saying, like, they are sickened.
And I'm like, hmm.
That I find particularly interesting.
But I'm going to do this.
While I have Dylan Mulvaney's Instagram pulled up, I want to show you exactly why I think Dylan Mulvaney is a bad person.
There's a longer version of this video, I'm not sure, someone posted it, where Dylan's like, you watched it twice?
The woman in the background is laughing, while Dylan Mulvaney, in my opinion, is fake crying about this Netflix show.
It's so good!
Here's a few things you should notice.
Dylan Mulvaney, in this, appears to be fake crying while a friend is laughing, has facial hair coming in.
What I was told by more than one trans person Facial hair removal is the cheapest and easiest thing to get done, and one of the first things that trans women get done.
Dyl Mulvaney has not done that.
Now, some people have said, yeah, but Dyl Mulvaney is clearly trans because Dyl Mulvaney got facial surgery.
What I was told, and again, could be wrong, by trans women, was that, and I don't care if you don't like, you know, oh, someone told you this, I don't know, whatever, this is my experience.
The facial surgeries are the easiest thing to ignore.
Like, Michael Jackson got facial surgery and was still a man.
The point they brought up to me is they think the refusal to remove the facial hair, which is substantially cheaper, says to them that Dylan's not really trans and is doing this as a performance, and at some point may decide not to be trans anymore.
I was also told Dylan Mulvaney clearly is not taking hormones, and there's certain ways you can tell, and I'm like, I don't know about that.
That's just what I was told by some trans people.
That there are certain things that happen when you take hormones that make it obvious that you are, and Dylan appears not to be.
Dylan appears to have gotten surgery and is acting a certain way with makeup and angles to look like they want to transition, but they're actually putting on performance.
I've had people say to me, that's ridiculous, Tim.
Why would a person undergo surgery just for fame and being on Instagram or whatever?
And I'm like, I would like to introduce you to literally every person in Hollywood.
Jennifer Aniston got a nose job.
Watch her in the film Leprechaun and then watch her on Friends.
She got a nose job.
That's fine, whatever, I don't care.
Madonna recently got plastic surgery and everybody made fun of her.
Why is it okay to make fun of Madonna but not Dylan Mulvaney?
I don't care about piling on with hate or anything.
I want to approach this academically.
My view of Dylan Mulvaney is it's an individual who has found a hole in the algorithm that boosts him and so feigning being trans makes money for him.
Like, women don't do this.
Trans people don't do this.
This is an offensive stereotype.
I can't believe social media is promoting it.
It's like they want people to hate trans people.
They're like, I literally don't care if you're trans, if you're, or whatever, and you want to live your life, you're doing your thing.
I have long said I think that trans people should use the bathrooms where they most socially fit in.
That is not the conservative position.
That's actually the left position.
The conservative position is use the bathroom that corresponds to the biological sex.
I don't know if that works.
I don't think it does.
Buck Angel going in the women's room would probably cause more problems than Buck Angel going in the men's room.
Blair White going into the men's room would probably cause more problems than Blair White going into the women's room.
And so there are challenges we face here, and I don't have the answers.
My solution is always the compromise, like, why don't we just do single-stall bathrooms?
It's just like, you walk into the restroom area, and there's like 10 doors, and each is their own room.
People have pointed out to me, it's, with the amount of people we have, like, in an airport, for instance, you can't do it.
Because you can have, like, 30 guys go in the bathroom, in and out, walk up to a urinal, walk right out.
You want to make single-use bathrooms, you're going to have substantially less.
Fair point.
Unless we make them very, very small, I guess.
And instead of just doing, like, five stalls in one room, you do five very small stall-sized rooms.
Some people have said it's not cost-effective, and you still have to connect them because of flooding.
One of the reasons they do shared bathrooms is that if one toilet floods, it all goes to the same drain in the floor, and I'm like, okay, man, look, I don't have the answers.
I don't have the answers.
But I just think, outside of all of that, I think it's, to me it's fairly obvious that Dylan Mulvaney is just mocking women and trans women.
Cruz and Blackburn probe Anheuser-Busch's partnership with Dylan Mulvaney.
Now the response they've given is that they always strive to have marketing not going to minors.
They say Cruz and Blackburn ask Whitworth to avoid a lengthy investigation by publicly severing its relationship with Mulvaney.
Publicly apologizing for marketing alcoholic beverages to minors and directing Mulvaney to remove any Anheuser-Busch content from TikTok and his other social media platforms.
That's really interesting.
The Beer Institute must examine whether your company violated the Beer Institute's advertising marketing code and buying guidelines prohibiting marketing to individuals younger than the legal drinking age.
Cruz and Blackburn write in their letter to Whitworth, chairman and senior director of the Beer Institute, in addition to being Anheuser-Busch's chief executive officer.
I don't know if this is the right thing to do, to be completely honest.
I don't think the government should be going to a private company and being like, you did a marketing campaign we don't like so you better sever ties.
at Anheuser-Busch to avoid a lengthy investigation, blah blah blah. I don't think the government should
be going to a private company and being like, you did a marketing campaign we don't like,
so you better sever ties. That seems weird. However, there are questions as to why Bud
Light thought it appropriate to market to children or to minors.
I think the drinking age should be 18.
I think drinking, for the most part, is bad.
I've had a handful of beers over the past few months, namely because of this whole controversy.
I'm like, we're getting yingling!
And then, like, we grab beers.
And, uh, you know, I try to avoid alcohol for the most part because it's bad for you.
But, just because I don't like Dylan Mulvaney's acting and campaign and mockery of women and trans people, doesn't mean Dylan Mulvaney isn't allowed to do it, doesn't mean Bud Light isn't allowed to sponsor that.
I do think that, you know, they should not be marketing to minors.
But I will stress, my point was that, um, look, if you're an adult, if you're 18, you can sign contracts, I think you should be allowed to have beers.
Raising the drinking age to 21 made no sense, I think that's all weird stuff, but it's immaterial to what's going on right now.
I think it's good that some action is being taken.
There's an inquiry here.
I think people need to understand the bigger picture around Dylan Mulvaney.
These people in Hollywood are pretending to like Dylan Mulvaney.
They're pretending.
And I have proof.
I really, really do.
Take a look at this.
This is an article from MEAWW.
It says, Tim Pool shredded for saying liberal women should be complimented by comparing them to Lizzo or Dylan Mulvaney.
Here's what I said.
Why would anyone be offended by this?
If you're on the left, you think Mulvaney and Lizzo are beautiful, so there is nothing wrong with what I said.
The only reason anyone would get offended by this is if they were disgusted by Mulvaney and Lizzo.
This is the point.
I said this a long time ago.
I said, compliment women by saying they look like Dylan Mulvaney.
If they are saying Dylan Mulvaney is so beautiful, then tell people they look like Dylan Mulvaney and you're complimenting them.
Then there was a comedian, Jeff Dye, I think his name was, said, if Lizzo is so beautiful, why do women get mad when I say you look like Lizzo?
I combined these things and said, compliment them.
Say they look like Dylan Mulvaney and Lizzo.
We were saying this before a while back when the start of the Dylan Mulvaney thing happened.
I was like, if women are really into this, then it's a compliment, right?
Of course not.
They get offended by it.
And so the media response to me saying compliment them was that I said something wrong.
How does that make sense?
It doesn't.
It exposes what these people really think.
These liberals do not find Dylan Mulvaney beautiful.
Do not find Lizzo beautiful.
They find them off-putting.
I'll put it mildly.
So when you tell them they look this way, they get offended.
When I say you should compliment women by saying they look like Mulvaney or Lizzo, they get offended.
Because they're lying to you.
So you want to know why Bud Light is failing?
This exemplifies it.
Because even leftists get offended if you tell them they look like Dylan Mulvaney.
Doesn't that exemplify exactly the issue?
They're lying to you, and the average person doesn't want to buy your beer anymore.
Well, I suppose the good news is for all the distributors, Bud Light will buy back the garbage beer nobody wants.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 4 p.m.
on this channel.
Thanks for hanging out, and we will see you all then.
Sorry to say this to you all, it's not a surprise to me and many others that Fox News is woke.
The only real thing they had going for them was Tucker Carlson, and they got rid of that reportedly because of the Dominion settlement.
But now we have this story from the post-millennial.
Fox News instructed producers not to bash Dylan Mulvaney.
Trans ideology.
Woke culture enforced in the workplace.
Now this report from the Postmillennial encapsulates, I think, some of the most important takeaways from another report, which is from the Daily Signal, who had the exclusive, leaked policy exposes Fox News' stance on woke ideology.
I've known about this, I should say.
There have been rumors and leaks slowly emerging.
Especially with the ousting of Tucker Carlson, a lot of those who worked within Fox News have no loyalty to this platform after they betrayed their most viewed personality.
So, um, let me just say, if you're surprised to hear that Fox News is woke, I perhaps have a large bridge to sell you.
Why?
For the longest time, we've known outright that Fox is woke.
For one, they're based in New York City.
I don't know about base, but they have a large New York City building where they do a lot of their content.
And, uh, do you think the people who live and work in New York City are conservatives?
They're not.
The Daily Beast wrote this up last year.
Fox News regulars and the far right freak out over Fox's trans teen segment.
Fox News is done, they said, but they still watched Tucker Carlson.
It was a story that Fox News ran about a transgender child.
You know, my stance on this as a milquetoast fence-sitter, classical, traditional, liberal, whatever you want to call it, is, hey, look, man, if you want to sterilize your kids and your kids want to get sterilized, have fun.
What am I going to do about it?
Now, don't get me wrong, we can influence culture and pass laws.
My point is simply, for the time being, there are states that allow this and states that don't, and where we win in states that no longer allow it, I think it's good.
But do you think I'm going to shed a tear that far-left cultists are sterilizing themselves?
Bro, you want it, you do your thing.
You know what's really funny about this argument that I keep making?
I'm like, bro, I'm not a staunch conservative.
I've never been hardcore pro-life.
I've always been traditional Democrat pro-choice.
What are you going to say?
I agree with you.
Please go abort your kids and sterilize the rest.
But they don't complain about that.
It's funny.
I have that tweet that I put out about, you know, complimenting liberal women by saying they look like Lizzo or Dylan Mulvaney.
And some people got so offended by it on the left.
They wrote a news article about it.
And I'm like, why are you mad?
This is what you believe.
Unless they're lying.
But they don't really engage with my position on sterilizing kids, which is what they're doing, because they would have to admit that's what they're doing.
But I digress.
The point of this is to highlight that Fox News has been woke for a long time.
Matt Walsh is calling for the Bud Light treatment.
Fox needs to get the full Bud Light treatment.
They're actively working to suppress conservative voices while promoting leftism in its most radical form, enough is enough.
Here, here.
Well, let's read about what's going on with this exclusive report from the Daily Signal.
Before we do, ladies and gentlemen, if you want to fight back against those who would get woke and go broke, go to castbrew.com and pick up your cast brew coffee.
Look at this, I got a bag of Appalachian Nights.
This is our coffee company.
We're sponsoring ourselves.
We are producing coffee as we work towards building our coffee shop.
And we hope to have many around the country at some point.
That's a goal.
We'll see if we can get there.
With your support, I do believe we can.
Casprew coffee is delicious.
I recommend Rise with Roberto Jr., Appalachian Nights, but we also have tons of the Colombian and French roast.
For those who just want to get some good coffee, I'm just going to come out and say it.
I made a cup of coffee this morning and I was drinking it, and then I was told we got the packs of Appalachian Nights finally came in.
Yo, I made this, and it was so good, I basically chugged the whole thing in like 10 minutes, which I kind of regret because now I'm wired, but not really.
It was just that good.
So support us, casprew.com.
Let's read the news.
Fox News employees are allowed to use bathrooms that align with their gender identity, rather than their biological sex, and permitted to dress in alignment with their preferred gender.
They must also be addressed by their preferred name and pronouns in the workplace.
Now, I'm going to pause right there.
That's New York law.
What's Fox News going to do about that?
These are just a few of the policies outlined in the company handbook dated January 2021, a copy of which was shared with the Daily Signal.
Fox also offers to help employees come up with a workplace transition plan to ease their gender transition at work.
The revelations come amid conservative consternation at Fox's digital use of activist language, like gender-affirming care in its stories on its website, as well as the site's consistent use of female pronouns for biological males like Dylan Mulvaney and Leah Thomas.
Fox also drew strong backlash for a June 2022 on-air segment praising a child's gender transition.
But do you know why they're doing it?
It's law!
It's law!
You legally have to do it!
This is what I was saying about these laws in New York, in New Jersey, in Pennsylvania.
If you have an employee, and you say something like, let's say Fox News says they're going to only use male pronouns, you get sued.
And you'll lose, because the institutions are captured.
I suppose many people expected Fox News to be a bastion of defense against this ideology, but I suppose that's not the case for Fox News.
The Daily Signal talked to current and former Fox employees who requested anonymity to speak candidly about the company.
Quote, they want you to think it's this place that supports traditionally conservative values.
A former producer for Tucker Carlson Tonight told the Daily Signal, but in reality, they're pushing this nonsense behind the scenes.
Carlson's show was canceled April 24th, this we know.
A source who still works at Fox News told the Daily Signal that Carlson's show was canceled In April, wait wait, the show was cancelled in April.
Producers for the new 8pm Fox News Tonight program were told not to bash Mulvaney.
That directive came from high-level executives, the source said.
Fox News did not respond to the data signal's multiple requests for comment.
Under the category Gender Transition, Fox's employee's handbook promises the company is dedicated to expanding and strengthening efforts to sustain a more inclusive work environment.
The Fox employee handbook is posted on Workday.
All right, Fox News employees.
I understand your company is bound by New York law.
Many of you may be saying, like, what are they supposed to do, defy the law?
Maybe that's some people's opinion.
Here's what you should do right now.
I'm not entirely convinced that people have the balls to do something like this, but I think that if you're a Fox News employee, I say you test the boundaries by which the law exists.
This is your opportunity to have a positive impact on culture and either advance civil rights law or end corruption.
To put it simply, if you are allowed to be called, and you must be called, any pronoun you want, pick a long and obnoxious one, if it makes you feel good.
If you can dress any way you want, wear a fursuit.
Now, you know, my concern with all of this is that I don't think people would do it.
I think there's very few people at Fox News who would actually be like, well, I... I'm... I should say this.
I think most people at Fox News are gonna say, I won't be the one to stand up against this.
If I worked at Fox News, and this report came out, yo, I would show up the next day in a fursuit and say, from now on, you must address me as Vulciferon, Herald of the Winter Mists, and my pronouns are Vulciferon, Herald of the Winter Mists, and Lord Vulciferon.
That's it.
You can say, that's Lord Volsiferon's coffee, please don't touch, or ask Lord Volsiferon.
If I must be called by how I deem to be called, then we'll play that game.
Now, of course, you may argue that's a bit absurd.
It goes too far.
No one's going to remember how to say that.
That's kind of the point.
But fine.
Fine.
Tone it down.
You at Fox News have an opportunity to put them in that position where they must either defy the law or allow you to act in a way that, well, probably is disruptive.
But see where they stand on this one.
I really wish we lived in a world where more people were willing to stand up and be that voice and be that person.
Alex Stein certainly is.
If Alex Stein worked for Fox News, you know he'd do it in two seconds.
He'd show up, dressed in the most ridiculous costume, and you know what he'd do?
He'd wear a bathing suit.
He's done this!
Alex Stein put on a onesie, women's bathing suit, whatever it's called, and went around saying he was a woman who wanted to do ballet.
Who's got the balls to do that at Fox News?
Do it on air.
What are they going to say?
Imagine this.
Imagine you put on a ridiculous outfit, and then you're scheduled for an on-air segment or something.
And then they say, we're not putting you on air if you wear that.
And you say, uh-oh, now you're defying the law.
And if they do, you can say, this is what we are protesting.
Why is this considered protected?
Why is this allowed?
I think, under the pretext of civil rights law, we are seeing the exploitation of our good will.
Now, for me personally, I don't care about pronouns.
I think the neopronouns make no sense, and I think it's fake, and I think there's exploitation there.
But, you know, my position on the transgender bathroom issue and things like that is, like, use the bathroom that corresponds with how you look.
But to be honest, we here at Tim Guest, we only have, like, single bathrooms.
Like, it's a house we converted, for the most part, into a studio, so the bathrooms are just bathrooms.
So it is what it is.
But, you know, I'm not as staunchly conservative on the issue as, say, Matt Walsh would be.
So Matt Walsh is outright saying, boycott Fox News.
Citing the Human Rights Campaign, one of the most prominent LGBTQ groups in the country, the Fox Handbook defines a slew of LGBTQ terms, including cisgender.
That's a slur, and you shouldn't be allowed to use it.
Sorry.
Look, you know, the challenge we face here is, they say cisgender, gender expression, gender fluid, gender identity, gender non-conforming, gender transition, LGBTQ, non-binary transition.
Cisgender, cis, it's a slur.
There may be people who don't think so, but people who are cis have expressed, that's a slur, we do not allow it.
There's nothing I can do about it.
You can't call someone that because, well, under, you know, state law, we have to create an inclusive work environment, and there are many people who are deeply offended by the use of that term as a slur.
You can't call somebody a word that they are offended by.
Where does this go?
Look, with the culture war, I gotta tell you, one of the biggest challenges as an employer is how we address this in trying to abide by the law.
If they say, you can't use terminology that's offensive to somebody, what if one person at the company is offended and the other person isn't, and they both say things that offend the other?
Who gets restricted?
No one can say anything.
No more words.
Use hand gestures.
That's the only thing we can do now.
But no, in all seriousness, Cisgender is a slur to many people.
Outright.
And it's been expressed online.
There are people who take deep offense to it.
So I don't think, I think Fox News, I think Fox should be sued over the use of the term.
It's deeply offensive.
I mean, imagine this.
I'm pretty sure Fox News would not be allowed to use slurs against white people, like, in the workplace, walking around saying it to people.
They'd have to reprimand you.
They'd say, you cannot use these terms.
There was this thing that happened where Facebook was banning feminists because they were saying, in a manner of speaking, that they wanted to end the lives of men.
They had a hashtag for it.
And they said, why can't we say it's not allowed?
It's not fair.
And they were getting banned for saying this thing because you can't say those things on the internet.
But they thought they had special privileges.
They don't.
They're going to mention that for the past several years, Fox has received a perfect score from the HRC, Corporate Equality Index.
The New York City Human Rights Law requires employers to use the names, pronouns, and title with which a person identifies regardless of their biological sex.
Okay.
The name?
It doesn't specify anything beyond that.
Let me see, what do they have the link to?
NYC.gov.
I've pulled this up before.
I have covered this in great detail.
Uh, definition- definitions.
Let's- here's the intent.
New York City passed the Transgender Rights Bill to expand the scope of gender-based protections.
Yadda yadda yadda.
The city's intent to amending the law is to make it explicit that the law permits discrimination against people based on their gender identity.
Okay.
They use the word cisgender to describe a person whose gender identity conforms to their sex assigned at birth.
Deeply offensive term.
It's an insult to somebody.
Gender expression.
I'm telling you.
Representation of gender is expressed through one's name, pronouns, clothing, hairstyle,
behavior, voice, or similar characteristics.
Expression may or may not conform to stereotypes, norms, and expectations in a given culture
or historical period.
I'm telling you.
You don't believe me?
It is not the same as orientation or identity.
Terms... So if they can't discriminate against... Okay, here's one.
Gender identity is an internal, deeply held sense of one's gender which may be the same or different from their sex assigned at birth.
A person's identity may be male, female, neither, or both.
Gender identity is not the same as sexual orientation.
The terms associated with etc.
are but not... are not limited to... yadda yadda yadda.
They can't discriminate against you on the basis of your identity at Fox News.
Gender Identity says it may or may not be male, female, neither, or both, i.e.
non-binary or genderqueer.
If we're gonna make the argument that male and female have a subset of social behaviors attached to them, we can make the argument that non-binary does not, and that queer does not either.
In which case, you should be allowed to wear a full fursuit in Fox News.
Who's got the balls to stand up at Fox News and actually do it?
To actually decide to be something.
Anything.
You're protected under New York law.
Transgender, sometimes shortened to trans, is a term used to describe someone whose gender identity does not conform to the sex assigned at birth.
And if gender identity can be non-binary or queer, that means quite literally anyone can be anything they want.
Violations!
They say, gender discrimination under the NYCHRL includes discrimination on the basis of gender identity, including to being trans, non-binary, or non-conforming, and gender expression.
I had a lawyer, and you guys have heard me talk about this, say that you'll be laughed at in the courtroom if you try and wear a fursuit and say your name's Vulciferon.
And I say, gender expression is explicitly protected right here.
And that's, uh, do they have the code here for, uh, NYC code 8-102?
And gender expression is your names, pronoun, clothing, hairstyle, behavior, voice, or similar characteristics that may or may not conform to gender stereotypes, norms, and expectations, or a historical period!
Like, they actually include historical period!
Dude.
Put on a safari costume, and a big fake beard, and say, from now on, this is who I am, and you must address me as the colonel.
Seriously.
Historical period.
Okay.
Put on old Victorian clothing.
Show up to work.
They can't kick you out.
It is protected.
Amazing.
So, gender expression is explicitly included.
They say, unlawful gender-based discrimination is prohibited in employment, public accommodations, and housing.
Failing to use the name or pronouns in which a person self-identifies.
It requires employers to do this!
Most people, and many trans people, use female or male pronouns.
Some trans and non-binary and gender non-conforming people use pronouns other than he, him, his, or she, her, hers.
Such as they, them, theirs, or ze, here.
Okay.
All people including employees, tenants, customers, participants, and programs have the right to use and have others use their name and pronoun regardless of whether they have the ID in that name.
Asking someone in good faith for their name and gender pronouns is not a violation of the human rights legislation.
Example of violation.
Intentional or repeated refusal to use a person's name, pronouns, or title.
It says, you can use a name not on your ID.
And if they refuse to do it, it is a violation.
They say refusal to use them because they don't conform to stereotypes.
Yo.
I will buy someone a fursuit if they really do identify as a noble wolf spirit, and you require that help.
Put on the suit, walk around in all fours, and demand a litter box.
Well, that's for cats, but you get my point.
Conditioning a person's use of their name on obtaining a court-ordered name change violates the law.
You hear that?
You can walk in right now and say, from now on, you will call me Volciferon, Herald of the Winter Mists, and my pronouns are Lord Volciferon and Lord Volciferons.
You can do it.
Floorball, how about that one?
Requiring a person to provide information on their medical history.
Not allowed.
Refusing to allow people to utilize single-gender facilities.
Not allowed.
It's amazing.
Examples.
Gender stereotyping.
More examples.
Imposing different uniforms or grooming standards.
Not allowed.
You can literally, under this, wear whatever you want and be called whatever you want.
So, that's why Fox News does it.
I don't necessarily blame Fox News entirely.
I think it's fair to say that Fox News does perform an important task, for sure.
They do provide information that I think counters the narrative.
But, yo, nothing changes till you decide to change it.
So I wonder, is there anybody at Fox News, anybody in New York who has the balls to say, okay, I'll play the game and see to what extent Fox News is willing to allow it?
Remember, Fox News didn't have to do this.
Fox News did not have to have Raising Ryland and talk about trans kids, a child who will likely be sterile.
Fox News could have just said no.
It's one thing to say we have to abide by New York City law.
It's another thing to come out defiantly and say we are moving our headquarters because this is going too far.
And it's even more so, worse, to say you're outright going to join in.
Fox News doesn't believe the things they claim to believe.
So here's what I'd like to see.
And I hope Matt Walsh will join me in calling for this.
Use the law to however you want.
I mean, think about the things you can do if the company must call you whatever you want.
Legally.
I'll tell you this.
If you show up in a woman's onesie, they cannot prohibit you from wearing that.
Let me pull up the law.
They say refusal to use certain facilities.
Examples of violation.
Imposing different grooming standards based on gender.
Under the New York City Human Rights Legislation, I believe that's what the L stands for, employers and covered entities may not require dress codes or uniforms or apply grooming or appearance standards that impose different requirements for people based on gender.
The fact that the grooming standard or dress code differentiates based on gender is sufficient for it to be considered discriminatory, even if perceived by some as harmless.
Okay.
So maybe they'll say, dude, men and women can't wear onesies.
All right.
Then see how far that goes.
What can men do that women can't do?
They can say that, um, you... they can't prohibit you.
So likely when a woman wears a pantsuit or a dress and a man wears a suit, well, it's because the men can wear suits and the women can... and so can the... men and women can both wear suits, men and women can both wear dresses.
Navigate this.
To what extent is it considered gender-based discrimination if you decide to wear certain things?
Wear a bra, like that one guy in that ad, and then wear a dress that is somewhat see-through.
Do things like that.
You're allowed to do it now.
Be you.
I think, outright, you can wear the onesie.
Because it says non-conforming.
And you can say, the onesie is the non-binary solution.
gender norms contrast vastly across culture, age, community, personality, style, and sense
You can say, this is the only way I feel- Oh, you know what you do?
Here, here's one.
Wear a big box.
Get a big cardboard box, put it- pull it over your head with like a hole for your head, and your arms can stick out, and you can say, it's the only clothing I can wear that makes me feel like I'm not adhering to male or female stereotypes.
It is non-binary clothing.
You know why?
There is no stereotype or standard by which gender is according to these laws.
The world is your oyster, Fox News employees.
Don't forget it.
But anyway, you get the point.
They're doing this because of New York City law.
But those segments they choose to run.
Fox News, of course.
It's Democrats driving the speed limit, and the whole culture is moving in that direction.
You got an issue with it?
Stand up and do something about it.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 6pm on this channel.
Thanks for hanging out, and I'll see you all then.
I hope y'all are ready for a wild ride in 2024, and even this year, starting now, as AI images are destroying the world already.
Just wait until we have AI rendered video and audio combined into one, because these things already exist.
Let me stress, AI images are here.
It's only a matter of doing frame by frame to make an AI video, and AI voice manipulation already exists, and now it's a little rudimentary.
With a little hard work, a little elbow grease, you can generate enough of someone saying something to make it sound indistinguishable from reality.
Ladies and gentlemen, I give you this story from Insider.
An apparently AI-generated hoax of an explosion at the Pentagon went viral online.
And markets briefly dipped.
But you need to understand, a market dip means money stolen.
Let me explain.
First, we have this tweet here from the Kobesi Letter who says, this morning an AI-generated image of an explosion at the U.S.
Pentagon surfaced, with multiple news sources reporting it as real.
The S&P 500 fell 30 points in minutes.
This resulted in a $500 billion market cap swing on a fake image.
That's right, ladies and gentlemen, $500 billion swing.
It then rebounded.
Once the image was confirmed fake, AI is becoming dangerous.
Becoming?
It is.
This is the image in question, which really just doesn't look real at all.
Remarkable.
Look at the building in the background.
The windows don't make sense.
The structure makes no sense.
People saw this image.
They quickly retweeted it.
And here's the S&P 500 index.
We can see a massive sell-off.
And then we can see a bit of a recovery.
Here's what you need to understand.
If I've got stocks, and I say, okay, right now the stock is worth $100.
If it hits $90, sell immediately.
I think, what are they called?
Stop-loss?
Let's say, I'm not paying attention, minding my own business, and this news goes viral.
It triggers many people to sell their stock.
The price drops to $90.
I haven't noticed a thing.
I'm sitting there playing World of Warcraft or something.
Instantly, a trigger hits selling off all of my stock, which is immediately then bought up by someone who has a buy order at $89, a premium price.
The stock recovers.
I lose my stock.
All because someone posted lies.
This massive market manipulation?
Think about what this could be.
You set up a bunch of buy orders for various stocks at maybe minus 10%.
You put out these images, stock collapses, you instantly buy it up, it rebounds, boom!
You made the money.
Now, can they prove it was you?
Some people just got very, very, very wealthy.
Very wealthy.
And they had nothing to do with it.
If you were someone who said, you know, this $100 stock, I really like it, but $100 is too much, $90 makes sense, so I'm going to put in a buy order at the bottom.
If it does fall to $90, I'll want to buy it.
You're sitting there minding your own business playing World of Warcraft, or whatever it is you're playing.
Fake news hits, the stock tanks, your buy order triggers, you buy it right back up, the news is revealed it's fake, and then boom, the price is up.
All of a sudden, you instantly bought in at $90 and are now sitting at $100.
Oh boy.
10% in an instant.
Now imagine you had $1,000,000.
You just made $100,000 in 10 minutes through market manipulation.
This is where things are going.
MoheganBTC on Twitter said, today we got the first glimpse of the dangers of AI and social media.
An image was released on Twitter stating there was an explosion near the Pentagon.
News spread quickly and over 500 million was sold off from the S&P 500 a minute.
It says 500 million, but the other tweet says 500 billion.
I don't think it's billion.
I think it's probably million.
I want to make sure that's clear.
Does anyone clarify whether it's million or billion?
I think it's million.
Let's make sure we get the number right.
And see if they have the official number here in Insider.
I don't think they do.
I don't think they do.
Billion sounds like it's very, very, very high.
But, not impossible.
I'm going to go ahead and say it's probably 500 million.
Not sure though, not sure though.
Probably should have checked.
I thought it was billion.
I thought it was reported.
I thought that was that big.
Let's just do this.
I'll do a quick fact check.
See what the, uh, the, the number here is.
Uh, 500.
Cause a lot of them are ignoring the hard number.
So I'm wondering if that 500 number is correct.
50 points as of noon.
Uh, it was, I mean, a New York Post says 500 billion.
Is that really right?
Is that a $500 billion?
That can't be right.
Can it?
500 million also does, to be completely honest, seem kind of small.
I'm not sure.
Man, I don't know for sure.
So just fact check me on that one.
And because if it really is 500 billion, that's crazy.
But yeah, this is where we're going.
PBS NewsHour fake AI images of Putin and Trump being arrested spread online.
You've seen these already.
Elliot Higgins of Bellingcat saying making pictures of Trump getting arrested while waiting for Trump's arrest.
Very interesting.
This story, of course, from March 23rd, 2023.
We all saw the images.
Trump being arrested, many of them looked relatively real.
And we knew they were fake.
But what happens when people make things that are more believable and more confusing?
Therein lies the bigger challenge with AI.
A picture of Donald Trump with two scoops of ice cream.
Yeah, nobody really cares, right?
A picture of Donald Trump with three scoops of ice cream.
But CNN did run the story saying Trump gets two scoops, everybody else gets one.
Pretty sure if anybody wanted more ice cream, they could have got it.
Most people probably just didn't care.
Or how about, Trump's salt and pepper shakers are bigger than everyone else's.
Pretty sure that was fake news.
Like, there were salt and pepper shakers on the table, and the ones that were closer to Trump just happened to be larger.
As if Trump would be like, no, you can't use my, these are my pepper shakers!
Could you imagine that?
If you're sitting down with dinner and Trump's got salt and pepper in front of him, you know, I'm gonna grab the salt.
No one's gonna bat an eye.
They make up fake news.
But it's all to generate negative images.
Now imagine if the image in question is a bit more damning?
Not the worst.
Because nobody would believe the craziest of crazy.
Like Donald Trump getting arrested and fighting with cops.
Yeah, nobody's gonna buy that.
They're gonna be like, what?
But what if someone took a real picture and then altered it in some way?
The reality is, my friends, we've already seen it.
Saturating Trump's face to make it look bright orange, so he looks like a clown.
There was one video, which is, this is crazy, a local news outlet actually superimposed a mouth over Trump, or something like this, to make him go like, and make him do something weird.
They fired the guy for it, saturating his face.
These people are insane!
Do you have any idea what's gonna start happening?
Mid-journey.
It's incredible.
It's a lot of fun.
Making pictures.
But they're not going to be able to stop people from doing the craziest things.
You are going to get a picture of Donald Trump doing something seemingly innocuous, but still kind of uncouth.
And they will use that to smear him.
It will appear in ad campaigns.
And they'll use clever words to get by defamation and slander laws.
But when every single political action committee or super PAC is running the same photo, Trump can't sue them.
Here's what I predict.
A photo of Donald Trump, you know, maybe flicking somebody off.
Or like yelling at somebody or making an obscene gesture in some way.
It'll look like a candid photo captured by someone when Trump thought he wasn't, no one was watching.
And then...
It'll be reported in the news.
Image of Trump emerges making obscene gesture.
An image of him making obscene gesture?
That's a fact statement.
Now, no one ever said it was a real image, so you can't sue him for defamation.
They'll say, there's an image, it happened, we reported on it, it was going viral.
Once they do that, political action committees Rival campaigns will run commercials saying, look at this photo of Donald Trump.
It has been making the rounds on the internet.
Is this the kind of person you want for president?
They never said in the commercial it was Trump and he did do it.
They say, look at this image that surfaced online of Donald Trump.
It is an image of Donald Trump.
If I draw a picture of Donald Trump, I can call it an image of Donald Trump.
You can't do anything about it.
The problem is art typically is not as realistic.
Now, I get it.
Photoshop has existed for a long time.
And yes, it's caused problems.
But now we are putting the power of Photoshop into the hands of a layman.
You will now have every single far leftist Liberal.
Able to do this.
Now that's probably the good news.
There will be such noise no one will believe any of it.
But then how do we get our news and information?
I think the chaos is going to come and then it all shuts down.
When the chaos reaches critical mass and there's too much fake news out there, people will just say it's all fake.
And how do you find the truth?
You can't.
Seriously, you won't be able to.
Sources you know and trust will be like, we're not sure if this is real or not.
No one will know what is real.
And maybe that's the point.
The reason why they want AI done so quick is they will end The flaw of information between people like you and me.
So they don't care if I have a show.
They're gonna say, sooner or later, Tim Pool will be unable to determine what's real outside of what we determine is real.
News organizations will say we're the only ones that are true, and what are we gonna say?
That's already where we almost are.
But what happens when I'm looking at 500 images and they're all slightly different and I don't know which one's the real one?
Why would I trust the New York Times?
That's the future.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up in a few minutes.
Stick around and I'll see you all shortly.
Angry at being defeated by a biological male, a female athlete gives a thumbs down as she is bumped from the top three places to fourth place and will not have the opportunity to advance.
But you know what's funny about this story?
Let me give you the white pill and the black pill.
The white pill is that more stories of women refusing to participate are emerging.
In one instance, no woman was willing to take the podium at all As a male won the women's, I believe it was a bike race.
So that's the good news.
You also have this woman saying, thumbs down.
Good news.
You have people like Riley Gaines and Taylor Silverman, who actually works here.
Taylor does.
Who are standing up and saying no.
Very good news.
Now here's the bad news.
Ah, sad, sad stories.
In this video of the fourth place woman giving a thumbs down, no one else does anything!
You know why?
Because the fifth place woman was never gonna get third place, so she doesn't care.
The second and third and second place women are advancing.
I'm sorry, the second, well, the first and third place women are advancing.
And the biological male doesn't care because they're competing there intentionally.
To put it simply, the women who are not directly impacted say nothing, and the only one who actually complains is the one who got bumped.
Welcome to living in a world with no community or solidarity.
There's that old poem.
You know, first they came for this group, I said nothing, then this group, I said nothing.
This is exactly what you're going to see.
The poem itself may be a bit more drastic because it refers to the takeover by Nazis in Germany.
But, if you do not stand up for those around you, eventually there will be no one left to stand up for you.
Unhappy at the finish line, California high school athlete gives big thumbs down after being pushed out of state finals by trans runner as parents clash with protesters.
That is disgusting, said one parent.
Here's the image in question.
You can see 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, and 6th.
And here's the 4th place runner giving a big ol' thumbs down.
Hold on there a minute.
The 1st place girl didn't say anything.
The 3rd place girl's not saying anything.
They're smiling.
6th place ain't saying nothing.
5th place ain't saying nothing.
Because it's obvious.
The only person who cares is the person who lost out.
5th and 6th place were like, we never won anyway.
1st and 3rd were like, yes, I'm advancing.
Far be it from me to say anything that could compromise what's mine!
Ah, it's just so pathetic.
It's sad, really.
Look, man, I know everybody wants me to be chipper and cheery all day and say, oh, nothing but good things, we should all stand up, but dude, at a certain point, we need to recognize, there are people who would throw you under a bus to save themselves.
And I'm not convinced this woman who got 4th place, I don't think she'd complain if she got 3rd.
If it was, if she beat the 3rd place girl, and the 3rd place girl's on the 4th place podium, I bet that girl would give a thumbs down.
And the girl giving the thumbs down now would probably be cheering and saying, Don't look at me, I squeaked by!
Adeline Johnson of Branson High School took fourth place during a recent meet in California.
Video showed the team giving a thumbs down after losing to a trans athlete.
No, no, no, no, no.
No, no, no, no, no.
Third place girl lost to a trans athlete.
She didn't care.
Because she gets to advance.
Because if you place, that's all that matters.
They say, Adeline Johnson finished fourth in the 1,600-meter race at the CIF North Coast section meet of champions, where Athena Ryan, a biological, this is a transgender female, that is incorrect.
You are incorrectly, you need to correct this.
Okay, hang on a second.
A transgendered person is a person whose gender identity does not conform with their sex observed at birth.
So, if someone is female and then is described as being transgender, that would be a trans man.
If someone is male and transgender, that's a trans woman.
Transgender female means descriptor, noun.
A female is this, a male is this, and if you add transgender, that would be a transgender female, trans man.
Do you get it?
I tried to explain this to people, they don't understand.
Johnson, from Branson High School, can be seen waving at people in the crowd before giving a thumbs down.
Ryan, from Sonoma Academy, along with the first and third place winners, will now move on to California's Interscholastic Federation State Track and Field Championships next week.
Protesters were seen at the track meet with signs saying, Protect Female Sports, before they were removed from the stadium after a clash with security.
Why aren't these women boycotting?
Here you go.
Riley Gaines calls for female athletes to boycott events and give governing bodies a big thumbs down after California high school senior lost her place in state finals to a trans girl.
Adeline Johnson, 18, missed out on a state championship after being beaten by transgender runner Athena Ryan.
She was videoed waving at the crowd before giving a thumbs down, so this we know.
Riley Gaines says boycott, I agree.
Look, all we can do is stand up for what we believe in.
And if that means most people will just take the win and say nothing because they personally benefit from it, that's reality.
I don't know what you will be able to do.
The first and third place women are saying nothing.
Now, maybe they'll speak up.
I don't know.
Maybe it's just this one photo.
She's giving a thumbs down.
She lost.
Other parents are protesting the protester, saying they're gross.
But what do you do to inspire people to actually defend others?
And stick up for them?
The video of Johnson giving the thumbs down was posted by the Independent Council on Women's Sports.
According to their Twitter bio, the group is a network of women athletes and are supporters advocating for female-protected categories in sport.
The video incorrectly referred to Ryan as a trans-identifying male, but pointed out- But that's not incorrect!
Like, that's- It's just so crazy!
Incor- No!
If you are male and identify as trans, that's a fact statement.
That's not insulting in any way.
Incorrectly referred to Ryan amazing, but pointed out Johnson's thumbs down response to her place Icons was not the only group to have their eye on the track meet in California at the weekend so so this this This is so fascinating to me.
If I said that there was a brown dog, right?
I am describing what it is.
If I said there was a crippled dog, disabled dog, there is an affliction, and then there is the thing that it is.
If you are male, and you are described as suffering from gender dysphoria, you are a transgendered male.
Get it?
This is so weird, isn't it?
Why they're adamant on referring to the female as a male, but then they invert the context.
That makes no sense.
It occurred to me like I was reading something, and you get these circumstances where, you know, they'll say trans-identifying male because the person's male.
The media then comes out and claims female to confuse the issue.
People then say, well, what's wrong?
If it's female sports and they're both female, what's the issue?
They're not.
This is a male who is transgendered.
Right?
Okay.
That's a biological male.
Okay.
What's the problem?
It's the weirdest thing to me how they're adamant on not telling the truth.
And I think that just goes to show that they are intentionally lying.
Like when they claim they're offended if I say they look like Lizzo or Dylan Mulvaney.
They freaked out over that one.
I don't even know if I still... Do I still have that one pulled up?
Yeah.
Why?
If you claim Dylan Mulvaney and Lizzo are beautiful, it's a compliment to say you look like them.
Ah, but they lose their minds.
Because the reality is they are deeply offended by it.
They will lie.
That's what they do.
And my point to that is, they'll also try and claim that females are males and males are female, and if you correctly point out someone is male or female, they get mad.
They are trying to lie.
Ryan spoke with Mile Split after the race and did not seem bothered by the protests.
Here's what people need to understand.
Fast twitch muscle matters.
The amount you have is determined by prenatal testosterone.
4 minutes 55 seconds.
I wasn't expecting that I dropped like 17 seconds on my season's best in the past two
weeks.
After last weekend, I didn't think I could run low fives again.
I was just coming here trying to break five, just glad I finished out.
Here's what people need to understand.
Fast twitch muscle matters.
The amount you have is determined by prenatal testosterone.
To a certain degree.
It's remarkable.
Below average males competing against above average females and competing.
Being competitive.
Just look at the grip strength chart and you'll see that the strongest woman barely is overlapping with the weakest men.
This is why there's a pickle jar meme.
There are big differences.
Now, I know that a person will lose muscle strength and endurance and stamina and muscle mass when they get off testosterone.
Of course, testosterone does boost these things, but that does not negate bone structure, joints, and decades of development, or nearly two decades of development.
But you don't need me to tell you this.
We all get it.
Right now we're seeing transgender athletes winning in many different categories.
House Republicans passed a ban on transgender women and girls from competing in female school athletics.
I think it's going to have to go to the Supreme Court.
And I think the solution is a trans league.
I don't think we can play this granular game of how much testosterone a person has.
No, the point is to see who's the best.
Not for us all to just win trophies if we feel like it.
I suppose we'll see, though.
I suppose we'll see.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up tonight at 8pm over at youtube.com slash TimCastIRL.