Trump Gets CORPORATE DEATH PENALTY, Democrat Judge DISSOLVES Company WITH NO TRIAL In SHOCKING Move
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
Trump Gets CORPORATE DEATH PENALTY, Democrat Judge DISSOLVES Company WITH NO TRIAL In SHOCKING Move
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
TimCast IRL will be live in Miami with Patrick Bette David, Donald Trump Jr., Matt Gaetz, and Luke Rudkowski.
Join us there.
Get your tickets by clicking the link in the description below or by going to TimCast.com.
Last night, a judge has ordered the corporate death penalty for Donald Trump's businesses.
A New York judge ordered the Trump organization be dissolved.
It is one of the most shocking stories we have seen yet, and it is comparable in many ways to the prosecution and persecution that we've seen so far of Trump, his family, and others who support him.
And it's only just begun.
Business Insider reports, Trump's corporate death penalty explained, veteran Manhattan fraud prosecutors describe what's next.
So here's what happens.
A lawsuit is filed accusing Trump of fraud.
A judge says we do not need to have a trial, bangs the gavel and orders Trump's companies be destroyed.
As a component of this, the judge also presumably lies about the value of other existing Trump family properties, notably Mar-a-Lago, claiming that beach to beach, 18 acres in Palm Beach is worth only 18 million dollars.
It's shockingly insane.
Now, Eric Trump, I believe, came out and said, this is nonsense.
It's got to be worth close to a billion dollars.
He's correct.
And you've got the likes of Kyle Kulinski issuing some of the most shocking and terrifying statements I've seen coming from a liberal or leftist.
And look, man, I like Kyle.
We've defended him in the past as a good dude.
But the statements he's made pertaining to this are shockingly ignorant and dangerously authoritarian.
And this is what we're up against right now.
The celebration of rule by decree.
A summary judgment against the Trump family.
No trial.
Why?
Well, because Kyle says that the AG held a press conference.
That's sufficient for him.
And if you don't know what she said in her press conference, well, then you're wrong.
The government issuing a public accusation does not, not warrant summary judgment.
End of story.
Whatever it is Trump is accused of doing, and I'm sure Trump is no saint, a trial must be had for a judge to have a summary judgment, no trial, and destroy what is presumably a billion dollar company while claiming it's not.
We are, we are beyond Banana Republic.
I'm sorry, we're beyond Banana Republic.
A lot of people, last night, you know, Carl Benjamin, Sargon, he's saying, you're in a Banana Republic, and, um, perhaps.
But this is, I mean, I don't know what you'd want to call it.
This is fifth generational warfare.
This is destruction.
This is, this is war!
I, look, You know, a lot of people have the perspective that war literally just defines hot conflict, but there is cold war.
There are other means of destruction.
There's sabotage, manipulation, hacking, espionage, etc.
What we are witnessing right now in New York is corporate death penalty without trial.
Corporate death penalty sounds shocking, but this is it.
The judge said the Trump Organization no longer exists.
Let me break this down for you.
Judge rules Trump committed fraud, stripping control of key properties.
The decision in a lawsuit that could go to trial next week is a major win for Attorney General Letitia James, who says former President Donald J. Trump overvalued his holdings by as much as $2.2 billion.
Now, what's happening here is, to clarify, there was a summary judgment dissolving the Trump Organization, as well as many other companies, even holdings for property, without a trial.
There are other claims still made against Trump which will be going to trial, it is presumed.
There could be a trial.
But this judge might just bang the gavel again.
Take a look at this.
The New York Times reporting.
A New York judge ruled on Tuesday that Donald J. Trump persistently committed fraud by inflating the value of his assets and stripped the former president of control over some of his signature New York properties.
The surprising decision by Justice Arthur F. Nguyen is a major victory for Attorney General Letitia James in her lawsuit against Mr. Trump, effectively deciding that no trial was needed to determine that he had fraudulently secured favorable terms on loans and insurance deals.
Now, you may be wondering, wow, did Trump really do this?
Well, NBC News, I believe it might be NBC News, that breaks down what the defense would have claimed had there been a trial.
They say, at one point, Engron pointed to Trump's having exaggerated the size of his New York apartment to pump up its value, repeatedly claiming it was over 30,000 feet when it was a third of that size.
Well, interesting.
The problem is, a summary judgment does not give us the opportunity to counter or hear what it is that Trump actually did.
That is to say, this is how the media operates.
If Donald Trump says in his tax filing or something that the property is 10,000 total square feet, 10,000 of it is livable and can be restructured, and 10,000 of it can be considered storage, depending on how you operate.
They then say, aha!
He called it 30,000 feet!
Now, I'm not saying that's what Trump did.
I'm saying there's no defense!
I don't believe that Trump outright was like, haha, my 10,000 square foot apartment is actually 30,000!
I don't believe him.
Sorry.
That's the point of a trial.
The government does not get to just decree these things.
Is it possible Trump did?
Sure!
Absolutely!
Thank you for your accusation.
In a normal country, we would then have a trial and say, Trump, is this true?
Did you do this?
Tell me.
And apparently, we don't get that.
A discrepancy of this magnitude by a real estate developer sizing up his own living space of decades can only be considered fraud.
This is a subject that came up before when the suit first began, and they said that the square footage was different.
What we're seeing here is Letitia James exploiting the ignorance of the public and people like Kyle Kalinske.
I'm not trying to be a dick to Kyle, but Kyle, you have crossed the line in a dangerously psychotic way, and you are the example here.
Not understanding real estate, and using that ignorance and justifying government rule by decree I'm sorry, that's authoritarianism.
That's fascism, whatever you want to call it.
No, just because my answer is like right away when I see this, I'm like, wow, well, what exactly did he do?
Because I don't quite understand how these filings work.
And what was Trump's argument?
Because certainly he has defense lawyers.
Oh, there's no trial.
OK, well, now I don't trust you.
You're lying to me, they say.
He found Trump, his sons Don Jr.
and Eric, and their companies liable for fraud.
But not criminally?
It's a civil case?
With no trial?
They're lying!
He also denied Trump's motion for a summary judgment that argued New York Attorney General Letitia James' lawsuit should be dismissed.
And Grant sanctioned Trump's attorney $7,500 apiece for making legal arguments that had already been rejected twice.
Wow.
Well, the New York-based LLCs will need to be dissolved.
It will be up to the receiver.
Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
Trump issued a statement.
I'm wondering if they actually... Here, let's read more.
Well, the full impact of the decision remains unclear.
What is clear is President Trump and his family will seek all available appellate remedies to rectify the miscarriage of justice.
Another Trump attorney, Alina Haba, well actually Trump's lead attorney in the case, Christopher Keis, called the ruling outrageous and said it was completely disconnected from the facts in governing law.
He said that Engron had disregarded the viewpoint of those actually involved in the loan transactions who testified there was nothing misleading, there was no fraud, and the transactions were all highly profitable.
This is to say, the people who were involved testified there is no fraud here.
And the judge, this is likely why he said, NO TRIAL!
NONE!
Because what would happen?
Experts would come in and be like, Your Honor, this is fine.
This is normal.
Something's weird, isn't it?
Another attorney, Alina Haba, focused on Engron's determination that Mar-a-Lago had been grossly overvalued.
Oh boy, I love this one.
Engron noted that from 2011 to 2021, the Palm Beach County Assessor appraised the market value of Mar-a-Lago at $18 million to $27.6 million.
Trump's financial statements, meanwhile, put the club's value at almost $427 million to $612 million.
So, if a Palm Beach County assessor makes an evaluation of the property, that has nothing to do with what Trump thinks the property is worth or could sell for, and then declares his valuation.
You do not evaluate your property because of what the tax assessor says.
Otherwise, I gotta tell you, my friends, I have been defrauded so many times.
Here's what happens.
I buy a lot of property, right?
We buy properties, we're building things.
If I- Good luck going to someone selling real estate.
They got a building for sale.
Let's say it's 2,000 square feet and they say the tax assessment is $100,000.
And I'm like, but the tax assessor said it's worth that!
You have to sell it for that.
No, you don't.
It is worth whatever you think it's worth regardless of what the government says it's worth.
And you can buy property that is sold for a higher price than the tax assessment.
Then the assessor can come in and determine if what you got was the right price.
I can say, I think my property is worth this for these reasons.
Here's the objective standards.
And the tax assessor can be like, yeah, not interested.
This is what it's worth.
That's not fraud.
This is crazy.
Otherwise, every real estate transaction in the country is fraud.
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.
I've listened to him before, I've considered him to be reasonable, but this is the most insane thing I've ever heard, these series of tweets.
First, he says the original press conference from the New York Attorney General laying out the details of the fraud case against Trump was overwhelming.
Anybody who thinks this is a witch hunt is either totally ignorant to the facts, lying, or has full cult brain.
Kyle, you're in a cult.
The government has no authority to issue a press conference and then a judge have a summary judgment that just strips multiple corporate entities of their existence.
This is an insane level of corruption.
You want to argue that there's evidence against Trump?
I'm not saying there isn't.
By all means.
Trump ain't no saint.
Businesses play dirty politics and they file fanciful numbers all the time.
Take a look at Hollywood.
Multi-billion dollar films that somehow made no money!
The business is formed, it makes the movie, and then all the profits are sent out, and then the company goes, yeah, we didn't make any money.
We owed everybody else, so we're negative.
Tax deductions, call it corruption, by all means, please do so.
These things exist, they are bad things, and I think they should be, people should be held accountable for this.
My issue is, the argument from Kyle is that, if the government issues a press conference, we're done.
Shut them down.
I'm sorry, that's insane and terrifying precedent.
But there's more.
Mark Levin showing Donald Trump's statement as to what's going on.
He said, unbelievable. America has never experienced this kind of Stalinism that Trump is contending with. It's unconscionable.
Conscionable.
He says, you effing idiots refuse to make actual arguments based on the facts of the case because you know you can't.
Nobody is forcing you to say stupid-ish like this. Just say nothing.
I'm sorry, dude. Kyle's lost the plot.
I will make substantive arguments against you, Kyle, because this is insane.
First, my point is of a moral and legal standard by which, yet we have trials, okay?
At the very least, Donald, they should have allowed Trump's defense attorneys to issue these arguments in court.
Now I know the argument is that they already made these arguments and the judge rejected them.
Then, humor me for one moment.
If you're going to make an extremely high-profile move against someone like Donald Trump, you need there to be a proceeding, lest you rip this country in twain.
However, I can give you a substantive argument as to why the judge is lying and wrong.
And so are you.
Let's argue the facts.
As I already pointed out, the key here is that the judge said no trial was needed.
The judge also said that Mar-a-Lago is worth $20 million.
A lie.
I can prove it.
Eric Trump says, in an attempt to destroy my father and kick him out of New York, a judge just ruled that Mar-a-Lago in Palm Beach, Florida is only worth an approximate $18 million.
Mar-a-Lago is speculated to be worth well over a billion dollars, making it arguably the most valuable residential property in the country.
It is also corrupt and coordinated.
Now hold on there a minute.
He calls it a residential property.
Perhaps.
It is.
It also does have a commercial component.
So I do believe there's going to be commercial zoning related to Mar-a-Lago, but we'll see.
If he's calling it residential, then I have questions about what they offer in terms of businesses, but sure, you can rent your house out.
I don't know what Palm Beach requires in terms of you using your residence for dining, clubs, weddings, etc.
Perhaps it's no big deal.
People, uh, I think even if you're doing Airbnb and stuff, you, like you're, you're turning your residential property into a commercial property, but probably not.
So people, people can file these things.
Let's just call it residential for the sake of argument.
Kyle Kalinsky says, Mar-a-Lago gets revenue of $25,000,000 per year.
It's valued at a max $75,000,000.
You idiots claim it's worth $739,000,000.
You did this with virtually all of your properties to inflate net worth and get loans from banks on more favorable terms.
Fraud.
Not true.
The evaluation, according to the news report, was between, I think, around 400 to 600.
I think... I think, uh... I haven't heard from Newsweek, so let me... Yeah, Kyle's wrong.
Trump had put the valuation of Mar-a-Lago at $426.5 million to $612.1 million in filings, which they said was an overvaluation of at least 2,300%.
First, Kyle, your number's wrong.
Flat out.
I don't know where he gets this number from.
This tweet really, really infuriates me.
As somebody who's run a business, who has run a startup that's received investor cash, and was given a kooky tech evaluation, as someone who has dealt with this for 15 years plus, first, I am not the foremost leading expert on this, but I can simplify it for you.
Before we get into the true value of Mar-a-Lago, let me just take Kyle's statement at face value.
$739 million based on what he's saying at $25 million a year is a perfectly adequate evaluation based on revenue.
First question I have for you.
Kyle Klinsky is saying, if it makes $25 million a year, it must be only worth $75 million.
Holy crap.
Okay, first, let's not include the fact that it's a 17 acre or 18, 17 and a half acre property, beachfront to beachfront, and remove the hard asset from the revenue.
Let's just ignore the real estate itself, Kyle, and talk purely revenue.
Okay, first of all, a business evaluation does not just include revenue and speculation, it includes your hard assets.
The value of Mar-a-Lago as real estate?
Substantial.
But let's just pause right there.
Okay.
Let's operate under the assumption of Kyle's pure ignorance.
Pure ignorance.
And I hope Kyle sees this.
If you make $25 million per year, And someone comes to you and says, I will buy your company off of you for $75 million.
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 that every single day right here on America on Trial with Josh Hammer.
Subscribe and download your episodes wherever you get your podcasts.
But if we're going just off of acreage, we can go off square footage.
Off of acreage, let's say, the lot itself, going for $40 million, minus the home, the lot itself, the home is not gonna be worth that much.
Constructing a property like this, a 6,488 square foot property, I gotta be honest, that's gonna cost you, what, maybe, if you're gonna do it nice, let's say a million bucks.
The real value is the beachfront property in Palm Beach.
So let's just say $40 million's fair.
Half acre.
That means an acre is $80,000,000.
That would put the evaluation of the property of Mar-a-Lago close to $1.5 billion.
Okay, fine.
The property itself, let's just cut it in half.
Well, however they want to do the evaluation.
There's also diminishing returns and it scales.
So let's just cut it in half.
Alright, let's say this.
Let's say a half acre is worth $20,000,000 and the property itself is $20,000,000.
That's probably not fair.
The real estate's worth more than that.
The lot is actually worth more than that.
But, you know, let's just say that.
Let's just say for the sake of argument.
This means that one acre is $40 million.
This means that Mar-a-Lago, outside of any revenue generated, is worth close to $1 billion.
I mean, let me just go back here and show you.
This is Mar-a-Lago.
This huge section.
It's massive.
And the Trumps are saying it's 400 to 600 million.
I'm sorry, I think that's a low estimate.
I think they undervalued the property.
The fact that the judge said it was worth around 18 to 20 million shows the judge is wrong.
Now if the judge is wrong about something as basic as that with testimony from experts and lenders saying they weren't defrauded, these are normal business practices, shows you the danger of not having a trial and why Kyle is This is an insane thing for him to be saying.
The fervor and anger he has in defense of a DA stating in a press conference and saying it's law, it's fact, it's done, and a judge banging the gavel.
This is absolutely remarkable to me.
I am curious about the Mar-a-Lago Club, the crown jewel of Palm Beach.
I'm curious, um, how they deem this a residential property if they're operating a business out of it.
I don't know the Palm Beach laws or how this works.
Whatever.
Mar-a-Lago makes $25 million per year.
Look, I already broke it down for you, but I have dealt with this with my businesses already, and Kyle does not understand any of this.
And you know, we try to be nice to him when we point out that he didn't know what farms looked like.
You know, when he took a picture from a plane and said, I wonder why it looks like that, and it was a photo of farms.
And people are like, my god, those are farms!
He didn't know.
And I said, but he's a nice guy.
He tries and I respect that.
This, this is where the danger of ignorance steps in.
I am not saying Trump is innocent at all.
I'm saying you have to have a trial.
I am not saying that Trump isn't inflating the value of his properties.
I actually think most companies do this, but based on the valuation of nearby properties, you'd have to arrest every one of these people for fraud.
No, I think the reasonable, simple solution here is if the judge says no trial and then claims a 17-acre beach-to-beach property is $18 million when a neighboring half-acre is listed at $40 million, the judge will be nice.
He's wrong.
And if he's wrong, there needed to be a trial.
But there wasn't.
Why is he sanctioning Trump's lawyers?
You can't use these arguments.
Sanctioning the lawyers?
This is insane.
The corporate death penalty to Trump's businesses.
The scariest thing, to be completely honest, is the fervent zealotry that you see from Kyle, who I once deemed to be reasonable, who is totally ignorant, does no research, and has no idea how real estate works or business evaluations work, coming out and justifying rule by decree of the government for no reason.
This is what we are up against, my friends.
The banality of evil.
The anger and the fervor.
Kyle has no idea what he's talking about.
Mostly, I'm wrong about a lot of it, too.
Which is why I'm saying, let's get a trial and get the experts in.
That's the way it should operate.
Instead, what we have is ignorant zealotry.
Zombie hordes.
Angry people who have no idea what they're talking about marching through the streets screaming in rage and demanding something be done.
The system can't sustain itself.
It's crazy what they're doing to Trump.
Newsweek has this article, how much is Mar-a-Lago worth?
Evaluation of Trump property raises questions.
Let's see what Newsweek has to say.
They say in a statement on Truth Social, Trump said this, yada yada.
Elsewhere, he shared listings for other houses on the market in Palm Beach with prices ranging between $38.9 and $59.9 million, despite seemingly far smaller than Mar-a-Lago.
Trump Jr.' 's eldest son joked, if Mar-a-Lago is worth $18 million, I'll take 10, please.
Yeah, you'd own 170 acres of West Palm Beach property.
A nearby vacant lot of 2.3 acres is on sale for 200 million.
The lending bank is required to get a valuation from a third party to cover its LTV calculation.
No one had an issue with any of this.
Everyone made money.
Until an activist DA came along decades later.
2.3?
Wow.
Ali Zayn Yusuf, a software engineer, replied, You're right!
If it was priced at the same per acre as the empty lot, it'd be 1.5 billion.
That's exactly what I said.
There are competing estimates as to the size of the estate.
Several publications have said it spans 17 acres, while the club's website says 20 acres.
That's like a generic commercial estimation it may be 20 acres because they may be including so I'll point this out Right in front right here.
You have additional properties.
I'm not sure if that's connected or not They may be the lot size as legally documented could be 17.5 But there may be neighboring separate lots that Trump includes as part of the property take a look at this tiny sliver right here What is this?
This is, uh, appears to be, I think this is an empty lot?
What is this?
Estimated at a million dollars for, uh, for, for, for what is this Zillow has?
Uh, no data.
Okay.
Well, I don't know for sure.
Let's, uh, let's zoom in here.
Ah, yes.
The million dollar empty lot, which appears to be like a third of an acre or less.
Why?
It's on the beach.
Now Mar-a-Lago, they say, is beach-to-beach, so I'm assuming that this across the street may actually be part of Mar-a-Lago, which is why it does not have a separate settlement.
I'm not sure, though.
I'm not sure, though.
Back at Newsweek, they say, While $27 million is obviously an undervaluation, Mar-a-Lago can't be developed or turned into a single-family estate.
A financial journalist commented, Its deed requires it to remain a club, which radically reduces its resale value.
No, it doesn't.
I would argue that there is a fair point to be made, for sure.
That could be the case.
But the fact that it can operate and make money suggests it's worth more than a residential property.
They say Zillow gives it a $24.2 million valuation.
Zillow erroneously said it was $422.
Lawyers for Trump have said they intend to appeal the decision, etc.
etc.
My point with the property is just this.
Kyle does not understand business evaluations.
I just feel like it's so obvious, okay?
Like, I've had people come to me and they say, Hey, we'd like to buy X of your company or whatever, and I'd be like, this of my company generates X dollars.
And they say, we'll give you X, and I'm like, why?
For what reason would I sell that to you?
It makes money.
I'll just sit back and take the money that I already make for myself.
Dude, I own the boat.
No point in selling you the boat if the boat is what I want, like, So typically what I tell people is like, listen, Mark Zuckerberg, they wanted to buy Facebook off him.
He says, why?
He's like, I just make another social media network.
What's the point?
He's already rich.
In order to get someone who's making $25 million in revenue per year to sell the property, you're going to need a 10-year advance.
Because then what's being said to me is, listen, 10 years up front right now, and you go live like a king.
You even start a new company.
Or you keep it, and over the span of 10 years you make the money.
How many cars you think I can buy?
That's why it's like, it might even be 30 years.
Depends on the company.
Donald Trump is already a billionaire with a 757.
Or it might be a 37.
For what purpose does he need your upfront cash?
He doesn't.
Which means, all the surrounding businesses generating this revenue have comparable systems where they say, you're not gonna be able to buy this.
The demand is high.
Supply is non-existent.
There's only one Mar-a-Lago.
Anyway, man.
More importantly, out of all of this in this segment, it's not for me to just talk about numbers and break this stuff down, because it is fascinating to me.
It's to tell you about the judge having no trial and destroying Trump's businesses.
Take a look at this.
Look at Mar-a-Lago.
They put $24.2 million on Zillow.
Look at this property right here!
It's a third, a sixth of the size of Mar-a-Lago, and it's listed at $56 million.
How many acres is this thing?
1.76 acres.
That's right.
Mar-a-Lago, on its property size alone, without consideration for its multiple tennis courts and parking lot, would be a billion and a half dollars.
And a judge said $18 million.
It's a lie.
See, what they're doing is they're saying, see, Mar-a-Lago proves it.
Trump overvalued his properties in New York.
He didn't.
They're lying.
And you know what?
I'll entertain that Trump may have lied for sure.
You'd have to have a trial and prove it.
If you, uh, what does Tyrion Lannister say?
When you cut out a man's tongue, you are not proving him wrong.
You are simply proving that you're scared of what he may say.
The reason they don't have a trial is because they know if Trump's experts and his partners and lenders showed up and testified under oath, they'd say Trump did everything right and his business is sound.
I don't see any other reason why they wouldn't have the trial.
Wouldn't, Kyle, wouldn't, wouldn't it make more sense for the judge to be like, here's a lender from Trump saying he defrauded them?
The fact of the matter is this, there was no trial.
So if you defend a press conference is enough to warrant the destruction of a real estate company, then you are an authoritarian, and you are what we are up against.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 4pm on this channel.
Thanks for hanging out, and I'll see you all then.
I will start the day off with the words you all want to hear so badly.
Civil War.
Yeah, what does that really mean?
Oh, of course I'm gonna talk about this.
Because last night in Philadelphia, we saw over a hundred youths, teens, I don't even know how young they were, some were probably in their 20s, ransacking numerous businesses, fighting with cops, fighting with store employees, and just stealing everything.
GameStop, Target, Apple, Lululemon, you name it.
Now, why did they do this?
Well, what they report in the news is that after a ruling in a failed shooting, people looted.
Yeah, sorry dude.
Whether or not the cops were justified in a shooting does not warrant stealing from a bunch of businesses.
Now there's a reason why I say civil war.
This.
Take this into consideration.
This is an example.
Take it from the experts.
Don't take it from me.
All I do is read the news.
But what we're talking about here is a breakdown of confidence in government and the mistake people make when they hear civil war.
Oh man, you know, look, I'm gonna talk about, let's talk about context and understanding, okay?
Right now there's a big story about Donald Trump's properties, Mar-a-Lago's evaluation, and it's fascinating to see so many people on Twitter, on social media in general, act like they know how to evaluate property and business despite not owning hard assets at all!
My point is this.
When a story breaks and someone says, here's a bit of information as to why a thing happened, a lot of people immediately make a generic assumption as if they know when they don't, right?
So, when someone hears civil war, the immediate thing they think of is the Confederacy declaring secession and then soldiers marching on a battlefield.
I bring this up all the time.
In reality, if you look at most civil wars, it's actually social breakdown.
Conflict begins when various factions become more hyper-polarized, and government loses the faith of the people, thus resulting in factions fighting over control.
What we're seeing here with Philadelphia is a component which may lead to revolution, civil war, or just collapse, right?
And so I think Civil War, mostly because, I don't know, January 6th, the 2016 election, the 2020 election, the strong political component to what is occurring as society begins to break down.
That is to say, when you have the 529 insurrection at the White House, and far-left extremists firebomb the White House, that's funny, right?
Ain't no J6er firebomb the Capitol, but the left, yes, did you not know this, firebombed the White House property, Setting fire to a guard post and they set fire to St.
John's Church across the street.
Ignored.
No tribunals, no commissions, no arrests.
Probably some arrests to be fair, but for the most part, nothing.
And that was under Trump.
And then you get January 6th, which is a nationwide hunt for anybody who may have been in the building.
A one woman in Alaska, she has her home raided because she looked like another woman who was in the building.
Isn't that crazy?
Right.
So this is my point.
Social order is breaking down at a time with political hyperpolarization.
So when you're in Philadelphia and you are, let's say one of these teenagers, these teenagers will become adults.
They're filming themselves destroy businesses, steal and fight with cops.
Why?
They do not feel the police have any legitimate authority.
They do not fear the consequences.
There is no fear of being shunned by society.
There is no fear of law enforcement.
None.
How can you have social order when you have large swaths of the population that don't believe it exists at all and will take from you?
Well, you can't.
And so this is what ends up happening.
As we look at what happened last night in Philadelphia, it's bonkers.
I mean, some of these videos, we'll go through some of the clips and stuff.
I'm not going to show videos of any of the violence or anything like that, but I'll give you examples.
You've got residents of Philadelphia who are going to say, no confidence in police.
Why?
Police can't stop the rioting.
No confidence in government.
Government can't stop the rioting.
And what ends up happening is, you get militia.
Not in the, like, people think militia and they're imagining, like, dudes wearing, you know, uh, camo and being like, um, you know, a fat dude with body armor.
No, dude.
Militia in the sense of locals in the area taking up arms and just coordinating with each other for the purpose of enforcing social order.
This is when you see the rise of factions that are acting in competition with government.
Government in the United States operates under the monopoly of violence doctrine.
That is, the police are allowed, the government is allowed, they control violence, and at any point, you know that if you act outside of what the government wants, they will inflict violence upon you.
That's the reality of how the system has been operating for some time.
It shouldn't be that way.
It should be social order.
It should be that we agree.
There should be some scrutiny for an abuse of the monopoly on violence.
But because of the, I guess, population density and disparate ideologies, this is where we are today.
As more and more people right now in these cities begin looting and ransacking because they do not believe that the police or government use of violence is monopolized, they will just say, try me, I can exert my force against you.
That is to say, When you get defund the police, when you get BLM protests, and you get Democrats basically releasing criminals, the message being sent out in general is, the government has no control in this instance.
And so, it would be fine if it was a sparse population, a smaller population of ideologically and morally homogenous people.
You don't need law enforcement if everybody agrees on how things should be.
And if one person acts out and commits a crime, the entirety of the community takes action.
But we're not in that system anymore.
Let me break down the news, and then we'll talk about more of the philosophical components here.
But the simple point I'm trying to say is, if we're seeing this across the board all throughout the United States... Oh, and check Google for this stuff.
It's crazy how many stories in the past few days.
We have seen these flash mobs over and over and over again.
What happens in 10-20 years as these young people don't care about police, film themselves breaking the law and laugh about it?
Do you think that when they're older, they're going to abide by the law?
No.
This is the markings, the makings of militia.
Right now, teenagers stealing iPads.
And you say, oh, it's just teenagers stealing iPads.
What happens when they're 25, 35?
Is it gonna be iPads, or is it gonna be property?
Is it gonna be these dudes coming together and being like, bro, we can take that house.
Ain't nobody come and stop us if we do.
Look at Chaz Chop.
If these teenagers decide they will surround a private residence and kick the family out, do you think police will stop them?
They will not.
Now, for now, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, don't get me wrong, right?
For now, you will, you will see police action.
I mean, we're seeing police try to stop this.
How many cops want to be a cop with Defund the Police?
How many cops want to be a cop if you can't even arrest these people, or if you do, they get released right away?
And then what happens when a hundred teenagers just occupy a city block?
Don't actually kick anybody out, like Chaz Chop already happened!
Already happened.
Now what happens if it's in a residential area, and the police are like, what are we gonna do?
What are we gonna do?
When the Chazz Chop started in Seattle, businesses were under the governance of communist mobs.
And the police did nothing.
Did nothing.
So this is not something that's far from the future.
It's something happening literally right now and has already taken place.
Autonomous zones in Atlanta, in Seattle, attempts in Portland, Minnesota.
These things have already emerged.
It's entirely possible that we restore order, sure.
But over the past decade, we've only seen things escalate.
Mike Cernovich has a stark warning, saying, I hope you're ready for what comes next, because this is just an example of what we're going to see in 2024.
Here's the story.
Let me give you the news, and then I'll give you some more breakdown.
Groups of teenagers.
Groups?
More than 100 people!
This is from TribDem.com.
The Tribune Democrat.
Crap.
Groups of teenagers sworn in the stores in Philly's Central City on Tuesday, stuffing
plastic bags with merchandise and fleeing.
Although police made several arrests, authorities and witnesses said an Apple store was hit
around 8 p.m. and police chased fleeing teenagers, recovering dropped iPhones and piles of iPads
at one spot.
More than 100 people appear to be teenagers looted a Lululemon store.
NBC 10 reported videos posted on social media showed masked people in hoodies running out
of the store.
The flash mob style ransacking followed an earlier peaceful protest over a judge's Tuesday
decision to dismiss murder and other charges against a Philadelphia officer who shot and
killed a driver, Eddie Irizarry, through a rolled up window.
Yep, and that was wrong, and that stuff shouldn't happen.
The police lied and claimed the dude got out of the car and lunged at him.
That's not what happened.
Video proves it.
So this is what happens.
The police are not being held accountable.
And I think they should be.
And when they're not held accountable, the people say, your system is illegitimate.
The government may have a monopoly on violence, but it comes with scrutiny.
And when the government violates these things too long and too often, and they do, you get social breakdown.
As these young people begin to say, the police are meaningless to me because they act, you know, these young people, especially leftists, Not all of them.
Some of them are exploiting the crisis, but many of them view the police as illegitimate.
They say, how many innocent people have been killed by cops with no accountability?
Yeah, there was one story we talked about where there was a guy in jail, he was arrested and detained, and a cop grabbed his head and bashed it on the wall, knocking him out.
For what reason?
None.
Like literally no reason a cop did this.
And then the other officers lied about what happened to protect the cop.
As soon as a story like that comes out, just one story, these teenagers are then propagandized and they say, despite the fact we understand those cops are bad, there was no accountability.
And so the young people say, if they don't act within the law, why would any of us?
All you're saying is it's a competition now over who's willing to come up You know, I was driving in my car the other day, and I was listening to April 26, 1992.
Am I getting the date right?
I'm gonna do a fact check on this.
I think that's what it was.
It's the sublime song.
April 26, 1992.
Yeah, I got it right.
I'm sorry.
No, I was wrong.
It's April 29th.
Oh, I was so close.
Inverted it.
There was a ride on the streets, tell me where were you?
You know, blah blah blah blah blah, if you know the lyrics.
There's a really great line in the song where he says, they claimed it was for the black man, it was for the African, but not for the white man.
That's a line in the song.
And then he actually, can I pull this up?
This lyric is too good.
Seriously.
Okay, let's see.
Let me see.
Let's see.
First spot we hit up was my liquor store.
I finally got all the alcohol I can't afford.
Let's see.
Where is it at?
Tell me where are you participating in some anarchy?
Where do you think I got this guitar that you're hearing today?
It's amazing.
When we returned to the pad and everything, they said it was for the black man, they said it was for the Mexican and not for the white man.
But if you look at the streets, it wasn't about Rodney King and this effed up situation and these effed up police.
It's about coming up and staying on top and screaming 187 on a mother effing cop.
It's not in the paper, it's on the wall.
National Guard spoke from all around.
That's an amazing line.
What we hear when we see all these riots is that it's about justice.
No, it's not.
These people are exploiting circumstance to quote-unquote come up and I've long said that.
I've experienced that when I watch this stuff.
But let's talk about social breakdown and what this means.
Take a look at this.
This is a tweet from Philly Crime Update.
Although heavily fortified, looters still tried to break into this auto zone at Broad and Cumberland in Philadelphia.
Why is an auto zone heavily fortified?
Look at this fencing!
Is it barbed wire on top?
That's weird.
Why Is AutoZone doing this?
That's crazy, isn't it?
Because they know what's happening.
They know what- This is social breakdown.
We got more.
This is a- This is a video.
This is one of the most shocking videos you can see right now.
Steve Keeley, Fox News, says, Apple Store security can't hold doors shut from crowd.
One posted videos.
Philly police gathering.
Stolen iPads and iPhones from Apple Stores have alarm going- alarms going off.
Off on them and message.
It's been disabled.
It's being tracked.
So looters start smashing them.
This says, please return to Apple, this device has been disabled and is being tracked.
Thieves saw this message on just stolen iPhones and iPads as loud beeping alarm sounds on them, moments after they were taken out of the Philadelphia store, and many of them smashed it.
Look at this!
That's- iPhones actually do this stuff.
You know what's shocking about this?
Employees were in the store when this violent mob broke in and ransacked it and stole as much as they could.
Social breakdown.
This is not a protest.
What this says is that people do not feel that the government has any authority over them and the government can do nothing to stop them.
Which is why I say civil war.
We have a bunch of photos here.
Let me get to a bit of the political points.
Ed Krasenstein.
The Krasensteins, you love them.
Liberals.
Ed Cressey says, What is wrong with people?
In Philadelphia last night, a bunch of people break into an Apple store and take iPhone 15s.
With sirens blaring, they run out, only to realize they're being tracked.
What do they do next?
They begin breaking all the phones they just took, while being filmed by people with other iPhones.
One such video can be seen below.
Some people just aren't very bright.
Who do you blame?
It's beautiful naivete, in my opinion.
Here's the tweet from Mike Cernovich.
Philadelphia shows how bad it's gonna get next year.
I can't emphasize this enough, and for my own karma, I must continue nagging you people.
This isn't the same country.
You need to be prepared.
This isn't some short-term thing you can watch happen.
You'll be an involuntary participant.
That's right!
So I watch this stuff.
I see these videos, and I'm like, how many of you listened to me when I explained Civil War, Civil Strife, etc.?
Many of you probably did.
What did I say?
Did I say that, and you all know this already, but bears repeating.
Did I say, oh man, all the conservatives are going to form paramilitary groups and then start marching down the streets with their weapons, goose-stepping, and then Ron DeSantis or, you know, Christy Noem, they're going to sign a declaration of... No!
What did I say?
I said men across this country will stop viewing the government as legitimate because of the prosecution, the political persecutions and prosecutions that the attacks made against Donald Trump.
And you will see militia, militia not organized in the sense of someone wearing camo.
You will see seven guys coming out and blocking their street.
And then when law enforcement shows up, they'll say, you have no authority here.
That's what I've been saying.
This is what happens in most countries when a civil war begins.
You begin to see people have no faith that the government can actually uphold any of the rules and any of the social norms.
This is a component of that from the liberal Democrat perspective.
If the federal government begins arresting people over January 6th and ignoring the far left for the things they did with firebombing the White House, what happens then is conservatives start saying the government's illegitimate.
They already do!
They already are saying abolish the FBI.
That is outright saying they do not feel the FBI acts legitimately.
ATF, that one's kind of obvious.
But what happens in cities?
Right now, you're seeing what the left does.
Now these people are more likely to be default lib in that they probably don't care too much about politics, but they fall on that side just by virtue of being in a city.
The fact that they're smashing up buildings and everything and stealing shows they ain't conservatives.
They're trying to come up.
But hold on, what does that mean?
They're enriching themselves.
That's what these attacks are.
They're not political.
It doesn't need to be political.
Again, people think civil war, and it's just so stupid, like when Bill Maher was like, what was his quote?
Something about the Mason-Dixon line would run through Nana's kitchen or something like that.
I don't know.
Something like that.
There doesn't have to be one!
I'll give you a scenario.
Philadelphia.
Here we go.
Let me do this.
Here's Google.
I Google-searched flash mob robbery.
Philadelphia, obvious.
YSL flash mob robbery, Glendale, five days ago.
Gucci handbags, Camarillo.
Flash mob, Philadelphia, okay, we got that one.
California flash mob was at Glendale, so we've got Glendale and Camarillo.
What do we have this one?
A month ago, California Macy's.
Uh, let's see, uh, four days ago, St.
Lawrence store in, is this, is this California?
So it looks like L.A.
plague of flash mob robberies hence police scrambling.
It looks like we may have two or three different stories right when you, right when you pull it up.
Two or three different instances of these flash mob robberies, but come on.
We know they're happening all over the place.
Eventually, as we see police resign and be defunded, and this political ideology breaks down, you will see people on the right act in a comparable inverse action.
AOC.
Here we go, here we go.
Let me pull up, this is something I covered yesterday morning.
People in Staten Island are protesting non-citizens being brought in to their homes, to their neighborhoods, and the police arrest the locals.
Tell me that you think anyone will believe and have confidence in government when the police lie about how they killed some dude in his car.
Now people are just like, hey, cops are illegitimate, right?
The idea now is just don't get caught.
How is anyone gonna have faith in law enforcement when we have seen too many stories of cops lying?
Now listen, listen.
I'm not saying that a thousand unarmed black men are being killed every year.
No, it was like 9, between 9 and 13 in 2019.
Not a lot.
The problem?
When police lie, they get away with it.
I'm in New York.
I'm filming Occupy Wall Street.
The police falsely arrest a photographer.
His name was Alex Arbuckle, standing on the sidewalk taking pictures.
They file a false police report claiming that he was obstructing a roadway.
My video proved the police lied.
Did the officer who lied under oath have any repercussions?
None.
Okay.
This system is lucky that people like you and I still fight to maintain social order knowing, knowing that in almost any instance, any instance where a cop lies, they get away with it.
They do.
Now, I'm not saying all cops are bad.
I'm saying in the instances where cops lie to cover up crimes, there is no accountability.
And you have bred this issue.
Teenagers, These kids, when I filmed that, that was 10 years ago.
12 years ago.
Just about 12 years ago, I filmed that.
So that kid who's 16 who's robbing that store, he was 4.
When I filmed this dude being wrongly arrested, and that's all it was.
And what do you think happens when this kid grows up and he's told?
Yeah, the police will arrest you, they'll lie about it, and they'll get away with it, and no one will hold them accountable.
I warned about this back then, I warn about it today.
The more they protect bad cops who lie under oath and file false police reports, the more they chip away at the confidence in the system.
You have now created a generation, you gave fuel to the far-left extremists, Justifying their claims and have built a generation with no confidence in this system.
These teenagers ransacking.
Do you think they're gonna have confidence in the system in 10 years?
No, they won't.
It's only getting worse.
Not only did you have Occupy Wall Street, millennials with no confidence in police who want to defund them, you now have Gen Z and Gen Alpha coming into a world where the police are impotent.
Not only did they lie and get away with it on numerous occasions, they can't stop you when you act out.
And you are not allowed to prepare yourself to defend your life.
They said, why were they pointing guns at these people?
OK, OK, you know, maybe a little over the top, but what am I to say?
If you come onto my private property, why is it incumbent upon me, the victim of your aggression, to wait and see whether or not you intend to kill me?
I don't, I don't agree with that.
So, we were talking, I talked about, uh, I have a video coming out, uh, it's for Friday, I think.
Where this guy was firing pellet guns at these dudes, the dudes beat him, they fought him, and then the dude died.
And it's this big story, Ethan Liming, I believe.
And the response I posted on Twitter was people were defending Liming, and they were like, it was just a water gun!
And I'm like, it was called a pellet gun with soft gel pellets.
Meaning, like, akin to paintballs.
And, uh, more importantly, I'm like, dude, I don't care if it's a squirt gun.
It is not incumbent upon me to figure out if you are trying to spray me down with bleach or acid or anything like that.
Somebody's walking down the street and they have a cup of liquid and they go to splash you in the face.
Do you have a right to defend yourself?
You bet you do.
They're acid attacks.
We know what happens to these people in the UK when they go up to these women and they splash her.
Should someone with a squirt gun aiming it at you about to spray you, should we say, well, it could be water, so therefore I won't protect myself?
No way.
If you attack someone for any reason, it is not the victim's fault or incumbent upon the victim to wait and figure out how much damage you seek to inflict upon them.
Don't attack people.
Well, my point is this.
We're getting now to the point where you're going to see locals, like we have in this video, they're going to snap.
The regular people who want to be left alone, that's when the system breaks down.
We talked about this last night with Carl Benjamin.
He says, the people who want to be left alone can't win a war.
And I'm like, right.
But there are more people who want to be left alone.
And when you refuse to leave them alone, they go nuts.
Here's what I think.
In 2020, I met many people who said, I cannot vote for Donald Trump.
I just want it to stop.
I wonder if you've seen this.
The idea that these people had was that Trump was the cause of civil strife.
That because of Trump, we were in this conflict and it needed to stop.
And if Trump just goes away, we can go back to normal!
They were wrong, of course.
Trump was the avatar of the outrage, not the cause of it.
So what happens?
Trump is ousted and these people think now we can go back to normal.
Sorry about that.
That's not true.
The ransacking, the rioting, the violence has only gotten worse and substantially worse.
They thought all of this craziness will end once Trump is just gone.
But now it's tenfold.
Now they're not just impeaching the president.
Now they're indicting him, ordering the dissolution of his businesses.
It is getting worse every single day.
Time travel test.
If I went back in time seven years and said that not only would they have indicted Trump on 91 counts, not only would thousands of people have, I should say a few hundred, stormed the Capitol with a thousand entering from various locations, and with many seeking to disrupt the Electoral College vote count, not saying everyone, Donald Trump's businesses, the Trump Organization, would be ordered dissolved by a New York judge.
Yep, that's the breaking news we'll talk about in a minute in the next segment.
Nobody would believe it.
A judge ordered the Trump Organization dissolved.
Trump's empire.
Trump's business.
The Trump Organization that saved New York City.
Gone.
In an instant.
On a summary judgment.
This is Civil War.
Yesterday, as we're getting ready for the show, Carl says, what's this?
A judge just ordered the Trump organization dissolved?
And I was like, what?
No, no, no, no, no.
They're calling it the corporate death penalty.
For what reason?
I'll get into more of that in the next segment, because this one, it's crazy.
What you are seeing right now is unsustainable and I don't see how it's repaired.
Call me crazy.
Call me wrong.
I don't care, man.
I got my chickens.
We got our emergency food.
We got our plans.
Did you expect New York City to bust non-citizens into your neighborhood and then arrest you?
Did you expect to see a residential neighborhood have non-citizens bust in, paid for by the federal government, to be given shelter in your community, and jobs to work under the table, and special protected status?
Did you ever expect it to happen?
And then, when locals come to protest, the police arrest the locals.
citizens being arrested in New York for saying, you can't bring these people here!
You think that's social order?
These people are already.
These are regular people who don't protest fighting cops.
Let me repeat that for you.
Regular people who don't protest and want to be left alone and voted against Trump.
Not all of them at Staten Island.
I get it.
Many of them voted for Trump.
But majority, they're voting for Joe Biden thinking, if Trump just goes away, it all stops.
And then the police came in, spit in your face figuratively, brought non-citizens to your community, straining your resources and laughed with a smile on their face, cackling like the Joker as they arrested you.
No one saw that coming.
This system is unsustainable.
Regular people in these neighborhoods are going, I'm sorry, I was going to say they're going to start pushing back.
They're already!
It worries me when the regular, working class dudes in urban, liberal areas protest the police.
It's not surprising when the far left does it.
This?
This freaks me out.
The police then arrest them.
What do you think these guys are going to say?
They're going to say, guys, the cops are here to shut you down and defend non-citizens.
I think one of the things we start to see is people stop paying taxes.
No question.
No doubt.
There have already been people making huge pushes for tax strikes and things like that.
That's worrying and very dangerous to me.
That's when the system stops completely.
People stop paying taxes.
Uh oh.
It's like, it's like 1764.
Call it, you know, whatever.
If the police are siding with non-citizens, why would someone want to fund the police?
What happens if the police are underfunded, unfunded?
Well, then you get violent riots.
Then what?
Social order is breaking down.
I don't know how many times I need to say it, but here we are once again with two big stories pertaining to social decay.
For sure.
Tell me that you think it stops here.
I'm all ears.
Tell me that you think, no, no, no, no, look, look, you know, this stuff's gonna chill out.
You think, it's 2023.
The election cycle is only just beginning.
You think things get calmer.
By all means, you're allowed to.
Make the mockery.
Claim I'm crazy and it's overhyped and it'll never happen.
Sure.
What I'm telling you is this.
The police are protecting non-citizens.
Federal law enforcement are opening the gates, letting them in.
They are giving a billion plus dollars of your tax dollars in New York to non-citizens while you struggle for work and struggle in this economy.
These immigrants are being given jobs and special protected status.
Do you think a regular working class guy is going to sit back and watch his businesses be ransacked and looted, neighborhoods be destroyed, all while the police protect the criminals?
And they do.
Look, I know 20 people got arrested in Philly.
But when the far left extremists firebombed the White House, I'm not kidding.
It's not an exaggeration.
They were lobbing firebombs.
They set fire to a guard post on the White House property trying to tear down the barricades.
They did tear down the barricades!
St.
John's Church, the historic presidential church, was set ablaze.
Fortunately, the fire was put out.
And what happens?
It just keeps happening.
The far left keeps their push against police, and police, with smiles on their faces, arrest Trump supporters.
What did these Staten Island people do to get arrested?
Protested non-citizens in their neighborhood?
People not from this country are coming into your neighborhood, protected by the government, paid for by the government.
You think the citizens of this country are going to have confidence in a government that does that?
I don't.
And I think I'm I mean, again, they literally already showed they don't fighting against the cops who are protecting them.
At what point do locals just say we have been betrayed?
What the police were doing in Staten Island protecting these illegal immigrants is sedition, acting to protect foreign nationals illegally entering this country in violation of our laws, siding with them over the citizens of this neighborhood.
It can be said a million ways.
The police seeing non-citizens come into a neighborhood with demands to take resources sided with the non-citizens over the citizens.
End of story.
The citizens got mad.
Those who pay the bills, who live in the area, and strive to protect their homes were attacked by police protecting foreign nationals.
Tell me you think that this stabilizes.
I hope.
I wish.
I pray.
Because I gotta tell you, man, I'd love to just sit around, I'd love to order pizza, watch the game, hang out with my buddies, make skate videos, was skating the other day filmed a bunch of clips, really, really fun stuff.
I'd love to just do all that.
This freaks me out.
And then I get people telling me, Tim, you shouldn't talk about this because it makes things worse.
I'm like, that is a moral philosophy that I don't care for and applies not to me.
My view is such.
I have opinions.
I talk about those opinions.
What is happening?
I will talk about how I feel and what I think is happening.
That's it.
End of story.
This idea that I, as someone in the media with a following, should lie, obfuscate, and try and calm things down.
I'm not a leader.
I'm not a politician.
I am not here to tell people, to make people do what I think they should do.
I am not someone who believes that I am so smart and so correct all the time that I should tell people lies so that they live the way I want them to live.
I'll tell you what I do.
I see things and then I talk about what I think about them.
And I hate to say it, everybody, but I got a lot of things wrong.
I always do, of course, because predictions are difficult.
Scary thing is, on the core, I've been right about too much that is particularly worrisome.
Owen Schroer.
Everyone was like, holy crap, Tim was right.
I know, but how could I have been wrong?
It's not like I'm making a grand prediction.
What did I say?
After the J6ers, Trump and his lawyers.
The next target will be media personalities that were speaking in support of January 6th.
And what do we get?
We get the halfway mark.
Owen Schroer was there on the Capitol grounds, but the prosecutors at the federal level wanted him sentenced to prison, and he was sentenced to prison for his speech.
And I said, that's what they'll do.
Owen Schroer, a media person.
Here we go.
Next up is going to be someone who maybe didn't go on the Capitol, but was inciting We'll see how far it goes and how fast it goes.
It may stop with Owen Schroyer.
He was there.
He wasn't in the building or anything like that.
He was at a permanent rally.
I think they're gonna go after people who weren't even in D.C.
Who are maybe even like in Iowa or something, but made videos rallying people and encouraging this.
People said some bombastic stuff.
2024 is around the corner.
You're going to see a whole lot of crazy accusations made against people.
You're going to see debanking.
It's going to get bad.
It's going to get crazy.
Because ain't nobody backing down.
But I hope you understand this, my friends.
The big news last night was that a judge unilaterally and summarily ordered Trump's businesses shuttered.
Dissolved.
Summary judgment.
That means he just banged the gavel and said, it is so.
You think, with the ground-level conflict and chaos, and the high-level corruption, it just stops here?
But you know, a lot of people hear this and they think that it means blackmail.
The end is nigh.
I'm not saying that.
I think culturally we're winning this.
And all the left is doing and all the chaos means is that there will be a resurgence.
I think right now the data shows Trump is going to win.
I think he does.
And I think this turns things around.
The night is always darkest before the dawn.
So I hope you're prepared for a wild and psychotic 2024.
But I think if we carry on the current trend we are, and things could change, Donald Trump wins, and then things will be very different.
But I don't know.
Look, man, I don't know.
You believe what you believe.
I'm just showing you what's going on right now.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment is coming up at 1pm on this channel.
Thanks for hanging out, and I'll see you all then.
The investigation into Joe Biden over classified documents is expanding.
And, uh, why would they do this?
Why would they do this?
Well, it's because they want to get Joe Biden out of the race.
I'm sorry, dude.
I know there are people, people that I like and trust and respect who are saying, no, no, you're wrong.
It's clickbait.
Joe Biden is going to be the nominee.
And I'm like, that's crazy.
That's crazy.
Okay.
Joe Biden, I do not believe will be the nominee.
I mean, he's running now.
There's talks about Democrats challenging him, but I can't see it.
Why?
Why would the unit party, facing Donald Trump, who they so desperately despise, why would they run Joe Biden?
But how do you get rid of Joe Biden?
There's a bunch of different ways.
And it may be this documents probe.
You see, this documents probe accomplishes two things.
One, it will remove Joe Biden.
From the race.
Kamala Harris may then say something to the effect of, look, I was in this to work with Joe Biden, and I think it's only appropriate that a new team step in, if that's the case.
Or there's another way to get rid of Kamala Harris in terms of 2024.
They have a primary, Newsom wins, and then says, I am choosing a different VP.
And yeah, maybe there's political turmoil and maybe there's compliance, but Biden cannot win.
The other thing accomplished by this probe, they say, we're not biased.
We went up against Trump and Joe Biden.
Come on, don't you get it?
So when Donald Trump gets charged on the documents, which he already has been, they say, look, we're doing the same thing to Joe Biden.
You can't use that as a talking point against us.
We went after him all the same.
I don't think it really matters, anyway.
I feel like the growing political division in this country, you basically have two parent factions, one faction, the Trump faction, freedom faction, libertarian, post-liberals, all these people, not all of them big Trump supporters either, are basically saying, we think you're all liars, you know, and we don't trust anything you do for any reason.
And the other side just basically says, you're probably lying too, but we'll do whatever you say, please don't hurt me.
That's the gist of it.
Here's the story from ABC News.
They say the federal investigation into President Joe Biden's handling of classified documents
prior to becoming president has grown into a sprawling examination of Obama era security
protocols and internal White House processes, with investigators so far interviewing scores
of witnesses, including Secretary of State Antony Blinken.
Sources familiar with the investigation told ABC News.
Federal prosecutors and FBI agents from the Special Counsel Robert Herr's office have been interviewing witnesses for nearly nine months, targeting an expansive constellation of former aides, from high-level advisors to executive assistants and at least one White House attorney.
Several sources estimated that as many as 100 witnesses have already been interviewed, with interviews conducted as recently as last week, and some witnesses asked to return for follow-up interviews.
Sources who were present for some of the interviews, including witnesses, told ABC News that authorities had apparently uncovered instances of carelessness from Biden's vice presidency, but that based on what was said in the interviews, it seemed to them that the improper removal of classified documents from Biden's office when he left the White House in 2017 was more likely a mistake than a criminal act.
Nevertheless, The special counsel has reached no final determinations, and the investigation is ongoing.
In January, shortly after news first surfaced that classified documents had been found in a personal office used by Biden after his vice presidency, Blinken, a longtime aide to Biden, said he and Biden were both surprised to learn that there were any government records taken.
It's unclear what Blinken told Herr's team.
I mean, that is indicative of the system, isn't it?
Joe Biden is under investigation.
And the media doesn't talk about it.
has operated largely under the radar since his appointment in January, avoiding the attention
and media scrutiny of special counsel Jack Smith's probes into former President Donald
Trump.
I mean, that is indicative of the system, isn't it?
Joe Biden is under investigation and the media doesn't talk about it.
ABC News learned from sources that her team has cast a wide net gathering documents dating
back to the early days, the Obama admin and drilling into questions about the task of
securely updating the vice president on highly sensitive matters.
Investigators have shown witnesses' email chains dating back to at least 2010 and asked for context about those exchanges, sources said.
Witnesses have also been pressed about the use of cabinets and safes, sources said.
It has been publicly reported that investigators reached for documents dating back to Biden's tenure in the Senate.
Dude, I'm sorry, man.
They're digging up dirt.
OK?
But this is the existing current federal government.
So call it whatever you want.
I got a simple one for you.
I don't know, civil war or something, because I'm sure what they're going to argue is that these are these are Trump supporting members of the government going after Joe Biden.
And sure, fine, whatever, man.
Believe whatever it is you want to believe.
The reality is, Joe Biden is being knocked out of the race.
I'm not saying definitively, I'm saying these moves are bad for him and could open the door to a Newsom victory.
Take a look at Predict It.
Gavin Newsom's at 18 cents.
Who will win the 2024 Democratic presidential nomination?
Joe Biden's a favorite.
Donald Trump is doing better.
I think I have Trump.
Trump is here at 72 cents.
Nikki Haley's at nine.
Vivek at nine.
Ron DeSantis in fourth place.
Oh, man.
Talk about just.
Man, talk about a crash.
That's so brutal.
So brutal.
It's a bummer.
But here's what I'm thinking, man.
Look at these articles, right?
Here's one from July 8th.
When is the optimal time for Biden to drop out of the race?
Really?
As if it's a foregone conclusion?
Here's one from The Guardian.
Biographer says it wouldn't be a total shock if Biden drops out of the 2024 race.
And then we have this from The Hill.
Pardon, Hunter, and drop out.
How Biden can spare his party, his family, and his image.
Sure.
Maybe that's the path.
I think...
I think it's not going to be Joe Biden.
You know, I think Gavin Newsom is the smarmy used car salesman who would fare better than most.
Michelle Obama probably would do very well, but the issue is, everyone's basing the Michelle Obama assumption off of a few things.
One, that she wants to run, and two, that she actually has the, you want to say, X-factor required.
And you know, X-factor's kind of a cop-out.
What I mean is, she needs confidence, charisma, and wit.
Does she have those things?
We know that she's popular among Democrats, but I don't know if she's going to be able to handle debating or public speaking to the great degree that, you know, Obama could.
So she might just be like, I can't do it.
The speculation is based off her image, based off of her celebrity rating, that she could be a good candidate.
But Gavin Newsom, while he doesn't have the policies, he certainly has the wit and the charisma.
And more so than many other people who may be running.
So here's my thoughts, man.
Look, they're doing a deep investigation into Joe Biden.
Right now, predicted market has Joe Biden to win at 43 cents, Trump at 37, but Gavin Newsom at 14.
I think it's funny that Ron DeSantis is in fourth place despite losing to Nikki Haley and Vivek Ramaswamy in the GOP presidential primary predictions.
Something doesn't add up there.
But Gavin Newsom's right there.
Gavin Newsom's gonna be debating Ron DeSantis.
Why?
Neither.
I mean, whatever.
Maybe it made sense a year ago when Ron DeSantis was actually doing well, but I just don't see it.
Ron DeSantis has done too much damage to himself and his campaign, but maybe the idea is that Trump and Biden are both not going to be in the race.
Who knows?
Who knows, man?
Right now, you got two very old people with Trump and Biden.
Trump is seemingly spry and running and winning in all the polls.
Biden is not.
So what happens for some reason or another Biden is going to be is that he's not he's going to drop out or be removed.
I think it's I think it's him dropping out because whatever they end up getting on him or doing to him.
It results in Joe Biden saying I'm stepping down something like that.
It's possible.
I agree that Joe Biden will be the nominee, but it just seems too far-fetched because if they run Joe Biden, it sounds like they're saying we want to lose for real at this point.
If the Democrats run Joe Biden, it seems the simple answer is they don't want to win.
And I assume they want to win.
The first time they ran Biden, sure, many of us thought, I thought, he couldn't win.
It's crazy, but I miscounted, I discounted the anti-election, right?
That people were just voting against Trump, so it didn't really matter who they had, right?
So they decided to use someone who was more disposable, someone older, which stands to reason why Joe Biden will not be the nominee.
And what may happen is, not likely a primary, but for some reason or another Joe Biden steps down and he says, you know, they could do something like the documents case comes out, Biden comes out and then says something to the effect of, you know, the law states that if you're found, you know, guilty of this documents thing, then you have to do this, that, you can't run for office.
And he says, I respect this constitution.
I regret the actions that I took.
It was a genuine mistake.
But the law is the law and we stand for the law, so I will be stepping down and allowing someone else to take up the mantle and lead this great nation.
There's a bunch of ways he could do it.
They could just remove him and be like, nope, you're out.
And Biden could be like, well, you know, what am I going to do about it?
Or Biden could say, we fought a good fight, but for me, perhaps it's time to realize that I'm a bit too old.
And he'll smile and he'll laugh and he'll beg, but it doesn't mean not capable because there's many people.
And then he'll pander to the older crowd and say, but the task ahead is going to be difficult.
And so we need someone younger, blah, blah, blah.
Gavin Newsom steps in, and then Kamala's just out of the picture.
The media stops talking about her, and that's it.
Everyone's like, how is she gonna get, how is she gonna go?
If Biden's removed, what about Kamala?
And it's like, dude, she'll just disappear.
There doesn't need to be a big public statement.
She could literally just not do press.
But I really, really, it's gonna be a wild year, with violence, with chaos.
I think probability stands, based on my view and everything I've seen, that Joe Biden will not be the Democrat nominee.
They are panicking in desperation to get him to be able to stand up straight.
Why would they run him unless they wanted him to lose?
Okay, fair point.
Perhaps they really want Donald Trump to win for some reason.
I don't buy that either.
So it seems to me it ain't gonna be Joe Biden.
We'll see.
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.
Recently on Timcast IRL, we were hanging out with Andy Ngo.
Andy Ngo asked if he thought it was wrong that people on the right will refer to those on the left in their entirety as communists, or Marxists.
His point was that the left calls everyone on the right fascists, and so everyone on the right just calls them communists, and it's wrong to do so.
I argued.
I said no, Andy, I disagree.
It is correct to call them communists.
I have data to back this up.
You see, my point was as such.
The left will call literally everyone on the right fascists, despite the quote-unquote culture war right being ideologically diverse.
That is, people who are associated with the right could be liberal, in the true sense.
Social liberal, traditional liberal, classical liberal.
These all mean things.
They could be post-liberal.
They could be actually fairly leftist on economic policy, but be very anti-war, anti-establishment.
If you're someone like Jimmy Dore, for instance, who is a socialist, for the most part.
I think he self-identifies, I'm not trying to drag Jimmy, I'm a fan of Jimmy, he's great.
But he's anti-establishment, calls it the war machine, and we agree on the corruption of the Uniparty, Democrats, Republicans, but we're all right-wing.
You can be pro-choice, you can be pro-life, you can be pro-progressive tax, you can be pro-flat tax, doesn't matter, you're right-wing.
So you have this disparate group of people who are anti-establishment, all called fascist.
That is incorrect.
On the right, however, you have the correct assessment that whether or not these people self-identify as communists, they vote and support the same thing.
Now, of course, the left makes that argument about the right.
They say, yeah, see, you're saying you're not a fascist, but you're supporting fascism.
Incorrect.
Many libertarians that are called fascists hate Donald Trump with a passion and are accused of having Trump derangement syndrome.
We identify these situations when they arise.
But you end up with progressive leftists who are socialist and or not just liberal, but they will Regardless of Joe Biden actually get behind the policies and defend them for their policies.
I will give you an example.
Kyle Kalinske.
He's gotten the today and yesterday.
He really went off in such a way that I find to be horrifying and evidence, at least in this one instance, is an example of what I'm trying to say.
Kyle Kilinski said, The original press conference from the New York Attorney General laying out the details of the fraud case against Trump was overwhelming.
Anybody who thinks this is a witch hunt is either totally ignorant to the facts, lying, or has full cult brain.
To which Carl Benj... I said, I tweeted in response, this is what we are up against.
No trial needed, judge just decides because the government said so in a press conference.
I'm actually surprised that Kyle supports rule by decree and summary judgments without trials.
The New York Times reported that the judge said effectively deciding there was no trial needed to determine that Trump had committed fraud and that his organizations should be dissolved.
Kyle made several comments about the value of Mar-a-Lago, as have many on the left, and they're just lies.
They're wrong.
And that's crazy to me.
You know, on Tim Guest IRL, we're not perfect, we're not geniuses, we're just people, and we have varying different ideas, and I'm often wrong, guests are often wrong, and we try to be right, and our audience, they watch, they comment, and sometimes correct us.
But you will find arguments.
For instance, Carl Benjamin and I fiercely debated the death penalty.
We did not agree.
We are ideologically opposed.
I oppose the death penalty, will never be convinced to support it.
Sorry, have a nice day.
And people make assumptions about what my views are because there is a predominant anti-death penalty and a dominant pro-death penalty.
Kyle Kalinske doesn't understand how property values work.
Many people are tweeting that Trump over-inflated the value of his property, defrauding his lenders, which is a lie.
Why?
Anybody who's bought property knows that The banks, they order a third-party appraisal.
The appraisal then determines the value, and if the value's not correct, then your loan is no good.
Plus, there's inspection periods, there's a whole bunch of... There are brokers that represent each, and sometimes both, and there's disclosures for all this.
Nobody was harmed.
But the point here is not so much to rehash a story I already covered, but to point out, Kyle Kalinske is a communist.
Now look, What I mean to say here is, Kyle Kalinske has leftist political views and ideologies pertaining to how we distribute resources, and he also believes in authoritarian rule by decree as so long as the government says so.
That is, in essence, communism.
And perhaps it's fair to say, Andy is correct in that, it's a bit of an umbrella.
But we're talking about a group of ideologies pertaining to class-based views, critical class theory, gender theory, and race theory, for which Kyle Kalinske would fall under, combined with authoritarian rule by decree.
This is a representation of communism in all of its forms as it has existed, or I'm sorry, I should say, as they tried to make it exist.
In the interest of self-preservation, even libertarians, so-called, must accept this.
Take power or be prepared for show trials for everyone.
Trump is only their test case.
Everyone else is next.
This is the point.
Fine, call Kyle Kalinske an authoritarian.
He's saying because the Attorney General gave a press conference, it's overwhelming and if you disagree, you're an occult.
Okay, I think Trump may have committed crimes, for sure.
I think there should be a trial.
Oh wait, I'm sorry, this is not a criminal case.
I think Trump may have lied or something.
Fine.
There should be a trial and an opportunity for his team to make their defense.
However, Kyle Kalinske is now in support of a judge sanctioning lawyers, not to mention all the people on the left who support the prosecution of Trump's legal team.
Jenna Ellis had no reason to be charged.
In the charging documents in Jordan, she's charged on counts one and two, which were basically just being part of a conspiracy.
That's it!
Literally, because she's a lawyer, she's part of a conspiracy.
What did she do?
She offered Trump legal advice.
Yes, this is insanity.
Call it authoritarianism, fine.
I say when you combine critical theory with authoritarianism, you are talking about a facet, a form of communism, and I think it's fair to say they're communists.
They are not libertarians.
They are not saying things like, we want to be hippies on a farm.
They're not saying, I think we should share resources and have community ownership, but we need to have the rights of the individual.
No, they're saying outright, it doesn't matter.
The lady gave a press conference.
That's enough.
You're in a cult if you don't agree.
Wow.
It's funny when they say that about me.
My position has never been, if you disagree with me, you're in a cult.
My position is, if you blindly march in lockstep, regardless of the evidence, You're an occult.
There's more to it than that.
I refer to it as the cult because, I don't know, there's videos of them sitting around with their hands up chanting and things like that.
Here's your data.
The 2016 electorate.
Red is Trump.
Blue is Clinton.
This is a dual axes graph showing the social and identity dimension as well as the economic dimension.
What you find is that the people who vote for Trump are I guess if you were to find the bulk of it, centrists.
That's right.
Are they far right?
They're not actually far right economically.
They are opposed to the social and identity views of wokeness.
Unsurprising.
They oppose the cult.
See?
Take a look at this.
You have actual communists voting for Donald Trump!
I'm not kidding.
On the economic dimension, you actually have several people who are super far left who are in the Trump camp.
Why?
I don't know.
I would probably fall here in the slightly left of center economic position, but away from the social identity dimension.
Probably not all the way up to the far end, but closer to the middle.
What you see for Hillary Clinton on this graph is that the bulk of Clinton voters are clustered in one space as far left and as woke as possible.
That's why we say communists.
It is not correct to assess the disparate economic views and different views on race and social identity because you actually have, even among Trump voters, a range from 0 to 1.
So it goes from 1 to negative 1.
So you have center.
It's mostly 0.75 to 1.
Basically, Trump voters are opposed to social identity issues in the way that Democrats are in favor of them.
But you can see that many of the Trump voters, a large portion, are still somewhat in agreement on many of these issues.
For the left to refer to all of these people, As in a cult, despite the fact that they're actually center economically and not even absolutely opposed to wokeness.
It's incorrect.
You have people who are economic leftists, you can see on the left.
Now, among the Democrat voters, do you have people on the right?
A spattering of some.
But they're moderately on the right economically.
Moderately.
I'm saying outright, Trump has voters who are as far left as possible, and even a few points that reach out into the far right.
This is economics, not social issues.
Trump voters, there are even some... These are fascists down here, by the way.
Trump even has voters who overlap with Democrats.
To be fair, Democrats also have voters that overlap with Trump.
Of course that's the case, because I'm not talking about absolutes.
My point is this.
It is.
If you look at it, you can see two bulks.
You can see that Democrats reach out into a similar space away from identity issues.
We know this to be true.
The core, the largest voting bloc for Democrats in 2016 was as far left and as far woke as possible, whereas Trump's base was actually much wider in terms of economics, but opposing wokeness.
My point.
Yes, in the simplest of terms, it is silly to refer to literally every single leftist as a communist.
The problem we have is that go to any democrat and ask them, what is a woman?
99% of the time they will say, why are you asking?
What's your definition?
I mean, these definitions don't make sense.
We get it.
You're in a cult.
Go to the average person who is considered right and you will get deep criticism of Donald Trump.
You will get deep support for Donald Trump.
You will get a lot of concern over Trump's foreign policy and a lot of support for his foreign policy.
Now I understand there are many Democrats that could provide something similar but what I am talking about is a generality and an inversion.
What I'm saying is Typically among the quote-unquote right as exemplified by Tim cast IRL.
We have hippy-dippy Ian who doesn't really fall anywhere He's not conservative.
He's not necessarily liberal, but he's probably more liberal than conservative We have some people who are deeply conservative some who are just libertarian Phil Labonte for instance is mostly just libertarian Luke Rudkowski frequent guest rags on Trump all the time But this is the quote-unquote, right?
When we bring on high-profile personalities on the left, they tend to all march in lockstep.
They agree.
They don't give interviews.
They avoid these hard conversations.
They tend to just parrot whatever it is the machine is saying, even if it's contradictory.
How is it that they say, Tim Pool used to be liberal, but now he's right?
Well, it's because the left went nuts.
Right?
So I say something like, war is bad.
And they go, yes, war is bad.
Ten years later, we're at war in Ukraine.
And I'm like, wow, war is bad.
And they go, you're a Russian propagandist and far right.
That's my point.
I think this graph sums up basically what I'm trying to say.
It is a generality to call everyone on the left a communist, but to be fair, to Andy Ngo's point, I'm not saying that anyone you ever meet on the left will be a communist.
I am saying, however, many of these people refuse to speak up, refuse to speak out, to challenge what is overt communism, which is progressive values beaten into people with authoritarianism, That's how I'm describing it.
This distribution of wealth by force and decree by government.
That is a tendency among the left.
And I think to see Kyle Kalinske espousing this shows it.
Kyle Kalinske, who once defended Sargon of Akkad and said, no, come on, stop insulting him.
He's not a bad guy.
And I liked Kyle for that.
But to see these people come out and just start doubling down on rule by decree?
Fine, call them whatever you want.
Maybe it's not communism.
I just think if they're authoritarian progressives, we call them communists.
They believe in critical theory?
Call them communists.
Call them whatever you want.
Neomarxism, neocommunism, authoritarianism.
Fine, whatever.
The point is the same.
It is an authoritarian cult.
That's what it is.
The Trump supporters?
Please.
If you could only get them to agree on things.
Certainly Trump has his core base that believe crazy things.
That's true.
But that's the minority!
And that's what I mean by a generality and inversion.
It is the minority of people on the right who are cultists for Trump.
It is most people on the right who actually argue about it all the time.
And it's what the left defines as the right wing.
And it is the majority of people on the left who march in lockstep behind ideas with no logic behind them.
Ultimately, what you'll find, if you're on the left, they'll say the same about the right.
If you're on the right, they'll say the same about the left.
Okay, but Donald Trump did not bring out the military.
Donald Trump did not mercilessly beat, arrest, and hunt down Antifa.
He didn't do any of these things.
Donald Trump didn't actually go after Hillary Clinton.
Some say he should have.
The left is doing all these things.
Donald Trump didn't... Republicans aren't prosecuting Democrats.
Nobody... Republicans didn't go after Hunter Biden.
They could have.
They didn't.
It's amazing, isn't it?
That's my point.
I think I'm mostly just upset to see what Kyle Kalinske's become.
Because it's a shockingly authoritarian stance for him to take.
And it is what it is.
This is what we're up against.
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.
Another day, another viral video.
This one showing several fathers who don't know the birthdays of their children, don't know the schools the children go to, don't know who their teachers are, and don't even know the color of their children's eyes.
It's a sad state of affairs.
I'm gonna play this clip for you and then talk about the Sodom and Gomorrahfication of this country.
Just another example.
You ready?
Let's play.
unidentified
What is your son's birthday?
No, that's a good one.
That's a really good one, because I don't know.
You really don't know his birthday?
No, I don't know his birthday.
Do you consider you guys pretty close?
Yeah.
What is your daughter's favorite subject in school?
Social study.
Is that true?
No.
What grade is your daughter going into?
Ninth grade.
What's the name of your daughter's school?
Ash Creek Elementary School?
No.
River Creek?
No.
Something creek.
No.
What color are your daughter's eyes?
Brown.
All right, let's look.
That is incorrect.
They're blue.
I have a brown-eyed daughter, though.
What is your daughter's birthday?
May 17th.
Oh, no, it's the 14th, and I don't know what year.
I will say first and foremost, they only show one mother.
They ask several men and the men get it wrong.
They show one mother who just gets it all right, but I'm sure there were men they interviewed who got things right as well.
However, my commentary here is that this exists at all.
You don't know who's teaching your kids.
You don't know the name of their school.
You don't know their birthdays.
This is what I mean by the Sodom and Gomorrah-ification of this country.
I know a lot of people have said it in a much more bombastic way because, oh man, the lewd and lascivious behavior that's taken off, oof.
I saw one video that was apparently, it claimed to have been from Knott's Berry Farm or whatever, and it was like people doing, it was a sex show on stage, and I'm just like, I don't know if that's real, but I kind of believe it.
And this is what's happening.
What's happening is, these guys don't know anything about their kids.
Why?
Well, they don't care.
I'm sorry, don't give that to me.
Don't come to me and say, don't you say I don't care.
Bro, if you don't know your kid's birthday... Okay, fine, fine.
Okay, fair point.
If you don't know your kid's birthday, it slips your mind.
It's not something you think about every single time.
I'll give you that one.
But the dude who didn't know his daughter's birthday was the previous day?
They don't care.
Now here's where I get serious.
What's the name of your child's teacher?
Do you not know?
Okay, I'm sorry.
Look, I know.
Everyone always goes, you don't have kids Tim, you don't have kids.
I'm like, dude, you don't know who's teaching your kid.
Why do you think it is that people's children are turning into pink haired communists?
Because they don't know anything about the school.
They don't know the name of the school and they don't know who the teacher is.
I'm not saying it's everybody.
I'm saying it shouldn't happen at all.
What are these guys doing every day that they don't know these things about their children?
I certainly believe that many of these people deeply care about their children, obviously, but it really does make you wonder why this video is going viral.
I mean, how many videos?
It's got 3.5 million views and that's just on this one clip.
This thing I've seen shared around by a bunch of different accounts.
It's got probably 10 plus million.
My question for these guys, what do you do all day that you don't know the color of your daughter's eyes?
What are you doing with your daughter walking down the street right now and you don't look at her eyes and you don't know the color?
That's crazy to me.
Now look, I mean, maybe some people got better memories than other people.
I know the eye color of most of the people that I talk to and work with, and that's not even something I care about.
My family members, yeah, I could describe them in great detail and know all their birthdays.
It's crazy to me to think that a person wouldn't know the birthday of their child.
So what happens?
As these parents detach from their children, probably the plan, if we consider this a component of the great march through the institutions, You have the effort to separate the child from the parent.
We're seeing this now in schools where they're saying children should be liberated from their parents.
It's insane.
But it is an effort of communism to separate a child from their traditional values and from their parents.
And parents seem to be totally fine with it.
Send the kids off to school and don't think about them.
So the children grow up knowing their parents don't care, don't know anything about them, and they appear to be just some kind of arbitrary authority above them.
They don't know their birthdays.
They don't know their schools.
These kids are just like, my dad doesn't care.
Do you think these kids hearing this are thinking to themselves, my dad loves and cares about me?
Or do you, uh, do you think they're thinking like, yeah, my dad doesn't care.
Cause I'll tell you this, I'm willing to bet these kids, when they go hang out with their friends and family, they're saying things, or I'm sorry, with their friends and their friend's family, they're saying stuff like, psh, my dad doesn't care anyway.
Who cares?
Let's go party.
But once your dad get mad, your grand, psh, my dad doesn't care at all.
He doesn't even want to left.
Yep.
You send your kids to a school where you effectively ignore them eight hours a day, and then expect your kids to be like, my parents care deeply about me.
The modern schooling system is busted.
Now, don't get me wrong, if you're a parent, you know your teachers, you know your kids' teachers, you know the school they're going to, it's a specialty school, you drop them off, you say, you know, tell Mrs. So-and-so, say hi, and then we'll pick you up after school.
There are a lot of parents that are sending kids to public schools that do care about their kids.
But the problem is, we as a society have begun to use school as a daycare instead of actually taking responsibility for our kids.
Why?
Easier.
That's reality.
Do you want to work on a farm all day?
Harder.
You stub your toe, you get an infection, you die.
Life was rough back then.
And the work we did was close with our family, and our kids did work with us to help us survive.
But now we have technology, and it's like, listen, if you go to school, and the school looks after you for eight hours, I can work, make ten times the money, and then we live like kings.
That's the reality.
I go out to eat at a burger restaurant, I mean, come on, McDonald's.
A king.
400 years ago, did not eat so well.
I'm not kidding.
The fact that you can get a chicken sandwich with french fries and specialty sauces.
Oh, I know the preservatives are bad and all that stuff, sure.
But in terms of the variety, how about this?
A local Thai food restaurant.
The fact that you can go in, or an Asian fusion, and you can get orange chicken.
I mean, wow.
Kings did not live so well.
So we make these sacrifices for these luxuries.
Is it worth it?
Look, I'm going to tell you, I don't know.
Some people are going to say society would not permit.
There is no circumstance where I can just bring my kid to work.
Totally get it.
My argument is we need to shift this culture and allow children to be with their parents and learn from their parents.
For what purpose did you learn about, I don't know, like cellular mitosis or something?
I was playing poker and I asked, like, when was the last time mitosis came up in your daily activities?
And everyone laughed.
And I was like, so why did we send you to school to learn something that doesn't matter?
Serious question.
Why didn't we teach you about the practical realities of living?
I think it's fine to teach kids basic stuff about cellular biology or whatever, but it's not relevant to the survival and expansion and success of the human race.
Where we are now, kids who think their parents don't care, and kids are being raised by other kids.
An important point that I think y'all parents need to hear and understand.
Who does your child become?
Well, you may notice when you have kids, your kids imitate you.
They love to imitate you.
Because it's what kids do.
They're learning.
They're trying to figure out how to be proper human adults.
And there is no respect among their peer group for teachers, for the most part.
And the kids who work with the teacher are insulted for it.
What ends up happening?
I'll tell you.
Kids learn from kids.
And that creates fractured generations.
It creates the Millennial Woke Problem!
Instead of learning from an adult, or a grandfather who fought in World War II, Millennials went to school and learned from other Millennials.
That's like making a copy of a copy.
You're gonna get some broken and fractured worldview because the parents weren't there to provide proper guidance.
Now, the truth is, many of these millennials were actually given a certain degree of guidance.
Me, I was homeschooled.
Maybe that's why I'm lucky.
Homeschooled before kindergarten, from a very, very, very early age, and was learning basic, you know, reading and writing well before kindergarten, and math and long division and multiplications before kindergarten.
And then we did a correspondence thing for high school, which was mostly self-learning, but I worked at the family business and learned a lot from my family.
I see a lot of people just go to school and their parents give them very little guidance.
These kids learn the basics of social behavior from children.
And so this is the problem with modern schooling and why homeschooling is better.
They make the argument that if your kid is homeschooled, they will be socially maladjusted.
Wrong.
Children should be learning from adults.
Homeschooling is better.
And they say, yeah, but homeschoolers are weird.
Yes, only to the degenerates.
A kid who learns from another kid?
That's like, imagine this.
Imagine a dude from France and a dude from Spain.
French dude speaks French.
Spanish dude speaks Spanish.
They meet.
Neither of them speaks each other's language, but they both learned a little bit of English.
I've personally experienced this.
I had three roommates from three different European countries.
Their second language was English.
So when they communicated with each other, they created a weird insular English among themselves.
Because here's what happens.
If you're talking as a native English speaker to someone who doesn't speak English, and they say, eh, how do you say, eh, the pizza?
The, and you're like, oh, pizza, right?
Pizza.
unidentified
Yeah, yeah, pizza, and the, the thing, only a pizza, the thing.
Right, I can understand why you wouldn't, you might not know the English word for mushroom or whatever.
I don't know what accent I'm even doing.
My point is, non-English speakers, like, what's that word?
Here's what ends up happening.
These dudes, who use English as a second language, make up words!
It's fascinating.
One guy's like, talking to the, you know, like, German guy's talking to the Spanish guy and he's like, uh, how do you say, uh, eh, uh, it's probably more of like the Spanish sounding accent, I don't know, I can't do accents.
But the Spanish guy will be like, what is the thing that like you put on the sandwich?
And then the German guy goes, Flurrgan?
And then the Spanish guy goes, Flurrgan, Flurrgan.
Oh, OK.
Because neither of them are native English speakers.
And so then they come to me and they're like, do you have the Flurrban?
And I'm like, huh?
And they're like, the Flurrban?
And I'm like, bro, I have no idea what you're saying.
But if you take three people who only have a generic understanding of a language and put them in the same room and tell them they can only speak English to each other because it's the only language they have they share, they're gonna make up words.
They're gonna get words wrong and reinforce the wrong word because it conveys the idea to each other they get, right?
Then when they come and speak to you, you're gonna be like, bro, that's not a word.
And they're gonna be like, but that's the word we say.
And you're gonna be like, you got it wrong.
Interesting.
Take children.
They do not have worldly understanding.
Put them all in a room together and tell them to figure it out.
And what's going to happen?
The same thing.
They'll make up weird ideas and develop based on child's interpretations of reality.
There's a viral video.
It shows like 10-year-old kids in World War II speaking about politics.
And people are sharing the video being like, how are these kids so smart?
People are like, these children sound like they're 40-year-old men.
Right, because they were raised by 40-year-old men.
And so, their worldview is built upon that.
That used to be progress that children would learn from.
I think about this with skateboarding.
Think about any sport.
Watch, like, early Olympics.
There'll be a guy and he'll do, like, a backflip.
He'll do, like, a running... He'll do a back layout or a gainer.
And they're like, wow, I can't believe he did that a hundred years later.
They're doing the craziest flippity-dos because people learn from the previous generations.
We stand on the shoulders of giants.
What we're seeing now is the sad reality.
We are no longer offering our shoulders for our children to stand on.
We're telling them, go fiddle about.
And then, of course, what will happen is these kids, one kid's gonna say, George Bush is dumb, and the other kid's gonna be like, yeah, I agree, he's dumb.
They're not gonna know why.
They're just gonna say these things without further thought.
There will be no adult to give them proper context or guidance.
This is why I think homeschooling is so important.
This is why this video terrifies me and saddens me.
The solution?
Recognizing it and turning it around.
So, I don't mean to rag on these people personally, but y'all really gotta be with your kids.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment is coming up tonight at, what do we got, 6 p.m.?
Is it Wednesday?
So 6 p.m.
I think.
Yeah.
Like, the first video is a Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday.
