Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

May 31, 2023 - Tim Pool Daily Show

01:25:36

Project Veritas SUES James O'Keefe For Contract Violations, DEMANDS Money, Tries To STOP JAMES

Project Veritas SUES James O'Keefe For Contract Violations, DEMANDS Money, Tries To STOP JAMES BUY CAST BREW COFFEE TO FIGHT BACK - https://castbrew.com/ Become a Member For Uncensored Videos - https://timcast.com/join-us/ Hang Out With Tim Pool & Crew LIVE At - http://Youtube.com/TimcastIRL Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Participants

Main voices

tim pool

01:22:02

Appearances

Clips

josh hammer

00:31

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Show episode speakers

Speaker	Time	Text
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		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.
		Major breaking news today.
		Project Veritas is suing James O'Keefe as well as it appears to be two other employees.
		Now this just dropped.
		I've got confirmation from the legal team.
		It is 100% confirmed.
		We have the PDF right here and I'll go over just a few details of the case here.
		The gist of it is that they say that James O'Keefe, as the founder and someone who's under contract with Veritas, has enriched himself, breaching a bunch of contracts, fiduciary duty, etc.
		I'm not a lawyer.
		And there's probably going to be a way better analysis from, say, you know, Viva Frye and Rakeda and other legal YouTubers.
		But seeing as this is major breaking news, I definitely want to jump on this and tell you what's currently going on.
		We have the court document here.
		United States District Court, Southern District of New York, complaint and demand for jury trial now.
		The fascinating thing here is the fact that this has gone to a lawsuit already means I have to assume there were attempts to negotiate beforehand, fell apart, and now we've ended up with this.
		They say, being known as the founder of an organization does not entitle that person to run amok and put his own interests ahead of the organization.
		Defendant James O'Keefe failed in his duties to plaintiff Project Veritas, causing it serious and significant damage.
		O'Keefe must be held accountable, and as must the organization O'Keefe created.
		Defendant Transparency 1, LLC, DBA, O'Keefe Media Group, for suborning his violations.
		Similarly, two individuals formerly affiliated with Plaintiff, Defendants R.C.
		Maxwell and Anthony Iatropoulos, breached their own contracts with Plaintiff for the benefit of OMG.
		Plaintiff's Project Veritas and Project Veritas Action Fund, by their attorneys, allege as follows.
		They go on to mention the parties involved.
		I'm going to say it outright.
		This is the death knell for Project Veritas.
		It's done.
		You know, sometimes you have internal conflict.
		Sometimes things don't go right.
		And you say, for the sake of both of us, that's it.
		With James O'Keefe leaving Veritas, there's nothing they could have done.
		They could have simply said, we'll continue to function.
		We'll continue to do the work that we do.
		But so be it.
		Cut our losses.
		Call it a bad hair day.
		And yes, there may be some truth to these claims.
		I don't know.
		They've not been adjudicated yet.
		And probably some untruths and exaggerations.
		Of course, lawsuits go.
		Project Veritas would have been better off saying, James, we want you to succeed and we want to succeed.
		What's the best way we do that?
		Maybe they tried.
		I don't know.
		But I can tell you this.
		Filing a lawsuit against James O'Keefe, who is the hero and the star, who has risked his life and his freedom, I'm sorry, I view that as a death knell for Veritas.
		And you know what?
		Maybe they already felt it, so they said, go out with a bang.
		They're gonna mention Project Veritas, a non-stop, a non-stock corporation under the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia.
		Veritas Action Fund.
		Then they mentioned Defendant James O'Keefe, his company, Delaware Limited Liability Company.
		What is it called?
		Defendant Transparency One.
		Interesting.
		It's called Transparency One.
		Is that what it is?
		Yeah.
		R.C.
		Maxwell.
		Jurisdiction and venue, they say they operate out of New York.
		But let's get to the, uh, let me see, let me see, blah, blah, blah.
		Proceeding court.
		Facts giving rise to complaint.
		Project Veritas and Veritas Action Fund are 501c3 and 501c4, respectively, not for profit corporation under Virginia law.
	Both organizations do this, that, or otherwise.
	James O'Keefe founded Project Veritas in 2010.
	He was, through his separation, the Chief Executive Officer of Veritas, President of Project Veritas Action Fund, and a member of the Board of Directors of both organizations, though he was suspended, yet not removed, on February 6th.
	You see, James' good work so far with starting OMG and doing podcasts.
	I think he interviewed Robert F. Kennedy.
	It's the way to go.
	Private.
	So that they could never steal from you what you made.
	Everybody knows James O'Keefe is the leader, the vision, the talent, I like Project Fairtrust as an organization, but this is just bad.
	They're going to mention the employment agreement.
	James O'Keefe entered into the employment agreement with plaintiffs.
	It's funny because he made it.
	It's what he made.
	They're going to mention that he would be an employee, etc., etc.
	Project Veritas shall be the sole owner of any and all rights in and to the results that proceeds of employee services.
	In the employment agreement, O'Keefe acknowledged that certain information is confidential, etc., etc.
	Let's get to the juicy points because I'm not going to make an 80-minute video on this one.
	You may want to go for further analysis.
	They say the employment agreement also prohibits O'Keefe during and after his employment from contacting, soliciting, or otherwise communicating with any person or entity that is a donor or prospective donor to Veritas, whom employee learns of, or with whom employee otherwise comes into contact as a result of employee's employment.
	Very interesting.
	So let's get to the allegations.
	They go to mention that they suspended O'Keefe pending the completion of an investigation into alleged misconduct.
	Let's see.
	O'Keefe had allegedly used Veritas' credit card for personal expenses.
	These are all allegations, mind you.
	It's not been proven.
	Going to mention why he was suspended.
	But why for the lawsuit?
	They say O'Keefe breaches his employment agreement.
	On February 17th, O'Keefe formed OMG, Notes on its website that it's located in Mamaroneck, New York, which is where O'Keefe lives and where Veritas is headquartered.
	According to its website, OMG is a media organization managed by O'Keefe with substantially the same mission and structure as Veritas.
	I do believe it's a private corporation though.
	The OMG website refers to its never- to never being shut down again.
	Because O'Keefe owns it.
	Forming and operating OMG was in violation of the Employment Agreements Prohibited Outside Activities provision.
	This is DIRTY!
	Bro, dude quit.
	He's gone.
	He can do what he wants.
	This is nuts.
	O'Keefe made multiple public media appearances in which he falsely stated that he was terminated from Project Veritas, including, but not limited to, the program set forth.
	They're going to mention the Charlie Kirk Show, saying he was thrown out of Veritas.
	He appeared on Steve Bannon's War Room.
	They mentioned that he was under the skin with Russell Brand.
	That the appearance of the program benefited Mark Levin, Human Events, and the Ben Shapiro Show.
	He was on the Megyn Kelly Show.
	He was on, uh, is that all they mention?
	How unfortunate!
	James O'Keefe was not on TimCast!
	James.
	James.
	I had an opportunity to have my name mentioned in this lawsuit.
	No, probably a good thing, probably a good thing.
	I know the legal team behind this, and it's disappointing to see that they're representing Project Veritas in this matter.
	But I don't hold it against...
	I don't hold it against lawyers for representing anybody.
	I'm not going to hold... Everyone's entitled to adequate representation in an argument they make.
	And I'm not going to hold it against a lawyer.
	So, this is Randazza Legal.
	He's been good to me.
	He's been helpful to me and people we know.
	Again, disappointing that he's on the other side of this, but I don't blame lawyers for the disputes.
	So I hope that's clear because I would prefer it if they didn't.
	But I'm also not a fan of the idea that, you know, Project Veritas is like, we've got a complaint and no lawyer will represent them because they're like, I don't want to be on the bad side of James O'Keefe or something like that.
	Everybody deserves legal representation.
	And again, I think that's fair to say.
	So they're going to mention that basically the forming of O'Keefe Media Group greatly benefited James O'Keefe in violation of his contract.
	I think it's rather silly to argue that a dude was like, I was fired, I'm gone, I'm out.
	They're going to mention that O'Keefe has continued to solicit Veritas donors, employees, and contractors in direct violation of his employment agreement for and on behalf of OMG.
	You know, I can't imagine this will sit well with Veritas donors.
	I can't imagine.
	Because a lot of people were like, look, Veritas is going to keep doing great work and we're going to support them.
	And James will do good work and we'll support him too.
	But now you're saying James is not allowed to do his work?
	You see what they're doing?
	I'm sorry, I'm going to say it right now.
	What Project Veritas sought to do was suspend James O'Keefe and then stop him from doing his work.
	How dare you?
	Again, very disappointed seeing Randazza on the Veritas side of this, but again, that's an emotional reaction and I'm not going to blame a lawyer for doing lawyer work.
	I just, I won't do it, man.
	Because you get people being like, how dare you represent that group?
	And dude, the Founding Fathers represented, you know, the British in certain circumstances.
	It's like, we understand the importance of that.
	So, and they're going to mention a bit more, but I'm going to jump down to the relief section.
	There is some private information I'm going to, I want to avoid showing.
	And you know what I'm going to do?
	Actually, to make sure I do avoid revealing any private information that may be in this document, I'm going to scroll on a different screen to pull up the demands that they have.
	Because there's a portion, if I scroll up, it hits someone's address.
	And I think it should be redacted, but I want to see what their demands are.
	There's like a section of notice and stuff like this.
	Look, this is publicly available on the internet, and I don't think the information revealing is outside of any publicly available information.
	I just want to make sure that I'm doing my best.
	They show the employment agreements.
	Man, they show how much these guys are getting paid?
	I'm not a fan of any of this stuff.
	But, uh, let's jump up to, uh, Demands.
	I believe, uh, here we go.
	They say, um, what do we have here?
	The Relief.
	Relief.
	Did I just scroll past it?
	Let's, uh, scroll to, uh, Prayer for Relief.
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.
		See you on the tour!
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		Alright, this is what the plaintiff is requesting.
		So let's just do this.
		I'll jump here and do prayer.
		And here we are.
		Prayer for relief.
		They say, wherefore plaintiff respectfully request this court declare O'Keefe in breach
		of his employment agreement in violation of fiduciary duties and in violation of his duty
		of loyalty. Declare Iatropoulos in breach of the Iatropoulos agreement and Maxwell in breach of
		Declare OMG to have tortiously interfered with the employment agreement.
		Wow.
		Declare O'Keefe to have misappropriated plaintiff trade secrets.
		They're trying to say O'Keefe can never work again!
		That's insane!
		Declare O'Keefe liable to identify plaintiffs for the cost of defense and or liabilities arising from action taken by him and his heirs.
		Issue a preliminary and permanent injunction enjoining O'Keefe and OMG.
		Enjoining O- This is- This is bonkers.
		Absolutely bonkers.
		Wow.
		This is crazy.
		They say soliciting to enjoin an injunction.
		Enjoining will keep from soliciting plaintiff's donors, employees, or contractors, disparaging plaintiffs, obtaining, using, or disclosing plaintiff's confidential information, and keeping and failing to return their property.
		Issue a preliminary and permanent injunction enjoining Eitropoulos and Maxwell from the same.
		Compel O'Keefe to account for his official conduct, award plaintiffs compensatory, actual, and or liquidated punitive and nominal damages, disgorge all funds by which O'Keefe and OMG were unjustly enriched, an account of his misappropriation of plaintiffs trade secrets, and B, disgorging his salary during his period of disloyalty.
		Absolutely amazing.
		Let's make sure I have this right.
		So, I don't know what disgorge means in a legal context, and you always gotta be careful about legalese, but I believe this means, they're saying, to have him released to them, the money he's made.
		Awards plaintiffs exemplary damages under 18 U.S.C.
		1836b3c, and award plaintiffs their reasonable attorney fees, and they demand a jury trial.
		Holy crap.
		I can't believe this.
		And, uh, they submitted by Randazza Legal, uh, PLLC.
		Wow.
		So there you have it, ladies and gentlemen.
		I'm gonna put this one up at 4 p.m., displacing my other 4 p.m.
		video because this is breaking news.
		This is massive.
		And, uh... Look, I have no idea.
		Um, I will say this.
		Stay tuned for TimCast IRL tonight.
		We're going to have some information on this.
		We've reached out for comment and apparently we're going to get more updates on what's happening with the lawsuit against James O'Keefe.
		But it sounds like what they're saying is they don't want James O'Keefe working at all.
		That's crazy.
		I'll leave it there.
		Next segment is coming up at 6 p.m.
		on this channel.
		Thanks for hanging out and I'll see you all then.
		Yesterday we saw two major stories in the culture war pertaining to Major League Baseball.
		The first was a struggle session in which a pitcher from the Blue Jays says, I'm so sorry, I will be re-educated.
		After he supported the boycotts against Target, and I believe also Bud Light, but everybody was just saying Target.
		Here's a guy that people said was a professed Christian bending the knee to a cult or a non-theistic religion, whatever you want to call it, seemingly rejecting his own faith.
		But the other story?
		Two other Major League players spoke out against the wokeness that's happening in L.A.
		with the anti-Christian drag nuns, and one apparently even called for a boycott.
		This is big news.
		Ladies and gentlemen, I know things may seem tough, and last night we were talking about the Chick-fil-A going woke, about the story.
		Chick-fil-A hires a diversity, equity, and inclusion VP.
		We had Seth Weathers who said, you're gonna have a hard time boycotting that because suburban moms don't care.
		And I refuse to accept that line of thinking.
		I just can't do it.
		It is triggering to me.
		The idea that with all of the successes we've had, with Bud Light, I gotta show you their stock.
		Once you see their numbers, whoa, they're way down.
		All of their gains in the years from this year erased.
	Target, apocalyptic decline.
	It's the Bud Light effect.
	And now we're seeing high-profile athletes stand up and say no to wokeness.
	So when I hear about Chick-fil-A, of all places, going as woke as possible.
	Like, we're not talking about a promo.
	We're not talking about them being like, here's a commercial where we have drag queens, which I believe they did.
	We're talking about them creating an office of a cult.
	Imagine if Chick-fil-A announced they were creating a Chinese Communist Party vice president to run that cult.
	It's no different, and I'm not even kidding.
	Having a DEI, a day cult, VP is outright creating an office in a corporation for a non-theistic religion.
	That is insane.
	A lot of companies do have this.
	We're seeing it more and more.
	It's very much like the Chinese Communist Party.
	They make sure that every company that's a certain size has a Chinese Communist Party office.
	This is what these crackpots are trying to do.
	But you know what?
	The people of the United States are defiant.
	This country was founded on independence, literally, a declaration of independence, individuality, meritocracy, personal responsibility, and now, despite the fact that we got Toronto Blue Jays, I got East Canadian, cowering in fear, and in my view, outright rejecting his faith, we see two individuals in Major League Baseball saying no.
	No, my friends, I am no Christian.
	I do believe in God, as I often say.
	I have a, I don't know, a unique view on life and all of that stuff.
	I'm not a Christian.
	I don't follow those tenets, but I can tell you this.
	You want to know what my problem is with the left?
	I am a traditional slash classical liberal.
	In that, I actually am not a fan of hate speech.
	Yes, it's true.
	I think people should be allowed to speak whatever they want.
	But if I saw a large public institution hosting a minstrel show, I would say, hey, that's messed up.
	Don't patronize that business.
	Are they allowed to do it?
	Sure.
	I don't think they should.
	So what's the difference here?
	When the L.A.
	Dodgers hosts what is effectively spitting in the face of a religious group.
	Now, you see, the left's view is there is no truth but power.
	They don't care because Christians are the dominant religion.
	I don't think that matters.
	I think attacking someone for these, based on these qualities, characteristics, or faiths, beliefs, etc., you don't do it.
	I'm not a fan of it, and I think it should be rejected outright.
	That includes if someone is LGBTQ whatever.
	I don't like, and you'll notice on all my shows, I don't go after people for these things.
	I'm not a fan of that.
	I go after ideas.
	Drag show?
	Literally don't care.
	Not gonna rag on something.
	Hey, that's not me.
	I'm not a conservative.
	However, you target children, we've got a problem.
unidentified		L.A.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		Dodgers wants to bring in what is effectively a minstrel show for Christians to spit on, insult, and mock Christians.
		I think that's wrong.
		And I think this exposes the absolute hypocrisy of the left.
		They don't care about hate speech.
		They only care about power.
		And this proves it.
		For all of these leftists who are like, you can't, you can't insult Christians, they're the dominant, you can.
		Why create enemies?
		Why create hate?
		Because the left doesn't actually care.
		They're lying to you.
		And this is what pisses me off the most.
		Hypocrites wielding the cudgel of civil rights when, in fact, they, more than any other group, despise civil rights.
		Take a look at their stance with critical race theory.
		People like Derrick, uh, Derrick, uh, what's his name?
		Um, is it Derrick Bell?
		No, I'm forgetting his name.
		I think it is, uh, I think it's, uh, Bell, right?
		Yep, Derrick Bell.
		Okay, I got it.
		Derrick Bell wants segregation.
		These people make a mockery of it.
		So let's call it out.
		Here's a story from the Post Millennial.
		L.A.
		Dodgers pitcher releases statement slamming team's decision to honor anti-Christian drag nuns organization.
		My convictions in Jesus Christ will always come first.
		I think I have the tweet here.
		Sean Folkt Probably pronouncing it wrong.
		Says, And here's his post.
		and Major League Baseball pitcher Blake Trennan asked that I post this statement form in regards
		to the Dodgers honoring of the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence.
		And here's his post.
		He says, I am disappointed to see, let me actually, I'll zoom in a little bit.
		I am disappointed to see the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence being honored as heroes at Dodgers
		Many of their performances are blasphemous, and their work only displays hate and mockery of Catholics and the Christian faith.
		I understand that playing baseball is a privilege, and not a right.
		My convictions in Jesus Christ will always come first.
		Since I have been with the Dodgers, they have been at the forefront of supporting a wide variety of groups.
		However, inviting the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence to perform disenfranchises a large community and promotes hate of Christians and people of faith.
		This single event alienates the fans and supporters of the Dodgers, Major League Baseball, and professional sports.
		People like baseball for its entertainment value and competition.
		The fans do not want propaganda or politics forced on them.
		The debacle with Bud Light and Target should be a warning to companies and professional sports to stay true to their brand and leave the propaganda and politics off the field.
		I believe Jesus Christ died on the cross for my sins.
		I believe the word of God is true.
		And in Galatians 6-7 it says, Do not be deceived.
		God cannot be mocked.
		A man reaps what he sows.
		This group openly mocks Jesus Christ, the cornerstone of my faith, and I want to make it clear that I do not agree with nor support the decision of the Dodgers to honor, he put it in quotes, the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence.
		But as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord, Joshua 24 15, signed Blake Trainan.
		Bravo.
		Absolutely bravo.
		I'm not a Christian.
		But I think this man saying, do not mock me and my faith, is absolutely warranted.
		If you had Jewish people playing on this team, and they openly mocked Jewish people, I'd say the same thing.
		If you had Muslims playing on this team, and they came out and they did something to openly mock Muslims on the field with drag imams, I'd say the same thing.
		Don't insult these people.
		In fact, I honestly think the drag stuff is just genuinely insulting, even to many LGBT people.
		You see, here's the important thing about how I grew up and what I was made to understand about LGBTQ stuff.
		They always just said, it's about love.
		I said, okay.
		And so I met many people in my days, many people who are LGBTQ, and I don't necessarily understand the The TQ part.
		I don't see how that relates with you have two guys wearing jeans and a t-shirt.
	They love each other.
	They are emotionally bonded to each other.
	And I don't want to take that away from them.
	I hear these sad stories where there are two men who have been together for a decade plus or longer.
	And when their significant other ends up in the hospital, they're denied access to that person.
	That's horrifying to me.
	And so I said, you know what?
	My value is growing up.
	We can't allow that.
	We need to protect that.
	Then all of a sudden, a guy dressed up as a drag nun and started dancing on stage, ripping his clothes off.
	And they said, this is the same thing.
	No, it's not.
	It's not at all the same thing.
	Look, man, if they had two guys come out on the field and they said, we want to support and protect people who love each other, I'd say they're in no way insulting anybody.
	Now, a lot of people used to say stuff like, well, it is a mockery to Christians because the Bible says man and woman and all that.
	And I'm like, dude, they're not talking about you.
	They're not insulting you.
	You don't have to like what they do.
	But I agree with protecting the rights of these individuals.
josh hammer ▲ ● ▼		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 But all of a sudden, things change.
		I shouldn't necessarily say all of a sudden.
		It was over some period of time.
		Now, instead of just being like, hey look, there's a woman.
		She's wearing a t-shirt and jeans.
		Josh Hammer.
		Subscribe and download your episodes wherever you get your podcasts.
		It's America on Trial with Josh Hammer.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		All of a sudden, things change.
		I shouldn't necessarily say all of a sudden.
		It was over some period of time.
		Now, instead of just being like, hey, look, there's a woman.
		She's wearing a t-shirt and jeans.
		She happens to be romantically and sexually attracted to other women.
		It's none of your business what she does.
		She's just having a coffee.
		I'm like, yeah, okay, I respect that.
		Like, you know, leave these people alone.
		I have many friends who are just regular people trying to live their daily lives.
		I think they should have rights.
		I think they should be protected and all that stuff.
		That's where I've always come from.
		Now you want nudity on the streets, now you want books grooming kids in schools, they deny it, they lie about it, but even Nikki Freed, the Democrat, who ran for, I believe she ran for governor, called it, I'm not even gonna say it, she called it adult content.
		I'll be very light with it, for the sake of the kids who may be listening to this.
		She referred to the books being banned in Florida as adult content.
		And I'm like, yes, I agree, stop giving that stuff to kids!
		So when did it go from there's a guy wearing a suit with a briefcase and it's none of your business who he's in love with to a clown dressing up like a nun and mocking and laughing at Christians?
		It's just, it's absurd to me.
		The fact that now you relate just an adult man wearing a t-shirt and jeans who may or may not be gay.
		It's like, okay, he's a gay guy.
		You don't even know that.
		You don't even know, you see him walking down the street.
		Now all of a sudden, you have a drag queen dancing around and prancing around with big fake hips, wearing fake boobs where you can see the nipples, and simulating adult activities on stage, and they're like, that's the same thing.
		I'm like, no, it isn't!
		But this always bothered me.
		Because when I was a kid, I tell you these stories, man.
		It's always been sexualized.
		They have these pride parades where people are engaging in simulated sex acts, and they're prancing around naked and doing other things, and it's like, what does that have to do with love?
		It's the lie.
		So while I support the love, I question why they openly do these things.
		And I think it makes a mockery of Run-of-the-mill gay people who just want to get by with their lives.
		And the same thing is true with people like Dylan Mulvaney.
		Openly mocking and insulting trans people and turning it into a minstrel show.
		Dylan Mulvaney is a minstrel show not just of women, but also trans people.
		Trans people don't act like that.
		You know, these conservatives will see these really awful videos of trans people and say, aha, that's it.
		And I'm like, dude, you don't even notice most of the trans people.
		You don't notice most of them.
		And I'm like, I don't think kids should be getting sex changes or these puberty blockers and chemicals and all that stuff.
		But I also have, I've always been traditionally liberal.
		And here I am standing up for Christians because at the same, the same way we should not put on a show insulting, you know, gay people or black people or Jewish people, don't do it to Christians.
		Don't mock their faith this openly.
		Now, check this out.
		Trevor Williams, another player, calls, the reporter is calling for a boycott.
		He's got this, check this out.
		He says, as a devout Catholic, I am deeply troubled by the Dodgers' decision to re-invite and honor the group's Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence at their Pride Night this year.
		A major league baseball game is a place where people from all walks of life should feel welcomed, something I greatly respect and support.
		This is the organization of different themed nights hosted by the organization, including Pride Night.
		To invite and honor a group that makes a blatant and deeply offensive mockery of my religion, and the religion of over 4 million people in LA County alone, undermines the values of respect and inclusivity that should be upheld by any organization.
		This is my point.
		As a traditional, slash, I say traditional liberal.
		Classical liberal leans more towards, you know, right-leaning libertarianism, a little bit.
		I'm more of a traditional liberal, like 10, 20 years ago.
		I do not find it appropriate to invite a group whose sole purpose is to insult another group of people.
		And Christians, uh, Christian conservatives don't agree with me on a ton of issues.
		But I will stand up for them the same as I would stand up for anybody.
		The left lies.
		They say, Tim's a bigot and he hates LGBT or whatever.
		I'm like, no, actually, I'm fully in support.
		The problem is, you send these people out to openly insult a group of people for no purpose other than to insult a group of people.
		And I tell you no, and then they lie and say, Tim Poole doesn't like LGBT or whatever.
		It's lies.
	Absolute BS.
	He says, we want to be inclusive.
	I completely agree.
	See, here's the thing.
	Diversity, inclusivity, these are fantastic things.
	But that's not what they actually mean when they say diversity, equity, and inclusion.
	They're actually saying, bend the knee, give us power, and shut your mouth.
	That's why when Black Panther comes out as an 80%, 90% black cast, say, it's diversity.
	No, it isn't.
	It's not at all.
	Diversity, I like real diversity.
	When they make, like Shang-Chi, they make a movie, right?
	It's a Chinese superhero.
	And I'm like, I think that's great.
	I think it's great when they make movies like Shang-Chi.
	When they make movies where the main characters are not white males.
	I don't care for the purpose of making a movie where the lead is not a white male.
	But we had Iron Man, Thor, Captain America.
	We do these Marvel movies.
	All the leads are white dudes.
	And that's fine.
	I like those movies.
	Then they say, we're gonna do a movie now with like an Asian lead.
	And I'm like, oh that's cool too.
	That's super cool.
	You can do a superhero movie with a black superhero.
	You can do a black James Bond.
	I think that's totally fine.
	The James Bond thing is where the line starts getting crossed when you start saying... And again, I still don't think it's... I think they talked about Idris Elba as James Bond, and I'm like, I think that'd be fantastic.
	You know, just from my perspective.
	The issue is when they start erasing traditional characters.
	To make them, like, recast them as minorities, like they're doing with Aragorn.
	I'm like, you're crossing the line.
	Make new characters.
	That real diversity is when you're like, we're gonna make new characters, we're gonna say to the world right now, we respect people from all walks of life and different perspectives and views, but I don't think the race matters all that much.
	They go in and they erase old characters.
	Don't do that.
	We like our stories.
	Make new characters.
	Let me read what else he goes on to say.
	Creating an environment in which one group feels celebrated and honored at the expense of another is counterproductive
	and wrong.
	It is a clear violation of the Dodgers' discrimination policy,
	which explicitly states that any conduct or attire at the ballpark that is deemed to be indecent or prejudiced
	against any particular group or religion is not tolerated.
	That's the- I'm like, okay!
	Like, that's the crazy thing.
	A private organization should have the right to say, we don't want you, we reserve the right to refuse service to you.
	And that goes for a bakery in Colorado, too.
	The thing about the bakery in Colorado is that he said, I will provide you any service, I'm just not going to write a specific message.
	You can't make me violate my faith.
	And I'm like, okay, I totally get it.
	If there was only one baker, I'd say we've got an issue.
	Now you've got a situation where the left, lying, claiming they oppose hate speech, are celebrating it.
	He says, it seems the Dodgers have made an exception in this case, doubling down at this group which grossly disrespects and openly mocks many of the traditions and beliefs that Catholics hold most dear should be celebrated.
	I believe it is essential for the Dodgers to reconsider their association with this group and strive to create an inclusive environment that does not demean or disrespect the religious beliefs of any fan or employee.
	I also encourage my fellow Catholics to reconsider their support of an organization that allows this type of mockery of its fans to occur.
	Brilliant.
	I know I'm not alone in my frustration, hurt, and disappointment about the situation.
	As Catholics, we look to Jesus Christ and the way he was treated, and we realize that any suffering in this world unites us to him in the next.
	Of course, then you have the inverse.
	Toronto Blue Jays player cowers before woke mob after sharing support for Target and Bud Light boycotts.
	Truly pathetic.
unidentified		That was hurtful to the Pride community, which includes friends of mine... The Pride community?
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		Huh?
unidentified		...close family members of mine, and I am truly sorry for that.
		I just spoke with my teammates, took and shared with them my actions yesterday.
		I apologized with them.
		And as of right now, I'm using the Blue Jays' resources to better educate myself, to make better decisions moving forward.
		The ballpark is for everybody.
		We include all fans at the ballpark, and we want to welcome everybody.
		That's all I have to say.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		Includes everybody.
		I'll be better educated.
		I ask you this, good sir.
		Now, I know you're talking about Target and Bud Light and all that stuff.
		My question is, why is he saying, it's for everybody, I apologize, the pride community, huh?
		Yet, L.A.
		Dodgers openly mock people like you.
		Stop being a coward.
		You know what I would do if I was him?
		I'd say, listen, so long as Major League Baseball openly mocks and belittles my faith, you'll not get an apology from me.
		If the issue is that you feel that you're being excluded by my statements because I supported a boycott, well then, I simply ask, why are the L.A.
		Dodgers doing what is effectively the same thing, if not worse?
		You don't get to have your cake and eat it too.
		That being said, calling for a boycott of a company because they're targeting children is different from having a minstrel show on display on the field.
		Very, very different.
		He's not insulting LGBTQ individuals simply by saying Bud Light should not be promoting commercials to children, and Target shouldn't be promoting sexual lifestyles to children.
		It's very, very different.
		It's very different.
		But this is the game.
		The point is, I think there was, like, Tim Heidecker tweeted something at Matt Wall saying, like, their goal is to normalize this behavior for children, so that they're not scared or whatever when they're older, and I'm just like, you see, that's, I'll tell you right now, Tim Heidecker, you see, that's where we disagree to a point where we will never agree.
		Children should not be exposed to sexualized ideas.
		Children should be taught How to live, work, survive, and then the birds and the bees come later.
		When you have a man dress like a nun and then mock a religion, I don't see how that is normalizing good behavior for kids.
		To spread hate, fear, and anger, and mockery, and derision.
		That's not diversity.
unidentified		So I tell you this, let kids be kids.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		They live in a world where they want children to be normalized to, like, a guy in a dog costume shaking his butt on the ground.
		Or people spanking each other in the streets.
		No, sorry, not interested.
		And we'll never agree.
		And you know what?
		I don't care what you think.
		You can tweet all day and night that I'm wrong.
		Your- your- listen, bro.
		Your boos mean nothing.
		I've seen what makes you cheer.
		A guy with a Bugs Bunny mask flopping his genitals around in public in front of children?
		You've got people spanking each other, men wearing weird kink body, kink article, I don't even, I guess you can't call them clothing.
		Wearing dog masks?
		You cheer for that!
		Your boos mean nothing to me!
		You want to indoctrinate kids to that?
		Ain't happening on my part.
		I don't have anything to do with that.
		So you can complain all day and night.
		I don't care about you and the people who support what you believe because I think you're sick and twisted.
		Therein lies the distinction.
		You can come out all day and night and say, I hate you.
		I hate this.
		You're this.
		You're that.
		You're fascists.
		And I'm not pulling punches.
		And I don't care what you think of the word.
		You see, here's the problem.
		People on the right are like, they're communists.
		They're not communists.
		The communists hated corporations.
		They destroyed them and the government took them over.
		These people praise Amazon, Walmart, Big Tech, big corporations.
		They defend big pharmaceutical corporations.
		They support war.
		They're fascists.
		They are some iteration of fascism, a lucrative merger of corporation and state, and I'm going to call them fascists.
		That's it.
		That's it.
		And tell regular people.
		You see, they weaponize these words.
		And then the people on the right, stop using them.
unidentified		No.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		Okay?
		The lucrative merger of corporation and state.
		I despise it.
		I don't like big corporations, and I don't like big government.
		I think there should be limited government, which regulates big corporations, and antitrust should break them up.
		But I don't think big government should take its place.
		So, if you were one of these leftists that support massive multinational corporations like big pharmaceutical companies, and you also are an authoritarian, you're a fascist.
		And this is the problem that we have in this country.
		There really is a rise in fascism.
		That's what we're seeing when people like this dude engage in struggle sessions.
		People, of course, call them Maoists and all that stuff.
		And there's a similarity.
		But, call them what... Look.
		The communists shattered corporations, took them over.
		Okay?
		We can argue it's similar, but it's fascism, the lucrative merger of corporation and state.
		They are not breaking the corporation and putting it under the umbrella of government.
		They are infecting them and putting their ideology and religion into them.
unidentified		So, I'm not playing that game.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		A tale of two baseball players.
		Three, really, but... Two sides.
		One guy who rejects, and I'll say this, in my view, like, I shamelessly completely agree, but this Blue Jays guy is outright rejecting his own faith.
		And then you have these other guys who stood up for their faith.
		We'll see how this stuff plays out, of course, but I think it's a major victory, to be honest.
		These baseball players speak it up.
		Next segment's coming up at 1pm on this channel.
		Thanks for hanging out, and I'll see you all then.
		You want to talk about Get Woke, Go Broke?
		Ladies and gentlemen, Bud Light, as of right now, is no longer the number one beer in the country.
		Now, the New York Post says Bud Light risks losing number one status in U.S.
		As sales plunge 25.7 in latest week.
		The reason they're saying that is because they're basing the top position off of a year of sales.
		But as of right now, Modelo has surpassed, according to this New York Post story, it has surpassed across all trade channels.
		Bud Light was knocked down from the top spot.
		Modelo is owned by InBev, but doesn't control the company in the United States.
		I'm not sure exactly how that works out.
		It may not be a perfect scenario to see another Anheuser-Busch product filling in the gap where Bud Light is collapsing, but it is still extremely bad for Anheuser-Busch for two reasons.
		First, the destruction, the absolute evisceration of their brand because they played the silly game and got woke And went broke, they could have just apologized.
		We begged.
		Bud Light, we begged you!
		Just say you're sorry!
		Just say, look, we'll never do this again.
		We didn't realize this individual was so divisive.
		They couldn't do it!
		They tried pulling every gimmick in the book out, and it didn't work.
		They were scared they were gonna offend LGBTQ people.
		I suppose they're still sponsoring these events.
		Bud Light still sponsors Pride events.
		They have made their bed and destroyed their brand.
		This is going to go down in market history.
		When you've got someone going to college and they're learning about marketing, they're going to say, let's talk about the Bud Light effect and how you can completely rip your brand to shreds overnight.
		Just destroy what was the biggest beer in the country.
unidentified		Now perhaps, they argue, it will recover.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		I don't know for sure, but we do have a lot more news, because I'm going to show you the stock for Bud Light, for Anheuser-Busch as a whole.
		Because while you may say, sure Bud Light got knocked down, but Modelo is still an Anheuser-Busch product.
		InBev is the parent company.
		Well, their stock is collapsing.
		Not only did they destroy the number one beer in the country and rip that brand to shreds, they have cost their stockholders untold amounts of money.
		And now the Bud Light effect comes for Target.
		And soon, many other companies who decide they're going to get woke.
		And then go broke.
		I think the going after kids crossed the line.
		You see, most people are probably like, look, I don't care if you're, you know, wearing a pride flag shirt or something like that.
		But then, they started going after kids.
		And parents stumbled upon what was coming after their kids and went, whoa, whoa, whoa.
		I think the Target thing.
		It wasn't conservatives.
		Don't, you can't take credit for it, sorry.
		I ain't giving conservatives credit for this one.
		Videos started to emerge of people in Target being like, what is this?
		And already, like seemingly in an instant, Target announced they were moving these things because of confrontations.
		That means it wasn't conservatives pointing it out, then a backlash, then Target's reaction.
		It was a backlash, conservatives pointing it out, the reaction.
		That means the reaction was not because of conservatives.
		It was because regular people were seeing these things and saying, yo, I don't want my kids exposed to this.
		But I'll break that all down for you.
		Let's start with the huge news.
		One of the biggest cultural victories for the right we've ever seen.
		The New York Post says, Bud Light sales suffered their worst week ever, falling 25.7%, endangering its status as the world's number one beer brand, according to the latest data provided to the Post on Tuesday.
		Okay, so I see what they're saying.
		They're saying that it could lose number one in the world, it already lost number one in the country.
		The plunge follows a 24.6% decline from the previous week, and the sixth straight week sales have been hit since the Dylan Mulvaney controversy.
		Going on nearly two months.
		The precipitous drop has narrowed the gap in sales between Bud Light and nearest rival Modelo Especial, which saw its sales surge 9.2 for the week ending May 20th, according to Bump Williams Consulting and Nielsen IQ Data.
		Quote, while Bud Light loses week after week, Modelo Especial gains week after week, and now Modelo outsells Bud Light on a national basis across all trade channels combined.
		Bump Williams, who runs the consulting firm, told the Post.
		If this continues, Modelo will surpass Bud Light for the year.
		In the nation.
		Anheuser-Busch InBev owns both brands, but it does not control Modelo in the U.S., where it is owned by New York-based conglomerate Constellation Brands.
		Now, I don't know what that means.
		How do you own both brands, but it's owned by someone else in the U.S.?
		I have no idea.
		Whatever that means.
		And I'll point it out because You could say that Anheuser-Busch owns the rights to Modelo around the world, but not in the U.S.
		But, how could it own Modelo, but not control Modelo?
		Is Modelo in the U.S.
		separate?
		In which case, either way, Anheuser-Busch doesn't control it, they do control Bud Light.
		Bud Light getting knocked down is a gut punch!
		I mean, it's more than a gut punch.
		It is, it is monumental!
		That's what they say.
		That's a monumental decline, Williams told The Post.
		Modelo has surpassed Bud Light for the first time since it was launched in 1982.
		Bang!
		So here's the Wikipedia for Modelo.
		Just so you can see, they say that it is owned by InBev.
		A.B.
		InBev.
		So, same company, lot of money to be made.
		Listen, 30%.
		That's, that's, that's...
		So 29.5 was a different sales metric.
		I don't know what the 25% they cite is, because the other day, there's two different numbers they give for sales, whatever.
		Let's just say between 25 and 30%.
unidentified		Look.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		We're not talking about single-digit drops where they get angry and say, oh, we're losing money.
		We're talking about apocalyptic brand collapse because they sponsor Dylan Mulvaney.
		Let me just make sure it's very clear to all of these companies.
		You must be very careful about the people you sponsor.
		Following the algorithm does not mean you will do right.
		Dylan Mulvaney has a lot of followers, but I think most people are off-put.
		And I'm being nice by Dylan Mulvaney's behavior.
		They say the backlash has also caused sales of other AB brands to dive.
		For the week ending May 20th, Budweiser dropped 11.2, Michelob Ultra 6.5, Bush Light 5.2, and Natty Light down 4.9.
		5.5, Bush Light 5.2, and Natty Light down 4.9.
		Wow.
		Yingling, which bills itself as America's oldest brewery, has seen sales of Yingling
		Flight soar by a whopping 47.6%.
		And its lagers spiked by 32 in the four-week period.
		Holy crap!
		Wow!
		Yingling, of course, not available in most of the country.
		So, a lot of people are begging Yingling to actually sell their beer.
		I gotta say, like, when it comes to beer, it's probably my favorite.
		I'm not a big beer drinker, but typically if we go out, we do get a beer.
		It's gonna be Yingling.
		And they posted a picture of a yingling beer held up with an American flag.
		So, I just gotta say this.
		If you're looking for a beer to buy that unabashedly posted an American flag and said, how things going?
		You buy a yingling!
		You can also, well, I strongly recommend against consuming alcohol and do not go and buy alcoholic products.
		I'll say that.
		I'm just saying, Yingling supports America.
		I'll put it that way.
		Yeah, and I'm not promoting any of you drink alcohol because, to be honest, I don't want to get wrapped up in the whole a beer company boycott thing is working and there's better brands.
		I think, all in all, alcohol is probably really, really bad for you, but I get it, you know?
		So, my personal recommendation is, nobody should drink any beer.
		But people do, and you're allowed to enjoy it, and I had a beer the other day, but, you know, I recommend against it.
		Granted, Yingling is a much better company.
		So, it is what it is.
		Take a look at this.
		Anheuser-Busch InBev.
		Oh, man.
		It's just apocalyptically bad.
		In the past five days, they are down 7.09%.
		And look at these cliffs.
		Bang, down.
		Bang, down.
		Bang, down again.
		As of today, they are down 2%.
		As of today, they are down 2%, $53.35.
unidentified		$53.35.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		In the past month, 17.45%.
		Absolutely crazy.
		In the past six months, they're down 9.39%.
		Year-to-date, it is a 10.47% drop.
		Now, here's why it's important.
		Anheuser-Busch was going up in March.
		They hit a high of $66.73.
		They were on cloud nine.
		They were like, our stock is way up.
		Is that as high?
		Okay, it's been higher, mind you.
		It was at $100 in 2018.
		So that's unfortunate.
		And they're way down from their main peak in 2016, where it's just been dropping and dropping and dropping.
		This year, they started to see a little bit of recovery.
		And, uh, they were very happy to see it.
		And then they said, I got an idea.
		Come April 1st, they said, at the height of their stock.
		What a coincidence.
		They sponsored Dylan Mulvaney, who put out a video, and then right away the stock started to go down.
		Drop.
		It goes up a little bit, hits 65, and then it is a free fall.
		At the start of the year, they were at $59.60, and right now, $53.37.
		But I am telling you, my friends, I think it's going to get worse.
		Now, this is Anheuser-Busch InBev as a whole, their whole company.
		You can see Bud is their name on the New York Stock Exchange.
		I wonder what's going to happen.
		If their stock drops off to like three bucks.
		Could that destroy the company?
		I don't know.
		I will just say this.
		Why would anyone hold stock in Anheuser-Busch right now?
		For real.
		Bud Light is no longer the top beer.
		If I scroll over a little bit to the right, you can see this.
		Molson Coors is up 2.47.
		Constellation Brands, which controls Modelo in the U.S., up 1.35.
		Heineken's down, okay, trading euros.
		Boston Beer Company, 2.34.
		Let's do this.
		Let's pull up Molson Coors.
		They're up 2.45% today.
		Here's what I see.
		If you really wanted a beer stock, like, let's say, regular guy is holding stock in a beer company, because he's like, people love beer.
		For me, I recommend against it.
		It's alcohol.
unidentified		Nah.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		Poison.
		But, uh, the average person, I totally get it.
		Do your thing.
		Don't let me get in your way.
		So you've got a regular guy, and he's like, beer always, you know, that's what they say, in a depression people drink, to celebrate people drink, so they go and buy a beer stock.
		Budweiser embroils itself in a major controversy.
		Why hold Budweiser?
		Why wouldn't they buy Molson Coors?
		They'd be like, beer's beer.
		Go with the company that's not in a controversy, the company that's growing.
		So this is the issue.
		In the past five days, Molson Coors is up 0.39% up.
		In the last month, they're up 2.33%.
		In the past six months, Molson Coors is up 12.25%.
		And you can see, when the controversy kicked off, On April 1st, Molson Coors stock skyrocketed.
		That means, on April 1st, if you bought in Molson Coors at $51, it was the dip.
		You hit a peak of $65 and are currently sitting at $61.86.
		If you held on to your Budweiser, it was the inverse!
		You are now at $53 from $66!
		So what happens to the smart people?
		They see the controversy, they immediately sell, they immediately buy Molson Coors, and they made a ton of money!
		So why would anyone keep holding Anheuser-Busch if the stock is in freefall?
		It's a panic sale.
		The news is not improving.
		The news is getting crazier every day, and they still won't apologize!
		After 30% collapsing, after their stock collapsing, after Modelo surpassing, they still will not apologize.
		And they sponsored another Pride event.
		Their customers are screaming in their face, stop!
		And they said, no.
		So the brand is collapsing.
		Now you may say, it's the collapse of an institution, whatever.
		But Molson Coors is also.
		It's like Miller and Budd were the big American beer brands.
		That's it.
		Tanking, they go.
		Wow.
		So here's what I think.
		I think the average person sees the bud stock and says, I can't hold on to this anymore.
		It's like, could you imagine seeing like it's an eight, what is it?
		15% drop off.
		So if you're looking at your 401k and you've lost 15% on this, I can't imagine anybody wanting to keep holding it.
		Seriously, I don't know why anybody with budstock would keep it.
		Do they think it's a dip and it's going to recover?
		It keeps going down.
		It's only getting worse.
		At what point do you say, get off this train and wait to see when it bottoms out?
		I imagine a lot of people will do that.
		Year-to-date down 10.55%.
		As of today, it's at minus 2.11.
		That's crazy.
		If you sold yesterday... If you sold yesterday, you'd have had more money.
		If you sold on Friday, you'd have sold at 57.
		But you waited!
		And then, it hit this week.
		Alright, last week.
		Alright, so this week, 54.
		Now it's even worse.
		I'm not going to tell you what to do.
		I don't want to give you any financial advice.
		My point is simply this.
		I don't understand why anyone holding it now would keep holding on to it.
		Because it's going to get worse.
		Take a look at this from Target Corp.
		Today, they are down .11%.
	Not apocalyptic, but they saw a spike and then a drop, so it's down from their previous close.
	In the past 5 days, they are down 8.67%.
	In the past month, 15%.
	That's how long the Target controversy has been going on.
	In the past 6 months, 20% down.
	But here's what matters.
	You can see that Target was actually doing well in February, and they went down a little bit, but they were fairly stable with a small decline, and then the controversy hit.
	Target got ROCKED.
	I don't know how much Walmart is up.
	I'm not here to lie or play games.
	Let's actually take a look at the raw Walmart numbers.
	to 133 the same thing meanwhile Walmart is up I don't know how much Walmart is
	up I'm not here to lie or play games let's actually take a look at the raw
	Walmart numbers as of today they're up 0.66 in the past five days they're down
	0.66 so they're doing way better than Target is despite still being down
	In the past month, they're down 3%.
	So that is to say, from 151 at the start of the controversy, to 147.
	You lost a little bit, but if you're holding Walmart, you did a lot better.
	And then we have this, my friends, over in Urban Dictionary.
	The Bud Light effect has now become canon.
	Describing the process by which a company adopts less than popular products or advertising and then sees their market share rapidly decline.
	May 25th.
	With the success of the Bud Light, boycott companies now fear the Bud Light effect hitting them if they adopt woke policies or sell woke products.
	Target loses $12 billion in 14 days.
	Retail giant's market cap plummets after the longest losing streak in five years, as shares drop to lowest level in a year amid pride, tuck-friendly swimwear controversy.
	Imagine you're a... Just imagine.
	And many of you probably experienced this.
	You're with your wife and kids, you're with your husband and kids, you walk into a Target, and there on the shelf is Tuck Friendly.
	And your seven-year-old goes, What does tucking mean, Dad?
	And you're like, Oh my God.
	What does tucking mean?
	And then they go and they say, how dare you put this in front of my children!
	The left says, it's just about being friendly to LGBTQ.
	What parent wants to have their child ask them about tucking?
	They don't.
	Unless you're like a creepy liberal family that's into, you know, grooming kids or something.
	I think what we saw with this backlash was regular people, who aren't political, having to explain to their children how they're not old enough to know what tucking is, and the kid being like, but it's right here at Target, everybody's walking past it.
	Ideas you don't want your children engaging with until they're a bit older, and they can understand that the world is full of different kinds of people.
	Which brings me to this story here from the National Review.
	Sometimes a onesie is just a onesie.
	Oh boy.
	Philip Klein, or how I became a villain in the culture war.
	And he says, I don't have a problem with this.
	If somebody wants to dress their baby in a pride onesie, why should it matter?
	We're not talking about transitioning minors here.
	It's just a shirt.
	So, grooming.
	Grooming typically refers to slowly indoctrinating someone, typically a child, into a certain set of behaviors or ideas.
	Usually it's revolving around adult activities.
	So, why is this grooming?
	Okay, let me explain.
	Grooming is a word that exists to represent In bringing someone into the lightest form of a thing, okay?
	Grooming is not when an adult shows adult objects to children.
	That's like overt exploitation, and that's called like... There's actually a name for that, it's a crime.
	In order to groom someone, you have to start by showing them the lightest form of it.
	That is, have a baby grow up asking questions about what this flag represents, overt sexuality.
	Typically when kids are born, we don't put sex symbols and stuff on their clothing.
	Now there are attractive men and attractive women in the public, but that's just people who are attractive.
	If there is a man who is ripped and smiling and holding up his forearms, you don't know if he's gay or straight, he's not embracing a woman.
	If there is a guy and a woman and they have their arms around each other, not overtly sexual.
	There could even be photos of like two dudes with their arms around each other, not overtly sexual.
	But then you introduce the flag.
	Level 1.
	The most basic example.
	And a child says, what does that mean?
	And the parent then explains the basic concepts of sexuality to a child.
	Which typically doesn't happen until the child is a bit older and the parents deem it appropriate.
	This is why I don't think this should be for children.
	I got no problem if, uh, you know, a parent decides their child is now old enough.
	But what they're doing is, in stores, showing products that are overtly sexual.
	And the left says, it's not sexual!
	It's not!
	It's not!
	It's about love!
	Love is love, it says right there.
	It's not.
	Lesbian, gay, bisexual.
	Those words literally reference to whom you are sexually attracted to.
	That's what it is.
	That's why the phrase is homosexual.
	Sexuality.
	Some children, most children, you know, not ready to be exposed to adult information.
	These ideas.
	So parents decide when the birds and the bees conversation becomes appropriate.
	For babies wearing onesies?
	Probably not.
	The left argues that it's good to normalize these things for kids.
unidentified		No.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		When you see the videos of guys wearing dog masks being pet by children, or drag queens bringing children on stage and men walking around in thongs, all of these videos exist, or drag queens giving lap dances to children in schools, which also happened, it's like, okay, these things are not appropriate for children.
		That's grooming.
		The left just denies it and says, we don't define grooming that way!
		I don't care how you define it.
		Your boos mean nothing.
		I've seen what makes you cheer.
		So, Philip, that's why people are upset.
		Ben Shapiro says, because indoctrinating children into sexual fluidity is extraordinarily destructive, and yes, it is the predicate to philosophy for transitioning minors.
		So, he writes his article, I don't really care much for his argument, but to make the point, this stuff is not appropriate for babies and children.
		Children in kindergarten should not be running around asking who's gay and who's not, but we're seeing this stuff.
		And that's why in Florida they said, no sex ed for kids in grade, in, in, for, to kindergarten.
		Now they've expanded it.
		Just not doing the sex ed stuff.
		Parents should decide.
		You know what?
		Those parents may decide a baby, fine.
		But don't sell the product in the front of your store so that parents who don't think it's fine are now being asked questions by their young children.
		That's the problem.
unidentified		There's a lot going on.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		And I want to wrap this all up and just say, you won.
		You won.
		Bud Light is no longer the top-selling beer in the country.
		Think about that.
		Crack open an Ultra Light or, I'm sorry, an Ultra Right Conservative Dad's Beer or a Yingling or whatever it is you have on hand and celebrate.
		Next segment's coming up at 4 p.m.
		over at, over on this channel actually, so thanks for hanging out and I'll see you all then.
		We get a major move playing out by the Georgia Bureau of Investigation arresting three in connection with the far-left extremist attacks on the police city.
		The reason this story is so significant is they're not just going after individuals who literally firebombed buildings or attacked government property.
		They're going after those who helped facilitate funding for these groups, calling it financial crimes, the story from Fox 5 Atlanta.
		Three people connected to protests at the site of the planned Atlanta Public Safety Training Center have been arrested on charges of money laundering and charity fraud.
		The Georgia Bureau of Investigation announced the arrests Wednesday morning in conjunction with the Atlanta police departments.
		Marlon Scott Cotts, 39, of Atlanta.
		Savannah D. Patterson and Adele McLean were all charged with money laundering and charity fraud.
		The GBI says arrests stem from ongoing investigation of individuals responsible for numerous criminal acts at the future site of the Atlanta Public Safety Training Center.
		Agents and officers executed search warrants and found evidence linking the three suspects to the financial crimes, according to the GBI.
		Authorities say all three individuals will be booked into a local jail and will have a bond hearing scheduled soon.
		We have the official Twitter thread here from the Georgia Bureau of Investigation.
		Now I think what we're seeing, for one, the left freaking out saying, they're just raising money for legal fees!
		Here's what I think is actually happening.
		My personal opinion on the matter.
		I think these people are running fundraisers under the guise of legal fees, but we're probably using these funds for direct action.
		And the government was able to see it.
		Now, if this is a case of the government arresting people for simply trying to launch a legal defense, then we've got a very, very serious problem.
		What do you do?
		I don't trust far-left extremists at all.
		So if they're raising money and the government comes out and they're like, dude, they're laundering money.
		It's charity fraud.
		I'd be like, well, okay, innocent until proven guilty, but these people get no benefit of the doubt from me.
		Show me the proof.
		Let me see it.
		The GBI, along with the Atlanta Police Department, have arrested three people on charges stemming from the ongoing investigation of individuals responsible for numerous criminal acts at the future site of the Atlanta Public Safety Training Center and other Metro Atlanta locations.
		Goes in to mention the names I already read.
		Agents and officers executed a search warrant, the cases being jointly prosecuted by the Georgia Attorney General's Office and the DeKalb County District Attorney's Office.
		In this tweet from Alec Karakatsanis, probably pronouncing your name wrong.
		He says, take a look at this.
		The logic by the Republican Attorney General would suggest that anyone donating to a bail fund or legal support charity is guilty of felony terrorism crimes.
		How liberal institutions react to this fascist abuse of power will be vital.
		Well, the people attacking the police station, the land, are fascists.
		So like, y'all can duke it out for all I care.
		You don't get to come to me.
		Say the government are fascists.
		Reek havoc throughout the city, attacking innocent people, lying about it, and then claim you aren't the fascists.
		You don't get to come to me and support massive multinational corporations that are gutting and destroying this country and its people, and then claim they are the fascists.
		Y'all are fascists as far as I'm concerned.
		And you want me to come out and defend you now?
		Spare me.
		Your boos mean nothing.
		I've seen what makes you cheer.
		Here's the tweet.
		Alex says, a bone-chilling development in Atlanta just now.
		Heavily militarized police just arrested bail support and legal defense workers who are providing charitable support to protesters arrested for opposing Cop City in Atlanta.
		Police are calling financial crimes.
		You're a liar.
		I just don't believe you.
		In fact, because you said this, I'm now under the impression that these people were raising money for legal defense, but then using that money for direct action.
		You people lie.
		The far left is a bunch of psychotic, deranged, cultist liars.
		You've lied about everything.
		After Jussie Smollett, the Covington kids, Russiagate, Ukrainegate, I know those are more establishment, but after all the lies, After the 529 insurrection where you tried to burn down a church.
		Sorry.
		You say this, I go, wow, it must be the opposite.
		Because far be it from me to fall for your lies.
		He says, As many have written before, the expansion of fascist state repression we are seeing, and the silence of many progressives and liberals, is on the verge of forever changing our society.
	That's right.
	We liberals are being silenced by you deranged psychopaths.
	Y'all are fascists.
	And you know what?
	If you want to go duke it out with other fascists, fine, so be it.
	The government will arrest you when you commit those crimes, and that's what should happen.
	Me?
	I'll continue to oppose massive multinational corporations and overreach by the state.
	I have no problem saying the government shouldn't arrest people who are engaged in legitimate legal defense practices.
	But you know what?
	Because the far left lies about literally everything, I'm gonna sit back and wait and see.
	All right, government, do your thing.
	Prove it.
	Not that I trust the government.
	So he says, take a look at this logic with what I read.
	G.A.A.G.
	Chris Carr said, As we have said before, we will not rest until we have held accountable every person who has funded, organized, or participated in the violence and intimidation.
	Good.
	You see how they lie?
	You see, this is why I'm saying these people are lying.
	By that logic, anyone who done it to a bail fund or legal support is guilty of a felony.
	Lie.
	That's not what the AG said.
	He said if you funded the violence and intimidation, the terror, they'll come for you.
	So, it seems that they're essentially admitting to what happened.
	And they're trying to scare you.
	You see, there are probably regular people who donated to this GoFundMe or a GoFundMe or something.
	And now they're gonna say, they're gonna come and arrest you!
	They're gonna arrest you!
	They're not.
	That's ridiculous.
	What may happen is they'll come and question you and say, why did you donate to this GoFundMe?
	The person will say, I thought they were activists who need to be bailed out.
	They called it a protest.
	Even Fox 5 Atlanta called it a protest.
	You see that?
	They call it a protest.
	A protest at the site.
	I'm sorry.
	Overt acts of terror.
unidentified		Hmm.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		Not protest.
		They'll go to you and say, okay, did you know that your funds were being used for weapons, explosives, for tools?
		I had no idea.
		Well, they were, and you're a victim.
		You see how that works?
		If you were tricked into donating to a legal fund, and your funds were then taken and used for terroristic purposes, that's called fraud, being defrauded.
		They're not going to arrest the victims.
		They want the victims in court saying, here's what I thought was going to happen.
		Here's the best part.
		Some of these people probably knew their money was being used for weapons and such, but they'll lie.
		And then the cops will say, we're going to file a subpoena so that you appear in court because you're a victim.
		And they're going to be like, what do you do?
		Do you admit that you knew you were funding terrorism?
		Or are you the victim?
		And you say on the stand, I had no idea, thus proving they committed the crime.
		Amazing.
		This is great news, says one tweet.
		Easy way to avoid this, don't fundraise for terrorists in any manner.
		Amazing.
		Yeah.
		This guy Alec has another thread.
		He says, many progressives are not paying enough attention to what is happening with Cop City in Atlanta.
		The level of state violence against local people organizing to protect an essential forest from becoming a training center for militarized cops is escalating.
		These people are just overtly evil.
		They burned down two homes.
		They booted a man from his truck, flipped it over, and torched it.
		I'm not a big fan of Cop City.
		I don't necessarily like the idea.
		I'm 50-50.
		We need police reform.
		We need criminal justice reform, no question.
		And because we do need this, and because liberals like me feel that pain, I just want accountability for bad cops.
		There's a lot of good cops, a lot of really bad cops.
		I want accountability when bad cops do bad things.
		I want body cameras.
		Don't make excuses.
		going to work for you.
		What do they really want?
		They want far left extremism.
		I don't want that.
		I just want accountability for bad cops.
		There's a lot of good cops, a lot of really bad cops.
		I want accountability when bad cops do bad things.
		I want body cameras.
		Don't make excuses.
		I want cops to do better.
		I want safety and security in this country.
		And you seek to exploit that and set fire to people's homes.
		I'm not going to get behind you.
		You people are nuts.
		Now they're going to come out and be like, Oh no, heavens help us.
		We're getting arrested.
		I'll be like, okay.
		And I will give you no, no penny, no nickel, no dime.
		I will do nothing for you.
		Now, that being said, again, I want to see what evidence the government actually has for this stuff.
		But we are getting to that fine line in warfare.
		The liberals in all of us say that we've got to maintain constitutional rights innocent until proven guilty, and I agree, it's all true.
		But you do need to reconcile that at a certain point you're in war.
		And if these people are terrorists who are seeking to destroy public property and hurt people and shoot cops, and they've done it, at what point do you say it's war?
		You see, herein lies the challenge.
		When you're in war, and someone is actively trying to kill you, doing all the nice things in the world will just get you defeated.
		It's the harsh reality of the world.
		We want to sit here and say we will be the good guys and we will always do right and always abide by the Constitution, and we should.
	But there will come a time when the threat is so intense, you must defend yourself.
	How we answer that is the challenge.
	Because if we use the tactics of the enemy, you become the enemy.
	If we believe in freedom and innocent until proven guilty, then those must be maintained.
	But then someone plants a pipe bomb at the Capitol or something like that, and you try your best to maintain all of these rights, they exploit them.
	What we really need in order to win this is a cultural shift towards honor and integrity.
	We need people to fear doing wrong for themselves and not for anybody else.
	I think the important thing to realize is the moment we cross that line into war, whatever rights you think you had are gone.
	That's the reality of war.
	Whoever survives wins.
	And that's the terrifying reality we aim to avoid.
	What I mean to say is, we should maintain all of the rights of the Constitution, and innocent until proven guilty, lest we become the monster we seek to fight.
	Be careful when gazing into the abyss.
	What is it?
	Be careful when fighting monsters, lest ye become one.
	For as you gaze into the abyss, the abyss gazes back.
	And that's the important lesson.
	How to win a battle without destroying your own values.
	That's how we win this.
	My point on the time of war is simply this.
	It may be out of your control.
	Because sooner or later, you're going to find yourself in a situation where people just say, don't know, don't care, it's war.
	That's the scary point.
	I'll leave it there.
	Next segment's coming up in a few minutes.
	Stick around and I'll see you all shortly.
unidentified		Everyone's favorite Democrat Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is furious!
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		Because of a Twitter parody that posts obvious jokes.
		Yo, there's like 800 TimCast Twitter parodies.
		I know, I don't have like the 13 million followers that she has.
		I have but a humble 1.6.
		And people make fun of me all the time.
		There are fake Tim Pool accounts, tons of different parody accounts, Tim Pool beanie accounts.
		Whatever, man.
		You gotta ignore this stuff.
		But AOC is now basically claiming that Elon Musk is preparing To interfere in the elections.
		Oh my stars and garters.
		Here we go.
		From the Daily Mail.
		AOC threatens to leave Twitter over faker account.
		Elon Musk has promoted parody with fake messages about her boyfriend's farts and how she is a gorgeous millionaire.
		I love this.
		Dude, the jokes are decently funny.
		Some are pretty funny.
		It's a parody account that is labeled parody.
		And AOC is getting oh so angry that anybody would make fun of her that she's like, I don't know what to do and I might have to leave this platform.
		I love it.
		Here we go.
		Squad member AOC has threatened to leave Twitter over a parody account.
		The woke New York congresswoman appeared on Tuesday, uh, tweeted on Tuesday that she may abandon her 13.4 million followers after Elon Musk promoted a sick account impersonating her.
		I don't think he promoted it.
		I think he just tweeted in response to them.
		She said she was assessing what to do after the billionaire replied to a tweet from the parody account.
		FYI, there's a fake account on here impersonating me and going viral.
		The Twitter CEO has engaged it, boosting visibility.
		It is releasing false policy statements and gaining spread.
		I am assessing with my team how to move forward.
		In the meantime, be careful of what you see.
		I absolutely love this.
		That AOC is assessing what to do because someone made fun of her.
		Like, for real, dude?
		All right, I'm gonna pull up the old parody account right here.
		Let's see what they're tweeting now.
		The pinned tweet says, printing money is the only way out of inflation.
		Okay, that's silly.
		Here's one from 40 minutes ago.
		If Congress would have passed my $93 trillion green new deal, inflation would be 0.00% right now.
		If we don't move to 100% green energy soon, car emissions will kill off the human race just like it did the dinosaurs.
		Oh, this one's good.
		I'm excited to get back to DC to go shopping with my girl, Ronna McDaniel.
		She always buys me the best stuff.
		Here's one.
		White people are literally holding our economy hostage by owning guns.
		Cow farts are racist.
		Like, not all of these land.
unidentified		What?
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		She's just giving it attention.
		That's the funniest thing.
		I remember when the Nunez Cow thing, I don't know if you guys know the story, but like there was a parody account called like Nunez Cow and I'm like, I just don't care.
		I don't, I don't, I don't know why everybody's all mad.
		He like sued or something.
		Here we go.
		The fake account, the parody, said, This might be the wine talking, but I've got a crush on Elon Musk.
		And then Elon responded with a fire emoji.
		They say the parody account tweeted out similar sentiments about Musk in the past, including one on Tuesday, saying, Elon Musk, my boyfriend is at Target and my DMs are open.
		You know what to do.
		It also wrote that every time my boyfriend farts, I make him plant a tree to offset his carbon emissions.
		Yeah, but farts are methane, dude.
		Nice try at the joke, though.
		No, I'm just being pedantic.
		Suggested the real reason MAGA— Can I just pull up these tweets?
		It just says, the real— The real reason MAGA extremists are so infatuated with me, I'm young, gorgeous, successful, and a millionaire.
		I genuinely don't think she's a millionaire, but it's funny.
		My boyfriend is at Target and my DMs are open.
		Every time my boyfriend farts.
		Take a moment on this Memorial Day to remember all the citizens that lost their lives trying to come through our southern border.
		Wow.
		AOC's threat of leaving Twitter is the latest in a string of attacks on Musk since he took over the social media platform.
		She tweeted, what is this one?
		LMAO at a billionaire earnestly trying to sell people on the idea that free speech is actually an $8 per month subscription plan.
		She wrote at the time.
		To which Musk replied, Your feedback is appreciated, now pay $8.
		Then, when the Tesla founder announced last month that Twitter would remove the blue verification marks, she said, uh, for legacy accounts, don't pay for them, AOC claimed he was paving the way for major potential harm.
		Here we go.
		Uh, the parody account says, after brainstorming with my staff, I'm going to push Congress to make it illegal to joke, laugh, or make fun of me.
		Parody should be illegal.
		FYI, I have no problem with parody accounts, just the ones that make fun of me.
unidentified		Yep.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		AOC, could you do me a favor and come out and condemn the accounts that make fun of me?
		No?
		You're not doing that?
		You don't care?
		Oh, come on.
		You get it?
		She is a narcissist.
		I believe AOC is maliciously evil, and the Daniel Penny story is a perfect example.
		Trying to imprison a guy who was the victim of violent threats, death threats on a subway.
		That's what she does.
		Like, this is the perfect example of what happens when you get these fake populists who demand power, you give them power, and they start, they just cull their enemies.
		It's what they do.
		And in December, AOC condemned Musk after he suspended the accounts of half a dozen journalists who reported on him and his takeover of Twitter.
		Yeah.
		I get feeling unsafe, but descending into an abuse of power and erratically banning
		journalists only increases the intensity around you.
		Yeah.
		That was because people were posting his exact location.
		It's a crazy concept.
		And Elon Musk was right.
		You should not be able to post the exact location of certain individuals within certain contexts, right?
		That is to say, if someone like me, if I choose to go to a public place, and I'm surrounded by people, and I'm like, look at me, surrounded by all these people, and then you take a picture and post saying, here this person is, if it's fine.
		If I'm in a private vehicle no one knows about, and I'm driving to a private place, and then you post a photo and say, there he is now, Totally different.
		Totally different.
		It's a fine line, and it's very difficult.
		In the instance of Elon, he was talking about his plane, and where he was flying to, and I absolutely... There's no journalistic value in revealing his precise location in real time.
		You could say, a few minutes later, or 20 minutes later, it looks like Elon is headed to Austin, or something like that, to report that something may be happening.
		But the post, his actual tail number, he's gonna land right here.
		People don't understand.
		It's private airports, no security.
		Not like major international airports.
		So if he's landing at a small airport, Actually, I'll just tell you right now, the Frederick Airport, the security there for their runway, it's a four foot tall chain link fence with a gate that can be swung open by just lifting the lever.
		So imagine someone, because this is where Kanye flew out of, imagine if he's landing and people are posting, this is where he is right now.
		He's got no security there.
		But anyway, I digress.
		I love this.
		AOC warns Elon Musk is testing the waters to interfere in the 2024 election.
unidentified		No!
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		She's so mad about these parody accounts that she's claiming Elon Musk is trying to interfere in the election.
		Oh, heavens me.
		Look what The Independent does.
		They say, AOC issued a warning.
		The New York rep slammed Tesla, CEO, for blocking dissident accounts ahead of the Turkish election.
		Now, don't get me wrong, there's a challenge here for Elon Musk, and I can respect the difficulty of his position.
		But, um, I think it's the same position held by so many of the big tech CEOs and Elon's now getting a hard lesson.
		Turkey said, we will ban you unless you ban these guys.
		And Elon's like, okay, do we shut down the entire service for everybody in the country?
		Or do we just ban a handful of people?
		If we don't shut the service down, they're banned anyway.
		You see the problem?
		This is what many of these big tech CEOs have said.
		And they've said it to me.
		Look, someone comes to us and says, you've got to ban these four people, or we ban a billion.
		You know, they don't have a billion users, but we ban the whole country.
		And they're like, okay, fine, we'll get rid of the four people.
		I've heard it over and over again.
		My response is, flex your muscles, Ilana.
		Say, okay.
		Ban Twitter.
		Try.
		And you know what we'll do?
		Here's what I would say.
		I would say, if you ban us, we will create a VPN service.
		We will create the Twitter VPN plugin.
		We will set up 50 new domains, and we will call them Twitter and Twitter and Tweeter and all the rest.
		Twotter?
		Whatever it is, Elon.
		Whatever you want to call it.
		Ban all those.
		Good luck.
		You can't do it.
		You've got to leverage what you have.
		You've got to be able to say to these bigots, to these censors, to these fascists, these evil people that would silence the opinions of those, you need to say... I'll give you this example, YouTube.
		When the advertiser said, we're gonna pull our ads off YouTube unless you censor this content, my response would have been, oh wow, is that true?
		Where are you gonna advertise?
		Serious question, where are you gonna advertise?
		And they'll say, we can hold out longer than you.
		It's like, okay, I'll tell you what I'll do.
		Instead of running your ad, we will run an ad explaining that you have pulled off of the service because you're trying to pressure us into shutting down the creators.
		So, essentially, for every dollar you don't spend, we will spend ten dollars telling all of our users exactly how censorious and evil you are.
		But by all means, you don't have to be on this platform.
		These companies need to understand these advertisers.
		You don't have to advertise on the platform.
		I wouldn't force a company to do that.
		But if you come to me and say, look, I know we're sponsoring your show, but we want you to no longer have this person on the show, I'd be like, you're not going to tell me what to do.
		And if that's seriously the reason you're pulling out your ads, I'll make sure everybody knows.
		Let's play that game.
		And you know what?
		They're gonna say, no, no, no, no, no, no, please don't, please don't.
		Because they think they can leverage control over you with no negative repercussions.
		If you're Coke, and you're saying, we're not gonna advertise on YouTube, I say, okay, we'll just give your space to Pepsi at a discount rate then.
		And they're gonna go, uh-oh, it's called competition, dude.
		Instead, these companies all do the same thing, and it's like, oh, I'm sorry, I'm sorry.
		So, I understand it's a rock and a hard place.
		And maybe Elon doesn't have the leverage to go up against Erdogan.
		And he does need to break even with his company, so he's in a tough spot.
		I can't say that I have the easy answers, especially when it comes to Turkey.
		But I think the real reason that AOC is claiming this, it's because there is a fake account with fake policies.
		I don't know what to do.
		That's what she's really complaining about.
		I'll leave it there.
		Next segment's coming up at 6 p.m.
	on this channel.

▲