CHAOS In NYC, Police PROTECT Illegal Migrants, ARREST Local Protesters, THIS IS WHY TRUMP IS WINNING
HANG OUT LIVE IN MIAMI WITH TIMCAST - https://timcast.com/timcast-irl-x-miami/
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
CHAOS In NYC, Police PROTECT Illegal Migrants, ARREST Local Protesters, THIS IS WHY TRUMP IS WINNING
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Cast IRL will be live in Miami with Patrick Bett David, Donald Trump Jr., Matt Gaetz and
Luke Rydkowski.
Join us there.
Get your tickets by clicking the link in the description below or by going to Timcast dot
com.
And it's so shocking to see such a lead for Donald Trump that the Washington Post said this must be an outlier.
Something's wrong with our poll.
Now, the other day we had people saying, see, they don't want to admit it.
How could they even put the poll out?
Well, it's simple.
If the Washington Post conducted a poll and found that Trump was winning by a massive margin and then suppressed it, it would be a scandal of epic proportions.
Their only editorial choice is to release it and try to bury it.
Then they can say, well, you know, we published it.
Ah, too bad.
FiveThirtyEight picks it up.
Real Clear Politics pick it up.
Somehow, and for some reason, The latest polls show Donald Trump crushing it.
So what's changed?
How is this possible?
Well, you clicked this video, you know exactly where I'm going with this.
Among independent voters, Hispanic and black voters, Donald Trump is surging.
Now, he doesn't have a majority of black voters or Latino voters.
Those voting blocs are still very Democrat leaning.
But Trump has improved dramatically.
And more importantly, among these groups, Democrats are actually struggling.
It's not so much that they're all switching to Trump, it's that some of them are just bowing out.
Which brings me to the subject of this video, which you already understand where I'm going.
How is it that Donald Trump is surging?
Perhaps it could be that in places like New York, fights are erupting as the city and the state ship in non-citizens into local neighborhoods and give resources To the tunes of millions, even up to billions of dollars to fund the lives of non-citizens while people in this country struggle.
Imagine you live in New York.
Your business was destroyed in 2020 when they forced you to shut down.
Or how about Cuomo murders your parents in a nursing home?
That's right.
I'll say it again.
Cuomo put sick people in nursing homes, sick people with COVID, I think the number was, what, 15,000 people?
Perhaps you've experienced that hardship.
And today, the city, which declared itself a sanctuary for illegal immigration, is now spending more and more of your resources...
On non-citizens, and this is where it gets crazy.
A viral video published by the Daily Mail showing the local police protecting non-citizens from citizens who are trying to defend their towns, their neighborhoods, their state.
I'm not talking about people fighting each other or attacking each other.
I am saying that New Yorkers in Staten Island I'm sorry.
to protest and through nonviolent civil disobedience, reject buses full of noncitizens
being brought into their neighborhoods. And the police arrested them. I'm sorry for those that
I didn't want to believe it.
Michael Malice is correct about police.
That there is no crime so egregious they would not commit if ordered to do so.
Including the execution of children.
That's what Michael Malice says, and I believe he's correct about it.
That doesn't mean, I think, that we should abolish the police entirely, right?
I'm sure someone will pull up a clip of me saying abolish the police, but I'll clarify what I mean.
In places like New York, where they vote for it, by all means, do your thing.
I certainly think we have problems when you watch police come in and attack the locals.
I mean, this is, this is insane.
What should have happened is non-violent civil disobedience.
The buses turn around and they say, you're going to have to go to some federal location, not here.
That's it.
They turn around.
Everybody would be fine.
And the people who live there, they've spoken.
That's not what happened.
The police began arresting locals.
You know, these things will not end well.
I'm deeply worried about this, but I can tell you for the time being, the best outcome may be, and I don't know this is one for one, but there is a correlation, I presume, With illegal immigration and Donald Trump's surge in the polls.
And I gotta throw it to Ann Coulter.
You know, a lot of people are critical of Ann, a lot of Trump supporters, because she does not like Donald Trump.
And she said in 2016, immigration was on the ballot.
And that's why Trump won, because he was calling it out.
And maybe she's right.
Because now, as we're seeing these crises befall these cities, it's not just illegal immigration, but Eric Adams, the mayor, said, New York will be destroyed!
Wow.
You don't think that's having an impact on people?
And you've got now a massive amount of sentiment, a large sentiment, in these cities of people saying, shut the borders down!
Where's Joe Biden?
I'm sorry.
Y'all voted for Joe Biden.
Oh, man.
You know, some would call it schadenfreude, I guess.
I don't want that.
I think it's a problem that the borders are porous and that Joe Biden is facilitating this.
And I'm not exaggerating.
The Biden administration was flying migrants in the middle of the night to various parts of this country.
This has been an ongoing problem.
Donald Trump, he was trying to push them out, deport them, and build a wall.
unidentified
Well, I bet that wall is looking real good if you're a New Yorker.
You're a New Yorker who went and voted for a Democrat.
You're now saying, like, what have I done?
Well, this is what you voted for.
You wanted Eric Adams?
Congratulations!
Now, I know, I know.
The people on Staten Island are not the same as the people in Brooklyn.
New York's a very big place.
And I'd imagine that sentiment in Staten Island was always a bit more Trump-supporting.
Still.
The majority of these people are voting for Democrats and Democrat policies.
I would assume that the people protesting are not those, right?
If you're going to have buses full of illegal immigrants coming to your town and you're going to go out and protest, the likelihood is you're someone who was already politically active enough to pay attention and not vote for these Democrat policies.
But this is the problem of the town you live in.
And so, it's going to have an impact on everyone, not just the protesters.
And while I can say, holy crap, cops arresting locals?
Do you, like... Stop and think about what that means.
You've got these videos of police arresting locals.
You live in a city.
The government ships in non-citizens to your town, where there's no room.
There's no place to go.
They're putting them in nursing facilities.
Nursing homes.
And you say, stop.
And they say, shut your mouth.
And they arrest you.
Wow.
This stuff, this kind of thing doesn't end well, man.
Because people are gonna be like, this is my home.
Here's the story.
Tensions flare over migrants in New York City.
Staten Island protesters are arrested while trying to stop buses carrying asylum seekers to shelter.
As they yelled, take them back.
Oh, I love the insult to injury of the Daily Mail.
Asylum seekers.
These people aren't seeking asylum.
They're economic migrants.
The media is lying to you.
Official UN reports pertaining to the migrant crisis in Europe outright said years ago these are economic migrants coming into Europe.
The people we see when they interview them in these caravans, they are young men coming here for work.
What was that?
Your business was destroyed and you're struggling to make ends meet and you're living paycheck to paycheck?
Fear not, good citizen!
We've got your tax dollars to pay non-citizens to work underground and take your jobs!
I love it.
It's like South Park.
Here we go, New York Post.
September 20th.
Illegal underground gig economy booms in New York City as migrants await work permits all while living off Citi's dime.
Ooh, I love this one.
When you're working underground, you ain't paying taxes.
So let me just make this very clear for all of you in your sanctuary city.
These people who are coming in are economic migrants.
I absolutely respect the desire to be in America and work a good-paying American job.
We all have it.
But there's only one pie, and only so many pieces of that pie to be given out.
So now, as you work your job, fingers to the bone!
What was that?
You missed Little Janie's piano recital because you had to work late hours to pay the bills?
You showed up in the last half?
Dirty grease on your hands.
You shed a tear when they say you missed her performance.
You tried to be there.
It's okay.
That extra time you worked?
Yeah, that gets cut off and sent to Uncle Sam.
I guess Uncle Adams in this instance.
Don't worry.
The percentage you pay in New York City income tax is going to be well allotted.
It's going to go in the hands of a non-citizen who is working a gig economy job who will receive benefits from you either because they're paying for these people to live in a shelter, be put on buses, given supplies, and here's the best part, when they work they don't pay taxes!
That's you!
That's you.
You pay for it.
You do.
Y'know, I think we have a word for that.
What is it when, like, there's one group of people that has to give up portions of their income to pay for other people?
Y'know?
Y'know?
We have, we have, uh, SURF?
Are you a serf?
Not really.
I mean, it's not like these guys are feudal lords or landowners or anything like that.
But the government is taking your money, because you pay your taxes like a good citizen, and they're using it to pay for the lives of economic migrants who work underground and don't pay taxes.
Now I'm sure the left will come out and say, they do pay taxes.
Some of them do, for sure.
But come on.
You want to play that game?
You really think someone doing underground gig economy work is going to pay taxes?
Bro, half the contractors in New York probably don't report all their taxes.
And I'm talking about American citizens.
You mean to tell me you think an illegal immigrant is going to give money away when they're not even being tracked and the government's giving them money?
Alright, let's put it this way.
Let's say the non-citizens that are coming into New York are paying taxes.
That's right, that's right.
They're getting paid, let's say they get $20 an hour in their gig economy job.
Maybe less.
The non-citizens, maybe it's $10.
Let's say they pay their taxes.
Okay, let's play that game.
They work $10 an hour.
They work 40 hours a week.
Just hypothetical.
$400 at the end of that week.
And then they gotta pay about, what is it, like 23%.
So let's say they end up giving about $100.
$100 a week.
That's $400 per month going to Uncle Sam or Uncle Adams.
That's your mayor in New York City.
unidentified
Hey, it's Kimberly Fletcher here from Moms 4 America with some very exciting news.
Tucker Carlson is going on a nationwide tour this fall, and Moms 4 America has the exclusive VIP meet-and-greet experience for you.
Before each show, you can have the opportunity to meet Tucker Carlson in person.
These tickets are fully tax-deductible donations, so go to momsforamerica.us and get one of our very limited VIP meet-and-greet experiences with Tucker at any of the 15 cities on his first ever Coast to Coast tour.
Not only will you be supporting Moms for America in our mission to empower moms, promote liberty, and raise patriots, your tax-deductible donation secures you a full VIP experience with priority entrance and check-in, premium gold seating in the first five rows, access to a pre-show cocktail reception, an individual meet-and-greet, and photo with America's most famous conservative and our friend, Tucker Carlson.
Visit Moms4America.us today for more information and to secure your exclusive VIP meet-and-greet tickets.
That's what happens when you call yourself a sanctuary city.
But that's just the hotel cost.
New York City Mayor Eric Adams estimates the total cost of the migrant crisis will be about $12 billion over the next three years.
You mean to tell me?
Y'all people in New York are gonna be paying four billion dollars this year.
Taken right from your pockets.
What was that?
Little Janie needs braces?
Too bad.
So what?
Too bad.
We are past our breaking point, he said, with more than 57,300 individuals currently in our care on an average night.
It amounts to $9.8 million per day, almost $300 million a month, and nearly $3.6 billion a year.
Residents in New York City have had enough.
In the video below, Staten Island locals were arrested for blocking migrant buses.
Take a look at these cops right here.
Those are your New York City cops.
They don't care about you.
They don't care about principle.
They don't care about family.
They don't care about this country.
Where did we go wrong?
I don't know.
I don't know.
Gone are the days of Officer Friendly, who cared about his neighborhood, who cared about his church community, who cared about the locals.
Long gone.
You know, I think the internet does this.
This guy does not care.
One, you can move anywhere at any point.
Good luck.
If this guy gets ostracized by his community, there's no repercussions.
If this guy, if these cops single out and arrest locals who are desperately fighting to protect their homes and what little they have, If he arrests them, heck, he can spit on their faces while laughing the whole time.
And you know what's going to happen?
The next day, when he goes out to eat and takes off his uniform, ain't nobody says nothing.
Nobody will know.
Nobody cares.
And this is the problem of community breakdown and social disarray.
This is the problem of people not working locally.
This is the problem with people not knowing who their neighbors are.
You will be suppressed, oppressed, and beaten by your government.
And these cops, they're given this dilemma when they see things like this happen.
And they think to themselves, there are no negative repercussions for mercilessly beating and arresting the people in their own neighborhoods.
None.
Now, in Jersey, during lockdown, Attila's gym says, we're staying open.
The local cops come out and say, we're not shutting you down.
And these cops are worried, like, people are gonna show up to our department, yelling at us.
City Council's gonna pull funding from us.
We can't do this.
So what did they do?
They brought in cops from outside to come in, and with a smile on their faces, they said, go yourselves.
Incredible.
I think Michael Malice is right about cops.
And this was exemplified by Lahaina.
In Hawaii, police shut down the road out of the city.
There's like one main road that leaves the city.
I think there might be more than one, but there's like one big one that everyone uses.
And this was the reporting that there were children that may have burned to death in the cars.
Children going missing.
A lot of people did burn to death.
A lot of people jumped out of their cars and jumped into the water and some didn't make it.
Because the police, knowing the fires were there, burning people alive, smiled and said, shut your mouth and stay where you are.
And you know what?
The people who disobeyed survived.
It's a scary thought, man.
This is the danger of the banality of evil.
When regular people, like these officers, don't know, don't care, and tell you to shut your mouth.
And they'll arrest you.
They arrested the people who lived here.
So, whose side are the police on?
New York City cops in Staten Island?
They're not on your side.
They're on the side of the non-citizens.
Huh.
If you have large swaths of people, to the tunes of millions, rushing your border, breaking your laws, and entering your country, what do you call that?
We call it an invasion.
Literally, by definition.
Ken Paxton, I don't know, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, Governor Abbott, declared an invasion in Texas.
Declared an invasion.
Okay.
So you have invaders, at least according to Texas, and you have the people of New York saying, stop them.
These police then aid and abet the invaders.
What do we call that?
We call that treason.
I would argue it's a seditious conspiracy.
You know, Eric Adams can say anything he wants.
I think that the reality is simple.
They're lying to you.
Eric Adams knows That these people in Staten Island, the locals, are angry.
He knows the people in Manhattan are angry.
And he knows that he's on the verge of seeing pitchfork mobs outside.
So what does he say?
Oh, woe is me!
Oh heavens, I can't believe this is happening!
In reality, he wants it to happen.
All of these politicians do.
Why?
Why bring a bus to Staten Island?
Send the buses down?
It would be cheaper to drive the buses No question.
It would probably only cost, let's do some math, a couple thousand dollars to send a busload of these non-citizens back to their home countries.
Instead, they'd pay for hotels, and housing, and benefits?
That doesn't make sense.
Why would Eric Adams do this?
He could easily send these buses back from whence they came.
He doesn't.
Because when he says that he is upset about this, he's lying.
And they want you, the people of Staten Island, to sit down and smile as they rip away your resources, give your money away, hurt your local economy, and destroy your life.
I don't blame the migrants that are coming here.
Someone offers free money, you take it.
But there is an issue of honor and integrity.
You know, if someone stole money from someone else and said, you can have it, I'd be like, I'm not taking that.
In fact, if I did, I'd give it back to the person that was stolen from.
If I found a wallet on the ground, I'd drop it in a mailbox.
You know the problem with finding a wallet on the ground?
What they say is you're supposed to like, well, this is not the official thing.
The official thing they say is just take the wallet, throw it in a mailbox.
What most people will tell you in Chicago is take the money out, throw it in the mailbox, depending on how much money's in it.
You pick up the wallet, you throw that cash in the mailbox, that cash ain't going nowhere.
Person will get their wallet back without cash.
So, what they usually say is take the money as a reward, throw the wallet in the mailbox, and they'll deliver it to the person.
I think maybe what you could do, if you're a good citizen, is not take the cash, look at the address on the ID, and bring it to the person's house.
Throwing it into the mailbox doesn't really solve the problem, but they do deliver it back to people, that's my understanding.
But this is what it should be.
What it should be is that you found a wallet on the ground, and you drive to the address and say, hey, I found this wallet, does this person live here?
And they'll be like, oh, thank you so much, and save their lives.
Well, not that they're gonna die or anything, but it really helps them out.
Yeah, gone are those days, man.
I guarantee you, you drop your wallet in any one of these cities.
Any one of them.
And you know what's gonna happen?
80% likelihood, they'll pull out the cash, throw the wallet in the dumpster.
That's it.
And maybe someone will throw it in a, you know, light chance they'll throw it in the mailbox.
This is Communal Breakdown.
I think a lot of it is a problem of density.
And this is why they are working to make these cities more and more dense and bring in more and more non-citizens.
So that these cops, with smiles on their faces, will arrest you when you try to defend your home.
I hope y'all get that.
Michael Malice does not bring up this point arbitrarily, that these cops do these things.
Look at Lahaina and understand that when the police are given an order, they will follow it.
Let me tell you a story.
Luke Rudkowski told me this story.
I think he was in Pittsburgh.
I think it was Pittsburgh, and it was like the G20 or something.
I can't remember.
And a bunch of, you know, anti... I don't know, establishments, anti-machine protesters, like Ron Paul supporter types and leftists, were in a park protesting.
And riot police surround the park, all facing inward at these protesters with their truncheons and their shields.
And then, Because they were done, the protesters started leaving.
They were done protesting and started slowly just going home.
But the police were never given any orders.
So what happens is, all the protesters have left, and the police were surrounding a park staring into nothing.
Because they're insane people.
This is who they bring on to these police departments.
That's why the Chazz Chop was allowed to exist.
That's why people were murdered in Seattle.
That's why a man was murdered in Portland.
Because these officers are no longer serving the community.
They're serving their Democrat-appointed bosses.
So these cops surround a park and just stand there.
Because they're morons.
And they're like, I got orders.
It's like, you realize you're looking into an empty park and doing literally nothing.
Hey, no problem.
Your tax dollars pay their salaries.
They don't care.
And here's the worst part.
You see what's happening in New York right now.
People are struggling.
The economy is not great.
It's in a weird place where like there's some good metrics, a lot of bad metrics.
And what happens is these cops, they think, hey man, I got mine.
You think I'm gonna walk away from a job that pays the bills?
Y'all, I can see out how much you're suffering.
I don't want to be in that boat.
This is where we'll end up.
And this is why I think Donald Trump is starting to surge.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 1 p.m.
on this channel.
Thanks for hanging out, and I'll see you all then.
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.
I think one of the reasons that Democrats, namely Joe Biden, are starting to fail among black voters has to do with immigration.
If you spend every election cycle talking about reparations, oppression, systemic racism, etc., but then allow illegal immigrants into the country to the tune of millions and start paying out billions, there's going to be some questions about your sincerity.
Right?
I mean, let's break it down.
Democrats love to bring up the issue of reparations, the big factor, big issue in California right now.
So you're going to these people and telling them, as a black American, you are oppressed and you are deserving of some recompense.
And a lot of these people in these states say, OK, we'll vote for that.
But then you don't pay out reparations.
You open up the borders and start dumping money into integrating illegal immigrants into this country.
You think people don't notice that?
I don't know to what degree that has an impact on the polling, but there are a lot of factors at play.
I mean, obviously, the economy, stupid, right?
First and foremost, people are probably just saying, like, why are my wages down?
Why is inflation up?
Why can't I buy groceries?
But we have this data.
For Donald Trump, he's doing better and better.
I think immigration is a big issue.
Look man, it's not just about this idea of reparations for a lot of these, for a lot of black people in this country.
I'm just saying, doesn't there seem to be something broken there?
Hey, you were oppressed, we should be giving you money.
Okay, will you give me money?
Nah, we're giving it to the non-citizens first.
Are you kidding me?
It's one thing if you're in New York City, and you live on Staten Island, and they're bringing in these illegal immigrants, and you're like, hey man, that's not okay, you're taking our tax dollars.
It's another thing to wave money in the face of people you claim are oppressed.
Don't give them the money and then hand it to someone who's not even in this country!
Yeah.
Insult to injury.
Or I should say, someone who's not even from this country, has no historical ties to it.
I'm sure they'll start making up an argument for native displacement or something like that.
But right now we're seeing Trump improve dramatically among black voters.
We are seeing Trump take over in the betting odds as of today.
There are, I got three metrics.
Predicted says Biden's in the lead.
We've got odds tracker, I think what it's called, showing neck and neck tie, same odds in Vegas.
And then we've got election betting odds showing Donald Trump is the favorite by five points.
The polls have Trump ahead in aggregate, but there's a new poll that just came out.
Biden's up one point.
We'll take it all into consideration, but I think you need to realize that Biden and Democrats are starting to lose among the black community.
And while it's not necessarily going to be enough, right?
Everyone in 2020 thought it was going to be a big deal for Trump that he was going to get a larger portion of the black vote.
He is getting younger black men, which is very interesting.
But we'll see.
The question, I suppose, is what does what does the race of the individual really tell us?
There are certain things you can probably assume based on a person's race, like who they live next to, because people have a tendency to do these things.
I don't think that is necessarily useful to us.
However, the bigger question is, are Republicans reaching out to enough people in general?
Now I know.
Everything gets super racialized, and I'm not a fan of it.
When it comes to politics, they're talking about how are Hispanics voting, how are Black people voting.
I don't think that's the country we will, it's not the country I want to live in.
I don't think it should matter the race of the individual, but there are trends that people see, and they use that, and I'm like, well, I understand.
Trump needs to convince more Black and Latino people to vote for him.
I think Trump needs to convince more people in general.
And I think we need an American message, not a racialized one.
But perhaps for individuals who experience a life as a particular of a particular race with different experiences, they're going to demand a perspective closely associated with their struggles.
Hence, this is how voting is always going to break down.
And for this, looks like Democrats are in trouble.
The Postmillennial says Biden's approval rating among Black Americans down 17 points.
Unless these men expect to be running for president.
DeSantis is.
Is Newsome.
I gotta wonder.
Now, Predict It is not betting odds.
It's people buying shares in the idea.
So if you buy one share of Joe Biden at 42 cents to win, if he does win, that share is worth $1.
That's basically how it works.
I don't know if betting on Newsom in this way is worth it.
Don't take financial advice from me.
I'm not advocating for any of this.
Over at Odds Checker, we have Biden and Trump neck and neck.
They're giving the same odds.
175, 175.
Interesting.
Newsom's up 1,200.
Vivek Ramaswamy is 1,400.
I find it interesting.
Ramaswamy has got better odds than DeSantis, so we will see.
We will see.
And then over at electionbettingodds.com, Donald Trump is the favorite at 34.6 percent to win to Biden's 30.1 with Gavin Newsom at 8 percent.
Now, I just got to tell you, man, we pop over to Odds Checker and they got Newsom just behind Donald Trump.
Now, I got to wonder about that, right?
Look, I often think about... You know, I read the news every single day.
If I just invested based on the news I was reading, I'd be way, way... I'd be a billionaire probably.
Not literally, but I just mean like, I'd have a ton of money and success in the stock market.
Because I look at these stories, news breaks, and it's like, railroad company goes on strike or whatever, and it's like, okay, now's probably not a good time to have that stock.
Not giving anyone advice, I'm saying for me personally.
And then, sure enough, you watch, and then people learn later on.
We, you and I, are more plugged in.
So I look at this, and I'm thinking to myself, should I take that bet?
Gavin Newsom.
I don't think Gavin Newsom would be president.
But, I think it's fair to say if you look at the prediction market, predicted is a better mechanism for making these wagers.
Again, not advocating you do this because you'll likely just lose money, so I would actually advocate not to engage in this stuff.
I'm just saying, for me, if I was going to make a wager, I would buy shares of Gavin Newsom right now because I don't believe Joe Biden will be the nominee.
I am just, look, I know everybody's saying it, but I just don't see it.
I don't understand how Joe Biden could be the nominee.
I want to have that bias, that normalcy bias, where it's like, nah, they can't.
What are they going to do?
What's the strategy?
I'm telling you, man.
Every time I think about it, I just don't see it making sense.
Biden is collapsing among basically every demographic.
He's losing support from the black community, from the Latino community.
What is this?
Are they just sending him out there knowing he's going to lose?
I don't see how he improves.
Granted, they're going to try and they're going to try and convict Trump and do all these things and take him off the ballot.
Maybe.
Maybe.
I just don't.
I just don't get how Joe Biden will be the guy.
There's no way he can last.
The dude can already not speak.
They've got Biden doing balance exercise because he falls so much.
In which case, I look at this and I'm like, maybe I should buy some shares of Gavin Newsom.
Because what'll happen is, I don't think Newsom will win.
But if Biden gets knocked out of the race and Newsom takes over, Newsom's shares will go from 13 to 50.
So that's how it works.
You don't actually have to bet on him to win, just improve, right?
But again, I don't recommend any of that stuff.
I recommend people, you know, stay away from this.
I will say, there's an interesting conversation around what gambling really is.
And there's the narrow and the broad views.
The broad view is that any kind of wager of money against a system, and it hopes that the value improves, is gambling.
That would mean the stock market is gambling.
I don't see the difference.
Look, let's talk about horse betting, right?
We have the horse track here in Charlestown, West Virginia, Charlestown races.
It's fun to watch the horses.
I don't really care for betting on them, because I don't understand half of it.
But, you know, you put a dollar on the horse with the funniest name, and then you cross your fingers and hope you win 10 bucks.
Or, I don't know, maybe he's the favorite and you win $1.50.
But the issue with horses.
I was talking to a guy at the track and what he said was...
Uh, it's not gambling.
And I'm like, horse betting's not?
And he goes, no, because people are tracking the breed of the horse, the horse's record, the terrain the horse is on, the jockey.
All of these factors play a role, and you can actually calculate greater-than-chance odds of winning and making more money.
For everybody else, they show up and they're just like, what are the odds?
Bet on the favorite, right?
Sometimes the favorite doesn't win.
And then you lose money.
Whatever.
The point is, the narrow view of gambling is that Flipping a coin is a gamble, because there's no way to predict what it will be.
But any system that allows you to gain information and make predictions about what is to come is not gambling.
Depends on the percentage.
So if you look at blackjack for instance, and you're counting cards, you have like a 51% chance of winning
Versus if you're not counting cards like 40.9, 49.5% sorry, 40, 49.5
And it's gambling because you're flipping a coin basically, you know
You're trying, if you play basic strategy, if you're playing a game like craps where you roll dice
You have no idea, you, the funny thing is there are skill shots in, in craps
People can learn to throw better, you know, throw better and land on certain numbers
But this is why they have rules like you've got to, the dice have to hit the back wall and things like this.
Roulette.
All of these games are chance.
No matter what you think you know, you can certainly have worse or better odds, but you're not beating the system.
However, for a thing, something like Predict It, where we know, because we're reading the news, you actually have substantially greater than chance odds of being right and making money.
So the question is, is that gambling?
Anyway, I digress.
I only bring that up in the context of PredictIt.
I think there's a move to try and get PredictIt banned or something, but I think the whole system is interesting and we will see.
What we get with PredictIt, in my opinion, is sentiment among those who use the system.
I don't know the demographics of a system like PredictIt, right?
Is it mostly 25-year-old men?
Is it mostly 40-year-old men?
Who knows?
If it was an accurate sampling of the population, Now you're looking at some data, but either way, we are experiencing through predicted wisdom of the crowds, which I think is important.
This means that while we don't know the demographics behind who is actually making the purchases on shares in favor of Joe Biden, what we do see is a lot of people Making their bets, and you effectively get an ask the audience.
Like who wants to be a millionaire?
Not always correct.
But in the earlier questions, the wisdom of the crowd tends to be correct.
Most people are making this bet.
Now, the information is based on today and will change.
But as of right now, based on all the information available to people making wagers, they think Joe Biden's gonna win.
Despite the fact that the other odds have Donald Trump as the favorite.
We will see.
Can't say I know for sure.
What I can tell you is, oh boy, does it really bother them that Joe Biden is losing black support?
First, I want to show you this article from NBC News from 2020.
This headline is something to behold.
I implore you!
This headline should be taught in journalism schools.
It reads, Black men shift slightly toward Trump in record numbers!
Black men shift slightly toward Trump in record numbers.
What, which is it?
How does that sentence make sense?
It's a shift slightly toward Trump.
What?
If black men shift toward Trump in record numbers, it's not slight.
Right?
They're trying- they're- they're- they're- an amazing article!
They say, most black men support Biden, but overall Democrats have been losing black male support since 08, according to NBC exit poll data.
Very interesting, very interesting.
Daily Mail reports Joe Biden trails Donald Trump in 2024 rematch and loses key support from independent and younger voters, Daily Mail poll reveals.
Daily Mail poll reveals.
Donald Trump takes one point lead over Joe Biden.
New survey of a thousand voters, so we have that.
Currently over at 538, we can see Daily Mail has been added to the mix, showing Trump up by one point, with ABC Washington Post saying Trump in two polls is up by nine and ten points.
That is earth-shattering.
That is apocalyptic news to Democrats.
Right now, Morning Consult with 6,000 registered voters has Joe Biden up one point.
It is right now.
It is nearly, nearly a statistical tie.
However, with the latest polls showing Trump typically ahead, it is skewing in favor of Donald Trump, despite the fact that much of this does, in aggregate, fall within the margin of error.
So, we don't know for sure.
Can't say we know for sure, but I can tell you.
Here's an article from March 8th, 2023.
I bring this article up because another video has gone viral of a conversation Joe Rogan had with Patrick McDavid, where Joe Rogan says, I've already said I'd vote for Trump over Biden.
But Joe Rogan did not say, I will vote Trump.
He did not.
And I think it's because Joe's hedging his bets that it ain't going to be Joe Biden.
The examiner says Rogan would vote Trump in 2024 over Biden and sideshow of diversity administration.
This was a conversation, I believe, with Russell Brand.
Quote, I would vote for Trump before I'd vote for Biden, just because I think with Biden, he's gone.
Like, you know, he's gone mentally, Rogan said.
He'd previously said he would support Ron DeSantis for president, noting that what he does is done is stand up for freedoms.
It is really interesting.
Rogan, I think, had a hard time during the COVID lockdowns.
And just my personal perception, not like anything he said to me, but listening to his show during lockdowns, it was a lot of the same stuff over and over and over again.
What do you do?
What do you talk about?
Nothing's happening.
It's just lockdown.
And so a lot of people were like, man, it's just lockdown stuff.
Well, that was everyone's life.
When Ron DeSantis burst onto the scene, I had also said the same thing Joe did.
That Ron's the guy.
I'm sitting there with the Daily Wire crew a year and a half ago like, guys, it's Ron.
He's got the tact, he's got the leadership.
If he runs, it's his to lose.
In fact, all the prediction markets had Ron DeSantis ahead.
I think it was two to one.
And then Ron launched his campaign and he brought on the worst communications people you could possibly imagine.
Well, Ron DeSantis was still doing very well in terms of the leadership in his state, getting rid of these Soros prosecutors.
I think he did a fantastic job with the hurricane down in Florida, and I think Ron DeSantis is one of the best politicians we have in the country.
I was for a while saying he was the best, but now I'll shout out Matt Gaetz.
Matt Gaetz's efforts on single-subject spending and standing up to the machine?
Hands down the best politician we got.
Getting rid of these omnibus spending bills is paramount.
This idea that a group of people with lobbyist backing, small-knit groups like the Speaker and whatever, craft a 5,000-page spending bill and say, vote or don't.
That's insane.
So Matt's doing a fantastic job.
But, DeSantis?
Look, when he came out the gate, he did his announcement on X. That was a mistake.
He did not create a memorable historical moment.
He created something easily forgettable, and it crashed.
It was a tactical error.
Ron should have done a public announcement at a rally.
He needed to undergo charisma training.
I'm not saying this to be mean to the guy, but his people could not handle the truth.
That Ron DeSantis coming out on X to a crashed stream and then going, well, I'm here to lead the great American comeback.
That is not a rally cry for a nation in distress.
Sorry, man.
And it's crazy that I'm like, I'm a huge fan.
I would vote for the guy and this is what you get.
Ron now is trailing.
I mean, it's brutal.
You look at election betting odds and DeSantis is losing to Michelle Obama and to RFK Jr.
How did he go from the favorite to what is he in?
Sixth?
Seventh?
Sixth place?
Man, he's tied with Ramaswamy!
Vivek has dropped down quite a bit.
He was bursting onto the scene, a lot of attention.
Seems to be waning a little bit since the debate, but I think Vivek could do a good job and pull ahead.
But we'll see.
I'm wondering who the VP choice will be.
And you even have Elizabeth Warren down here.
Really, really unlikely.
But it is kind of crazy to see that Ron is just completely out of the conversation.
And you know, I had someone saying to me, like, do you think that Ron will be VP?
And I was like, no.
And they're like, yeah, but why?
Everyone likes him.
I'm like, no, they don't!
Ron's knocked out!
This is crazy!
Look at this!
GOP nomination election chances has Ron at 8.6% now!
Yo, that's nuts!
Let's jump over to the predicted market and see what they say about the, uh... Wow!
Remarkable.
Ron DeSantis, unpredicted, is tied with Vivek Ramaswamy, and they're both losing to Nikki Haley.
Donald Trump now sits proudly at 74 cents.
Yeah, I gotta say, if you bet on Donald Trump a while ago, last year, you've more than doubled your shares.
That's crazy.
I actually thought DeSantis might actually take it.
Not anymore.
Sorry, man.
Donald Trump, he's got some problems.
He needs to stop talking about persecution of himself.
Well, I should clarify.
He needs to stop talking about 2020.
I think it is still effective in some ways to talk about the targeting and the persecution and prosecution of himself.
Trump coming out and saying, they're trying to arrest me and lock me up.
Yeah, yeah, I think that's fine.
Some people have argued it's not.
No, I think it's fine.
But Trump does need to redouble his efforts on talking about the border crisis.
That right there, number one.
Donald Trump comes out and says, I built secure fencing, triple layer bollard fencing, we brought in more CBP and federal law enforcement to deal with the influx of illegal immigration, and I was halted by Democrats.
Bro, bring out every clip, every video of Democrats saying Trump's racist, Trump's racist, and run those ads in New York City.
Do it.
Show every Democrat being like, we don't need a wall.
Let the asylum seekers come in.
Show Ocasio-Cortez saying, legal asylees.
Play those videos as the people are fighting in the streets against the immigration crisis.
Donald Trump, at this point, it's his to lose.
Trump needs only focus on immigration.
Ann Coulter was right about that.
And you are going to see something very interesting.
Now, I don't know what's going to happen.
I say it's Trump's to lose, but listen, we're a year out.
The variables, there are too many.
There are too many to count.
Things could change.
Joe Biden could have a medical issue.
Gavin Newsom steps in, maybe.
Michelle Obama maybe announces.
Who knows?
We'll see.
I can't predict the future for you, my friends.
I can only look at the prediction markets, but I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 4 p.m.
on this channel.
Thanks for hanging out, and I will see you all then.
Recently, a trend emerged on TikTok where women ask their male friends and partners and family members, how often do you think about the Roman Empire?
And they're shocked to discover that men think about the Roman Empire often.
But the misleading thing is, it's not just the Roman Empire.
The idea, I suppose, is that men are singularly focused on this one aspect of history.
But if you were to ask many men about, say, other times in history, like the Bolshevik Revolution, Nazi Germany, the Spanish Civil War, you might get comparable answers to varying degrees.
Simply put, Roman Empire, major part of U.S.
history, and a component of male thinking.
Now we have this article from the Huffington Post.
It is not so much the Roman Empire.
It is not because of video games.
It is not because of movies, which is what the Huffington Post tries to argue.
get it. It is not so much the Roman Empire. It is not because of video games. It is not
because of movies, which is what the Huffington Post tries to argue. It is because men think
about worldly things, how the world operates and how it may become a threat to them, their
friends and their families.
That's a very basic way of explaining it.
We look to history to give us guidance to the future.
We remember the past so that we are not doomed to repeat it.
History doesn't repeat, it rhymes, as they say.
So.
When we think about today, the current state of political affairs, we often, especially if you're watching my show in the morning or at night, we often compare what's happening to other historical events.
Thus, when I am asked, how often do you think about the Roman Empire?
The response is, I don't know, a couple times per week?
Why?
Because I host a political talk show where we talk about historical references and, okay, that's an easy answer, right?
But why are so many people, so many men, drawn to a conversation like this?
Oh boy, I'd love to talk to you all about it and show you this article and break down for you the views that many people have.
There are many different reasons why men think about the Roman Empire.
Carl Benjamin has a great response.
He says, What I love about the Roman Empire trend is that a lot of women are suddenly realizing that their, that her own husband is intelligent, educated, and thinks about important and far-reaching things she doesn't even consider at all.
He had an interesting inner life and she had no idea.
In this video from Wall Street Silver, Oman says, I asked my husband if he ever thinks about the Roman Empire.
I was not prepared for his response.
This should terrify you.
This trend.
I am not here to pile on to a silly trend and have a conversation about history and silly ideas men have.
I'm actually here to worry you.
Because what you need to understand is that this trend has exposed that men are concerned about worldly affairs.
How they will get food for their families, how we survive, and women tend not to care.
I'm not saying that no woman cares.
There are many women who do care.
I'm saying the trend is as such.
Men tend to care about worldly affairs, history, and what's happening to the world around us.
Women tend not to.
I have a video that can exemplify this for you.
And this is why I believe you're getting so many people saying, repeal the 19th amendment.
This video right here.
This is a tweet from Billy Ragland.
It's originally an Instagram from JamalTheCreative, and it is brilliant, and I want to play for it, uh, play you this video right now.
For those that are just listening, I'll need to explain it to you, but let me play.
It's only 16 seconds long.
unidentified
There goes two exits to the left.
My nearest exit is still in front of me.
That guy looks kind of suspicious.
Let me make sure he doesn't get too close to her.
Make my way downtown, walkin' fast, that's this person's home.
The video says, me not using a single brain cell when I'm with my man.
And it is a man and a woman walking through what appears to be a mall, and the man explaining that while they're walking, he is checking for his exits and concerned about a strange-looking man.
This is the male perspective.
And then, the woman is singing... She's oblivious, not paying attention.
Now, I'm not saying all women are doing this, but this is an exaggeration of this phenomenon related to the Roman Empire.
Let's take this from the simple.
Yes, let me tell you guys.
When I go out, it's not true of all men.
When I go out, I am constantly paying attention to the people around me.
I am constantly paying attention to where my exits are.
I've told this story several times when I worked for Fusion, the ABC News company.
I'm sitting at, they have these diner tables in the office, I thought it was cool, I guess.
And then everyone else at their desks.
And all of a sudden, lights start flashing, and bram bram bram, fire alarm going off.
I immediately grab my computer, grab my bag, and I get up, and I look to my associate, who is female, and I said, let's go, let's go!
And she's like, we're leaving?
I'm like, the fire alarm's going off!
We go outside.
No one else came.
Wow.
It's amazing.
I remember I was in another building for Fusion.
They had different offices.
And the power went out in the building.
And the loudspeakers came on and they say, do not panic.
Remain at your desks.
Everything is fine.
And I say, nope!
And I got the F out of that building.
Because I'm not stupid.
Turns out there was some kind of electrical problem in the basement.
Water leakage plus electricity, not good.
Wow.
Sure enough, I said, y'all should leave.
But there are different worldviews.
Some people are oblivious to what's going on, men and women alike, and they don't know and they don't care.
Not every man is thinking about the Roman Empire, but I assume every man is thinking about historical events and their consequences.
Which brings me to this from the Huffington Post.
I'm a Roman expert.
Here's why men are so obsessed with it.
And they are wrong.
You know what the funny thing is?
My audience is mostly male, so most of you already know this.
But I really would love to opine on the matter, considering we're seeing... I mean, here's another article.
It's an article from yesterday talking about the Roman Empire.
I'm a Roman Empire expert.
This is a woman, Amy Glover, who does not understand the male perspective.
The reason why I say this is shocking and should worry you is that many of these women, overwhelmingly voting Democrat, do not care about historical events and the lessons they teach us.
I am not saying all women.
I'm saying the tendency is for men to look at, say, the Roman Empire and say, wow, How did that happen, and will that happen to us?
And for women, they're surprised!
It's a joke, it's a meme, it's hilarious!
Why are you thinking about history?
Holy crap, are you serious?
The president's been indicted on 91 counts!
They're arresting people for storming the Capitol!
This is crazy!
We have debt crisis, we have an economic crisis.
Are we going to have food tomorrow?
And many women are going, and they're voting.
Welcome to Modern Living.
Let me play for you the response from this guy.
Is that a chicken coop back there?
Okay, now I know this guy's awesome.
Anyway, let me play this video.
unidentified
Do you ever think about the Roman Empire?
All the time.
Why?
What are you thinking about it?
Well, because we're in those times right now.
Everybody's preoccupied with sports, movies, work.
What was it you said about bread?
Well, alright, the common people... Roman Empire said that everybody was equal, everybody had a chance.
But it wasn't.
The rich got richer and the poor got poorer.
And they worried constantly about people rioting.
Because they knew that the common man, the common people, could take over at any time.
So they would bring them into the Colosseums, and they would give them free grain, they would give them bread, They would give them wine, whatever they needed.
To fill their bellies and block their minds from what they were angry about.
They would watch plays.
They would watch fights with the gladiators.
Sometimes for months on end.
Huh.
And that's where we're at right now.
And I think about it all the time.
Because so many people are preoccupied with their favorite football team, their favorite actor, actress, singer, and they just don't even think about what's being taken away from them.
So this is a really great but surface level explanation to why men think about the Roman Empire, right?
My simple take is men are interested in worldly affairs and externalities.
Women are interested in their social circles and less so with worldly affairs.
That is not absolute.
There are many men who behave this way and there are many women who don't.
No, but I think if you look at trends in news media, you can see that overwhelmingly, news audiences tend to skew male.
Podcast, news, culture, conflict, crisis, male audience.
Makeup, social, cultural commentary, pop culture tends to be more female.
And it makes sense.
Men being object-oriented, women being subject-oriented.
Women don't care about history.
History is not now.
It's nothing to do with my friends, my family, my culture, and the trends we have.
Take a look at Instagram, for instance.
We see these trends among young girls, where if they don't get enough likes, they get seriously depressed.
Women are more heavily influenced by social issues than men are.
This all plays a role.
Think of it this way.
Men are the ones that are sitting outside of the campsite.
It's a nomadic tribe.
It's the year 2000 BC.
And the women are cooking.
They're making food.
They have baskets of berries and fruit and stuff.
They're rearing children.
And the men are standing guard.
The men are thinking about what's happening outside.
What just happened with that native tribe?
Do you remember?
Seven years ago, the story you were told about how the people came and killed everybody?
One day, they see off in the distance a bunch of men who have shields with a symbol on it.
And they say, I remember that story!
Those are the, insert barbarian horde, and they say, I know what's going to happen next.
And the women are less likely to be paying attention to those things because of evolutionary biology as well as traditional gender norms.
Here's the article from Huffington Post.
Because it's fascinating that this woman who writes this still doesn't get it.
And I understand it's going to be difficult for a lot of men to properly articulate, you know, why they are concerned the way they are.
And I'm sure I'm not even giving the best answer possible, but I think, you know, it's a little bit more advanced than someone just saying because it was history or something like this, which what some men do.
So here's what she writes.
If you've so much as heard of TikTok, chances are you'll know about the current Roman Empire trend.
It's not a current trend.
But I get her point.
I get her point.
I'm saying that men think about this stuff all the time, regardless of whether women realized it.
It began when history enthusiast Gaius Flavius from Sweden reignited a conversation previously begun on Instagram by influencer Saskia Kort.
Court originally went viral for asking her male fans how often they think about the Roman Empire.
Spoiler alert, it's way more often than I'd expected.
Flavius asked the same question on Instagram this August, to such viral success that eventually took over TikTok.
Women filmed themselves asking their male partners how often they think about the Roman Empire, and were amazed to find out that for some, they considered the conquest every single day.
Videos like the one below encouraged others, myself very much included, to ask the men, in my life, how often the ancient empire marched across their minds.
Here, let me play this video for you.
unidentified
Like a week, or just how many times in general do you think about the Roman Empire?
It is unsurprising to me that there is a trend among women shocked to figure out that men care about worldly affairs and history.
They're now realizing, wait, what?
So why are men so obsessed?
They still don't get it.
And I think this is cause for a lot of our political ails.
Look, man, I gotta be honest with you.
When women are so shocked to discover that men care about politics and history, that it becomes a trend where they're laughing in surprise, like, what is happening here?
Men are from Mars, women are from Venus, and women truly don't get men.
They really don't.
Men don't get women.
Don't get me wrong.
But this should worry you when you consider the political ramifications for the average perspective of women versus the average perspective of men.
It is not to say that women are more right or men are more right in how they view the world.
I think there's an appropriate balance between a matriarch and a patriarch in that a mother and a father lead to the success of the child.
If there's no father, we learn that there's probably going to be high crime, drug use, bad behavior.
Now, we don't see that same thing if there's no mother.
But, in my opinion, because we've talked about this on The Culture War, without a mother, I think you're likely to encounter emotional issues and social connection issues that can result in a fractured authoritarian system.
You need a balance between the emotional and the logical that you get from the two parents' perspectives.
So she writes, Oh.
None of the answers men give in their videos are satisfying to me.
It is a lot of big stories and lessons of what to do and what not to do, one woman's
partner says.
But so does the real housewives and I cannot tell you how unsuccessful my attempts to get
The statement made about big stories and lessons of what to do and what not to do is basically
saying, do you want to eat food tomorrow?
And her response is, but the Real Housewives talks about lessons.
Making my way down, down, down.
That's right there.
The man walking through the mall, worried.
There's a predator.
What if there's a fire?
What if a storm happens?
Men think about these things.
That's why I told the story about the alarms going off.
I was hanging out at the casino last year, and the fire alarms went off.
And so, me and my girlfriend make our way to the front exit.
They say, hey, look, everything's fine.
It's a fire alarm.
And this is one where I actually stuck around.
It was a smoke machine that was falsely triggering the alarm.
And we were like, okay, okay.
However, I don't blindly just trust that.
You could see the smoke machine coming out from the event center.
So we went to near the exit and I said, we'll keep calm, we'll stay right next to the exit hanging out, but I'm like 99% confident it's literally the smoke machine that we can see.
So that I understand.
But when I'm walking around a big place like this, I am constantly thinking about these things.
She goes on to say, another says, that how they lived, how they governed, how they built, like engineering food, the septic systems, has really grabbed their attention.
But ancient Chinese people invented loads too.
Why don't you think about that?
Simple.
We are thinking about what is widely known to us in the context of historical politics and cultural affairs.
That is to say, we talk quite a bit about the Bolshevik Revolution.
We talk quite a bit about ancient Rome and Israel.
That comes up when we talk about stories of Christianity.
We talk about Southeast Asia.
We talk about feudal Japan.
Not nearly as much.
Why?
Well, because the Roman Empire is much more tied to our history.
So, yes, we think about a lot of things.
We think about World War II.
How about this trend?
How often do you think about World War II?
I'm willing to bet people think about World War II more often than they think about the Roman Empire.
But the trend becomes the Roman Empire because it's so long ago and so confusing to women to think about worldly affairs in this way.
And I'm not saying every women!
Every woman.
There's so much to ancient Rome, literature and beautiful poetry, but it actually wasn't what's copping up in the trend.
Instead, he finds the common themes are sports, armies, and sex.
This is, of course, a very particular slice of complicated era.
I think men are thinking of, you know, gladiators who are like sports stars.
They're not envisaging themselves as enslaved people.
These people really don't get it.
Some of the TikToks talking about, you know, Rome was the best, but you must also think about the terrible effects of conquest and colonization.
So there's some element of hyper-masculinity or the fixation, or as one TikTok commenter put it, just men-men-ing.
Look, man, progressives don't want to accept this, but the guy here is taller than the woman, has more bone density, more muscle mass, more skin collagen, and if he dies, the woman can still have babies.
And that is not meant to be an insult to women.
Producing life is the most important thing a human being can do.
Because if you can't make more humans, there will be no humans within a few decades.
Eh, to be fair, within like 70 years.
Humans will cease to exist if you can't make more people.
So, men think about protecting women, because women make more humans.
And without more humans, we are gone.
And women rely on men.
This is not absolute, but it is typical of history, biological evolution, etc.
So to simply break it down for you, why do men think about the Roman Empire?
The Roman Empire is one of the most prominent Prominent stories, histories, lessons.
of civilization for people of European descent and people who live in cultures with a strong European connection.
If you are in Asia, you probably think about the Chinese Empire.
What was it?
What was the the Jin Dynasty?
I don't know enough about it.
You might be thinking about Shaka Zulu.
We've talked about Shaka Zulu periodically.
We talk about the the conquest in South America.
We talk about the Aztec Empire.
I think the issue with this is Here's what the trend should be.
Instead of just asking people, how often do you think about the Roman Empire?
Ask them, how often do you think about World War II in any way?
And they're probably going to tell you, way more often than the Roman Empire.
Why?
Recent history, political issues, everyone today is being called a Nazi.
That, I think you will find more common.
But of course the issue is the Roman Empire seems to be a novelty.
It's so long ago, who cares?
What does that have to do with anything?
It has to do with everything.
I mean, the Roman Empire was massive.
It breaks up into two different factions, two different empires.
You have all these tremendous stories, the crossing of the Rubicon.
Why do we think about the Roman Empire?
Because the concept of crossing the Rubicon means the point of no return, and it is a turn of phrase we use in politics all the time.
When Harry Reid changes the rules and is a filibuster, we called that crossing the Rubicon, referencing at this point You're gonna regret it, because what happens?
Trump then gets three Supreme Court justices in.
Why are we thinking about the Roman Empire?
Because the phrase crossing the Rubicon!
The Betrayal of Caesar.
Et tu, Brutus?
There are so many stories in what happened in Rome, it comes up frequently in our daily perspectives.
But I suppose, if you're more concerned with makeup tutorials, and Taylor Swift, and I'm not saying these things are bad things.
This is not meant to be disrespectful.
If you're more concerned with makeup tutorials, pop culture, celebrity news, and things like that, you're not thinking about the Roman Empire.
But if you are a dude, you're likely to be more politically inclined, paying attention to news and information, and thinking about the consequences of the past.
Meaning, World War I, World War II, the Roman Empire.
The Japanese Empire, which leads to the first use of nuclear weapons.
World War II.
World War II was not just Europe.
Anyway, I love the trend.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 6pm on this channel.
Thanks for hanging out, and I'll see you all then.
This story is just breaking earlier today.
Pava Marie LePere, 26, murdered in a Baltimore apartment, is a Forbes 30 Under 30 tech CEO who launched a $7 million eco-company.
Now the first thing I want to say is, it's a horrifying story, and I feel for the, my condolences to the friends and family of this young woman who apparently had launched a successful tech company.
And of course, you know that the subject matter that I'm going to be discussing is going to be crime in big cities, which is why I highlight this is a woke female tech CEO who was murdered.
Now I want to make sure it's clear for all of you.
We don't know the circumstances around what happened.
And this woman, it may have been someone she knows.
And even in the best of times, the most secure of times, there's nothing you can really do if you invite someone to your house you trust and then a bad thing happens.
It's also true that even if you're home by yourself and the door is kicked in by a violent criminal who's been stalking you, calling the police can only do so much.
My point is simply this.
You need friends.
You don't want to live alone.
You need to be able to defend yourself.
None of these things are perfect.
None of these things will stop violent criminals' intent on causing you harm.
And what do you do in an apartment building, you know, when you're being attacked?
I think this is why we have a right to keep and bear arms, and I think it's particularly important for women.
So I will stress.
The issue at hand that I will be commenting on is not to criticize this woman for anything other than her ideology.
And that is to say, there's no guarantee that any change in her ideology would result in anything other than what happened so far, because we don't know the details.
My point is simply this.
You align yourself with a faction of people that vote to take away your right to defend yourself.
And I believe that you are opening the door for these problems.
You align yourself with people who vote for releasing criminals onto the street.
You increase the rate of violent crime.
Now again, we don't know the circumstances.
The story is quite simple.
Pava Marie Lepere, 26, murdered in a Baltimore apartment.
They say no suspects have been arrested and cops have not revealed any possible motives.
According to her social media, LePere was born in Tucson, Arizona and was single.
So the first thing I want to say is... Look, you're allowed to be single.
I got no issue with that.
I do want to stress...
is not typical of American society and human society for people to be single.
And so you are much less likely to encounter things like this when you live with someone else.
However, I will also add, men do beat their wives more so than women beat their husbands, and there have been circumstances like this even when women are not single.
They say, under her leadership, the Baltimore-based tech startup raised a total of $7 million of funding in the last 18 months.
Officers arrived around 11.34 a.m.
to her apartment complex.
Upon arrival, they found her dead.
She had signs of blunt force trauma.
The medical examiner's office took position of the body pending examination.
According to investigators, there had been a missing persons call made for her a short time before she was discovered.
Chris McNeese, a tenant of the building, told WJZ that's pretty horrifying.
I mean, just for that to happen anywhere in the city is obviously a bad thing, but it's hard to imagine why this would happen specifically in this building.
LePere lived in an apartment building, the former site of the Congress Hotel, where a one-bedroom is $1,500.
You can see that she was featured in Forbes 30 Under 30.
She has a bunch of photos.
And I think it's important to point out that this is a woke individual because My warning to all of you is pay attention to these stories and let's figure out how we prevent things like this from happening.
This is not a gun death.
It's a blunt force trauma death.
It may be that this was someone she was dating or rejecting.
It may be that it was a stalker.
It could be that it was a family member.
Who knows?
Could be a neighbor.
No idea.
There may be no real solution to something like this happening, but I think it's worth bringing up because crime is running rampant, to an extreme degree, and we do not want anyone to be made an example of.
I want this woman, I wish that she succeeded in her company, improving the lives of people around her through technology, but instead we consistently get these activists that ignore the plight in these cities, the crime in these cities, resulting in more crime in these cities.
They go to mention, Lapera said her workforce is 50% female, 50% people of color.
Her clients include the Aspen Institute, MEDA, WXR Fund, T-Row, etc.
Our proprietary tech allows us to create platforms that are pre-populated with information about resources, etc., etc.
And of course, over on her social media, she does have a call-out in support of Black Lives Matter.
Now, I want to stress, it may be generic, right?
The support that she puts out these statements, she may know nothing about any of this stuff, but this is still the banality of the current political state.
Not necessarily anything this woman having done being evil, I'm just saying, supporting these causes, which are fake, which are exploitative, which are manipulative, and which lead to policies that increase crime in our major cities, is going to make more of these stories, and we do not want that.
In this post, she says, 30% of SBA loans go to black-owned businesses.
percent of VC firms that have a single black investor, 30 percent of the top VC funds are
white. But all of this is just indicative of a majority white population. 30 percent of SBA
loans go to black-owned businesses. She says, we all have a role to play. If you're not sure how
you can contribute to building an anti-racist society, think about where your expertise and
influence lie. For me, that's entrepreneurship. Anti-racist is a neo-Marxist concept.
It does not mean you oppose racism.
It means you support racial discrimination and segregation, just in a different way.
And then we have this story, of course.
CVS says it will close 900 stores by the end of 2024, 10% of all of its shops, as it moves to online strategy amid rampant increase in shoplifting.
It's getting crazy, man!
And so I see this story, and the first thing I thought, because I'm biased, was when I read about a woman being murdered in Baltimore, I said, I bet the woman is woke.
I bet she is a woke Democrat, supporting anti-racism and all of that stuff.
Even the article talks about her woke, anti-racist, Marxist policies.
And my concern is, these people who want to be seen... I don't care if you're a man or a woman, okay?
Women obviously are more at risk because men tend to be the perpetrators of violence, tend to be the victims of violence, that's true.
But a woman is less able to defend herself relative to a man.
Yo, I don't care if you think that's sexist.
Men tend to be taller, tend to have more muscle mass.
Women need guns.
And so I am sick of these stories.
There should not be stories of women being victimized in this way.
She should be allowed to espouse her views, but I tell you this, when you vote for people who vow to open up the prisons, Let people out.
More violent crime will happen.
And the sad reality is, I will also add, I don't blame her.
She's the victim.
Okay?
Some of her policies contributed to this, but to all the people who vote for policies that release criminals, this is what the result will be.
Now, I don't believe, I'm not a fan of cash bail.
This idea that someone gets arrested, they're not even convicted, and you lock them up.
Nah, I'm not a fan of that.
It used to be that you had a bail hearing, but they barely do this anymore because there's no time.
Now they just say, pay the bail and get out, whatever.
Okay, fine, everybody gets bail, but you gotta pay.
Well, that's a problem.
If the preponderance of evidence, or I should say, your character and everything, suggests you're a non-violent offender, well then, let them go.
And maybe we'd operate on more like a three strikes model.
The problem I have with this system of cash bail is that there are people who are wrongly accused, Go to jail.
They can't go to work.
They lose their jobs.
They can't pay rent.
Things like that happen.
Why?
And then what happens?
They get acquitted.
Whoops, sorry, wrong person.
And their life is destroyed.
That's not okay.
If you're not proven guilty, we shouldn't be able to lock you up unless we have direct evidence that can be presented to the court that proves you're violent.
And I'm not even super concerned about a flight risk.
If you're a shoplifter and you're a flight risk, it's non-violent.
I don't think, you know, like, so the issue is, let's say you're accused of shoplifting, and then they're like, oh, this person's got money and a passport and the means to travel.
That doesn't mean you're guilty of anything.
But that being said, I fully recognize violent offenders must, you have to be detained.
Otherwise, what happens?
We can't have someone be arrested on a violent charge, released, and then go engage in violence.
But that creates a very serious problem for us.
How do we handle a system like this?
You know, I'd make the argument that people should be given hotel accommodations when they're in lockup pre-conviction.
That is to say, if you're convicted, you go to jail.
Jail is jail.
But if you are being held without bond or you can't pay bond, you should be given access to the internet, you should be given a comfortable bed, you should be given good food.
Oh, I know it's challenging because then you'll get people committing crimes just to get into these beautiful, nice systems.
We can't afford it.
Yep, it's tough.
But I don't see how you justify someone who has not been convicted being placed in squalor and being forced to miss work and cut off from communication.
No, I reject all of that.
The system wants to lock someone up because they fear they're violent, but they haven't proven it?
Then you've got to provide that person's basic standard of living.
Long story short, man, whatever it is we're doing, it ain't working.
And I think the real issue here is cultural.
I think the woke narratives and all of that contributes to a culture of destruction outside of policy, and it brings sad stories just like this.
I don't have the solutions for you, my friends, because, like I said, I'll say it for the fifth time, even if we had different policies or culture, murder happens.
And there's no direct correlation between this woman being woke and whatever happened to her.
It's not like one of those stories where it's like, prison advocate gets attacked by prisoner they helped, or something like that.
It's like, a woman who was a tech CEO happened to have posted woke stuff and believed in all this woke policy stuff, and then something bad happens to her.
We don't know why.
My point is simply, do not support these policies that weaken our ability to protect ourselves.
How much do you want to bet the lady was in favor of gun control and all that?
I wish she had a weapon to defend herself.
I really do.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up tonight at 8 p.m.
over at youtube.com slash TimCastIRL.
Thanks for hanging out, and I'll see you all then.
I've seen several people talking about the story of Ethan Liming, and the framing on Twitter seems to be that several young black men beat a white man to death and no one seems to care.
And so as I've seen this narrative persist, I decided, you know, well, let me look into this because there are some videos going around of violent assaults and a narrative that When it is black-on-white crime, nobody cares.
But if it's white-on-black, it's national news.
Now, I certainly think that is the case in a lot of circumstances.
If it is like a white cop and like a black unarmed man, it's a national headline.
But if it's a story about a white cop and a white man, or even Latino, typically these stories are just often ignored.
And they do happen.
Unarmed people, innocent people, and sometimes not innocent people, are killed by police fairly often.
And I say fairly often in that, relative to each other.
So if in, I think, 2019 you had between 9 and 13 unarmed black men that were shot and killed by police, you have, I believe comparable amounts, actually a higher amount, I'm pretty sure it's a bit higher, among other races.
And so the narratives don't get as much attention.
Well, let's talk about the Ethan Lyman case, because there's a big question about whether or not this is a story of injustice or justice.
Let me break it down for you.
When I see people saying that these brothers being found not guilty of manslaughter is injustice, and they're framing it as though these black men beat this white kid to death and got away with it, the story is that the white kid, Lyman, was smoking pot, driving around, and shooting people with a pellet gun!
And when they tried to stop him, a fight broke out and he died in the scuffle.
Sorry, dude.
I'm not gonna condemn these dudes.
In fact, I will say, the only consideration here is the Ahmaud Arbery story, where it was a black man robbing a white neighbor accused of, a felony suspect in a white neighborhood, Locals were told by the cops that was the guy.
A gun had gone missing.
They went to try and stop this guy they saw running through the neighborhood and didn't live there.
A fight broke out when Ahmaud Arbery tried taking the shotgun from Travis McMichael.
The gun goes off, killing him.
Now those guys are in prison.
So that's where I will say there's a question here about whether or not you really get justice, but I will also stress, Ahmaud Arbery was not in the right.
Now there's a complicated question about what happened.
If I'm being surrounded by vehicles, I got a car behind me, a car in front of me, I might fight back too.
But this is a guy who was a felony suspect that they claimed was just jogging in this neighborhood where he didn't live.
I just... I think that's absurd.
And so the reality is, locals, who didn't instigate the fight, are trying to stop a criminal, and something bad happens.
Do they really deserve to go to prison for the rest of their lives?
By all means, you can say they shouldn't have traced after him.
But... 34 years?
Now let's talk about the story of Ethan Lyman, where the races are reversed.
These men did not get convicted, which I do find fascinating.
I think they got lesser charges.
They didn't get murder.
And they killed a guy.
What's the difference?
They chased after a guy who was committing a crime.
Granted, I'll tell you that there's a difference.
Liming is shooting at people with a pellet gun.
End of story.
He's a direct threat.
Aubrey was fleeing.
So there's a difference here.
But let's read.
Outkick reports.
Two men involved in the... can we close this somehow? I guess you can you really not close
this thing? This video player? Oh there it is. Nope. You can't close their video player. Come
on guys. Are you kidding me? Anyway, they say two men involved in the death of 17-year-old Ethan
Lyming last summer at LeBron James's I Promise School in Akron were found not guilty of involuntary
manslaughter according to a Summit County jury. The Summit County jury reached the decision on Monday.
Deshawn and Tyler Stafford faced two counts of involuntary manslaughter.
A verdict was not reached for the first count, and the jury determined the Stafford brothers were not guilty concerning the second count.
Deshawn and Tyler were also charged with aggravated assault.
The public elementary school in Akron, Ohio was launched by LeBron as a resource for at-risk children and families.
In 2022, Lyman was caught up in a spat with Deshawn, Tyler, and Donovan Jones after driving by LeBron's school and shooting at the three males with a pellet gun.
Are you kidding?
Listen, I'm sorry, man.
Out here in West Virginia, you pull out any kind of gun and open fire on someone, they're gonna open fire with real bullets.
Do not do that.
This, and pellet guns, are lethal.
I don't know what he was gonna say, they were water capsule pellets.
But either way, apparently, one of the dudes got shot in the face.
You could take out somebody's eye, this is nuts.
The three men confronted Lyman after shooting at them.
with water bead pellets. Police testimony shared in the case stated Lyming, accompanied by several
friends, was high on weed and pranking bystanders with a pellet gun. No, he was assaulting people
with a weapon. Deshawn Stafford was the first of three suspected men to engage with Lyming
until his brother Tyler and cousin Donovan Jones joined in.
Details on Lyming's fatal injuries revealed blunt trauma to the head believed to have been suffered after Deshawn punched Lyming, causing the teen to fatally hit his head on the ground.
Lyming's vehicle was reportedly removed from the scene by Deshawn, Tyler, and Donovan.
However, the boys claimed that they acted in self-defense after Lyming and his friends shot at them with his pellet gun.
Additionally, Deshawn Stafford admitted that he moved the vehicle to keep Lyming's friends from fleeing the site as police arrived.
Stafford, his brother, and his cousin ultimately fled the scene.
Now, that's a problem right there that makes me call into question what their story actually is.
Under Ohio law, a person is allowed to use force in self-defense or in defense of another.
You're allowed to do that, a defense attorney Johnson shared.
You don't have to back up from a fight.
He met a punch with a punch.
These boys were not looking for trouble.
Trouble came looking for them.
This is OutKick.
OutKick is not a woke outlet.
So I see people tweeting being like, this is an injustice, yada yada.
And I'm like, what am I missing here?
Seriously, what am I missing?
If you go outside, With something resembling a gun.
Like, let's say you go into West Virginia, and you've got a replica weapon, and you point it at someone.
I'm sorry, man.
You are likely going to lose your life.
Do not threaten people.
Do not engage in violence.
None of this.
If you're driving around, smoking pot.
I don't think it's the biggest thing in the world, but hopefully he wasn't behind the wheel.
And you have a pellet gun.
I'm assuming a water pellet gun... I don't know what kind of weapon it was, or how it looked.
But either way, if you're firing something at me and I don't know what it is, I consider that a threat on my life.
There are people, I grew up in Chicago, man, they would load super soakers with bleach and try and blind people.
I'm not kidding.
Halloween was brutal.
People would get pellet guns, like 17, what is it, 17 or 22, fully auto pellet guns, and open fire on people, and you'd be pelted up and welted.
Someone pulls up to my neighborhood shooting at anybody.
It doesn't look like these dudes were trying to start a fight with anybody.
It looks like someone shut up and started shooting at him.
That being said, I know the media narrative around Ahmaud Arbery was a lie.
I know the media narrative around George Floyd was a lie.
So I'm not going to immediately come out and I blame the media for this and say that these guys are completely innocent.
Because I'm wondering why it is so many people are saying this is an injustice.
Is it in dispute that this dude was firing on people with a pellet gun?
Because if that's a fact of the case, then there's very little you could say otherwise to make me be like, oh, then these guys are bad dudes.
You know, if someone's walking around with a pellet gun shooting at people...
I'm sorry, bro.
I don't know if they have any evidence that these guys actually got hit in the face, but I'm not gonna sit here and play any stupid race game, right?
I don't care if you're white, black, Latino, or otherwise.
And I don't care if the perpetrator is of any race.
If you're minding your own business with your friends, and someone starts firing a weapon at you, you have a right to defend yourself.
And I'm not gonna fall into this trap of being like, oh, you know, these guys should go to prison.
We can call it a double standard in society.
We can say that the McMichaels in the Ahmaud Arbery case was an injustice.
Their conviction.
Ahmaud Arbery should not have died.
Ahmaud Arbery... I would say this.
Ahmaud Arbery was a felony suspect.
Okay?
This gave them the right to pursue a citizen's arrest.
Police told them not to do it, though.
The argument in court was the interpretation of citizen's arrest.
That's it.
And without that protection, now it's murder.
Ahmed Arbery, I can understand.
He's got a car behind him, a car in front of him, and the guys are armed.
And so he may be thinking, maybe he's innocent.
I don't know.
He was never proven guilty of anything.
The police believed he was the suspect.
And so he says, these guys are surrounding me.
I'm gonna fight back.
Now I'll pause right there.
Listen.
If there are guys surrounding me, and they have weapons, I don't care who or what they are.
It is not incumbent upon me, if I'm innocent, to determine whether or not they are a threat to me or not, and calmly talk to them and wait and find out.
You engage someone with a weapon, you have started the fight.
Ahmaud Arbery may have been a felony burglary suspect, and if he was, he should be arrested and charged.
Maybe if the police showed up, he would have fled.
But as a local citizen, should you go to prison for the rest of your life?
Or for 30 plus years?
Because some dude attacked you while you had a shotgun?
I think that's absolutely insane.
I think that story is a travesty of justice.
The idea that these dudes, you're allowed to be in your neighborhood, you're allowed to keep and bear weapons, and you're allowed to try and stop criminals.
And they were attacked.
So should there be some kind of charge?
Yeah, I think there's something appropriate here.
The police told you not to pursue them.
I mean, but it's probably a civil issue, right?
Payment, restitution to the family, and to a minor degree, to be completely honest, if someone fights you, for any reason, and they die, these are the challenges we face.
So, I'll put it this way.
I'm only addressing, right now, this surface-level issue of, if a person fires you with a pellet gun, you have a right to defend yourself.
What I will add to this story is, I don't believe the media.
I think they're lying.
I think they're lying about everything.
Pertaining to this stuff, I mean, like, obviously the media tells the truth.
We use the media in our commentary.
But I'm saying too often stories like this turn to be false.
The story will turn out to be like, the dude asked for directions, and they tried robbing him and stole his pellet gun.
Who knows?
I'm not gonna accuse him of doing anything wrong unless there's evidence.
But I'm sorry, the way the media is run, it's very difficult to give people the benefit of the doubt.
