Hunter Biden Tried To SCAM Judge, Judge EXPOSES DOJ Scamming Court With HIDDEN IMMUNITY For Hunter
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
Hunter Biden Tried To SCAM Judge, Judge EXPOSES DOJ Scamming Court With HIDDEN IMMUNITY For Hunter
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.
Yesterday, it all came crashing down for Hunter Biden.
His sweetheart deal, which tried to sneak in broad immunities, was struck down by Judge Norega.
And right now, you've got people on the right praising the judge, saying, good job sniffing this one out.
Meanwhile, you've got people on the left saying the judge is trying to protect Hunter Biden from a Donald Trump vengeance or revenge.
Interesting.
The story is this.
Yesterday, Hunter Biden was supposed to plead guilty.
I talked about it in the morning.
But by the afternoon, the plea deal had fallen apart.
They had said maybe it's going to come back.
They're negotiating.
And then it's been put on hold.
What happens here is downright shocking.
We got transcripts from the courtroom, and it's crazier than we know.
Basically, what happened was, the prosecution hid immunity provisions in a deferment program, effectively behind the plea agreement.
I'm not a lawyer, so it's harder for me to explain.
I'm a lawyer.
Actually, I don't know if a lawyer could explain it better, because they might use jargon.
But the idea is, they say, hey, here are these things you're pleading guilty to, in terms of taxes.
You read through it, and it's kind of like, oh, okay, that's fine.
Then there's this deferment program on the gun issue, but within it were deep and broad provisions for immunity, which could ultimately make Hunter Biden immune to everything.
I find it funny that the left is arguing the judge is trying to protect Hunter Biden from Trump when the judge asked about FARA violations and whether or not there was an ongoing investigation.
I gotta break this down for you.
I gotta read.
I'll read to you what some of these lawyers are saying.
But this is the story we have from Newsweek.
Hunter Biden judge trying to protect him from Donald Trump, according to this attorney.
I find it absolutely laughable.
But the scandal is deeper than that because we did talk about this yesterday.
Take a look at this.
Judge says Hunter Biden legal team apparently misrepresented identity to court clerk.
Yeah, this was yesterday morning.
Apparently, the scandal gets crazier.
They were trying to get negative information, emotion removed by pretending to be Republicans on the Ways and Means Committee, I believe.
This is a crazy story.
Right now, there is a grand jury convening to indict Donald Trump.
This is where we're at, my friends.
Now, I'm gonna wait on this story until we get developments, but as it goes, they're saying Trump may be indicted today over January 6th, and if he is, they are going to say insurrection, therefore, he is removed from the ballot.
Then who's left standing?
Ron DeSantis.
So, maybe there is a path for Ron, and it's not through the traditional means, but welcome to modern civil war?
I do find it beautifully ironic that a provision made post-civil war to stop insurrectionists from being in government would be used as a weapon which could lead to a civil war.
The idea that Donald Trump would be removed over January 6th, when we all know it's a lie.
One side is, in plain view, gaming the system and spitting in our faces.
The other side is saying, well, this may reach the level of inquiry.
Republicans saying, maybe we'll have an impeachment inquiry.
Maybe an inquiry?
So you think after a bit more corruption, you might ask the question as to whether or not it warrants removal from office?
Absolutely stunning on the part of Republicans.
Take a look at this from the Washington Post.
Let's read what they say, and then I'll show you the breakdown from a former federal prosecutor and the transcripts.
The Washington Post writes why Hunter Biden's plea deal wasn't approved on Wednesday.
A federal judge exposed a rift over immunity provisions and questioned whether the structure of the deal was legal.
Hunter Biden walked into court in Delaware expecting to plead guilty to two minor crimes and avoid jail.
But the plea deal ended up on hold, at least temporarily.
And if prosecutors and defense lawyers can't work out some structural problems, Biden could face a criminal trial.
On Wednesday, Hunter Biden headed to a courtroom not far from where he grew up expecting to plead guilty to failure to pay taxes, etc, etc.
We get it.
We get it.
He reached a tentative plea agreement in June to keep the gun charge off his record and avoid jail time, provided that he meets conditions over a two-year period, including staying drug-free and not buying a firearm.
He's got to get a job, too.
That was one of the latest ones.
They say that the plea deal initially did not protect Hunter Biden from prosecution for other potential charges in connection with a long-running government investigation into his business dealings.
When the federal judge asked Hunter Biden if he would plead guilty knowing he could still face additional charges, he said no.
Prosecutors in the courtroom maintained this was part of the agreement all along.
Then we misunderstood.
We're ripping it up.
Biden lawyer Chris Clark snapped at them.
The two sides then quickly reworked the deal to include immunity for certain tax, drug, and gun charges between 2014 and 2019, essentially the main time period covered by the investigation.
The judge then raised constitutional questions.
She noted that the immunity provisions were tucked into the agreement involving the gun charge, which she does not actually have to approve.
That's because diversion agreements are forged between prosecutors and defense attorneys.
Plea agreements, on the other hand, must be approved by a judge.
But the diversion agreement includes language saying the judge could revive the gun charge if Hunter Biden violated the terms of the agreement.
The judge said she did not think she has the power to do so.
So what happens next?
Yada, yada, yada.
The framing you get from these articles in the corporate press is very, very interesting.
Because let me show you the breakdown from Will Scharf, a former federal prosecutor.
And, uh, it's a bit more interesting than that.
Now, the Washington Post makes it seem very simple.
The judge was just like, well, what about this?
I don't know if I can do that.
In reality, the judge was yelling.
We're getting this transcript where the judge was like, you're putting me in an impossible position, I can't approve this, what's going on?
Basically, they have this gun charge, as the Washington Post even said, that the judge does not have to approve, it's a private agreement, but includes broad immunity.
You see, they're trying to pull a fast one.
Will Scharf on Twitter, he is candidate for Missouri Attorney General.
He says, based on conversations with people who are in the courtroom today, and my experience as a former federal prosecutor, I think I know the full story of what happened with the Hunter Biden plea agreement blow up this morning.
Bear with me, because this is a little complicated.
Typically, if the government is offering to a defendant that it will either drop charges or decline to bring new charges in return for the defendant's guilty plea, the plea is structured under federal rule of criminal procedure 11C1A.
An agreement not to prosecute Hunter for FARA violations or other crimes in return for his pleading guilty to the tax misdemeanors, for example, would usually be a C1A plea.
This is open, transparent, subject to judicial approval, etc.
In Hunter's case, according to what folks in the courtroom have told me, Hunter's plea was structured under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11C1B.
Which is usually just a plea in return for a joint sentencing recommendation only, and contained no information on its face about other potential charges, and contained no clear agreement by DOJ to forego prosecution of other charges.
Instead, DOJ and Hunter's lawyers effectively hid that part of the agreement in what was publicly described as a pre-trial diversion agreement relating to a S922G3 gun charge against Hunter for being a drug user in possession of a firearm.
That pretrial diversion agreement, as written, was actually much broader than just the gun charge.
If Hunter were to complete probation, the pretrial diversion agreement prevented DOJ from ever bringing charges against Hunter for any crimes relating to the offense conduct discussed in the plea agreement.
Which was purposely written to include his foreign influence peddling operations in China and elsewhere.
You see how they pulled it off?
The plea agreement includes this stuff, but he's just pleading on taxes.
And then the diversion program references the plea agreement, which would be approved by the judge, but then says he wouldn't be charged on those issues.
The judge Apparently, the plan was the judge would not care about the gun thing.
He's like, yeah, sure, fine, whatever.
This one looks good on tax charges.
Thus, tricking the judge into signing off on an agreement which would grant Hunter Biden broad immunities.
Amazing.
Let's read more.
So they put the facts in the plea agreement, but put their non-prosecution agreement in the pre-trial diversion agreement, effectively hiding the full scope of what DOJ was offering and Hunter was obtaining through these proceedings.
Hunter's upside from this deal was vast immunity from further prosecution if he finished a couple years of probation.
And the public wouldn't be any the wiser, because none of this was clearly stated on the face of the plea agreement, as would normally be the case.
Now imagine Donald Trump gets elected, and he says, we're going after Hunter Biden and the Biden family, and they'd go, ah, ah, ah, we have an agreement, that'd be unconstitutional.
This judge saw that and went, what?
I can't approve this.
And now you've got these lefties being like, the judge is actually on our side.
Judge Noreka smelled a rat.
She understood that the lawyers were trying to paint her into a corner and hide the ball.
Instead, she backed DOJ and Hunter's lawyers into a corner by pulling all the details out into the open, and then indicating that she wasn't going to approve a deal as broad as what she had discovered.
DOJ, attempting to save face and save its case, then stated on the record the investigation into Hunter was ongoing, and that Hunter remained susceptible to prosecution under FARA.
Hunter's lawyers exploded!
They clearly believed that FARA was covered under the deal, because as written, the pre-trial diversion agreement language was broad enough to cover it.
They blew up the deal, Hunter pled not guilty, and that's the current state of play.
And so here we are, Hunter's lawyers and the DOJ are going to go off and try to pull together a new set of agreements, likely narrower, to satisfy Judge Noriega.
Fortunately, I doubt if FAR or any charges related to Hunter's Foreign Influence peddling will be included, which leaves open the possibility of further investigations leading to further prosecutions.
Hey it's Kimberly Fletcher here from Moms4America with some very exciting news.
Tucker Carlson is going on a nationwide tour this fall and Moms4America has the exclusive VIP meet and greet experience for you.
Before each show, you can have the opportunity to meet Tucker Carlson in person.
These tickets are fully tax-deductible donations, so go to momsforamerica.us and get one of our very limited VIP meet-and-greet experiences with Tucker at any of the 15 cities on his first ever coast-to-coast tour.
Not only will you be supporting Moms for America in our mission to empower moms, promote liberty, and raise patriots, your tax-deductible donation secures you a full VIP experience with priority entrance and check-in, premium gold seating in the first five rows, access to a pre-show cocktail reception, an individual meet-and-greet, and photo with America's most famous conservative and our friend, Tucker Carlson.
Visit momsforamerica.us today for more information and to secure your exclusive VIP meet and greet tickets.
Attorney Weiss's office was really trying to game the system because they hid the agreement to not charge various things related to the tax case in the diversion agreement, which covers the gun charge, instead of in the memorandum of plea, because that changes the type of plea it is under the FRCP and the role of the judge.
The judge and her staff could not find another case in which a plea agreement was done this way.
Take a look at this.
We've got some images.
It says, paragraph, so the court, all right, we're going to discuss the agreement in a bit, but for now, let me say, by the way, I didn't get a copy of paragraph 15 of the agreement, but the parties provided me with a copy of that agreement prior to this hearing, so that's what I'm going to quote for the moment.
Paragraph 15 of the diversion agreement states, the United States agrees not to criminally prosecute Biden outside of the terms of this agreement for any federal crimes encompassed by the attached statement of facts.
Attachment A to the Diversion Agreement and the Statement of Facts attached as Exhibit 1 to the Memorandum of Plea Agreement filed the same day.
This agreement does not provide any protection against prosecution for any future conduct by Biden or by any of his affiliated businesses.
And just so we're clear, I think you already answered this, sir, but are you are you relying on that promise in connection with your agreement to accept the memorandum of plea agreement and plead guilty?
The defendant, Senator Biden, said, yes, your honor.
The court says if that provision were not valid or not enforceable, would you accept the memorandum of plea agreement?
And he said, no, there's more.
Alright, now I want to talk a little bit about this agreement to not prosecute.
This is from the court.
The agreement not to prosecute includes, is in the gun case, but it also includes crimes related to the tax case.
So we looked through a bunch of diversion agreements that we have access to and we couldn't find anything that had anything similar to that.
So, have you ever seen, I think, I just asked you this, but have you ever seen a diversion agreement where the agreement not to prosecute is so broad that it encompasses crimes in a different case?
Mr. Wise says.
No, I would say, your honor, I don't think it is broad in a sense that, the judge responds, we're going to talk about that, you can sit down.
Now, is an agreement not to bring charges or an agreement to drop charges typically something that is included in a memorandum of a plea agreement?
Basically, the judge said, hold on there a minute.
Man, this is truly depraved stuff.
Talk about scandalous.
We are, you know, as much as I hate the internet and Twitter and all that for all the bad, it really does bring about a whole lot of good.
Because you don't see this in the Washington Post article, just vague references.
Newsweek writes the judge was trying to protect Hunter Biden.
Are you serious?
The judge is like, I've never seen a diversion program on a gun charge, a drug and gun thing, have broad protections totally unrelated to the guns, and talking about tax and FARA.
Let's break it down.
A dude walks into a courtroom and they're like, you were doing a bunch of drugs and you had a gun.
It's like, yes.
So we're gonna put you through a diversion program.
We don't want you to go to jail.
It could make things worse.
You're just gonna do probation and then, you know, everything is hunky-dory.
Yes.
It says here in this plea agreement, we can't charge you for the bribery, for bank robbery, for aggravated assault.
None of that has anything to do with the fact that he was a drug user who bought a gun and lied on a document or whatever.
But they snuck it in.
That was the scam.
It was brilliant.
I don't think they actually care about the gun charge.
They were trying to find a way to have something that would slip past the judge, but create a binding legal agreement preventing the federal government from going after Hunter Biden, thus shielding the Biden family from future prosecution.
The idea that the judge was protecting Hunter Biden, I think, is silly.
I think the judge was protecting herself.
A lot of people are like, yeah, you go, Judge Noriega.
You smelled a rat.
You did a good job.
I think the judge isn't thinking that at all.
I think the judge is simply like, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa.
What am I agreeing to?
Let me tell y'all a story.
I'll keep it a little bit vague.
But I had some friends who agreed to be in a documentary.
And the documentary was produced by some corporate press.
But, you know, people on the right often give these interviews anyway.
Assuming.
But, you know, to be fair, the freedom faction type individuals, post-liberal, conservative, etc., have learned their lesson in that regard.
There was a document that was being given to some prominent conservative personalities, a waiver for the documentary, and they were signing it.
They were like, you want to sign this?
It just says that we're allowed to use your likeness for the documentary.
And they're like, okay.
And so I'm sitting there.
I'm not in this documentary, by the way.
I didn't sign anything.
And I look at it and I'm like, yeah, don't sign this.
And my friends asked me why.
I said, this agreement would allow them to use your likeness and image in perpetuity forever for any reason.
They're not having you sign a waiver that grants them the right to a documentary.
You're signing a waiver that they could put up a billboard with your face on it and call you a Nazi.
That they could run commercials with your face on it.
You see, this is what people sneak into these agreements, hoping you don't understand.
Now to be fair, a contract like that isn't enforceable, right?
If you signed, if you were going to agree to be in a documentary, and they said sign this release form, and it was broad and allowed them to do crazy things, Let's say they did put up a billboard, you'd sue them, they'd say, it's all here in writing, they knew, you'd go to court and say, no, we agreed to do a documentary, we never agreed on advertisements or whatever.
It's entirely possible the judge just says, come on, no reasonable person is gonna genuinely believe that by agreeing to be in a documentary, you'd insult them in a billboard or on TV.
However, the judge could uphold it, so it's 50-50.
The idea is, and I bring this up a lot, Contracts have words, but judges make the decision.
And if it becomes apparent to a judge that one party was trying to manipulate and scam the other party, and now they're like, sorry, you signed power of attorney, they're just gonna be like, get out of here!
That's not the spirit of the agreement.
That's why judges exist, because they're people.
The world is not just a machine where it's like, sorry, you signed it, and it says I get your car.
Well, you don't.
It doesn't work that way.
It can, though.
It can.
Right?
This guy could come out and be like, we explained to them we needed their rights for promotion, and we would be doing these things.
And the judge is going to be like, okay, I mean, you signed it.
That's reasonable.
It makes sense.
However, it just depends on what they ended up doing.
This is the thing about these agreements, right?
To be completely honest, even if the judge did end up signing this, it does not mean anything.
Okay, to be fair, it means a little bit.
It means that it would be harder for Trump to go after him, but look, man.
There's always a way.
There's always a way.
Look at what they're doing to Trump and Trump associates right now.
The current news, as we were waiting, is, uh...
Live coverage!
Trump grand jury probing 2020 election arrives at courthouse.
Trump has said he's a target of a criminal investigation into efforts to overturn his electoral defeat from President Joe Biden.
Now, did Trump do anything wrong?
Of course not.
Sorry, that's just the truth.
On January 6th, Donald Trump said, stop.
He said, be peaceful.
He could have issued a stronger, broader statement earlier, but before, I believe it was right around the time the breach happened, Trump said, we respect law enforcement, be peaceful, etc, etc.
He then came out and said, everyone go home.
You know, he gave a video statement.
Big tech social media companies, they deleted those posts.
And they deleted them to hide the fact that Trump was saying no.
Trump said, we're going to peacefully have our voices heard.
There was a permitted rally on the other side of the Capitol building.
And then you have Certain individuals, we'll just leave it at this, tearing down barricades, advocating for storming the Capitol, and they're blaming Trump for doing it.
Trump, you know, look, I think Trump wants revenge.
I think he'll fire people.
Good.
But the idea that he's some like mastermind 4D chess playing guy is just not true.
Trump really was bumbling about.
To see what happened on January 6th and how he responded to it.
It's like, it's just so clear he did not know how to handle these high-intensity situations.
Same thing with May 29th, the 529 insurrection.
There are certainly people who disagree with me.
I had a conversation with Michael Malice and Roseanne Barr.
I said that if the police on May 29th stood down and the far-left extremists who set fire to St.
John's Church and the guard post were able to actually breach the White House, Trump would be president right now.
And, uh, you know, Michael disagreed, and, and, you know, I think Ian disagreed, saying, like, the media would just claim Trump betrayed our country and allowed extremists.
Maybe.
He'd be fighting the media.
But it's very difficult for the media to attack Trump when it was leftists, Antifa, and far-left extremists who would have committed this act.
Instead, what happened was the police cleared them out, and the media narrative became Donald Trump mercilessly beats peaceful protesters.
What's the better narrative for Trump?
Certainly some would say Trump allowing extremists to storm the White House is not the appropriate, is not the better narrative.
But then they just came out and said Trump mercilessly beats peaceful protesters.
When it came to January 6th, if they actually were to stop the protests and the rioters, media wouldn't talk about it at all.
Because it was right-wing individuals.
But because they stormed in, now it's the insurrection and they are weaponizing this against Trump.
Now, ultimately, if the far left did breach the White House or burn down a church or something like that, I think it would be impossible to ignore.
And my evidence for this is Andy Ngo.
When Andy Ngo was mercilessly beaten in the streets, even CNN had to acknowledge it.
It made them look bad.
They couldn't ignore it.
Andy Ngo was just walking down the street filming, and far-left extremists mercilessly beat him and left him bloodied up.
Even CNN.
Brian Stelter was forced to say it was wrong.
Imagine what would happen if on 529, when Trump was rushed to the bunker, he put out a statement saying, please remain peaceful.
We don't want anyone to get hurt.
And then they ransacked, you know, they burned this building down.
You see, conservatives, Republicans, whatever, they don't get it.
They keep saying we're going to play by the rules.
Meanwhile, the other side says we will burn to the ground to destroy our enemies.
That's a reality.
You know, the ends don't justify the means.
I'm not saying that Republicans should break the rules.
I'm saying they need to start utilizing the system to the best of their abilities in which they should prosecute people who are committing crimes, call for impeachment, etc.
But they ain't doing it.
They're not.
Mitch, uh, I'm sorry, uh, Kevin McCarthy says, This may rise to the level of an impeachment inquiry.
Seriously?
This may rise to the level of an inquiry?
You know what that means?
It means he's not sure whether or not he should actually look into whether or not we should consider impeachment of Joe Biden.
That's incredible, isn't it?
After everything we've seen so far.
Bravo, Republicans!
I think the reality is the Republicans are with the Democrats.
It's one big uniparty, it's one big club, and you ain't in it.
And it's the same club they used to beat you over the head with.
Shout out to George Carlin on that line.
That's the reality.
Kim McCarthy's not your friend.
Mitch McConnell's not your friend.
The Republicans are speed bumps to stop you, the American voter, from voting out the corrupt establishment elites.
So we should have an impeachment of Joe Biden.
I mean, it's plain as day.
And look, maybe you want to make an argument about corruption and the liberals are going to argue, no, fine.
How about 25th Amendment?
How about Biden is incapable and incompetent and needs to retire?
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 They should be removed for medical reasons.
I mean, no disrespect.
But come on, if you can't do it, you can't do it.
day right here on America on Trial with Josh Hammer.
Subscribe and download your episodes wherever you get your podcasts. It's America on Trial with
They should be removed for medical reasons. I mean, no disrespect, but come on, if you can't
do it, you can't do it. But this is where we are.
Republicans are basically running diversion for Democrats as Democrats rip apart anyone who
stands in the way of the corrupt, diseased establishment machine.
With Donald Trump, we had this brief moment, as crass as it was, of the American people actually voting for somebody they wanted.
Now, a lot of Americans don't like Trump, that I get.
But with Biden, once again, we're back to Your rulers are in control once again.
What did George Carlin say?
You have owners!
They own you!
I don't agree with George Carlin and everything, but the dude was pretty rad.
And this is where we are with Donald Trump.
He broke that machine.
And now they're trying to make sure he can't win.
And that includes the Republicans as well.
They want to make sure he doesn't win.
They want control once again.
But you can't!
People like me are not leaving, and there's nothing you can do to stop this wave in the culture.
Blame Ron Paul, I guess.
So many people, young people, heard that message of anti-war, anti-centralized banks, etc., etc., government corruption, and we want populism.
The establishment machine is a disgusting zombie trying to latch on to the reins of power.
We'll see how that works out for him.
It may.
Next segment's coming up at 1 p.m.
on this channel.
Perhaps we'll be discussing Donald Trump's indictment.
Stick around.
Thanks for hanging out.
You can support us by becoming a member at timcast.com or buying Cast Brew Coffee at castbrew.com.
New blends are out.
Thanks for hanging out.
We'll see y'all at 1.
The story of Bud Light is not quite over.
There are many things happening in the news which I think are particularly relevant and show that my friends, those who believe in freedom, meritocracy, liberty, that means conservatives, post-liberals, libertarians, etc.
We are winning.
Bud Light will be laying off hundreds of U.S.
workers as the Bud Light Brewer.
We've also got news that Dylan Mulvaney, who sparked the outrage, has announced a slowdown, a step back, a reduction in content production.
Meanwhile, Bud Light sales continue to shrink and now Bud Light is being used as an example by some prominent individuals to be taught in colleges what not to do and how to destroy your brand.
Winning.
That's all I can say is winning.
Bud Light wanted to play dirty games?
Well, you've won a dirty, dirty prize.
And now, they're trying to just act like nothing happened.
With new commercials, but no matter what they do, people say, you are done.
Bud Light is a dead brand.
It's crazy to see!
It really, really is.
You know, for the longest time we've had so many crazy stories happening where we would come out and say, Disney shouldn't do this, Netflix shouldn't do this, we demand boycott, etc.
And nothing changed.
But now it looks like you and I and those of us who are pushing back on the woke cult, and that's like I said, post-liberals, conservatives, not just the right.
But it looks like we are now coming into our community and power.
Our ability to say, we vote with our dollars and we will not support these brands.
And it's working.
And it means that while the left may control powerful institutions, maybe even a majority of the cultural space, they are losing that control.
Here's a story from the Wall Street Journal.
Bud Light Brewer lays off hundreds of U.S.
workers.
Anheuser-Busch restructures corporate offices amid controversy and sales slump.
Well, you'll love to see it.
Anheuser-Busch InBev laid off hundreds of workers at its U.S.
offices after months of slumping sales at Bud Light.
The world's largest brewer, which also sells Stella Artois and Budweiser, on Wednesday said the cuts would affect less than 2% of its roughly 18,000 U.S.
workforce.
The layoffs won't impact frontline workers such as brewery and warehouse staff, the company said.
Quote.
Well, we never take these decisions lightly.
We want to ensure that our organization continues to be set for future long-term success.
Anheuser-Busch Chief Executive Brendan Whitworth said in a written statement.
These corporate structure changes will enable our team to focus on what we do best.
Brewing great beer for everyone.
I don't know how much people really think Bud Light was a great beer.
The restructuring eliminated corporate and marketing roles at major US offices including St.
Louis, New York, and LA.
Could you imagine?
Working for Bud Light, they hire some dumb woke woman, and she goes, I got an idea.
And now, several months later, you're being fired because of it!
That's truly incredible, isn't it?
Bud Light sales have tanked since April amid a commercial backlash over a promotion with trans influencer Dylan Mulvaney.
Earlier this summer, Mexican brand Modelo Especial dethroned Bud Light as the top-selling beer in the U.S.
AB InBev is slated to update investors on its latest quarterly financial results next week.
Oh, man!
I can't wait to see that.
I have to imagine that their stock is going to drop substantially.
So, I'm looking at their current... Actually, it's not looking too bad for Anheuser-Busch.
It does look like they're recovering somewhat.
Their worst point was May 31st.
And since then, they've actually been decently recovering.
I mean, we've slowly stopped talking about the story.
We've a bit moved on.
But now that they're going to be laying people off, The story is kicking back up and today they dropped from 59,
what is it, $59.14 down to $58.79 next week when they announce how much money they've lost,
presumably.
I imagine their stock is going to get hit once again.
But you know what a lot of people may think?
It's, you know, buy the dip!
Can AB InBev really go away just because of one brand?
Well, they lost Bud Light.
So be it.
But, I don't know, some people may find an opportunity there.
Now we have this story from the Washington Examiner.
And we'll come back to the Bud Light stuff.
Dylan Mulvaney shares lessons of trust and trauma in 500 days of being a girl.
You know, it's interesting that this idea of, quote, being a girl.
Delma Mulvaney is a trans woman, and I have to say, I don't actually believe Delma Mulvaney is genuinely trans.
I think Delma Mulvaney is intentionally insulting and mocking trans people, using it as a costume and a caricature to generate followers to make money.
We've had trans people on Tim Kast's IRL, you know, I've explained this before, but I think it bears repeating.
And they don't sing about their bulges, right?
They kind of just want to live their lives, be left alone.
But Dylan Mulvaney, I believe, is putting on this character, and undergoing plastic surgery and such, for the same reason Madonna or any other celebrity would, to create a character that makes money.
That's it.
Take a look at this.
Dylan Mulvaney surveyed lessons learned over 500 days of being a girl in a new social media video.
Mulvaney, a biological man who identifies as a woman, shared how backlash concerning daily posts about trans joy caused trauma.
We're resulting in a choice to scale back on social media posts.
This is what I want to point out.
I want to stress, not only is Bud Light terminating tons of jobs, but Dylan Mulvaney, in response to this, is actually saying that they will scale back on producing content.
Take a look at this.
Quote, if I make the content that I want to make and freely share my trans joy, I subject myself to a lot more trauma.
So lately I've chosen to scale back in order to protect my overall well-being, and it works.
Mulvaney said in a post to TikTok and Instagram.
I am quite happy, but I am not doing what I love, so it's kind of a bittersweet thing.
I can just rephrase this.
The anger and outrage That Bud Light caused in endorsing Dylan Mulvaney has resulted in Dylan experiencing a negative pushback and pulling back on content.
That's what protests do.
How many brands are going to want to work with Dylan Mulvaney after this?
I have to imagine Mulvaney and many other personalities are going to see their sponsorship opportunities dry up and disappear because Bud Light has been utterly destroyed.
The Activist Influencer celebrated Day 500 of publicly coming out as a woman, noting that the lessons learned since Day 365 have been greater.
What I find really interesting, let me read this quote.
Something really ugly happened during these last few months where I started to believe that if I just got really pretty and if I stayed quiet, I could find success, Mulvaney said, noting that it was heartbreaking.
On Day 488, I learned through an online poll that 50% of Americans like me.
When do non-politicians get polled like that?
Um, Dylan, celebrities get polled like that all the time.
In fact, celebrities have something they call cue ratings.
Not necessarily the same thing, but they typically try to figure out how the public feels about a personality.
Now, if I were to say, bring up Tom Cruise or Brad Pitt, You see, these guys, general celebrities, probably have an approval rating, if you were to poll people, of around, like, 70 or 80%.
It's probably as good as you're gonna get.
I'm trying to think of, like, can you guys name a celebrity that everyone just loves?
Maybe Keanu Reeves.
I bet Keanu Reeves polls at, like, 95%.
I bet nobody hates the guy.
He's a chill dude, he minds his own business, he's not mean, he's not super political, he donates money.
What's to hate?
But you know, people are jealous, and so he probably is not going to get a perfect score.
But Dylan, you're at 50%.
You know, a lot of people in this country do not like you and the work you do, and that's a reality of being in a political space.
Dylan says, I do wish it was 51, but I would also like to know what exactly are we voting on?
But here's what I learned from that.
That the people who took that poll are judging me based on pictures and videos and articles, and those things make up such a small amount of who I actually am.
I'll tell you what I think.
I watched a video from The Price is Right of Dylan Mulvaney for several minutes, just screaming and running around and rolling on the ground and doing weird things.
But really, the disturbing thing to me was the SCREAMING!
Like, watch the video and the AHHHHHH!
It's horrifying.
It shows me a person who is so demanding and requiring of attention, of eyeballs, that they're just, like, screaming, like, ah!
It freaks me out.
I'm not trying to be mean, but it does.
I'm like, this is the kind of person you should not have on TV.
You know, we've got bad enough stories with crazy celebrities and things like that.
You don't... You have a lot of individuals who become famous, and they have breakdowns.
I would advise, but not like it matters, not like anyone's in control of this, but I would say we should avoid, as a society, taking people who are screaming and demanding fame.
Those are the kind of people you don't want to put on TV.
And that's what I see with Mulvaney.
But here's the latest.
So unprecedented.
Kevin O'Leary says Bud Light is the gift that keeps on giving.
Plans to teach its 25% market share collapse to college students.
It is history!
From this point forward, Bud Light's actions here will go down in history!
Truly amazing.
The CEO of Anheuser-Busch InBev, the multinational brewing company behind Bud Light, is reportedly planning to go on a tour this summer to listen to consumers.
But Shark Tank star Kevin O'Leary, also known as Mr. Wonderful, doesn't believe it will turn things around.
Quote, I don't think it's gonna work, O'Leary said in a recent interview with Fox Business.
He's going to get an earful, there's no question about it.
The problem with that tour and that idea is it keeps it as a frontline press item.
Agreed.
Mr. Wonderful then highlighted how Bud Light's situation is unprecedented in the beer industry.
He said, beer brands take decades to build and usually are fighting for 1-2% share per year by spending hundreds of millions of dollars in advertising.
This has never happened before.
No beer brand has ever lost 25% market share in a matter of hours.
It's so unprecedented that there's no playbook for this.
They want to mention Dylan Mulvaney, etc, etc, and Modelo.
O'Leary pointed out why Bud Light has been facing such strong headwinds.
Beer is a commodity.
The only difference is brand.
So you really have to protect your brand every way you can.
If you don't understand who's buying your brand and you enrage them, which seems to be what happened here, you don't know the outcome.
And now we can measure it.
25% market share.
This is so extraordinary that I'm planning to teach it this fall in the colleges that I visit and guest lecture at.
I've never seen a brand case like this one.
Later adding that Bud Light is the gift that keeps on giving.
And Ezra Bush and Bev's share price also took a hit since then, tumbling 12%.
As a Shark Tank star, O'Leary has invested in plenty of startups over the past 40 years.
They go on to say, bah, bah, bah, bah, bah.
He's a successful guy.
He knows what he's talking about.
And ladies and gentlemen, this is where we're at.
Bud Light is still tanking.
Yingling is skyrocketing.
And this is...
How else do I say it?
Winning the culture war.
It's everything you've asked for, and you've done it.
Sound of Freedom, $130 million at the box office.
Number three in the box office.
Number three!
Beating Mission Impossible, as of yesterday.
Incredible.
Outkick reports, Bud Light sales continue to plunge this week, ending July 15th, dropping over 26% year over year, man.
Going to bump Williams, Yingling, America's oldest brewer, is coming for Bud Light in an alarming rate.
If things continue at the current rate, we'll continue to see Modelo climb the ladder, Miller Light, Coors, and Yingling can gain market share.
You know what the craziest thing is?
We've been heavily advocating for Yingling since this whole thing started, and Yingling is taking off.
People get it.
Yingling, they're doing well.
And there was this controversy.
There was a venue that was having an all-ages drag show, and the venue was sponsored by Yingling.
Someone told us this on the show.
We tweeted it out.
Yingling issued a response!
Man, you guys, it's incredible to see that you and I can have an idea of something and say, hey, what about this?
And actually see that impact.
Yingling did the right thing and said, all we do is sponsor the venue, but we talked with the venue and said, this should be 18 up.
You want to have an adult, lewd, or gratuitous performance?
Or let's just make the argument, as many drag performers have said, it's not, it's just, okay, it's sexualized.
You know, right?
It's like, if a woman was in a bikini and go-go dancing, I view it the exact same way.
Not appropriate for children.
We won.
Yingling agreed.
They also posted a photo early on of someone holding a beer up against an American flag.
These are the brands that should succeed.
I'm glad to say they are.
Shout out to Public Square.
It's an app that went public recently.
You can download the app and it shows you all of these different companies that take a pledge to support American values.
You know, I like it.
I like the idea that we can look at a business that says we believe in America, we believe in the family, we believe in free speech, and that's why we're here.
And they're on this platform where you can find businesses that you can support.
If we keep doing this, building a parallel economy, then we win the culture war outright, right now.
I'm waiting for the news!
The news is that Trump's gonna be indicted!
But they have not come out, as of the recording of this video, with the hard information, the official statement.
So far, it's just that Trump's lawyers are informed to expect an indictment.
The Democrats, the left, they're going hard into policy and law enforcement.
But law enforcement doesn't matter.
Culture does.
I'll give you evidence.
In West Virginia, cohabitation is illegal.
In Florida, it's illegal for unmarried women to skydive on Sunday.
No joke.
There are things called Blue Laws.
Blue Laws are laws that typically were made to prevent people from violating some kind of like rigid religious tradition or practice or something.
Like no drinking on the Sabbath or something like that.
Not specifically, but things like that, you know, like you can't work on Sundays.
That's an example.
They're more broad than that.
Typically though, Blue Laws don't ever get enforced.
Like, if a woman went skydiving on Sunday in Florida, ain't nobody gonna say anything.
And no cop is gonna arrest her or issue a citation or anything like that.
But the law's on the books, so what gives?
Culture.
Our culture will not support the idea of putting a woman in prison because she went skydiving on the weekend.
Yeah, they're allowed to do that, right?
The law's in the books, though.
What gives?
Like I said, in West Virginia, you can't cohabitate.
Come on, people cohabitate all the time.
Like, you can't cohabitate without being married.
That's what it means.
Men and women cannot live together and engage in adult activities unless they're married.
That's a law.
Ain't nobody enforcing it.
So while the Democrats try to make these moves, I sit here, I come to you and I say, with Sound of Freedom, with Bud Light, with the rise of Modelo and Yingling, we are showing cultural influence.
Sound of Freedom especially.
And culture is everything.
Because if they keep going after Republicans, but eventually the culture shifts and this causes a major backlash publicly, they can't do it anymore.
Law enforcement won't do it.
This is the question I have.
Why is it that police officers would not go into that adult sex performance that they allow children into and arrest anybody?
Culture.
There were protesters outside, but the cops were like, I am not getting in the middle of this!
Even though it is discernibly illegal, in West Virginia, under the same laws for cohabitation, children cannot be at drag shows.
But culturally, the police will do nothing.
Because they know Laws can only be enforced with cultural support, with cultural confidence, with the confidence of the people.
It makes sense, right?
In this instance though, the country is fractured, especially in West Virginia.
Who supports children being on stage at a lewd adult performance?
Leftists?
And the police are thinking to themselves, I think it's wrong, I know it's illegal, but I'm not going to get in the middle of a political conflict.
And that's just it.
Police will not enforce laws if they feel they are on the wrong side of the political majority, regardless of what is on the books.
Crazy, right?
That's the way it is.
So here's where we are.
As they prepare their indictment, their third or whatever indictment for Trump, and they're going to make an attempt to remove him from the ballot.
It's interesting to me that Republicans just sit back and watch it all happen.
Mitch McConnell, Kevin McCarthy, they do nothing.
But you know what?
I'm over here focused on a culture war.
That's why we have castbrew.com, Cast Brew Coffee.
Bud Light's going down the tank.
New brands are emerging.
Conservative Dad's Ultra Right Beer, we got a bunch of that stuff.
And we've got Cast Brew Coffee.
We're opening a coffee shop.
We are building the cultural spaces.
I think the most important endeavor that we currently have here at TimCast is Cast Brew Coffee.
The goal is to have physical locations everywhere.
And as I've explained it before, but I'll explain it again because it matters.
You walk into a coffee shop.
A soccer mom bringing her kids to go, uh, play soccer.
And she says, we're going to stop and get some snacks and some coffee.
She looks up on her old Google Maps and says coffee shop and boop, a little pin appears.
And it says Casper coffee here in the shopping center.
And, uh, the mom says, uh, I'm gonna go and, uh, buy some coffee.
She goes inside with the kids, and the kids want orange juice, and chips, or whatever, and apple slices.
And she looks up, she orders herself a cold brew.
And while she's waiting for that cold brew, there are TVs on the walls.
And who's on that TV?
Steven Crowder.
Matt Walsh.
Viva Frye.
TimCast IRL.
And the kids are giggling, and she looks up, and it's me.
And I'm saying something like, Joe Biden has recently said X, Y, and Z, and she's like, oh, I didn't know that.
And that is how we get in the cultural space.
A video like this being played for the general public.
How do we break through to regular people?
Fox News is garbage-controlled opposition.
This is how.
Regular people will walk into the coffee shop and they will hear something simple.
They'll see a video clip of Joe Biden saying, if you don't fire the prosecutor, you're not getting the billion dollars.
And they'll go, oh wow, I can't believe he said that.
Uh, I'll take the, uh, the ham and cheese, and I'll have the... You see what I mean?
Then they go to work, they're hanging out, and someone will say something like, do you hear that Joe Biden was trying to, like, get a guy fired, and he was trying to withhold loans or something?
The Q, the liberal at the office will be like, that never happened!
And then there's the guy holding the Casper coffee being like, no, no, no, I just saw that today!
Yeah, that happened!
That's how we do it.
So when the Democrats make those moves, and they try and violate the law or the spirit of the law, and they try to use the power of the DOJ against their political opponents, people won't stand for it.
And the cultural shift will happen right before our eyes.
Bud Light is evidence of that.
It's the opportunity.
I said this about the Daily Wire, too.
Hollywood has abandoned the top of the mountain.
Disney climbed to the top, they stood up top, planted that flag, and then eventually said, you know what, let's go down there, and they walked away.
And all the Daily Wire did was start walking up to the top.
Angel Studios, walking up to this vacant location, saying, I guess we'll take it.
We're gonna do the same thing.
Build that parallel economy.
In the meantime, it doesn't mean we just sit back and watch as Donald Trump gets indicted.
The Republicans need to be doing something, but they're not.
So it will require political effort and cultural effort.
And I think, at least on our part, that's the best I can do.
We also are launching that skate show.
Currently in production.
Filming has already started.
Construction on the actual park itself has to come, but we have the big open space and we're gearing up.
I'm excited for it.
I'll leave it there by cast brew coffee if you want to support our efforts at cast brew dot com.
Thanks for hanging out and we'll see you all at 4 p.m.
on this channel.
Trump's lawyers are currently making their case.
Explaining why Donald Trump should not be indicted by the latest news from CNBC, Trump lawyers told to expect indictment of former president as grand jury meets in DC court.
That's right.
Donald Trump will likely be indicted over something to do with January 6th.
Democrats probably will try and, they'll use this to get Trump removed under, I think it's the 14th Amendment, insurrection, that if you've waged insurrection against the US, you can't hold office.
We've seen the trial balloons with many Republicans in the past midterm elections.
So what happens?
If Donald Trump is removed, who's next in line?
Many would have said Ron DeSantis a year ago.
In fact, I think Ron DeSantis actually was beating Trump in the prediction markets for some time.
But now it may be Vivek Ramaswamy.
Because Ron DeSantis is sinking in the polls and in the prediction markets.
And you know what, man?
You know, I'll put it like this.
My view is the Republican Party.
Never been a fan of them.
Never cared for them.
And I didn't even vote for Donald Trump in 2016.
But I voted for Trump in 2020 because I liked his foreign policy.
Not perfect, but better.
And I want to see him fire people.
Schedule F. That kind of stuff.
That's the only thing I really see right now is making it worth it.
Trump had a bunch of bad personnel.
Undeniable.
He had some bad decisions.
It is what it is.
But why would I vote for establishment politics?
And that appears to be the detainee's campaign.
Don't get me wrong, he's winning the culture wars in Florida, but his campaign is coming across like Democrat strategy.
When I look at the Democrats and how they operate, and I look at the detainee's campaign and how it operates, I'm like, same thing.
I don't know, whatever.
You can tell me I'm wrong, that's fine.
I'm not saying I'm right about everything, but I'm telling you, that's how I feel about it.
And so long as that's the case, I won't support him.
I mean, that's it.
Look, obviously I think the big issue is the deception, the deepfakes and stuff.
But it looks like the play is to remove Trump by force and not through a democratic victory.
Let's read this news and then we'll talk about the current state of politics.
Here's the report from CNBC.
Trump's lawyers were told Thursday by prosecutors to expect an indictment against the former president in connection with his efforts to reverse his loss in the 2020 election.
Full stop!
Donald Trump did not try to reverse his loss.
Donald Trump was a party to many lawsuits, not even just his, but there were lawsuits to prevent... I shouldn't say reverse, but prevent loss is probably better.
Reverse implies Trump lost, and then after the fact, he went, no, no, no, no, no.
The reality is, votes come in, there's a process, the votes get counted, and it all ended when Mike Pence counted the votes and Joe Biden won.
That's it.
There were certainly some lawsuits, and before that happened, Trump was making his case.
So it's like the race was still on, right?
Anyway, Trump's lawyers, Todd Blanche and John Laurel, met Thursday morning in Washington, D.C.
with prosecutors for the Department of Justice Special Counsel Jack Smith and were informed of the planned indictment.
At around the same time, the grand jury that could soon vote on criminally charging Trump assembled in Washington federal court.
Multiple members of that panel were seen entering the Ebert Prettyman Courthouse around 8.30 a.m.
So, you know, look, I put it off as long as I could.
We're trying to see if there was going to be indictment.
We don't know.
By the time you watch this, news may come out because this video is going to go up at 4.
Early Thursday afternoon, members of the U.S.
Marshals Service, who are responsible for security at federal court, met with officials from the U.S.
Park Police and Washington, D.C.
Police Department at the Prettyman Courthouse NBC reported.
It looks like we're going to see this.
The media, of course, is claiming Donald Trump is an insurrectionist.
He incited violence, when in reality, Trump told people to be peaceful and not to be violent, but here we are.
Now, with this news, you would think that Donald Trump would tank in the prediction markets, and everyone would say, there's no way he's gonna be president.
Still, despite all the indictments, Donald Trump holds a 58 cent lead.
Or he holds the lead with 58 cents in the prediction markets at Predicted.
Ron DeSantis is now at 16 cents, tied with Vivek Ramaswamy at 16 cents.
This is not a poll.
This is two things.
First, it is people buying shares in who they think will win the nomination.
If you buy one share at 16 cents of Ron DeSantis, and then he becomes the nominee, that share will sell for $1.
I believe that's how it works.
One dollar.
That means it's a good bet.
Some people will buy shares because it's a good bet.
16 cents gets you a dollar?
Hey, better than 5 to 1, right?
Some people might be thinking 58 cents for Donald Trump is even better because he's gonna get it no matter what.
But Vivek Ramaswamy has now become profitable.
This is a combination of a poll and prediction, in that the wisdom of the crowd is making a bet on who they think is going to win.
I think it's substantive to look at.
When Ron DeSantis is sinking, despite the fact that Trump could get knocked out, you might be asking, how could that be?
Donald Trump could be indicted and removed, certainly Ron DeSantis.
Vivek Ramaswamy.
It could very well be Vivek.
Why?
Well, Vivek is, he's killing it.
He goes on shows, he speaks openly, he says what he thinks, even if there's potential negative press from it.
I've mentioned this before, but when he was like, we should have a civics test for voting, I'm like, wow, that's brave.
Because you'll get attacked relentlessly by Democrats for it.
But Vivek is just, he's sitting here on the show and he's like, you know, they're probably gonna get mad at me for saying this, like his people.
But he's like, there's got to be some kind of like civic test for voting.
And I'm like, yes.
Vivek is quick-witted, sharp, knowledgeable, principled.
I like the guy.
Nobody's perfect and I don't trust everyone completely.
Especially politicians.
But I'm a big fan of Vivek.
Some people are even saying Trump Ramaswamy 2024.
Could be cool.
Tim Scott might be good.
Not so sure.
I think he might be more war, hockey.
I don't know.
Take a look at this from Politico.
What Ron DeSantis misjudged about the 2024 race and how he can revive his faltering campaign.
What I will say is two things.
What I have found is that very few people in the general space care about Ron DeSantis.
Ron DeSantis supporters get really, really angry when you point these things out, and they attack viciously, trying to win flame wars instead of trying to earn allies.
That's why I think they're going to lose.
And then they say, but Trump does it because they think they can compete with Trump.
If that's the case, you deserve to lose.
Don't care.
Many people will say, but his policies are better.
Don't care.
The way I see things impacts what I do, right?
It's how everybody is.
It's a simple statement.
So if you insult me over and over again, probably not going to want to be involved in whatever it is you got going on.
So I have to wonder if these Ron DeSantis supporters and surrogates and personalities are actually just Trump supporters trying to sink Ron DeSantis, and it's the smartest way to do it.
I love this.
The one takeaway from this, let me just pull up this one line.
The one line that I think matters the most.
They say it is telling the misfire of an announcement happened on Twitter.
Or X it's called now.
The campaign has appeared to believe that the governor can only secure the nomination if it wins constant Twitter flame wars against the likes of pro-Trump voices Cat Turd and Alex Brusiewicz.
Could not agree more.
Who wrote this?
Politico?
I'm surprised.
Who wrote this, uh, what do we have?
Rich Lowry.
Yeah.
You know, when I say like, hey, Ron DeSantis was fairly weak in his announcement, they go, but Alex Brusiewicz said a thing!
And I'm like, I don't care!
I don't care about Alex Brusiewicz.
We've had him on the show a couple times.
Oh.
We've tried inviting DeSantis people on the show, they won't do it.
And I'm like, I'm telling you, I look at this and I'm like, reeks of the same Democrat establishment garbage.
Sorry.
And if you think I'm wrong, you're, DeSantis supporters, you're doing nothing to convince me otherwise.
Here's Alex Brusiewicz.
He's the one who- Oh, okay, so that's who posted it.
I think it's funny.
CatTurd and I remain undefeated.
Check the latest CatTurd poll.
Very funny.
Well let me show you a tweet from me with a response from a very strong DeSantis supporter.
I tweeted.
This is not to say DeSantis comes off that way to me.
He doesn't.
just like the old GOP which I never cared for.
If anything, I'd vote libertarian before I'd vote establishment Republicans.
This is not to say DeSantis comes off that way to me.
He doesn't, but his campaign and his surrogates do.
Max Ilago, prominent DeSantis supporter, has 30,000 followers, says, quote, I can't support
Trump because he was endorsed by David Duke and Nick Fuentes.
Yes, this is the straw man false narrative tactics that I have so loathed from Democrats.
Now, what do we see from, like, Alex Brusewitz, Cat Turd, and Laura Loomer?
Um, vicious attacks.
I don't mean to say, like, political attacks.
Like, manipulations and things like that.
What I mean is, like, Laura Loomer is relentless on digging through the dirt of DeSantis donors and his campaign and calling him out.
It is relentless.
But it's on the level.
They're mad that she's looking into who the donors are and she has thoughts and views on why those donors are bad.
What am I supposed to say about that?
Is the Santas campaign gonna come out and be like, well, Laura Loomer claimed that this guy donated to Ronda Santas and how dare she?
And I'm like, Did he?
I'm like, I don't know!
Uh, Bruce Switz has posted things like, there was a photo of, I think George Soros at an event, and he says, okay, that's not real, but I'm not surprised, blah blah blah.
Ronda Santas' campaign put out a deepfake.
Several.
Called it Real Life Trump, even though they were fake.
And then, when I said, yo, this is shockingly wrong, they should not do this, The response from DeSantis supporters was, Tim Pool is stupid, and actually thought those were real.
And I'm like, well, okay, I guess.
The DeSantis campaign did not take down the posts, has kept them up, and, according to the New York Times, whether you trust them or not, produced the video of the LGBT issues, passed it off to someone else to make it look like they didn't make it.
It's just a bunch of weird, pandery establishment manipulation.
The worst advice.
What Max Ilago said in this post, I can't support Trump because he was endorsed by David Duke and Nick Fuentes.
When did I ever say that?
When did I ever say I can't support Ron DeSantis because he's endorsed by people I disagree with?
Ron DeSantis is endorsed by a lot of people I disagree with.
And so is Donald Trump.
Ah, false framing, the insufferable, the insufferable responses of the DeSantis surrogates and supporters.
And this is a perfect example.
In fact, I even responded, thank you for exemplifying one of my issues.
I'm going to use it in my video about why Ron keeps sinking.
Y'all are insufferable.
What I'm saying is, the DeSantis campaign Is coming off like a traditional Republican establishment campaign that the people who are working for and supporting him are coming off like establishment politics?
falsely framing things, manipulating information and photos just like the Democrats had always done, and I've been complaining about this for some time.
You will not be able to come to me, a man who has been screeching since 2015, stop making me defend Trump because the media kept lying about him.
You're not going to be able to lie about Trump and come to me and be like, vote for us instead.
I'll be like, you're exactly what I've been complaining about.
But that's their game.
That's why Ron is losing.
Trump earned new voters like me.
Moderate, centrist, little left-leaning, a lot of issues.
Big for Bernie Sanders because more so anti-establishment than anything.
I liked his consistency, but boy did he let us down.
Didn't vote for Trump in 2016.
Only came around to Trump like two months, three months before the actual election.
And even now so, I can only really say, I think he's the best bet towards firing a lot of people, because he did have a lot of people that he hired that were really bad.
But I, but I trust in his emotional state.
Trump's an emotional, arrogant guy, and he's gonna want revenge.
That's it.
I wouldn't vote for any one of these establishment types.
Last year, Ron DeSantis came off more like a anti-establishment guy fighting the culture war, and I said, we need that Trumpian strategy with tact, and that could be Ron DeSantis.
And then what happened?
He launched a campaign rather poorly.
His campaign staff started just relentlessly attacking allies.
It's not just my opinion, Mike Cernovich talks about it.
The DeSantis supporters must actually be Trump supporters.
It's the only thing I can see.
Because there's no reason for Christina Pashaw, Redfern, Brian Griffin, these other people to start insulting me on Twitter over my concerns about what's going on in the state of Florida when I didn't even insult Ron DeSantis over it.
That's it.
A video went viral of Jazz Jennings.
I basically said, is this happening in Florida?
Like, where's Ron DeSantis?
What did I get?
The DeSantis people just went nuts.
Started insulting and attacking me.
And then, when I said, hey, it's probably a bad idea, why are you insulting and attacking me?
They doubled down and said, Tim Pool's whining and crying.
Then when I said, y'all are really sinking Ron DeSantis, they responded with, Tim had his feelings hurt, so now he won't support DeSantis.
And I'm just like, man.
DeSantis has surrounded himself with the most ineffective, insufferable people I've ever seen.
And for that reason, he's sinking.
I'm not saying my support of the man is predicated upon the awful people he's surrounded himself with and who support him.
I'm saying that there's gonna be a ton of people who will have an emotional and visceral reaction to being repeatedly insulted, and they're gonna be like, I am so done with this.
I mean, to be fair, when his own campaign staff And gubernatorial staff started insulting me.
I was just like, well, okay, I guess.
If you don't want my support, you don't get it.
Geez.
There's simple answers to this.
They could have simply said something like, well, I've said this before, but when it comes to the Jazz Jennings things, they could have been like working on it.
Winky emoji.
They could have said nothing.
But this is what you get.
I can't support Trump because he was endorsed by David Duke and Nick Fuentes.
Are you daft?
Are you trying to- You know, to be fair, maybe the DeSantis campaign, they're just really stupid people.
Like, they're not very smart.
They don't know what they're doing.
They don't- They can't formulate arguments.
Another reason why I have little faith in Ron DeSantis.
He needs to fire these people.
Now, hold on there a minute!
He fired a lot of people!
Okay.
Respect.
He fired that guy who posted that Sun and Rad, the Black Sun Nazi thing?
Okay.
I think he's starting to figure it out, and that's why I've said I think he can turn it around.
But one of the biggest hurdles he's got is that his supporters are going out on Twitter and intentionally sabotaging support for Ron DeSantis.
I don't know how you overcome that.
That's a tough challenge.
Should the DeSantis campaign go to Max Ilago and say, stop tweeting about us, we disavow you, you are hurting us?
Probably would be a good idea.
According to reporting from Laura Loomer, they think that this Maxillago guy is actually working for DeSantis, but I'm like, I don't know, man.
He's really hurting the DeSantis campaign.
Like, more than anyone I've seen on social media.
DeSantis has fired a lot of people, and he's got a lot of negative press for it.
I don't think that's fair.
I think he should be firing people.
I think it's the right thing to do.
He needs to restructure this if he's going to turn it around, and I think he's figuring out what that's all about.
For this, Trump supporters are attacking him.
Well, you know, that's politics.
He ain't gonna sail through a storm without getting wet.
But I think it's the right move for him to do, and he could turn things around.
Right now, his prediction markets have him tied with Vivek on Predicted.
His polls are sinking.
This is bad news.
But he's making moves, so we'll see.
Whether or not Ron is the right guy will be determined on, in my view.
Whether or not he can turn this ship around, and it is a good move to start firing people.
I don't know how you deal with having a base that is insufferable and annoying.
That is gonna cost him a lot, and it is.
But I can tell you, he should terminate his communications staff outright.
Like, Jeremy Radford fired... Is Brian Griffin, is that the name of the guy?
It's funny, he's named after the dog on Family Guy.
Uh, let me see if I can find this, uh, find this, make sure I'm getting it right.
Because maybe it's not Brian Griffin.
I'm pretty sure it is.
Let me see if, uh, all that really comes up is, uh, the dog.
Maybe I got the name wrong.
Uh, let's see.
I'm trying to do a search here.
I want to make sure I get this one right, so you're gonna have to bear with me.
But there's, uh, uh, maybe it was, uh, Oh yeah, there you go, right.
Yeah, okay, no, I got it right.
Brian Griffin is his name.
Yeah, fire him.
Press Secretary for Ron DeSantis, fired!
Christina Pashaw, fired.
Jeremy Redfern.
So, Pashaw, Griffin, and Redfern should be terminated.
And I think it's because they do a really, really bad job.
They're not giving good advice.
They're not directing DeSantis in a way that's helping his campaign, as evidenced by his polls sinking.
As evidenced by previous supporters turning on him.
I was big for DeSantis last year.
I was like, he's probably the guy because Trump's too brash and arrogant, talks about body slamming reporters, but they still attack me anyway.
Alright.
Ron, you gotta fire him.
And I said it a while ago, you gotta fire him.
And you gotta own it, and you gotta take responsibility, and you gotta be authentic, and you need better advice.
If he doesn't do that, I'm not so confident he can win, but, look, I don't run presidential campaigns, what do I know?
I'm just some dude who complains on the internet, okay?
Some people don't like my videos, I don't have nearly as big of an audience as, say, like, Steven Crowder or whatever, so take their advice.
I can only tell you how I feel.
Alright?
And that could be completely meaningless.
But I'll tell you how I feel, and that is, I find the DeSantis campaign to be abysmal.
I think DeSantis' choice for staff has been terrible.
I think these people are doing a terrible job.
They're thin-skinned, quick to react, aggressive, constantly attacking allies.
His supporters are doing the same thing.
Ron made the right move in firing a lot of these people.
He's got to fire more of them.
He needs to clean house.
He needs to clean house, he needs to find better people, and he can turn it around, it is still early.
But for the time being, with the likes of these individuals, I just don't see it.
Instead of being, um, authentic in their defense of Ron DeSantis, they become this, like, I don't know, vile, vapid sludge.
Donald Trump should have fired Fauci.
He's the guy who says, I'm gonna drain the swamp!
Vote for me!
And then what does he do?
Oh, but I couldn't.
He couldn't.
And then Trump supporters are like, but he couldn't fire Fauci.
Oh, come on.
I know it's hard to fire federal employees.
Fair point.
Not the easiest thing.
But I have said this before.
He could have shunned him.
He could have said, like, don't come on TV with me at the very least.
Let me be a fence-sitter here and say Trump could have done more, right?
So, Trump supporters, you know, you're not going to win that one, but Trump wants revenge.
That I recognize.
Ron DeSantis needs to come out strongly for firing people.
And Trump doesn't even necessarily have this, this degree.
You need the dude on the stallion with the sword and the crown and the flowing robes, standing in front of all of his loyal soldiers, raising his sword and going, ah, just screaming.
I mean, figuratively.
What I mean to say is you need someone Who's going to be stern.
And Vivek doesn't have this either.
The thing is, Trump has more of it than anybody else.
Someone who's going to stand up, grip the sides of that podium and say, this country will not fall.
I will not allow the weaponization of government to be used against political opponents.
I will not allow the mutilation of children in this country.
Barack Obama had it.
Anyway, I'm ranting.
I'm ranting, right?
We'll see.
The indictment for Trump is probably coming.
And if he does get indicted and they pull his name off the ballot, it's gonna split the vote.
But I don't know that Ron DeSantis will be the guy.
Perhaps Vivek Ramaswamy.
We'll see.
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.
In a now-deleted post, YouTuber H. Pearl Davis said that 16-year-olds are more attractive than 26-year-olds.
The now-deleted post appeared to be an extension of a June post from Davis suggesting women in their 30s were less attractive than women in their 20s.
Oh boy!
Let's get controversial.
And address what Pearl has to say.
Now we had her on the show recently.
And many people are calling her like the female Andrew Tate or something like that.
And I do think that Pearl is starting to say things that are shocking for the sake of being shocking.
Like, arguing that women shouldn't have opinions and stuff like that.
It's a little over the top!
You want to make an argument about traditional gender roles, women leading the family, men leading the workplace.
That does not stop women from having the right to opinions.
But I don't want to be too hyperbolic and put words in Pearl's mouth, so I'll keep this one focused on this particular tweet that was deleted.
Dating, attraction, etc.
And I think it is, suffice it to say, no, this statement is dramatically incorrect.
Not only do most people, most men, not, would likely not prefer a 16-year-old over a 26-year-old, well, just that much, the data shows that, we talked about this on IRL, There's more than just physical appearance.
There's mental state.
And with the utmost respect to our nation's youth, I'm sorry, but 16-year-olds are cringe.
And the way I see this is it's like a weird thing to say for a person to claim that 16-year-olds, you know, could in any way be.
More attractive than a full adult female.
I think it's a strange thing to say.
It's just like no context for it.
But anyway, let's read.
I saw this and I was just like, huh?
Is this real?
goes by pearly things said 16 year old minor girls were more attracted than 26
year old I saw this and I was just like huh Davis later deleted the post of
heavy criticism is this real wrote the redheaded libertarian at Josie adults
shouldn't be talking about how hot kids are Gladbeck continued in another post.
Josie, I'm probably pouncing your name wrong.
My God, Pearl, stop this for F's sake.
What a weird thing to say, wrote one user.
No, they are not.
If a 26-year-old man is finding 16-year-olds hot, then there is an issue with them.
It's not just that.
Someone said, why does Pearl want adults to agree with her that 16-year-olds are hot?
They're not.
You know what I would say of a child?
If a child had good symmetrical features, I would say, cute kid.
Cute kid, that's about it.
I don't even necessarily, like, maybe it's just me.
There's got to be adult features, you know what I mean?
Like, looking at, it's just, it's a weird thing to say.
A lot of people are gonna try and play the game, like, oh, but 16-year-olds are teenagers, they've gone through puberty.
I'm like, dude, that's not it.
In fact, personally, I don't find 18, 19, 20-year-olds attractive either.
But there is some nuance to the conversation that I think it's fair to bring up.
Me?
Maybe I'm an outlier.
But I prefer women my own age.
I know women enjoy hearing that greatly.
And most guys do like younger women.
Take a look at Leonardo DiCaprio.
But there's a reason why Leo goes for women who are like 22 to 24.
Because men are attracted to women based on their ability to reproduce, and women are attracted to men based on their status.
Typically, in general, not absolutely.
Thus, it's not strange to find that guys want a woman in her 20s.
Perfect childbearing age.
In fact, by some studies, they say it's 28.
I've been doing the- I- I- I looked it up for this- for this segment.
Now, according to some dating websites, it's around 20.
Because, you know, you've got, like, a healthy young woman or whatever.
But there was, um, I think it was OkCupid.
They said, while physical attraction may be around that age, the issue is men are not attracted to the mental state of younger women.
So it may be that they're watching adult videos of, you know, teens, they'll call it 18, 19 year olds.
But guys really don't want that in the real world.
It's maybe more fantasy stuff.
There are some fair things to say in regard to what H. Pearl Davis tweeted, though, despite the fact that I believe she is overwhelmingly incorrect.
What I mean to say is, many people don't know this, but when you go to the mall, and you see a clothing store, and there's like a model wearing, you know, clothes and smiling or whatever, you know, those models are like 15, 16.
And in that regard, I understand what H. Pearl Davis is saying.
I, personally, don't.
I think it's disgusting.
I think it's horrifying.
That they, these modeling agencies, go for teenage girls who are underage to model scantily clad clothing.
But what I can say to that is, we know the entertainment industry is filled with pedos.
That's why it's gross.
And I gotta be honest, it's all gross.
Go to a mall and now what do you see?
Morbidly obese!
There's always something wrong with it.
You know, it's funny because there's like lifestyle modeling where you'll actually get a woman who's like 28 and she's like wearing normal clothes and I'm like, I gotta be honest, that's the most attractive thing.
That's why, look, maybe the trope in liberal worldviews and circles is to go to a bar to get to hook up.
Yeah, if you really want like legitimate pair bonding, it's you go to a grocery store or a laundromat.
You meet a real person your age who you can actually have a connection with, find things in common, and try to build a life with.
Anyway, I do think this is particularly funny.
Other users suggested Davis's post was designed to drive up engagement on X. Ah, you gotta love TimCast.com for calling Twitter X. Good work, guys.
The things people will say for engagement.
This is a bit much.
16-year-olds are still developing, one user continued.
They are children, leave them out of this.
Seriously.
This is what it's like to do anything for attention.
PSA, love your kids so much they don't grow up and need this kind of validation.
Pearl deleting this tweet proves it's weird and proves that all of you weirdos defending 16-year-old that the statement are also weird.
I agree.
But do you know what I got to say?
Pearl said, I gotta be honest, man.
It's just, it's just literally not true.
say what is true and people will like it or not. I gotta be honest man it's just
it's just literally not true. One person said I don't know Pearl I used to F with
you pretty hard now you kind of coming off as weird. There was no explanation
for that tweet yesterday not even sure an explanation would cover it. She said
people tend to get uglier the older they get in general.
Most Americans are overweight by 26 don't shoot the messenger. Okay. She had
tweeted before Or, yes, you're less attractive at 35 than at 25 as a woman.
This used to be common sense 50 years ago.
If what she means to say is that as people get older, they break down based on cultural standards, we can say this.
16-year-olds may be fitter and healthier than 26-year-olds.
I don't know that that's true.
And maybe H. Pearl Davis just phrased it particularly poorly.
But, uh, overwhelmingly, I think the data just shows that, uh, guys want women who are 20.
Look at this.
Like, no matter how old a guy gets, he wants a 20-year-old.
And then, for women, they want men their own age.
That's really interesting.
Women, uh, uh, can actually go up a little bit sometimes, but, uh, when women are younger, you can see this line.
20-year-old women want 23-year-old men.
Isn't that interesting?
20-year-old men want 20-year-old women.
21-year-old men want 20-year-old women.
Guys almost always go down.
The only time that's not true is when they're 20, and the data shows it's fairly even.
But for women, there's a period where they do want slightly older guys.
And then as they get older, they want slightly younger guys, you know?
Perhaps Pearl just phrased things rather poorly.
Rather poorly.
But here's my views.
I think that to a certain degree, Pearl Davis is just saying more and more things that generate attention.
Like, Pearl Davis got into it with shoe on head because she was critical of like Twitter or something.
And then Pearl Davis said, imagine a woman thinking she knows more than a literal billionaire.
And it's just like, What is- and she was like, what is gender?
Like, how did you bring gender into this?
And it's like, I agree with Shu.
I certainly agree that somebody who's a billionaire has- they know something.
Take their advice, right?
But how is gender involved?
I think that's the issue.
I think the mistake Pearl made was, if you want to say that as people age, they get uglier and fatter, true.
Grey hair, gaining weight, it happens to everybody.
You gotta work hard.
When you're younger, your body is growing.
So the calories you eat are going to literal cellular division and growth of your body.
And when you get older, if you maintain those habits of eating the same food, you get fat!
For me, I used to skate relentlessly like 8 hours a day.
And so I'd eat crazy amounts of food.
It was nuts.
Uh, thousands of calories per day, skating eight hours a day, no joke.
And when I slowed down skating, partly due to injury and partly due to work, my eating habits remained relatively the same.
Not completely, I did go down, but I would still eat a lot of food.
Panda Express, for instance.
I love go to Panda Express, get a double orange chicken fried rice, and I'd annihilate it, and then I'd go skate relentlessly, and I was thin as thin could get.
Skating slowed down, gained weight, went up 200 pounds.
Yikes!
That's a damage when you get your 30s, right?
And then I just said, I'm gonna stop eating these sugars and this garbage, and I adjusted my diet.
There had been periods shortly after where I would adjust my diet and lose weight.
When I was in New York during Occupy Wall Street, I was running up and down Manhattan all day filming stuff and lost a lot of weight.
I could eat a pint of Ben & Jerry's every night and it wasn't enough.
Yeah, no kidding.
You'd go to a protest and they'd march from the financial district up to Harlem.
It's like... What is it?
Like 10 or something miles?
I don't know how many miles.
And back down to the point where like my legs couldn't move and I'm like... Some protestors actually took the train to meet up with them because they didn't want to walk.
But, uh, you could eat relentlessly.
If the point there is that as we get older we become uglier, I get it.
But the most you could say about a teenager is, cute kid, cute teenager, whatever.
Obviously, there are beauty standards of all ages.
They don't want ugly, weird-looking kids in movies, they don't want ugly, weird-looking teenagers on the Disney Channel, and when you're an adult, they want you to have sex appeal.
But I think the problem for Pearl is that she said, hot.
Hot typically implies, you know, like sexual attraction.
And anybody who thinks that in that way... Yeah, you know, those are people we don't like.
But I think that the main issue there is just the improper phrasing, so whatever.
I'll leave it at that.
It was a fun segment to do because I wanted to highlight the, you know, I don't know, the tweet or whatever.
But next segment is coming up tonight at 8 p.m.
over at youtube.com slash TimCast.
Thanks for hanging out and I'll see you all then.
From the ashes of the old, we shall build anew.
The system is being intentionally destroyed.
Far-left extremists want to exploit the destruction to then build something different in their image.
Something they want.
It won't work, it never does.
Whenever these extremists tear things down, typically it gets replaced by something more extreme and dangerous, something that they don't expect.
When it came to the Soviet era, it's the intellectuals that get purged first.
And I could be wrong about this, I'm not a big French Revolution history buff, but wasn't it like the French Revolution happened and then Napoleon became emperor?
And then like another revolution?
You get my point.
But the story is thus.
Improvised explosive devices used to bomb tent full of homeless drug addicts in ongoing turf war near Seattle Hospital.
The explosion was a targeted attack on a fentanyl tent where 20 customers were inside using drugs.
Holy what?
Yeah, apparently there were people inside.
This is a crazy story.
Multiple explosive devices likely connected to an ongoing drug turf war were the cause of multiple explosions and a massive fire in a homeless encampment outside Harborview Medical Center in Seattle on Friday morning, putting the hospital at risk as passerbys reported debris impacting the building.
According to a police report obtained by the Post Millennial, at the encampment located between Interstate 5 and the hospital in downtown Seattle, the explosion was a targeted attack on a fentanyl tent where 20 customers were inside using drugs.
Now, I don't know if they mentioned this.
I don't think anybody got hurt.
I think they fled.
One witness stated that minutes before the explosion, he saw the devices and alerted others inside.
He added that everyone inside the tent freaked out and exited by lifting the other side of the structure to escape.
The witness told police that he attempted to exit south due to hearing gunshots and flashing from the bushes to the northeast, but saw another improvised explosive device south of the structure and added that he heard someone yelling that the suspect in the attack was shooting at them.
Yo!
What?
This is crazy.
What's this video?
Let me get the audio going on this one.
unidentified
That's right, wave and smile as we're talking about explosions and drug camps.
John, we've talked publicly about in encampment areas the correlation between crime and...
That's right. Wave and smile as we're talking about explosions and drug camps. This is what the city's become.
Survivors told investigators the former leader of the encampment named Coconut had recently been replaced
and as a result had come back with a firearm and shot at both the old smoking tent and the new smoking tent.
Jeez.
And held the people inside the tents at gunpoint robbing them of everything.
According to court filings, Coconut is connected to drug trafficking operations in the area, and was described in the report as a Pacific Islander Asian male in his 50s with cornrow-style braids, with graying hair, wearing a gray t-shirt and tan cargo pants, who's identified as Michael Benito Palasa, 55, and is associated with the short white female with tan skin, with the alias Monkey, who has been identified as 39-year-old Michelle Desiree Olajosen, Man.
Crazy.
Witness say a few weeks ago, the fire.
There was a lot of infighting at the camp.
Coconut was replaced as leader.
Jeez.
In 2020, Powassa was convicted of arson in the first degree.
And in 2004, of domestic violence.
He was also mentioned as a possible suspect for an arson in 2020.
One of the witnesses said Coconut made explosive devices from plastic buckets and had been teaching people in the encampment how to make IEDs.
It's that factions are forming weird gangs, and now there's... I don't know what do you call it?
Street war?
Urban warfare conflict?
A different witness saw the buckets placed around the tent with closed lids with a white and green wire coming out of the top of the buckets with a plastic bag attached.
Another witness added that there had been ongoing conflicts over $80,000 worth of fentanyl that was stolen from the Asians by one of the traffickers in the encampment and there was now a price on his head.
He also believed the fire and explosion were retaliation for the recent shooting death of a person named Foolish.
They say, though, the encampment was destroyed in the fire just a few days later.
Tents, gas cans, propane, and even video cameras to monitor the drug tents were already being brought in by people attempting to rebuild it.
After the fire, you know what it reminds me of?
We have, like, wasps all over the place, and we'll knock their stupid little thing down and spritz them, and then the day later, like, there it is again!
It just keeps coming back.
You gotta be vigilant.
Man, this is it.
This is what cities are turning into.
Take a look at this Twitter thread.
We got Jeremy Harris over on X.com.
Gas canisters and propane tanks are back today in the encampment that exploded outside Harborview.
The city had posted signs saying anything put in this area is subject to immediate removal.
So will the city enforce the law they posted here?
People who work near here expressed to me today they are frustrated the state and city are allowing the encampment to return after the explosion last week.
It happened once.
It'll happen again.
For the safety of the hospital, I think it would be better if they cleaned this up.
It's not going to happen.
Y'all heard about that song, Try That in a Small Town, right?
Jack Posobiec had a good tweet.
I retweeted it.
Actually, let me pull that tweet up to explain to you where we're going and what's going on.
I'll scroll down and here we are.
I got it right here.
We'll pop it in.
Here's the post.
Try That in a Small Town song.
Imagine a small town like Brunswick, Georgia, where a black man is skulking around a home under construction looking for things to steal.
So local residents confront him and he attacks them, getting shot in the process.
Full stop.
I gotta provide more context to that because it's more than that.
Imagine a small town like Brunswick, Georgia, where there have been a series of burglaries.
A gun has been stolen from a vehicle.
Then, a black man is seen on video, on camera, skulking around a home under construction looking for things to steal.
residents confront him. He attacks them, he gets shot in the process. The prosecutor who
Crazy.
declined to charge them for defending themselves would herself be thrown in prison by the federal
government. Yeah, crazy. The two men who slipped with the criminal would be sentenced to life
in state prison. And their neighbor would be sentenced to life in state prison for filming
the conflict despite having no involvement and just filming it. The black man's criminal
history and the fact that he was currently on probation would be kept from the jurors.
A federal jury would then find them guilty of civil rights violations and kidnapping, adding additional life sentences for Travis and Greg McMichael and another 35 years for the neighbor.
A street would then be named after the dead black thief.
That's what happens when you try that in a small town.
And that's the story of Ahmaud Arbery.
And that's what's happening to our small towns.
That's what's happening to our big cities.
Cultural corruption, degradation, and pure evil of the highest order.
It's crazy, isn't it?
Now, I could be wrong, but let me make sure I get this right, because there is some important context I can add to this.
This took place, I believe, let me make sure I have the dates right.
The case ultimately transferred to Cobb County on June 24th, and then the trial began in 2020.
Donald Trump was president when this stuff was going down.
And I'm not blaming him directly, because the federal trial took place later.
But there is a lot Trump could have done that he did not do.
Because Republicans and even Trump don't understand the degree of cultural conflict.
They didn't get it.
Trump didn't invoke the Insurrection Act, Trump didn't know how to fight this culture war, and he lost.
Things are changing.
Bud Light is showing us that things are changing.
But you look at a place like Seattle, these explosions, the crime, the gangs, I only expect it to get worse in the short term.
To be honest, in the long term, I'm fairly optimistic.
Despite everything we've seen, I'm fairly optimistic that we're going to win this one because of our cultural endeavors.
Because we are going to shape the minds of the people in this country in a positive direction.
Shape their minds in such a way that they are responsible for themselves.
That they uphold their own freedoms.
What I mean to say is, I want people to develop an understanding that it is their responsibility, that no one's in charge of them.
The other side, the Democrats, want you to just do as they say and they will lie, cheat, and steal to get that power from you and keep you scared.
I want the opposite.
And that means producing content and building culture that develops people into free-thinking, independent individuals.
In the meantime, consider whether or not you want to live in Seattle.
Next segment is tonight over at youtube.com slash TimCastIRL at 8 p.m.