Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

Aug. 15, 2023 - Tim Pool Daily Show

01:40:03

Trump AND His Lawyers Charged UNDER RICO, Democrats Are Engaged IN SEDITIOUS CONSPIRACY Against US

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 Trump AND His Lawyers Charged UNDER RICO, Democrats Are Engaged IN SEDITIOUS CONSPIRACY Against US Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Participants

Main voices

tim pool

01:35:16

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.
		Last night, we got word that the Georgia grand jury issued 10 indictments.
		We didn't know who was going to be indicted.
		The assumption was that it was going to be Donald Trump.
		After we wrapped TimCast IRL, that was the only thing we knew, and I was speaking with one of our producers about, what do we title this?
		Because the segment was going to be titled, Indictments for Trump, and I said, actually, the indictments could be for his lawyers.
		We don't know for sure.
		So we're going to hold off on this one.
		Because all we know is that an indictment was voted on, but we don't know for who.
		Early this morning, around 1 or 2 a.m., there was a press conference where it was revealed Trump and 18 co-defendants were charged with racketeering multiple felonies in Georgia 2020 election probe.
		Charges in the sprawling indictment include racketeering and conspiracy, according to NBC News.
		The 18 co-defendants, for the most part, Trump's lawyers.
		Yeah.
		People are saying on Twitter that we're in Banana Republic territory.
		I mean, I think, I just, I reject that.
		It's dumb.
		We are in outright revolution territory.
		Banana Republic, fine, sure.
		It's a reference to these fake governments propped up, etc.
		No, I think we're facing full-scale revolution.
		You've got a seditious conspiracy by elements of local and federal government to cheat in the 2024 election by levying false charges against Trump and his lawyers.
		We're talking about legal counsel.
		Donald Trump Facing legitimate questions about the 2020 election, notably the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, I believe that's the paper's name, reported that there were duplicate ballots scanned and that after a watchdog group caught this, they were removed.
		Now, hold on.
		You say they were caught and removed?
		Yes, because a watchdog group caught and had them removed.
		Upon hearing this, is it reasonable for a person in this election to say, we got to do an audit, we got to figure out what's going on?
		I certainly think so.
		Trump then confers with legal counsel about strategies and how to assess claims of impropriety in Georgia, burst water pipes, etc.
		Whether or not you agree or disagree with the narrative, what would someone do?
		What would you do in an election when you're hearing about these things going on?
		As I've stated since the beginning, there should be a full-scale audit.
		Why?
		If you don't actually investigate the claims made, then you are going to end up with half the country pitted against half the country, and you face civil war or full-scale cultural collapse.
		This is the point of a legal system.
		For this, Donald Trump has been indicted and so have his lawyers.
		So this is not, in my view, legitimate in any way.
		This is not, I don't like the phrase banana republic.
		This is militarized weaponization of law enforcement across multiple jurisdictions.
		I believe we're looking at 91 plus indictments, the targeting of legal counsel.
		Saying that anyone who dares to provide constitutionally protected legal advice will also be brought up on charges.
		This is, I don't know what you'd call it, fifth generational civil war?
		Revolution?
		History will determine whether or not we are facing revolution, civil war, or justice against an evil criminal enterprise Yeah.
		If fighting erupts over whatever happens in the next year, perhaps they'll say Civil War.
		If these individuals imprison Trump and his lawyers, and I believe the next step is going to be media personalities who encouraged Trump to pursue this, encouraged the fraud narrative, encouraged protests in Washington, D.C.
		They're next.
		They'll say that it was criminal incitement, that it was conspiracy, etc.
		They're already saying that there are several unindebted co-conspirators in this Georgia charge against Trump.
		They're next.
		Depending on who wins is how history will dictate what happened.
		If the far-left extremists and the criminal seditious conspiracy against the United States, that is, the Democrat prosecutor and their allies, people like Jack Smith, if they win, they will simply write that they averted an insurrection.
		If honor, integrity, justice, and the American Constitution wins, that is, the right to legal counsel, for instance, and free speech, then we will say it was an attempted revolution.
		If fighting breaks out, call it a civil war.
		Let me read for you what NBC News has to say, and then we'll go through the indictment.
		Many people are pointing out that to justify conspiracy charges, they're claiming that Donald Trump telling people to watch TV Well, we'll clarify that.
		In the indictment, there are many things, and you'll see these repeated on Twitter, and they're sort of correct, sort of incorrect.
		They show that Donald Trump is being accused of furthering his conspiracy by tweeting things like watch OAN and calling Mike Pence a wimp.
		They are not saying that these activities are illegal.
		What they're saying is that when all of them are combined, it amounts to a criminal conspiracy.
		The assumption from many is that the goal here is to get a rapid conviction of Donald Trump.
		It will likely be appealed.
		The Supreme Court may intervene.
	But as Alan Dershowitz said, Trump will be convicted.
	The Supreme Court will likely intervene and remove these charges.
	But I'll say this before we read.
	I think this is a civil war.
	I suppose you can argue it's not hot conflict, so it's more like a bleeding Kansas, civil unrest, or revolutionary period.
	Whatever, I guess.
	I guess people don't refer to Weimar Germany as a civil war when the Nazis were taking over and then eventually did.
	Just a revolution or a shift happened, I suppose.
	But I think it's fair to say that you're in it.
	You're in it because it's as simple as this.
	Either.
	You have Democrats engaging in the weaponization of government against their political opponents, knowing they'll lose, and this is their only way to win in 2024.
	Win power, not the election, because this is cheating to subvert an election.
	Or, you have Donald Trump and his allies conspiring to overthrow the U.S.
	government and its duly elected representatives.
	Take your pick.
	It's one or the other.
	In which case, welcome to a civil war.
	Cold Civil War?
	Call it that.
	That's what that Princeton professor referred to it as.
	But again, I will stress, take your pick.
	Is it Trump conspiring with his allies to overthrow the government?
	With an insurrection at the Capitol in an attempt to actually seize the seat of power by force?
	Or, are Democrats in multiple jurisdictions across this country Filing charges against Trump to cheat and steal power.
	It's one or the other and that's it.
	There is no circumstance where it's two criminal enterprises fighting each other to gain criminal control of the government.
	Well, I suppose you could argue a very small possibility.
	There's no argument where both factions are just innocent in this and misconstruing what's going on.
	No, it's the worst.
	Let's read this, and then I'll show you some of the indictment, and then we'll talk about where this all goes, because...
	You know, I just think I would not be surprised to hear of prominent U.S.
	individuals fleeing the country already.
	We know about the billionaires building doomsday bunkers on islands in New Zealand and other places.
	We know about the escalation of war that's going on.
	There are already stories of people in the U.S.
	either fleeing their state because it's Democrat or Republican.
	And we've already heard stories of the ultra-wealthy preparing to flee or having fled to certain locations.
	Throughout the past several years, there have been many prominent individuals, lawyers, and journalists who have left the United States to go live abroad because of the extent of persecution that we've been seeing escalate.
	NBC News reports it as such.
	Former President Donald Trump and top allies, including his lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, and his former White House Chief of Staff, Mark Meadows, and a top former Justice Department official, Jeffrey Clark, were indicted Monday on felony charges in connection with efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election results in Georgia.
	The sweeping 41-count indictment also names lawyers John Eastman, Sidney Powell, Kenneth Chaseborough, Jenna Ellis, and Ray Smith, along with several others, all were charged with violating Georgia's RICO Act, racketeer-influenced and corrupt organization.
	In an indictment handed up by the judge around 9 p.m.
	and made public just before 11 p.m., Trump was charged with felony racketeering and numerous conspiracy charges court filings show.
	I'm of the opinion that there is a criminal conspiracy, a seditious conspiracy against the United States levied by Democrat personalities for a variety of reasons, but I'll give you one.
	Yesterday around 1 p.m.
	Reuters obtained documents, court documents, that were posted by the Fulton County Court.
	Charges filed against Trump, a judge assigned.
	They were published by the court.
	Now lawyers on Twitter, many personalities, said, how is it that the court received charging documents, assigned a judge to the case, before the grand jury had convened?
unidentified		Hey, it's Kimberly Fletcher here from Moms4America with some very exciting news.
		Tucker Carlson is going on a nationwide tour this fall and Moms4America has the exclusive VIP meet and greet experience for you.
		Before each show, you can have the opportunity to meet Tucker Carlson in person.
		These tickets are fully tax-deductible donations, so go to momsforamerica.us and get one of our very limited VIP meet-and-greet experiences with Tucker at any of the 15 cities on his first ever Coast to Coast tour.
		Not only will you be supporting Moms for America in our mission to empower moms, promote liberty, and raise patriots, your tax-deductible donation secures you a full VIP experience with priority entrance and check-in, premium gold seating in the first five rows, access to a pre-show cocktail reception, an individual meet-and-greet, and photo with America's most famous conservative and our friend, Tucker Carlson.
		Visit momsforamerica.us today for more information and to secure your exclusive VIP meet-and-greet tickets.
		See you on the tour!
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		The grand jury hadn't even voted on an indictment and the court had already said they were intending to prosecute.
		Because my friends, the conspiracy against Donald Trump goes a bit beyond just this prosecutor who's already fundraising off of this, and it extends to judges and other prominent personalities, including Republicans in Georgia.
		There's a lot of people in on it.
		I don't know to what extent, but at least a couple dozen, it would seem, and they know exactly what they're doing.
		Here's the scary reality.
		I don't see this as just some criminal conspiracy or seditious conspiracy.
		I do think there is a seditious conspiracy against the United States government to subvert and steal the election in 2024 by indicting the frontrunner.
		But I think we're also looking at a dangerous standalone complex level situation, which is why I say civil war.
		For those that aren't familiar with the concept of a standalone complex, it is as such.
		There are actions taken by numerous individuals that appear to be in concert, but they're not.
		It gives the appearance of a conspiracy, when in fact, it's just in furtherance of a shared goal.
		It's a brilliant concept.
		You have, let's say, 30 people across the country who all engage in some kind of surreptitious behavior where you assume, certainly, with all their actions benefiting each other, it was a conspiracy, but in fact it wasn't.
		It's just A concerted ideological effort.
		I believe that's what we're looking at here with Georgia, with New York, with D.C., with Democrats.
		You don't need there to be a conspiracy because all of these people are working towards the same end using nefarious means.
		That's what I think we're dealing with here.
		That's why I say civil war.
		A seditious conspiracy or coup or whatever you want to call it would be a small group of people conspiring to steal power.
		But what we have here are ideologically entrapped individuals across the board in multiple jurisdictions who are all doing whatever they can to steal power and cheat in the 2024 election.
		That's why I say so.
		It's an ideological push among a large faction.
		The other day, my friend said to me, as the trope goes, there can never be a civil war in this country.
		Who's going to fight?
		You think Trump supporters on the left are going to go out and march?
		I said, no.
		Do you know what a civil war is?
		Have you ever read history about how they begin?
		It is a small faction of ideologically captured individuals who start fighting.
		It spreads to the general public and then it erupts.
		Perhaps it doesn't reach the level of full-scale conflict like the American Civil War, but if it does...
		Then what we are dealing with today will be considered the Civil War period.
		Perhaps they won't say it was a Civil War until you get state-on-state conflict, or I don't think you need state-on-state conflict, you need factional violence.
		But right now, this is that period.
		I wonder what they'll call it.
		The Trump era?
		The lead-up to the Civil War?
		I don't know.
		It really just depends on what happens.
		If Trump and his allies are crushed, And the media personalities who defended him and supported him are indicted and crushed.
		They will just say they averted a civil war.
		If the seditious conspiracy against the U.S.
		government from these Democrat personalities is stopped, you will say, people will say a civil war was averted.
		Here's the indictment.
		Fulton County Superior Court filed August 14th.
		Amazing.
		Donald Trump, Rudy Giuliani, John Eastman, Mark Meadows, Kenneth Chespero, Jeffrey Clark, Jenna Ellis, Ray Smith, Robert Scheele, Michael Roman, David Schaefer, Sean Still, Stephen Lee, Harrison Floyd, Trevian Coote, Sydney Powell, Kathleen Latham, Scott Graham Hall, Misty Hampton, Misty Hampton and Kathleen Latham, my understanding is, were election officials who invited Trump's team to come in and take a look at voting systems that had had problems, that had problems during the election.
		According to CNN, a written invitation was given to Trump's team.
		Did Trump's team know who this person was?
		Let me break down for you.
		Trump contacts a legal team, a firm, and he says, I want to investigate these claims about impropriety.
		They do.
		The individuals, the lawyers and several people, make contact with these election officials, who then say that they're going to allow them to come and take a look.
		Georgia has now indicted all of them as a criminal conspiracy.
		Makes me wonder.
		About what really went down and about the claims made by Trump and his supporters in 2020 about impropriety.
		Because boy, it certainly seems like they're trying to cover something up, doesn't it?
		But I'll tell you what I think is the simple solution.
		I certainly think there was impropriety, but I think the gist of it was the governor, secretary of state, Democrats and Republicans changed the rules to heavily benefit Democrats.
		I don't think they needed to fabricate ballots or anything like that.
		I don't think they needed it.
		But what they got out of all of this was criminal conspiracy charges.
		It feels more like bait to me.
		Look, if you have ballot harvesting and ballot chasing, you don't need to create fake ballots.
	And a lot of people say the signatures were BS and they were duplicate counting and all this stuff, and I'm like, yes, yes, absolutely.
	That's using the system as it stands in nefarious ways.
	I guess I'm trying to differentiate from manufacturing fake ballots and forging signatures to going to a nursing home and then claiming to be a representative for all of these individuals, having them sign off on these documents and getting the votes you need through nefarious means.
	Donald Trump and his team then demand to know what happened.
	They engage in this behavior which results in conspiracy charges against all of them.
	If Donald Trump did nothing, And came out and said, they beat us in the ground game, it was ballot harvesting, they changed the rules, we have to file lawsuits.
	What would they charge him with?
	And they seem to have found anything to go after him.
	Now, again, I do believe there was a degree of impropriety in 2020, but I believe that Donald Trump lost in 2020 because executives of several states, Georgia included, changed the rules to benefit Democrats.
	That's it.
	That is the simple explanation.
	They made it very, very easy for Democrats to find the ballots by ballot chasing and ballot harvesting.
	That's how Biden got so many votes.
	People locked in their homes were told Trump's at fault and you should vote for him.
	They went to nursing homes and said, you can sign us as your caregiver and then we will collect the ballots.
	There you go.
	Mike Cernovich tweeted, this is collusion.
	Georgia GOP politician refers to the Trump-RICO indictment as our opportunity to get rid of Trump.
	He says, yep.
	He doesn't say, this is our opportunity to get rid of Trump.
	He says, Trump damaged the Republican Party and now we have the opportunity to get in someone else and to change this and blah, blah, blah.
	Oh boy.
	We're already in dangerous territory.
	Here's the, here's the initial charging document that was accidentally published 1239 PM.
	They've not explained how this happened, but it shows you that the grand jury was fake.
	That these Democrats have conspired and pre-planned to bring charges regardless of what the grand jury had to say.
	Let's give a shout out to two of our liberal friends here, Kyle Kalinsky.
	Kyle Kalinsky says, In total, there are 91 criminal charges against Trump when you factor in all the cases, and the best the right can do is scream free speech, call the prosecutors Democrats, and say Fannie Willis' dad was a commie.
	LOL.
	This is unbecoming of you, good Sir Kolinsky, because we're fans.
	Here's the best I can say.
	Donald Trump hired lawyers who gave him legal advice, which is constitutionally protected.
	You can make arguments about the actions taken, but they're charging his lawyers with crimes for providing legal advice.
	Jeffrey Clark was a State Department lawyer.
	You will never be able to come to me and claim the charges are legitimate when they're going after legal counsel.
	And the best you can do, Kyle, is make the argument that the right is claiming the prosecutor's a Democrat.
	I don't care if the prosecutor was a communist, Green Party, an American Nazi party or otherwise.
	Donald Trump hired lawyers who gave him advice.
	He took legal actions.
	They have written invitations to go to the Coffee County to take a look at the voting systems.
unidentified		CNN confirmed that.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		And for this, RICO charges?
		Laughably insane.
		Ed Krasenstein, all the same.
		He says sitting U.S.
		Congressman Lauren Boebert called it a banana republic because Fannie Willis in Georgia unanimously convinced a grand jury made up of hard-working American people that there was probable cause.
		Seriously, dude?
		They published the charges before the grand jury even voted on it!
		This is why I'm like, it's Civil War.
		Because Kyle Kalinske and Ed Krasenstein don't actually care about facts like that.
		They don't care.
unidentified		They're like, oh, it's just normal stuff.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		It's not normal stuff.
		Here's the next thing that happened.
		I'm not going to call out any of the individuals because I don't want to bring... That's not what I do.
		But there were many individuals who went on social media and advocated for some type of unrest on January 6, who said things like, you know, insinuated that people should breach the Capitol or something to that effect, who called for people to go out into the streets.
		If they are criminally charging Trump's legal counsel, how long do you think it will be before they criminally charge media personalities for incitement?
		Incitement is a clearer path than providing legal counsel.
		But the legal counsel are high-profile individuals and Trump allies.
		And the first thing they want to do is make sure nobody can get a lawyer to defend them.
		That's what we saw with January 6th.
		Legal firms dropping clients saying, we don't have anything to do with this.
		Yep.
		It's a revolutionary period.
		Or it's a civil war.
		That's where we are going.
		There are many personalities who, during January 6th, cheered for it.
		They're next after the first media personalities.
		Jamie Raskin already said to the January 6th committee, here are videos of Trump supporters encouraging what happened, calling for more.
		How long do you think until D.C.
		says we need to silence anyone who supports Trump?
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 and affecting the 2024 presidential election.
		We do all of that every single day right here on America on Trial with Josh Hammer.
		Subscribe and download your episodes wherever you get your podcasts.
		It's America on Trial with Josh Hammer.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		First, you need to make sure anybody who supported Trump physically in any way,
		many of these bumbling dotards on January 6th who walked into a building having no idea what's going on,
		first they get locked up.
		They're told to disavow Trump, to say Trump is wrong, Trump was evil, it's Trump's fault, Trump told you to do it.
		Some people have refused.
		Those that have, they've been locked up for years without charge or trial.
		I'm not exaggerating.
		That's a fact.
		Still to this day in jail, solitary, being tortured because they refused to say Trump told them to do it.
		Some of these people deserve to be in jail.
		They were fighting violently and stormed the gates, stormed toward on barricades.
		No question.
		They should be in jail.
		They should get a fair trial, you know.
		Some of these people didn't know what was going on.
		On the other side of the building, the door was open, they were let in.
		This is why they're going after people to the extent that they raided the wrong woman up in Alaska.
		They stormed into her house because she looked like someone who was in the building.
		That's why they killed Ashley Babbitt.
		They want to make sure anybody who engaged in physical activity to support Trump begs!
		Gets on their knees and says, please!
		And many of them did.
		Many of them took the agreement where they issued statements saying that they were wrong and it was stupid and Trump was a bad person.
		They did it.
		Next, they're going after lawyers to make sure that anyone who provides legal counsel to those who challenge them or support the January Sixers, you will be locked up.
		The next move is obvious.
		They have to go after any social media influencer or media personality who encouraged protest or entertained Trump's arguments.
		Anyone who said there was fraud or impropriety, they will say colluded and was part of the conspiracy.
		And there are very prominent personalities who are in direct communication with Trump's legal team, with Trump himself, who then went on TV or the Internet and said, this is true.
		This happened.
		They're going to say those individuals furthered the conspiracy and were in on it.
		That they had spoken with Donald Trump and explained how they would go and advocate for this to try and shift the perception in this country into supporting Trump's wild allegations and crackpot claims.
		Then there were YouTubers, people on social media.
		These are smaller personalities, but they actually went on their channels and they encouraged people to engage in riotous behaviors on January 6th.
		They're next.
		What's after that?
		The periphery.
		Anyone who supports Trump.
		Anyone who publicly defended him.
		If they can claim that providing legal counsel is a criminal conspiracy... We pulled the indictment.
		If they can claim that furtherance of this conspiracy... Let me just jump down to some acts.
		Let's see if we can find something.
		Here we go.
		On or about the 14th day of December, David Schaefer instructed unindicted co-conspirator
		Individual 15, interesting, whose identity is known to the grand jury, to deliver to the
		office of the governor Georgia document signed David J. Schaefer and Sean Micah Thresher still
		titled, Notice of Filing of Electoral College Vacancy. The document contained multiple false
		It was an overt act.
		If you can have lawyers file claims and documents and say, that's a criminal conspiracy, that's that's in furtherance of a conspiracy, what can they say about you?
		They say that John Eastman sent an email to Kenneth Chespero and unindicted co-conspirator, privileged and confidential, January 6th scenario.
		As for hearings, I think both are necessary.
		The fact that they have multiple slates of electors demonstrates the uncertainty of either.
		That should be enough, and I agree with Ken, that Judiciary Committee hearings on the constitutionality of the Electoral College Count Act could invite counter views that we do not believe should constrain Pence or Grassley in the exercise of power they have under the 12th Amendment.
		If lawyers providing legal advice to each other on the constitutional actions they're allowed to take is a criminal conspiracy, what can they say about you?
		Of course, the real issue, I believe, is Donald Trump solicited acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen and General Richard Donahue to make a false statement saying, just say the election was corrupt and leave the rest to me and the Republican congressmen.
		If they can argue that there is no qualification for these statements, they're false, period.
		Therefore, what can they say about you?
		Let's break some of this down.
		Donald Trump, believing he has evidence of impropriety and is conferring with his legal team, then says, look, just say it's corrupt and we're working on it.
		That's a criminal conspiracy, they say.
		Now, I think the egregious acts, I'm not sure, I think it, what do they have, number, is it perhaps 80, it's not 87, is it?
unidentified		No.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		There were actions where they claimed, here we go, Act 100.
		Donald Trump caused to be tweeted from the Twitter account.
		Hearings from Atlanta on the Georgia election overturn now being broadcast.
		Check out OAN Newsmax and many more.
		Brian Kemp should resign.
		This was an overt act of in furtherance of the conspiracy.
		That's the important point that you guys should hear.
		If Donald Trump tweeted, hey, take a look at what's going on on TV, and that's furtherance of a conspiracy, how long until they say it was criminal incitement for people on Twitter to say similarly?
		I do not believe it ends here.
		I think we're going to see a whole lot more.
		So I hope you're ready.
		I don't know what's going to happen next.
		But I don't think that after everything we've seen, they simply say that this is the line.
		This is the line.
		No, I think they need to make sure that there is no positive messaging for Donald Trump in 2024, because even if he gets indicted, people are still supporting him and telling people to vote for him.
		They're gonna have to shut that down.
		It may start simply.
		YouTube and other big platforms will just start banning people like they did with Alex Jones, Paul Joseph Watson, Laura Loomer, etc., Milo Yiannopoulos.
		But I think that they're going to go a bit more heavy-handed than that.
		Jamie Raskin already claimed that people were inciting.
		So we'll see what happens next.
		More to come.
		I'll leave it there.
		We'll see what the updates are.
		Next video is coming up at 1 p.m.
		on this channel, and I'll see you all then.
		Even MSNBC is now running segments warning of civil war.
		Mehdi Hassan says Trump indictments spark threats of civil war and it is not just talk.
		I've been talking about the threat of civil war for some time and I want you all to reflect and think about where we are right now.
		It is not just Donald Trump who has been indicted in an unprecedented move never before seen in this country.
		It is also his legal counsel And we also have some more updates as they go through the list of those who are being indicted.
		You have Kanye West's publicist involved because apparently the publicist was hired to advocate for Trump's legal strategy.
		And that is conspiracy.
		They also going to mention in the indictment that there are many, many unindicted co-conspirators.
		We know that in Jack Smith's probe out of D.C.
		with the federal government, there are many other unindicted co-conspirators, and it is believed they will be criminally charged.
		What we are seeing now is that, well, since 2016, the Democrats claim the election was stolen, levied a fake, a hoax against Donald Trump, not a fake hoax, but a fake claim and a hoax against Trump about Russian collusion, obstructing government and falsely impeaching him twice.
		I don't see how this is anything but a revolutionary period.
		Or I should say civil war period.
		Now many people tell me that I'm wrong, that I'm crazy.
		They take my tweets and they say, look at all the times Tim said this.
		And I just think back and I would say it this way.
		If you go back to when I was saying several years ago that we were tracking towards a civil war.
		You know, I'd watched a documentary about the Spanish Civil War.
		I've watched short videos about the Russian Revolution.
		I've watched, I don't know, probably a dozen American Civil War documentaries.
		And I just keep feeling like there are similarities.
		Of course, it's never the same, but there are many, many similar things.
		We have leftists, we have a Princeton professor, we have national security analysts all warning of similar or the same things.
		And just yesterday, and this is before the indictment, Mehdi Hassan says Trump supporters' threats of civil war are not just talk.
		But I find it funny.
		Trump supporters' threats of civil war?
		That's an interesting way to put it.
		Because this guy supports the actions of the DOJ going after Donald Trump and his lawyers and political consultants and publicists and advocates.
		But the warnings are real.
		So, to finish my point.
		I always like to call it the time travel test.
		I'd like to take you back to 2018.
		I think that was the year of the Battle of Berkeley, I'm not sure.
		Back then I had a few hundred thousand subscribers on YouTube, now I have several million.
		Back then I was witnessing these street battles, I was witnessing the political sentiment, and I was told consistently by Republicans, Republican personalities and conservative journalists, that I was crazy to think that this could eventually lead to civil war.
		I've made this point several times because it seems like the escalation just keeps happening before us, yet there are still people who say it's crazy to think it's happening.
		Fair point, fair point.
		It could be a revolution and you all could find yourselves just locked up in jail like many of these Republicans who were slated as alternate electors.
	They're now being accused of being co-conspirators.
	So you've got Democrats in all of these states going after anyone who dared to oppose them.
	Let's talk about one of the conspirators in the current case against Donald Trump and and again these conspirators.
	One individual met with an alternate slate of electors, explaining to them that in the event that there is a legal challenge that succeeds in 2020, they will need to have filled out the appropriate documents to submit.
	The Constitution prescribes as such.
	This is what happened in 1960 with Kennedy versus Nixon.
	Republicans had won in Hawaii.
	Democrats convened an alternate slate of electors anyway, filled out the forms, and submitted them because there were ongoing legal challenges.
	And then it came down to Richard Nixon, who ultimately had to decide whether or not he would count the Democrat or the Republican votes.
	Despite the fact the state had certified the Republicans, Nixon said, we're going to count the Democrats.
	And that was history.
	Donald Trump and his team came up with a similar legal argument.
	Now, on the left, they argue that this was a crackpot scheme to try and steal the election because they lost.
	On the right, they argue that there were discrepancies.
	There was evidence of fraud or malfeasance.
	There were issues pertaining to the executive of states changing the rules despite the fact the Constitution says the state legislature has ultimate say.
	The argument from the Trump camp boiled down to a very simple point.
	If the state legislature has not had its say on these election procedures, the vice president should not accept the results of the electors that were presented to them.
	Often they were done by either courts or the governor, and that he should send them back to the state legislature to vote on them.
	Now, I don't know.
	You can argue that Trump is lying, or you can argue that he was wrong, or you can argue that he was right.
	Regardless, this is a legal procedure for handling it.
	If the Vice President decided that he agreed, and he could have, it would be kicked back either to the state legislatures to decide, or it could go to delegates in the House of Representatives.
	The delegations are not the total members of Congress.
	It is, uh, it was believed at the time, Newsweek wrote about this before the election, and I can't believe this is over three years ago, that what would happen is there are more Republican delegations to the House than Democrat, and thus they would likely elect Donald Trump.
	But this is the process by which the Constitution and legal precedent sets for how we deal with these discrepancies, how we deal with these conflicts.
	We don't just say, one side is right, everyone give up, we're done.
	We say, hey, I have a challenge to this.
	And then the legal challenge carries on, and that's how the system is to be handled.
	Mike Pence ultimately decided NOT to participate, and that's that.
	And in all the arguments in the world, I think, that's that.
	A legal challenge is made, Mike Pence says no, we move on.
	But that's not what they're doing.
	They're advancing forward.
	They're advancing forward with criminal charges against lawyers and political consultants and publicists.
	Mehdi Hasan, here's what he says.
	He warned that threats of political violence are no longer just talk, as some elected Republicans allude to civil war or the use of force amid the criminal prosecutions of Donald Trump.
	The MSNBC host on Sunday was discussing how a possible conviction, so clarification, the article they published was from, they posted the video on MSNBC Today.
	It was actually from two days ago.
	The House on Sunday was discussing how a possible conviction and sentencing of the former president would play out among his supporters, particularly as Georgia prosecutors look to bring their election interference case against him to a grand jury on Tuesday.
	Trump is already facing three other criminal cases.
	Hassan rolled a clip of one Trump supporter speaking with NBC News' Vaughn Hilliard at a New Hampshire rally last week.
	If Donald Trump were to be found guilty by a jury, where do you see this going?
	Civil war, the woman responded, adding, because we can't live together, obviously.
	These were not the rantings of a cultist Trump superfan, Hasan argued, pointing to elected Republicans who have made similar remarks.
	And you know what?
	I completely agree with that sentiment.
	These are not ranting and raving crackpots in the middle of the woods screaming about the end being nigh.
	These are regular, working-class people who are pointing out what Maddie Hassan has already said, what many liberals and leftists have already said, what everyone seems to agree on.
	There have been numerous polls showing that the majority of people polled think we are headed towards a civil war.
	There could be many catalysts for this, depending on what happens, but I believe We are in some kind of civil war right now.
	I think it's a fair assessment.
	Of course, we can get semantic.
	We can argue what civil war actually means.
	You can argue that war means hot conflict, but there's the cold wars.
	So you say it's a cold civil war.
	Whatever, man.
	What I'm saying is that force is being used in new ways to try and seize power.
	The traditional definition of civil war is when two or more factions fight for control over one government.
	Some have argued this means that the American Civil War was in fact not a civil war because the South was trying to secede.
	However, I think when you take into consideration that eventually the South invaded the North, there are arguments to be said that it does extend into that territory.
	And thus, many have revised the definition of civil war to be a battle, the fracturing of a state with fighting amongst factions within itself and things of that nature.
	We now see that on the left and the right there is an agreement.
	We can't live together.
	The culture of this nation has fractured to such a degree that there will be no accepting what happens now.
	Now I think it's actually rather simple.
	Donald Trump made a legal move.
	Lost.
	Mike Pence said he wasn't going to play along.
	That's it.
	We're done.
	The Democrats got to take the White House.
	The winner is the guy sitting in the chair.
	The winner is the guy, as it said, who put his hand in the Bible and said that he's president.
	That's it.
	But the Democrats can't be satisfied with that.
	And so the argument as to who caused the Civil War, I think, is fairly clear.
	Or call it whatever you want right now.
	Perhaps you don't want to call it a civil war.
	But I think we're in it, considering the Democrats are using the weight of the federal government and law enforcement to arrest and prosecute publicists, lawyers, and bumbling dotherds who walked about the Capitol grounds.
	I'm not talking about the rioters, because you tell me someone rioted at a building, I'll say, okay, you get charged for that.
	I'm saying they're going after people who had no idea what was going on and just rallied to support Trump.
	At an Iowa rally on Saturday, Rep.
	Matt Gaetz declared that change in Washington can come only through force.
	But what does that mean?
	Is Matt Gaetz quite literally calling for violence, or is he saying political force?
	Honestly, I don't know.
	Interpret it as you see fit.
	We have this from the Washington Post from August 11th.
	GOP lawmaker warns of civil war at fundraiser for indicted Trump electors.
	Michigan State Rep Matt Maddox warned supporters at a recent fundraiser at his home that a civil war would break out or that people would get shot if the government continued to target conservatives according to audio of the event obtained by The Messenger, which first reported the remarks.
	Maddox, whose wife was one of 16 fake electors charged with felony crimes in Michigan last month, told the crowd that it had been a difficult time for them recently.
	The event, Billed as the Free the 16 Electors Poolside Party, was held at the Maddox home to raise legal defense funds for the fake electors, according to a copy of the invitation.
	If the government continues to weaponize these departments against conservatives and the citizens and the taxpayers, what's going to happen to this country?
	Does anyone have any idea?
	If this doesn't stop, Maddox is heard asking in the recording.
	His question prompted several responses from the audience.
	Each one waved off by Medic as not the answer he had in mind.
	Someone's going to get so pissed off, they're gonna shoot someone, Medic continued.
	According to the recording.
	Or we're going to have a civil war or some kind of revolution.
	That's where this is going.
	And when that happens, we're going to get squashed.
unidentified		Hm.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		Interesting.
		Recently, the FBI raided the home of an individual in Provo, Utah.
		The latest reports are that this man had a .357 Magnum pointed at federal law enforcement, so they shot him dead.
		It could all end here.
		I don't know.
		Or it could all escalate.
		I've had so many conversations with people about where this goes and what they should be concerned with.
		And the first thing I'll say is, Violence is not the answer.
		Violence gives them exactly what they're hoping for.
		And a lot of very smart people are pointing this out.
		The one thing Democrats need more than anything is legitimacy.
		They're going after lawyers for illegal arguments, showing they have none.
		Violence gives them legitimacy.
		And that's why I and many others have repeatedly said the path to victory here is confidence building.
		Strip the confidence in the Democratic Party institutions away, and you have people who refuse to participate, refuse to enforce their insane actions, and it is a calm, peaceful transfer of power as this country prescribes.
		They argue it was Trump who withheld it.
		Okay, here's what I'm saying.
		With overwhelming voting power and activism, people like Scott Pressler, and PR campaigns, news, commentary, etc., culture building, you eventually will end up in a situation in 2024 where the Democrats look like crackpot psychopaths who are using violence and force against conservatives, libertarians, post-liberals, etc., because they can't win otherwise.
		This is the perception right now.
		You've got the sophistry from liberals saying, this is the law at play.
		Sorry.
		The grand jury indictments were released before the grand jury voted on them.
		And as of right now, this information really will have an impact.
		Imagine where we find ourselves in 2024, a month out from the election.
		Democrats have gone so insane, they're arresting podcasters.
		There are a lot of people who are encouraging Donald Trump, TV personalities, people who are in direct contact with Trump and his legal team, who went on TV and then advocated for and encouraged these challenges to electoral systems.
		They'll say, that was incitement!
		In their desperation, they turn to Overt weaponization of government, and this will freak people out.
		You know, I don't know if it's true, but I'm seeing this viral tweet about the guy who made the song F Donald Trump is now saying he's going to vote for Donald Trump.
		I don't know if that's really true, but I can tell you this.
		People, friends of my friends, extended family members, who were passively anti-Trump and voting Democrat are now passively anti-Democrat, not saying they're voting Trump.
		But now they're talking about the lies in the media.
		They're starting to wake up to it.
		The Democrats are desperate for what Maddox is describing.
		They are trying as hard as possible.
		And that's why I say, the night is always darkest before the dawn.
		But we are winning.
		And I don't mean we by conservatives or Republicans.
		I'm talking about those who are opposing the cult that is weaponizing government against the people of this country.
		I do think.
		We are in some kind of civil war.
		But it doesn't mean that, in the end, it will be described as full-blown civil war.
		It's a cold civil war period, or a period of tumult, if, come 2024, Donald Trump is elected.
		It doesn't mean we're out of the woods just yet, but Trump can start taking action to weed out the corruption, and through the peaceful process the Constitution prescribes, we may actually avert a major conflict.
		That being said, I do not believe that ANYONE will accept the results of the 2024 election, so I don't know what to expect.
		What I can tell you right now is the worst possible thing for Republicans, Conservatives, Trump supporters, Libertarians, anti-establishment types, the anti-woke, etc., etc., will be violence.
		The worst possible outcome.
		Let's say far-left extremists engage in overt violence in a city.
		Proud Boys or otherwise, defend it.
unidentified		Boom!
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		Now they're going to highlight in the media, they're going to attack, they're going to say this is right-wing violence and it proves it.
		That's my point.
		Violence in any capacity will be bad.
		And that's something that people should be worried about.
		And that's why I always say non-violent civil disobedience, legal methods, but take a look at what they've done.
		And I think it's obvious.
		Trying to criminally charge Donald Trump and lock him up to cheat in the election, they're literally cheating.
		They desperately want a violent reaction.
		They desperately want JFK's statement to come true.
		Those who make peaceful revolution impossible make violent revolution inevitable.
		They're crossing their fingers and hoping that their monopoly on violence will be given legitimacy to crush anyone who dares oppose them.
		That's January 6th.
		It gave them almost everything they wanted.
		It gave them a lot of what they wanted.
		It gave them grounds to go after Trump, It's not the only reason they're going after Trump.
		Not the only grounds.
		But now they can cry insurrection, they can file legal challenges, and they can try to claim legitimacy.
		That is what they want.
		We'll talk about that in a second, but let me point this out.
		Fannie Willis says Trump and his co-defendants must surrender in Georgia by August 25th.
		So we have 10 days.
		Donald Trump will get a mugshot.
		I believe he will go to jail.
		Jail is where they hold you before you go to prison.
		Typically, in many circumstances, if your crime is a misdemeanor and you are spending less than a year, you'll be held in jail.
		If your crime is over a year, you get shipped to a prison for longer term holding.
		I believe this is what they're going to be pushing for for Donald Trump.
		Donald Trump is convinced that he will have irrefutable evidence come Monday.
		I don't buy it.
		Look, Trump can come out and say literally anything he wants.
		He can show you whatever evidence.
		It doesn't matter.
		The factions are split.
		The fighting is, the political fighting is here.
		And it's hard to know exactly how it's all going to play out, but I just don't see... I don't see whatever this is.
		Trump's complete exoneration.
		An interesting argument has been published by the National Constitutional Law Union pointing out that Trump is actually immune to criminal proceedings related to things he did in office.
		They're completely correct in their assessment.
		I think so.
		Before you can prosecute a president, he must be convicted of impeachment.
		They actually point out that in the Federalist Papers, there's many arguments made for this, and the idea that a president could be criminally charged at the local level meant that the president couldn't even operate.
		I do believe that Obama should be criminally charged and investigated.
		He should be impeached to this day for the actions taken with drone strikes.
		Trump, by all means, investigate for the exact same reasons.
		Trump should not be immune.
		But, in the instance that he as president filed legal charges to pursue whether or not there was some impropriety or not, absolutely immune.
		Absolutely.
		Civil War, my friends.
		We may not be in one in the sense that we win.
		That the anti-establishment factions push back the weaponization of government, stop it, fire everybody, and that's that.
		Or it may be that fighting actually does erupt, but I wanted to talk to you about where I think this all goes.
		Will violence erupt?
		I think it's a strong possibility no matter what happens, and I hope it doesn't.
		But I think you're gonna get crazy people on the left, on the right, false flags, who knows?
		The false flag is the scary thing.
		You're gonna get some story about a crackpot right-wing dude no one's ever heard of doing something really dumb, and they'll say, that's it.
		That's our justification.
		Joe Biden will issue a state of emergency, warning that political extremist groups will be targeted because they're engaging in this.
		I mean, next year is going to be insane.
		Hope y'all are ready for it.
		But I think there's a wide variety of possibilities and in no way guarantees that these far leftists, the neolibs, will succeed in anything they're doing.
		I think there is a strong possibility that factions start to emerge with these viral videos of people saying they can't afford rent anymore.
		Their listless, depressed suicide rates are through the roof.
		That's scary.
	Someone with no money and nothing left to lose, full of political rage.
	It's a recipe for disaster.
	I think you'll start seeing factions form because of the street violence.
	The looting of the Nordstrom in LA, the shuttering of these cities, crime running rampant, people being robbed or stabbed in broad daylight for no reason.
	Eventually, you will get rogue factions of small groups that are not even particularly political.
	Neighborhood watch groups, for instance.
	You've already got left-wing groups that, like the Red Guard and other organizations, Antifa obviously, but they have small cells, Rose City Antifa for instance.
	These people are John Brown Gun Club, they're armed, they're trained, they've killed already.
	Viral videos coming out of the Pacific Northwest where they aim rifles at a man in his vehicle because they control the streets.
	The CHAZ, the Occupation of Cities.
	These things have already happened!
	I think it's particularly fascinating when people say, like, who's going to fight?
	Nobody has the will to fight.
	It's like, my friends, we've already had, as I mentioned, vehicles stopped by our effective checkpoints as far left extremists march around with rifles.
	You've had the chop where they actually shot and killed people.
	You've had in the George Floyd Square, they called it, an occupation.
	An autonomous zone.
	You had the same thing in, I think it was in, um, which was it, um, Memphis, Georgia, I think it was, I could be wrong.
	Where, was that where the Wendy's was?
	And they basically took over this location?
	Add all of these stories together and what do you get?
	There'll be a group of locals who don't care for Trump or otherwise and they're gonna band together and they're gonna buy guns and they're gonna say, we need to protect our neighborhoods.
	They're gonna say we've got vehicles coming through, we've had too much crime, someone got robbed, take a look at Ahmaud Arbery.
	That is the beginning.
	Ahmaud Arbery, the lie.
	He was just jogging, for no reason, in some random neighborhood?
	Spare me.
	Now people say he was jogging in work boots or whatever, I don't know, nor care about that.
	What we know is that the police were on the lookout for this man.
	He was witnessed burglarizing a house.
	Someone had stolen a gun from a vehicle.
	There was a lot of burglaries, and they were trying to figure out who was doing it.
	This man came to their neighborhood.
	Don't know what he did, but he was a suspect.
	I do believe it's fair to say he was on camera committing burglary.
	There's video footage showing him in the house.
	I believe it was him.
	When they chase him down to stop him, He runs around the truck, grabs the shotgun, fights over it, gets shot and dies.
	The two men who tried to stop this man, who was a suspect, a felony suspect, are going to prison for the rest of their lives.
	The man who simply filmed it is also going to prison for the rest of his life.
	At a certain point, you will get people forming factions.
	They're going to say, look, I don't know or care about Trump, but I'm not going to let that happen in my neighborhood.
	We've already seen the videos of people standing at the ends of their streets with rifles.
	So what happens next?
	2024 is going to be insane.
	I mean, maybe it's not.
	Hopefully it's not.
	A civil war erupts, as we've seen in many countries, when various factions, with various different reasons for doing so, take up arms to defend and secure their territory.
	Eventually, fighting breaks out.
unidentified		Why?
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		Okay, well, a roving band of burglars and robbers, a gang, whatever you want to call it, are looting a grocery store, or a supermarket, or a department store.
		These vigilante groups are set up because they're trying to stop it.
		One of these guys opened fires.
		A gun, a gunfight breaks out.
		We already had a guy open, uh, throw firebombs at an ICE facility and shoot at ICE officers.
		They shot and killed him.
		It is entirely possible with the escalation of violence with the looting in these stores that civil war breakdown does not begin with a Democrat arresting a Trump supporter.
		It begins with a gangbanger looting a Kmart and locals who took up arms because there's no one defending them.
		Run in and try to stop and secure the store.
		The gang, seeing the guns, point the weapons at the guys.
		A gun, a shootout ensues and you get a news report of a shootout.
		This is the spark in the Tinder.
		This is people saying, hey, look, man, I'm not going to wait around for this.
		After the 2020 riots, liberals went out and bought guns and they were shocked to find out how hard it was in places like California.
		But that is what I fear.
		As the whole system starts to break down, the fact that we're seeing the weaponization of government against Republicans is not indicative of Democrats taking up arms against Republicans, it's indicative of a no-confidence system.
		Where when the police or law enforcement show up, a local faction says, you've never enforced the law, you've not protected us, you've sacrificed us, you have no legitimacy here.
		The point is this.
		Every move made by Democrats against Donald Trump and his supporters strips confidence in the system that the system actually exists.
		There's no neutral arbiter of justice, only vengeful partisans taking action to steal power.
		The police are not enforcing the law.
		Cities are crumbling.
		People are fleeing.
		But many people have said, I can't flee.
		I have children here.
		I can't afford it.
		It's things like that that lead me to believe those are the people that eventually just say, I don't want to fight anybody, but I better get a weapon for protection.
		And eventually then, someone comes to their neighborhood, tries to rob them, and you get Ahmaud Arbery 2.0.
		Then 3.0, then 4.0.
		Then the police come and try to arrest a working-class dad who was defending his seven-year-old daughter during a gang raid.
		Then, someone does something stupid.
		Like the scene in V for Vendetta I've mentioned oh so many times.
		A police officer comes to arrest a teenager who is protecting his kid sister from a gang raid, and then locals come out with baseball bats and crowbars, and the cop goes, no, no, no, stop!
		Or I'm wrong.
		Or I'm completely wrong.
		I can only say this.
		Perhaps right now, everything stops!
		Everything just stops.
		Joe Biden comes out with a tear in his eye and says, this has gone too far.
		I don't hate anyone.
		We must stop this.
		Donald Trump, you are hereby pardoned.
		I call on Georgia and New York to drop the charges and bring civility and peace to this nation.
		Trump comes out also crying and says, I don't want to fight anymore.
		Biden, let's meet.
		And then there's a great video where they hold hands together and say, America is united.
		Maybe that happens.
		You really think so?
		I don't.
		And I've said this hundreds of times.
		Four years ago, I said, the violence is escalating.
		Then we get the Summer of Love.
		They tried to burn down the White House with Donald Trump in it.
		Not an exaggeration.
		They threw firebombs at the White House.
		A guard post was set on fire.
unidentified		St.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		John's Church was set on fire.
		You can say that Trump staged an insurrection.
		Fine.
		So be it.
		My point is this.
		The factions are at odds.
		And it's escalating.
		Imagine.
		When January 6th happened, I said, you know, I've been talking about the real threat of civil war, and if I went back two years and told everybody that in two years' time, a thousand Trump supporters would enter the Capitol building, several hundred would tear down barricades, fighting with cops to stop the count of the electoral college, you'd say, you're insane!
		That would never happen!
		Because that's what they told me!
		When I said in 2018, I was told by all these smarter people that the federal government is secure and would never allow anything to reach that level.
		And then January 6th happened.
		By all means, call it a riot, call it a protest, or call it an insurrection.
		The fact is, people did fight with police to force their way into the Capitol.
		And they actually shut everything down, briefly.
		But it doesn't matter.
		Because if I told you that tear gas would be fired in the Rotunda, you'd say, shut up!
		It's never gonna happen.
		And I know because they quite literally told me that.
		Over and over and over again.
		I hear it every single day.
		I'm wrong.
		Fine.
		Please, please let me be wrong.
		I beg of you.
		I beg of you.
		Every time I say, holy crap, it's escalating and I followed up with, but maybe I'm wrong and it will just stop here and then it doesn't.
		I don't know where it stops.
		I don't know where it goes.
		All I can tell you is that we are tracking towards civil war.
		Read any book about any revolution, any... Fine.
		You know what?
		Fine.
		Weimar, Germany.
		Not a revolution or a civil war.
		I guess it was technically a revolution because the Nazis took over.
		Call it that!
		Agree with the leftists that Donald Trump is the next Hitler.
		Fine!
		Then that's happening, right?
		I'm just telling you this.
		They are now going after lawyers.
		Lawyers who provided legal counsel.
		The next step.
		Influential personalities who are in contact with Donald Trump and advocated for his plan.
unidentified		Don't believe me!
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		Kanye West's publicist, here's a story from the Daily Mail, has been charged in the Trump indictment for pressuring Fulton County election worker Ruby Freeman.
		Trevian Cootey, This is not a lawyer.
		It's a publicist.
		Publicists provide advocacy.
		This individual agreed, a crisis manager, that Trump's plan was correct.
		They're working on this and went to the election official and is accused of pressuring them to side with Trump.
		Now you may say, yeah, but that's a bit different from just someone being on TV, right?
		Of course.
		That's why I said the next thing to happen is, not the current thing happening right now.
		My point is this.
		This is a celebrity publicist who was likely hired to advocate on behalf of Trump and his legal team for their plans to go to election officials and say, we are going to be handling things this way.
		Say it was wrong.
		Say it was illegal.
		I'm not saying you're wrong.
		Fine.
		That's fine.
unidentified		I'm saying what's what comes next?
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		The next move, likely, I could be wrong about this.
		Media personalities who are in contact with Trump or his legal team, who then took to high profile television shows, YouTube videos, Twitter, otherwise, and advocated for Trump's plan.
		Some of these people outright called for action on January 6th.
		Do you think that these people who have gone after lawyers will overlook that?
		I don't think so.
		Considering that many of these people are some of Trump's strongest supporters, they're going to want to curtail public support for Trump.
		And thus, we'll see them arrested next.
		Excuse me.
		I can't predict the future, so I don't know.
		Maybe I'm wrong about that.
		It's all very specific, right?
		I just see that, as the threads are being braided together, the most likely variable before us is such.
		Because we didn't think they'd go after lawyers!
		When they indicted Trump in D.C.
		only, what, a week or two ago?
		They said they may go after his lawyers as the unindicted co-conspirators.
		And I said, that is when you know it's on.
		It's begun.
		Constitutionally protected, legal advice, warranting criminal prosecution.
		Well, guess what?
		Georgia has done it.
		You tell me that you don't believe they'll go after media personalities?
		Six months ago, if I said they'd arrest Trump's lawyers, you'd be like, I don't know about his lawyers.
		Maybe not six months, maybe a year ago.
		So when the time comes, six, seven, eight months from now, and there are prominent, I think likely what will happen is people in the range of a few hundred thousand followers who are going on YouTube and Rumble and cheering for Trump's calls for protests on January 6th.
		People who didn't call for violence, but who advocated for the protest, You see, what'll happen is they'll say, these individuals knew full well what would happen, and encouraged people to go, inciting them to engage in insurrection.
		Think they won't do it?
		I think that's crazy.
		I think they will.
		We'll see.
		I'll leave it there.
		Next segment is coming up at 4pm on this channel.
		Thanks for hanging out, and I'll see you all then.
		Strangely, it's exactly what many of the conspiracy theorists said was going to happen.
		That after the Maui fires, the government would seize the land and use it to create 15-minute cities.
		Now, I'm not a proponent of that theory, because they were already implementing smart city policies and infrastructure in Maui.
		They didn't need to destroy everything that they had already built over the past five years in order to accomplish this.
		There are many ways they could get it done.
		However, I guess eminent domain can be messy.
		Buying land from people who didn't want to sell it could be very difficult.
		And this is one way to get the job done.
		There's been reports that people are not getting their insurance claims paid out, that they're being denied.
		And so the conspiracy theory was the government started the fire on purpose, or that Some individuals did, I don't know if the government or otherwise.
		That way the land would be completely valueless and useless unless you were a government entity that could claim the land.
		Now here's the story from the post-millennial.
		On Monday, Hawaiian Governor Josh Green announced that his administration was considering acquiring properties in the seaside resort town of Lahaina that had been destroyed by the recent wildfires.
		He vowed to prevent foreign buyers from swooping in to exploit the tragedy, suggesting the state was better suited to take control of the land.
		I'm already thinking of ways for the state to acquire that land so that we can put it into workforce housing, to put it back into families, or make it open spaces in perpetuity as a memorial to those who are lost, Green said, while standing amongst the rubble.
		We want this to be something we remember.
		After the pain passes as a magic place.
		Lahaina will rebuild.
		The tragedy right now is the loss of life.
		The buildings can be rebuilt over time.
		Even the banyan tree may survive.
		But we don't want this to become a clear space where then people from overseas just come and decide they're going to take it.
		The state will take it and preserve it first.
		In a separate press conference, Green reiterated his commitment to ensure the land was protected for residents and revealed that he had spoken with the Hawaiian Attorney General regarding options to do a moratorium on any sales of properties that have been damaged or destroyed.
		It's going to be a very long time before any growth or housing can be built.
		So you'll be pretty poorly informed if you try to steal land from our people and then build here.
		I will try to allow no one from outside our state to buy any land until we get through this crisis and decide what Lahaina should be in the future.
		Take a look at that.
		If you had a house, it's gone.
		You can't rebuild it.
		You can't.
	They're not gonna let you do it.
	You won't get a permit.
	They'll say, no, there's too much damage.
	Tons of work has to be done before anything can be built here.
	But I'll tell you what.
	You can sell it to the government!
	They'll buy it off you for pennies on the dollar.
	No, to be fair, they'll probably give you a fair price and say they're going to come out and be like, these poor people, we're paying a premium for this land.
	Now, again, I'm not entertaining any conspiracy theories.
	Fires happen.
	They were already building smart hub infrastructure in this city before the fire.
	That means they destroyed the infrastructure they had already spent money on.
	But, far be it from me to reject the idea that they are exploiting a crisis to reinvigorate their plans for a smart city.
	Here's what I think makes the most sense.
	They wanted to build a smart city, they wanted to buy land, they bought what they could, and they were building it.
	They don't need to wait very long.
	The people who live there, eventually they'll pass on, they'll pass the house to their kids, the kids will be like, I don't want it.
	The city will then buy it from them, and that's how things typically go.
	They didn't need to burn down and destroy everything they'd already built so that they could buy it up and build it again.
	I mean, it's in the realm of possibility.
	Like, it's physically possible something like this could happen.
	I wouldn't be surprised if we've seen things like this in the past.
	I just don't know what degree the probability is.
	But I think the reality is, bad power lines, garbage companies, negligence, social breakdown, which we're watching happen in every major city, Fire erupts.
	They're like, oh crap.
	Afterwards, you got the governor saying, well, look guys, closing a door, open a window here.
	Let's block any of this, of the, uh, any sales of this land to anyone but us.
	We'll buy it up.
	We'll take it over and we'll do our thing.
	I think the more likely scenario is exploiting a crisis.
	Now here's the really dark portion of this.
	He's going to block sales.
	You know, if you lost your house in this fire and someone right now came along and said, I will buy it as an investment and help you out because you need the cash.
	They're going to say no.
	You've got to sit and wait.
	That's what I'm talking about with exploiting a crisis.
	They'll tell you to wait.
	They're not going to let people come in and exploit a crisis, but they're actually exploiting it.
	You, the person who lost your home, then suffer eventually in desperation.
	You say, I need money.
	And they say, well, look, we'll take it off your hands for you, but we're not going to let someone else swoop in.
	And then they'll pay you pennies on the dollar.
	According to the Honolulu Civil Beat, over 2,000 structures were destroyed in the fire, three-quarters of which were residential.
	Nearly 100 people have been found dead, though that number is expected to rise as crews continue searching the area.
	Here's the article from Vice.
	Oh, Vice.
	We hardly knew ye.
	Conspiracy theorists think the government used lasers to start Maui wildfires on purpose.
	Many of those spreading the conspiracies are subscribed to Twitter Blue.
	Which ensures their posts are promoted more heavily.
	It's actually called X-Premium.
	Get it right, dude.
	Journalists.
	They're gonna mention the posts have racked up tens of millions of views, and many of them remain on the platforms without any warning that the claims being made are entirely false.
	Yes, there are fake photos that look like lasers.
	They are wrong.
	Lasers don't look like that.
	It's like a movie laser.
	There's a photo of a rocket going off and they're like, that's a laser strike!
	Well, the claims about the government seeking to create a smart island or turn the fire-ray
	city of Lahaina into a 15-minute city are new.
	The idea that laser weapons systems developed by the government have been used to start
	fires are nothing new, dating back to at least the devastating wildfires in California on
	October 2017.
	And I just think, look, people are like, you undertained the possibility that China could
	fire lasers.
	And I'm like, yes, I'm not saying it's likely or probable.
	I'm saying like, hey, let's consider the future of warfare and the weapons they have available.
	I mean, maybe they set the Canadian wildfires to choke us out or something, whatever, but it's probably not the case.
	This is the difficulty with any kind of future weapon, to be honest, because Occam's razor would always suggest the simple solution tends to be correct, therefore, Lightning strikes, downed power lines.
	Bro, if you came to me and said that the US government fired a laser to start fires in Maui, I'd say, okay, what are our other options?
	And someone said, a guy was driving his truck down the road and flicked a cigarette into the brush.
	I'd be like, I'm gonna go with the cigarette, dude.
	Have you ever seen how many cigarette butts are flicked out of windows?
	It's nasty.
	People be smoking.
	There was a fire in California that I think was started because a guy was driving his truck and a chain was hanging off the back.
	And as the chain was being dragged, it sparked and it lit some brush.
	It created a spark which hit some tinder and then there you go.
	It's really that simple.
	The reality was mismanagement.
	What I see here is more likely that Maui completely mismanaged this.
	I mean, these people should be impeached and removed.
	How about this?
	Maui, Lahaina, had a robust emergency siren system that did not go off.
	People are going to come and say, oh, that proves conspiracy.
	No, it proves that social order is breaking down.
	I don't need to assume everything's a conspiracy and was planned.
	When you see like Nordstrom getting raided, I don't think Democrats plan on Rico gangs, or whatever you want to call it, storming into these stores.
	Certainly they're not prosecuting crime.
	And I think it's mostly because they're trying to get elected, not because they've conspired to destroy these cities.
	Though, to be fair, it does seem like a controlled demolition.
	We've talked about that before.
	You know, I'd put it at, there's a possibility and a probability that we have these elements of government destroying everything for personal gain, perhaps.
	When I look at what's going on with law enforcement, and against Trump and all that stuff, and the failures, I'm just like, these people are as dumb as a box of rocks.
	They continually make moves for short-term gains, which bring about long-term losses, and that fits the pattern.
	The reality here is, Democrats love to exploit a crisis for personal gain.
	I'm sure there have been many instances, we know for a fact, that they've actually false flagged.
	They've made the crises.
	The Gulf of Tonkin incident, that was a false flag.
	There are many, many more.
	It's a clever tactic for building PR for seizing land and property, for sure.
	But it doesn't mean that we make our bets based off of that.
	Ooh, I got a poker analogy for you.
	If you're playing against someone in poker, you don't just always operate under the assumptions they're holding aces.
	They might be.
	Probably not.
	Another way to put it is what doctors say.
	When you hear hooves clopping, you don't think zebras.
	Is it possible that when you hear that trotting, Is it a zebra?
	It could be a zebra.
	Probably not gonna be a zebra.
	Zebra?
	I don't know, whatever country you're from.
	You get my point.
	We have to operate typically on the most probable outcomes because then we'll have the highest rate of success when making decisions.
	That is to say, I think it's fairly obvious that Democrats are going to exploit the crisis for power and personal gain.
	That also means that the fire was likely started because a downed power line, because they're everywhere and they're aging.
	Can I just explain this to you guys?
	Our system of power lines, it's like a 150, what is it, 130 year old machine that is in complete disrepair.
	I can't tell you how many times I drive down the road I see a power pole about to fall over and I saw one recently and they like took a big 2x4 and just propped it up like hammered it in to the ground and up against the pole and I'm like is that gonna work?
	I would not be surprised if one of these things falls and starts a fire and burns a house down.
	Because nobody wants to clean up the trash, nobody wants to do the hard work.
	Here's what I think.
	I think they're gonna steal the land, they're gonna claim it's for the good of the city, and they're gonna exploit the crisis to get what they want.
	But the reality is since 2017, I think it was, they've been working on smart city infrastructure in Lahaina.
	Uh, power poles or whatever, a bunch of, like, Wi-Fi and stuff they were building.
	That's been destroyed!
	They have to rebuild all that!
	And they're gonna be happy to do so.
	I'll leave it there.
	Next segment's coming up at 6 p.m.
	on this channel.
	Thanks for hanging out, and I'll see you all then.
	Right now, Tim Pool is trending on Twitter because I said, y'all are in a civil war.
	Did a long segment about it for 1PM talking about what we're currently facing, and I go quite in-depth on what I mean by civil war.
	There is a multi-generational theory of warfare.
	First, second, third, fourth, fifth.
	Boy, there could be sixth.
	Fifth generation warfare typically is psychological operations, manipulation, and, um, easiest way to describe it is that.
	I would say this.
	Back in the day, when communication was limited, you could go to a village, and you would say, We hereby, on the name of the king, tell you to submit!
	You try to tell them that you are now going to fall into the crown, submit to his whims, and they would say, over our dead bodies.
	In order to gain access to this land, its resources, and its people, you would then engage in physical subjugation and oppression.
	Hey, Warwood Breakout, famously with Sparta and, uh, was it Xerxes?
	Persia?
	He says to hand over your weapons, and they said, come and take them.
	But what happens when you control communications?
	Now with the mass communication system, social media or otherwise, you don't need to fight anybody to get them to submit.
	You need only twist their minds through the control of media.
	That's fifth generational warfare.
	Brian Krasenstein disagrees with me.
	He's wrong.
	And I will address this and the comments people have made and talk about this concept.
	Krasenstein says, America is not in a civil war.
	We're not even close.
	Yes, we are divided as a nation, but we are a nation of laws, a nation that values the separation of powers, and a nation with strong judicial systems.
	No.
	Brian, I believe, is just being contrarian.
	We just had lawyers get arrested, dude.
	It's never happened before.
	He says, I don't agree with Tim Pool here.
	Division over the Georgia 2020 election indictment does not equate to anything close to war and the concern that such is even a remote possibility in my mind is much, much too pessimistic.
	Americans in general are good, kind, understanding people.
	We don't seek to harm each other because of political differences or because a fourth grand jury decided to hand up yet another indictment, blah, blah, blah, blah.
	How about this one from the Postmillennial?
	30 million Americans say violence is justified to keep Trump from power.
	You Chicago study.
	I'll give a better headline to the Postmillennial.
	Study says 30 million Americans think violence is justified.
	30 million Americans didn't say this.
	A study of 3,500 people was done and they found that around 11.6% of those surveyed believe violence was justified.
	I want to address this because I really want to dig in the core of what I think people are missing in any kind of discussion about civil war.
	He goes on to say, Most of the people here on X who are arguing over the Trump indictment would be cordial to one another in real life.
	Words on social media do not equate to hate towards one another.
	Stop allowing the media and social media to make you think otherwise.
	We need to stop using harmful rhetoric and allow the independent judicial system to settle these cases.
	And then he posts a photo of people with a fake gallows in front of the Capitol building on January 6th.
	Give us liberty or death is one of the flags in the photos.
	Okay.
	Well, let's talk about it.
	Let's talk about it.
	The first response most people bring up is, how many people fought in the American Revolution?
	3%, they say.
	It's actually between 3 and 10%, probably not 3%.
	But even 10% is very, very low.
	If we're seeing that a study shows 11.6% of people hold sentiments that violence is justified to keep Trump out of power, and among Republicans, about 6%, that means, uh, ladies and gentlemen, We're looking at, oh let's just do the math, some 30, 45 to 50 million people in this country believe that violence is justified in some way or another.
	Now the left has the monopoly here, 2 to 1 against conservatives.
	What do you think that means?
	When I say civil war, I often clarify to say that this could be a higher evolution, a further generation of what civil war could be or what is.
	That is to say, it's psychological manipulation.
	But I do think it's fair to say we are rapidly, rapidly approaching very real civil war.
	When the GOP has a meeting, which I pointed out in the 1pm segment, they say that civil war is coming because they're arresting alternate electors.
	This is the constitutional process by which you challenge an election.
	The alternate electors fill out the paperwork, a court proceeding ensues, a judge issues a ruling, and if the ruling is confirmed, those alternate electors are certified.
	If the judge rules otherwise, nothing happens.
	For this reason, they are trying to arrest Republicans.
	Okay.
	Maybe Brian's right.
	It's not a civil war because Republicans are doing quite literally nothing as innocent people are being imprisoned for doing quite literally nothing.
	Sure.
	Here's some of the responses.
	Misha Fitton, a subscriber to me on Twitter, I appreciate it, says, I think the Civil War rhetoric is wrong.
	There are ways to protest peacefully in an upcoming election.
	Violence should be avoided.
	I completely agree.
	I understand there can be an argument that we are in a cold Civil War, but I disagree with that as well.
	I think we're in a battle of political brinksmanship.
	I don't know what that means.
	Ryan says, Americans always think things are worse than they really are.
	We are not headed towards a civil war.
	We're not even close to such a thing.
	There is too much at stake for everybody to go to war with one another.
	It's fascinating.
	Maybe he's right.
	I'm not saying I know everything.
	All I can tell you is that I've kept, I've repeatedly said, hey, I think this will lead to escalation, and the escalation has occurred.
	We've seen, many people who have studied history, more so than I, I've barely studied it, Have pointed out the similarities between, say, the Spanish Civil War, the Bolshevik Revolution, Weimar Germany, or even the American Civil War.
	A few years ago, a Trump supporter was walking down the street when a far left extremist walked up to him and put two bullets in his chest.
	We had the story of there's a man recently convicted driving an Uber in Austin, I believe, when a far-left extremist came up to him with a rifle at low ready.
	So, fearing for his life, he opened fire, killing this man.
	Now he's going to jail.
	People are dying already.
	Fights are already happening in the streets.
	And far-left extremists tried to burn down the White House with the President inside of it.
	He was forced into an emergency bunker.
	They firebombed a guard post on the White House grounds and set fire to the church across the street.
	But we're nowhere near a civil war, says Brian Krasenstein.
	Misha Fitton responds, I agree, I do worry about lone wolves.
	But that is a threat that will exist in any society.
	But the average American street?
	It's not like social media and the media describe.
	People aren't preparing for war, at least around where I live.
	Ah.
	It's the most frustrating thing.
	It's what everyone says to me every single time.
	The first battle of Bull Run.
	Let me pull that up.
	First battle.
	I'm sure there are a lot of people who disagree with me and think I'm wrong, and I'm not going to pretend to know everything about everything.
	Let me read this for you.
	The first battle of Bull Run, called the Battle of First Manassas, by Confederate forces was the first major battle of the American Civil War.
	The battle was fought on July 21st, 1861 in Prince William County, Virginia, just north of Manassas, and about 30 miles west-southwest of Washington, D.C.
	The Union Army was slow in positioning themselves, allowing Confederate reinforcements time to arrive by rail.
	Each side had about 18,000 poorly trained and poorly led troops.
	The battle was a Confederate victory and was followed by a disorganized post-battle retreat of the Union forces.
	Just months after the start of the war at Fort Sumter, the Northern Republic clamored for a march against the Confederate capital on Richmond, Virginia, which was expected to bring an early end to the Confederacy.
	Yielding to political pressure, Brigadier General Irvin McDowell led his unseasoned Union Army across Bull Run against the equally inexperienced Confederate Army of Brigadier General P.G.T.
	Beauregard.
	"...whose forces were camped near Manassas Junction.
	McDowell's ambitious plan for a surprise flank attack on the Confederate left was poorly executed.
	Nevertheless, the Confederates, who had been planning to attack the Union left flank, found themselves at initial disadvantage.
	Confederate reinforcements under Brigadier General Joseph E. Johnston arrived from the Shenandoah Valley by railroad, and the course of the battle quickly changed.
	A brigade of Virginians under a relatively unknown Brigadier General from the Virginia Military Institute, Thomas J. Jackson, Stood its ground, which resulted in Jackson receiving his famous nickname Stonewall.
	The Confederates launched a strong counterattack, and as the Union troops began withdrawing under fire, many panicked and the retreat turned into a rout.
	McDowell's men frantically ran without order in the direction of Washington, D.C.
	Both armies were sobered by the fierce fighting and the many casualties and realized the new war was going to be much longer and bloodier than either had anticipated.
	The first battle of Bull Run highlighted many of the problems and deficiencies that were typical in the first year of the war.
	Unions were committed piecemeal, attacks were frontal, infantry failed to protect exposed artillery, etc., etc., etc.
	Now they say here that both armies realized it was going to be a much bigger fight.
	Yeah, I don't believe that's correct, but far be it from me to question the academic source.
	I've watched a few documentaries and I've read a few academic papers.
	Far be it from me to claim to be an academic expert.
	But I read something interesting.
	The Confederates won.
	But they did not march on Washington, D.C.
	Why?
	I thought it was over.
	That's what I think is interesting here.
	When they said both armies sobered up and realized it was going to be a much longer and bloodier than either had anticipated.
	If that statement were true, wouldn't the Confederates have simply marched forward and taken Washington, D.C.? ?
	They didn't.
	Because they didn't think that the fight was going to be long.
	It's remarkable to me that the history of this battle was that people were picnicking and never thought fighting would actually break out!
	But you know what?
	I don't know.
	Maybe I'm wrong.
	All I can tell you is that every step of the way, with every statement made, people keep saying we are not in or headed towards a civil war despite this image.
	You can argue the left has done similar things quite some time.
	Give me liberty or give me death, it's a famous statement.
	Trump make America great again, bringing the gallows to the Capitol.
	It's a fake gallows by the way, that ain't holding up any human weight.
	The point is, it's fascinating to me.
	Frogs in a pot boiling, not realizing how things are escalating.
	You would never!
	I just, it's just so, it's so fascinating.
	Brian Krasenstein, let's go back in time to when he was running, was it a Bieber fan account or something?
	Let's go back to 2016.
	Trump gets elected.
	I then say to you, by 2020, 800 people will storm their way into the Capitol.
	They will shut down the Electoral College proceedings.
	A few years later, Donald Trump and his lawyers will be criminally charged under RICO for conspiracy.
	Trump will be facing hundreds of years in prison.
	There will be violence in the streets.
	Someone will set fire to the church in front of the White House.
	The guard post will be burned down.
	Extremists will tear down the barricades.
unidentified		You'd be like, shut up.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		You know, I know they'd say shut up because they told me to shut up.
		So all I'll say is this.
		Make your arguments, fine.
		I'm not psychic.
unidentified		Okay?
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		That's all I can say.
		Is that six years ago, I'm like, hey, this is going in a bad direction.
		And they went, nah, it'll be fine.
		It'll never get this far.
		Don't mistake kindness for weakness, one says.
		One person says, or what if we're in a civil war except it's being waged online instead of on a physical battlefield?
		That's what it feels like to me.
		Krasenstein says, but is that actually considered a war?
		Words and memes are a lot different than guns and bombs.
		Because Brian Krasenstein, like many others, hasn't read about generational warfare.
		And the purpose of war, and what it seeks to execute.
		So my point is this.
		Typically, when I come to the argument about civil war, people often say, I've not read anything about civil war.
		I've only ever read about state versus state.
		I've never read about Spain, or Russia, or revolutions, or Weimar Germany, or South America, the rotation of power.
		And I'm not pretending to be an expert, I'm just saying, man, I've done some cursory Google searches.
		And I can tell you, We're tracking.
		And I was looking at this stuff in 2018, the Spanish Civil War.
		Watched documentaries on the Spanish Civil War.
		What the communists had been doing before the military stepped in.
		Crazy.
		But I'm not gonna go on too long with this one.
		That would be my response.
		To put it simply, if you have not done a cursory glance at what ignites civil war and the sentiments around it, then spare me the, most people don't want to fight.
		Because my simple answer is, in every single conflict, the overwhelming majority did not fight.
		I mean, I guess maybe Sparta or whatever.
		Typically, it is a small group of individuals who engage in the fighting.
		And most people don't want to be involved.
		So we'll see.
		I'll leave it there.
		We'll go in more depth, I suppose, tonight.
		YouTube.com slash TimCastIRL, tonight at 8pm.
		We'll see you all there.
		Thanks for hanging out.
		A video going viral, showing a woman say that she feels trapped, hopeless, and does not know how to survive in Canada.
		And it's similar to a bunch of videos that we've seen in the United States, where people say they don't make enough to survive.
		And I found it very interesting.
		I mean, it got me thinking about our expectations, our entitlement, and our standard of living.
		While I certainly sympathize and empathize with those that are struggling, I'd like to play for you this video.
		Wall Street Silver has the tweet.
		This video is about a minute and a half long, and I think you should listen to it.
		I want to know how the hell people in Canada are even living.
		I generally consider myself a positive person.
		to get out of the situation.
		Canada is broken.
		This video is about a minute and a half long, and I think you should listen to it.
unidentified		I wanna know how the hell people in Canada are even living.
		I generally consider myself a positive person.
		I'm like resourceful, but some stuff happened around the property,
		and like, well, I know I'll never truly be homeless.
		Like, I have family to live with, and you know, like, I have options.
		Like, I'm luckier than a lot of other people, but how the hell is anyone existing in Canada?
		Like, I just, I feel trapped.
		And like, like, I just got a good job.
		I start in September, but even with that job, it pays less than 40 grand a year.
		And it's a job that requires, like, education.
		And even on that job, like, I still can't do shit.
		I can't buy anything.
		I can't afford the rent these days.
		Like, I'm just, I'm, I'm just feeling so much despair.
		And I know I'm normally, like, Really really positive but I'm just like how is everyone else and are you okay?
		Because the answer is probably no and I know I'm lucky I don't I don't have kids I have like good family that will support me but I just I feel like I can't stay here but I can't move anywhere else because anywhere else So I don't know what she goes on to say other than I can't move anywhere else.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		Because anywhere else I move to or whatever.
		I certainly feel bad for these people who are experiencing pain.
		I think joy and happiness are relative.
		And the first thing I want to address with this is... Yeah, people are gonna get really, really mad at me, but... There is an unseen entitlement that we all have experienced because...
		Our ancestors, the founding fathers, I don't know, I know she's in Canada, but they have done such a very, very good job to gift us a beautiful life of luxury, wealth, and freedom, that when we start to lose it, it hurts.
		This isn't my point.
		It is an anomaly that you were gifted such a country.
		That you were able to play video games all day.
		That you didn't have to worry about finding a good job or working hard.
		You didn't have to worry about being gunned down in the street or mauled by a bear for the most part.
		Because we're in a golden age.
		And that golden age is sinking away.
		And it hurts.
		But when she says, you know, she can't afford rent and stuff like that, I think about the immigrant families who come to the United States.
		The famous story, the trope story, is that there are Chinese migrants who come to the United States.
		This is the American dream.
		They come to the United States and they make very little money.
		They have a family of five and they live in a one-bedroom apartment.
		They're stacked on top of each other in bunk beds.
		The father works really, really hard.
		16-hour shifts every day.
		When I worked for American Eagle Airlines out of O'Hare Airport, it's an American Airlines regional, there was a group that people referred to as the Filipino Mafia.
		It was a bunch of migrants from the Philippines who all got jobs and then over time called their buddies and said, there's jobs here, we can help you get a job.
		Several of these men, Worked maximum.
		The legal maximum.
		16 hours a day, every day, no days off until they were forced to take days off by law.
		And boy did they hate it.
		I remember one guy who was told he had to go on a two-week vacation, and he got really, really upset.
		Why?
		A two-week vacation only pays him 40 hours per week.
		He normally works 80 hours per week.
		He didn't want his pay cut in half for two weeks.
		Why?
		All of the money was going to his children for their education because his dream was that they would get an education he could pay for and their lives would be better.
		Where are we now?
		This woman says she can't afford rent.
		And again, by today's standards, that's kind of horrifying.
		Used to be able to.
		Well, let's talk about reality.
		Back in the day, there'd be a family of five, six, or seven, and they'd have one house in the middle of nowhere, and they'd all live in that house together for a very, very, very long time.
		Then, when a son got old enough, and he wanted to have his own family, they'd come together, there's dowry and things like that, the community would help build a new house for them, they'd all work together, and that's just how it was.
		Now our community is dejected, disintegrated, and people are all trying to live by themselves without families.
		What does that mean?
		Well, if you have two parents and five to seven kids, and those kids live with the family for a very, very long time, well then, you don't need to pay rent.
		It was a much simpler time back then.
		My point is this.
		The pain and suffering that people are feeling is because we built up this system of cities and credit.
		We can't afford cars, so we take out loans and then pay it off and Ponzi scheme our way into wealth.
		But it's breaking down.
		The system's collapsing.
		People are going to have to go back to the way things were, and they've never experienced that.
		Me, look, I think this.
		I think I'm fortunate enough to have been homeless on more than one occasion.
		And that gives me a very different perspective.
		That is to say, man, I gotta be honest.
		You could probably, if you were to take away everything I owned, I'm not gonna be upset.
		Because I don't find joy through material possession.
unidentified		And I love adventure.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		I went to Occupy Wall Street.
		Left a warm place to sleep, and chose to sleep outside in the park.
		But that's because I experienced this at a younger age, and I'm not scared of it.
		For someone like this, and for many of these people, they're absolutely terrified.
		That they're going to... They're not going to know how to survive.
		How do you find food?
		How do you pay your cell phone bill?
		How do you get clean running water?
		As an adult, who's never experienced that level of hardship, it is terrifying.
		For me?
		Oh, I figured out those things the very hard way.
		Life hack.
		So, there was one point where I was just literally homeless, had nowhere to go, and that absolutely was a challenge, but to be fair, that was a very short period of time.
		And, uh, ultimately it was like, what you do is, you'd go to Denny's, and you'd order a cup of coffee, and then sit in the booth and fall asleep.
		Then you, once the sun came up, because they're open 24 hours, and they know exactly what you're doing, but I gotta be honest, as someone who was like 19 or 20 years old at the time, they didn't think too much of a young guy getting a coffee at night, and then kind of dozing off and waking up at 6am, because in their mind I was probably just sleeping off drunkenness from a party and didn't want to drive or something, so I didn't get a lot of flack.
		But if you're an older guy doing that, and you're wearing ratty clothes, they'll probably throw you out.
		I learned something very, uh, uh, interesting, too.
		When you're well off, and you have an apartment and a car, because I had that experience, there are a lot of people who don't care if you fall asleep on their couch.
		You're hanging out, you're playing video games, it's late, it's Friday, and you fall asleep watching a movie, and they wake up and be like, yo, what up dude, you wanna get breakfast?
		Nobody cares.
		But when they know you don't have a place to go, now they're angry at you for it.
		I've experienced all of this stuff.
		One trick was, you get a gym membership, and now you got a place to take showers.
		You sleep in your car, you wake up, many people know these tricks.
		That's the interesting thing I see about videos like this.
		Perhaps it's because she's a woman, and women are substantially less likely to experience homelessness, but they do, or it's because she's always had a moderate living.
		She doesn't know how people are going to survive.
		I survived.
		I think the reality is we've built a system, which it brings up a good point about, like, where do I go?
		I can't move.
		I can't get any place better than this.
		I have to stay here.
		It's really hard, nigh impossible, when growing into this system, born into it, to make a homestead.
		You can't just go out into the middle of the woods and pitch a tent.
		My point is this.
		It's a system that was built and a system that is failing.
		I don't blame the individuals for this.
		You cannot survive in a system like this reasonably.
		It used to be that you could walk into the woods and start building a house.
		Now everyone owns everything.
		There's no unclaimed land.
		You have to go and file paperwork and that can't be done.
		You're forced to live in their chicken coop, I guess I'll call it.
		But I think the reality of these narratives and what we're seeing is, to put it simply, we had it really good for a really long time.
		And we all grew up in an era where you'd get a high school diploma and you were fine.
		Our parents wanted us to get college degrees and the economy began breaking down.
		We then experienced the Great Recession, things started to fall apart, and now we're like, how do we survive this?
		But the reality is simple.
		With clean running water, I hope people don't take it for granted.
		I'm not trying to downplay hardship.
		bills, you are still better off than every single person 100 years ago.
		I hope people don't take it for granted.
		I'm not trying to downplay hardship.
		I'm just pointing out that this woman here who's crying, she has better dental care than
		Rockefeller did because of technological advancements and capitalism.
		She has a refrigerator, she has air conditioning.
		I'm assuming.
		But as bad as things are, it's remarkable to me that people don't have a relative view, they don't take a look at history as where things could be or where they've been.
		I suppose for me, because I was homeless, I understand not having a refrigerator, or a washing machine, or a microwave, or, you know, air conditioning, whatever, you name it.
		I once lived in a band practice space.
		Found it on Craigslist.
		It was 100 bucks a month.
		Only thing that I could afford.
		It had no bathroom.
	It was just one square room with drywall put in between.
	You constantly heard loud music.
	And me and another found a... We split it.
	It was 50 bucks a month.
	We found discarded van seats from like a 1989 family van or something.
	And congratulations, we had a bed.
	And that was it.
	Showers?
	Oh, that was easy.
	You'd go into the shared bathroom and you would take a rag and you'd wipe yourself off with water from the sink.
	That was not being able to afford rent.
	But you know, to be honest, nobody should have to live that way.
	I'm just pointing out that I think those experiences changed my view of how society is and should function.
	People didn't used to have running water at all.
	And for 50 bucks a month, I had a warm place to sleep and clean running water.
	No refrigerator, no microwave, nothing.
	Just an empty square room with discarded car seats that you could sleep in.
	That was it.
	I hope things get better for this individual.
	I hope people figure it out.
	But it's gonna take a lot of hard work and elbow grease.
	I'll leave it there.
	Next segment's coming up at 1pm on this channel.

▲