Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

Oct. 26, 2023 - Tim Pool Daily Show

01:27:21

Lewiston Maine Suspect AT LARGE, Robert Card Named PERSON OF INTEREST, Democrats DEMAND Gun Control

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 Lewiston Maine Suspect AT LARGE, Robert Card Named PERSON OF INTEREST, Democrats DEMAND Gun Control Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Participants

Main voices

tim pool

01:20:59

Appearances

Clips

josh hammer

00:30

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Show episode speakers

Speaker	Time	Text
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		Make sure to go to TimCast.com, click join us, and become a member to support this podcast and all the work we do, and you'll get access to exclusive uncensored segments from TimCast IRL and way more.
		Now, let's jump into the first story.
		Last night in Lewiston, Maine, 22 people were killed, 60 were wounded.
		There's an individual named as a person of interest, Robert Card.
		He is still at large.
		We do not know that this man is the person who committed this horrifying crime.
		There's a lot of confusion, a lot of fake videos, a lot of false statements, and, you know, it's very frustrating.
		I beg people to chill out on sharing these random videos But alas, there are a lot of people on Twitter, on X, Facebook, and other platforms, sharing fake videos intentionally.
		Last night, there were videos of an arrest being made, multiple different videos of an arrest, and everyone was saying- and people just reposted it, reposted it, reposted it!
		There are people claiming that this man is a sex offender.
		The person of interest, Robert Card, is not.
		But let's go through the facts and the details right now.
		It is important that you understand what's going on for those that are in the Boston area.
		This is not just Lewiston, Maine.
		People need to understand that in Maine, there's a serious concern.
		This individual, should he be the perpetrator?
		I believe there's a strong possibility, but let's be very careful.
		This man is a person of interest, that's all.
		You can easily, within a couple hours, I don't know exactly from Lewiston, Maine, but Boston is not far from the more highly populated areas of Portland, and there's already, you know, Boston Reporting is taking this seriously.
		The individual remains at large.
		Schools, grocery stores, they're being shut down.
		There is a serious concern that whoever did this could still be in the area.
		Now, the one thing I think is very important to understand is that there were two different locations relatively far apart from each other.
		So I think this is something we should be very much paying attention to.
		Now, of course, Democrats have spent, have waited no time To come out and start attacking gun rights.
		But what we're learning now about the person of interest is that should this person be the actual perpetrator, then gun control did nothing to stop this individual who should by every right have been stopped.
		Mental health issues, threats, that alone is going to bar you from purchasing a weapon.
		We're also seeing even the Daily Mail lie!
		I love this.
		Saying that the AR-15 is the weapon of choice in mass shootings.
		I have the data.
		It is not true.
		But let's break down the facts, and then, of course, I'm gonna talk about the 2A implications that you're seeing pop up, as well as some of the conspiracy theories.
		Daily Mail reports.
		A highly skilled gunman opened fire on a children's bowling league in a rampage that killed at least 22 people and
		wounded 60 in Maine, in the main city of Lewiston, and is still on the run as a shelter-in-place advisory has
		expanded into multiple towns.
		Residents of both Lewiston and nearby Lisbon and Bodewyn, I think I'm pronouncing that right, I hope,
		have been advised to not go out on Thursday morning as the gunman remains at large.
		Public schools have closed in Lewiston and Beaudoin.
		Beaudoin?
		Is that how you pronounce it?
		And also Portland, the state's biggest city, which is over 30 miles from Lewiston.
		And understand, I mean, this means Boston's within a couple hours drive.
		Police have named previously sectioned Army Reserve Firearms Instructor Robert Card, 40, 40 years old, as a person of interest.
		Card is from Bodouin, and his abandoned car was found in Lisbon shortly after the shooting.
		Now understand as well, there were two different locations.
		So, I'm wondering, after the first incident, was it reported?
		You'd think that'd be big news, and if they didn't stop this guy, he then what, made it to another location?
		The shooter used an AR-15 style rifle.
		Yeah, full stop.
		When they say AR-15 style rifle, what they're saying is rifle.
unidentified		That's it.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		That's all they're saying.
		And they're putting AR-15 style because that just means rifle.
		I mean seriously, they're not telling us anything.
		They say a spare time recreation bowling alley around 7 p.m.
		Wednesday and then nearby It's a small town of about 30,000.
		What was it?
		Cheminji's Bar and Grill.
		Lewiston counselor Robert McCarthy said on Thursday morning the death toll was up to
		22 and the town was struggling to handle this kind of shooting event.
		It's a small town of about 30,000.
		It's on lockdown currently.
		Police say, please stay inside your homes.
		While more than 100 investigators, both local and federal, worked to locate Robert Card, who was a person of interest in the shootings.
		This is Maine State Police on Facebook.
		Survivors have described how they escaped by fleeing down bowling lanes and hiding behind pins as the gunman used an AR-15 style rifle to open fire while children were playing with teenagers among the injured.
		Megan Hutchinson described the horror when her daughter was grazed by a bullet in the bowling alley as they were running away from the gunman.
		We were in the back room, another child came in whose arm had a massive, was bleeding profusely.
		So we barricaded in there and another parent was in the room with me.
		She had a phone call and she called 911, the mother told WMTW.
		Now, again, there's a lot to break down here.
		We have this from CBS News.
		Robert Card, person of interest, has ties to Massachusetts.
		There's a concern here that considering the proximity of a massive urban metropolitan area, he may have already made it.
		And assuming this is the guy, assuming this is the guy, because we don't know for sure.
		We do not.
		But also understand, whoever did this could easily disappear into an urban environment, and that's very, very disconcerting.
		Hopefully, they'll get a handle on this.
		We have updates from CNN.
		Manhunt underway after Maine mass shootings.
		What we know so far, at least 16 people were killed.
		One local counselor said it could be as high as 22.
		An intensive manhunt is underway for the suspect.
		Police are asking residents to shelter in place.
		Authorities are expected to hold a news conference this morning.
		Robert Cardas sought as the person of interest.
		They say the violence added to a list of 565 mass shootings reported across the United States, which is completely immaterial to what we're actually trying to, uh, what we're being concerned about.
		Thanks for the politics, CNN!
		But, uh, to be fair, I will also be getting into politics in a few minutes after we get through the important, uh, update.
		Hannaford Supermarkets, a major Northeast grocery chain, is keeping all of its stores in Maine closed Thursday morning as the search for a suspect continues.
		Some stores did open at the regular times Thursday before learning about the closure, and they're in the process of transitioning people out of the store.
		Federal agencies are assisting in the search.
		Authorities have scheduled a news conference for 1030 a.m.
		So for many of you, by the time you watch this, that will already have occurred.
		Lisbon police chief calls an entire department to help in the manhunt.
		But let's, uh, so this is where we're currently at right now.
		I hope all of you are staying safe, paying attention, and I wanted to make sure that we had a quick update on this, because everyone wants to know, and I think it's important to understand, the shooter is at large.
		But we do have the politics!
		The politics, my friends!
		Of course, of course.
		Raw's Alerts on Twitter.
		It says, according to law enforcement, CARD recently reported mental health issues, including hearing voices and threats to shoot at the National Guard base in Saco, Maine.
		The subject should be considered armed and dangerous.
		Caution should be used if contact is made with card or the vehicle.
		Now, this is very important.
		He's a person of interest.
		That's all we know.
		I would consider taking this information seriously, and I recommend following the advice of law enforcement, shelter in place.
		You don't want to go out and bump into someone like this, but that does not mean this person that they've named is the guilty party.
		They say this.
		Card is a trained firearms instructor believed to be in the Army Reserve stationed out of Saco, Maine.
		According to law enforcement, Card recently reported mental health issues to include hearing voices and threats to shoot up a National Guard base.
		Card was also reported to have been committed to a mental health facility for two weeks during the summer of 2023 and subsequently released.
		Was last known to be operating a Maine registration white Subaru Outback with a black bumper.
		The subject should be considered armed and dangerous.
	Caution should be used if contact is made with Card or the vehicle.
	So, there's a lot of assumptions that have to be made right now as we enter the political space here.
	Because already, before anything's happened, you've got liberals and Democrats coming out and calling for an end to people's Second Amendment rights.
	Ed Krasenstein.
	I strongly recommend you apologize for this tweet and take it down.
	Robert Card, the shooter in Maine. Whoa, whoa, full stop, Ed. In all seriousness,
	I strongly recommend you apologize for this tweet and take it down. Robert Card is only
	named as a person of interest and is not confirmed to have been the shooter.
	This may be the guy, but you have to understand we see photos, they're grainy.
	We don't know for sure if it's him.
	We can't really tell all that much.
	His vehicle was found abandoned.
	There are other possibilities here, okay?
	And I want to be very, very careful, but let me stress, let's say a photo emerged, I'm not going to say this, well, let's just go this route, because people are going to get mad, but I strongly believe we must get the evidence and wait for law enforcement to confirm evidence Even if the media and police say someone committed a crime, it does not mean they did.
	If this is a person of interest, and they have evidence, and they arrest him, good?
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 Moms4America.us today for more information and to secure your exclusive VIP meet and greet tickets.
		See you on the tour!
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		But always be concerned!
		They've named this guy a person of interest, so he may not have done it!
		And if the police arrest him and say, we got him, boys, and the actual shooter's still out there, we are in danger.
		Calm down.
		Secondly, bro, you can get sued into oblivion if you're wrong, posting a guy's photo and saying you know it's him.
		Imagine a scenario where a firearms instructor with an AR-15 is at a bowling alley when a shooting breaks out.
		This instructor runs to his car and grabs his weapon to try and stop the shooter.
		Photos that emerge and people think he is the shooter.
		I am not trying to defend this individual because we don't know enough, but there are many stories.
		There's one very tragic story about a man who was at a mall when an active shooter opened fire and a good guy with a gun returned fire, subduing this man.
		And when the police arrived, they thought the good Samaritan was the bad guy and killed him.
		We have to be careful here.
		It's very irresponsible on the part of Ed Krasenstein, and I believe he should delete, repost it, by all means, make your political point, but to come out right now and say this guy did it.
		But let's read.
		He says, he calls Card the shooter, and says he also repeatedly threatened to shoot up a National Guard base.
		Stop it with the Second Amendment argument.
		It doesn't prohibit us from taking steps to stop this.
		Full stop.
		Those steps have already been taken.
		If you have a mental illness to this degree, you cannot buy a gun.
		You must pass a federal background check everywhere.
		He says, why can't we just have universal background checks?
		We do!
		It's the weirdest thing that they lie about this!
		I just don't understand.
		Why can't we require background checks on all sales of guns, including all sold at gun shows?
		Y'all know already.
		I don't even need to say it.
		But okay, we'll say it for those that don't, because I assume there's many of you.
		You cannot buy a gun at a gun show without a background check.
		This is a lie pushed by people like Ed Krasenstein to erode your right to keep and bear arms when we already have background checks.
		Spoken like a person.
		Never actually bought a gun.
		Or been to a gun show.
		I've been to many a gun show.
		Y'all have probably been to more than me.
		But I've probably been to a couple dozen in my day.
		You can't buy a gun without a background check.
		But we'll break this down and we'll talk about the lies that he's pushing.
		Why can't we regulate AR-15s and similar guns like we do machine guns and sawed-off shotguns?
		Those are already unconstitutional laws!
		No question!
		And it's ridiculous that we're having this argument.
		Why can't we fix our mental health issues in this country?
		Now, that I agree with.
		That I agree with.
		Alright, well, let's break this down.
		Let's walk through this.
		The Second Amendment, when it was written, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
		Back then, and even to this day, private individuals had weapons of mass destruction.
		Thank you, have a nice day.
		Privateers, Corsairs, letters of marque actually in the Constitution.
		The idea was that private individuals owned warships.
		That was normal.
		And the United States, recognizing this, said, we're going to issue letters of marque To privateers, private warships.
		Amazing, isn't it?
		To disrupt enemy supply lines.
		Basically, condone piracy.
		Today, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, these large military contractors are private entities with weapons of mass destruction.
		Who do you think makes the weapons?
		This argument against Second Amendment, what Ed Kresenstein is actually saying is that you, you, the private individual, should not have the same rights as a massive multinational war machine corporation and private individuals for when the Second Amendment was actually written.
		Why can't we have universal background checks?
		You ever been to a gun show?
		Okay, let's break this down.
	What do we have, do we have, we have this from Austin American Statesman.
	Can you buy whatever you want at a gun show without a background checks from two years ago or two and a half years ago?
	Mostly false.
	And I love this game they play because even they don't paint the full picture.
	Joe Biden said you go to a gun show you can buy whatever you want, no background check.
	They're relying on the fact that people like Ed Krasenstein are either evil or ignorant.
	The question.
	Do people like Ed and David Hogg and Harry Sisson, these prominent personalities, do they know they're lying?
	That's the question.
	Because they're lying.
	Let's break it down.
	What the law says about sales at gun shows.
	Advocates for stricter gun control measures ought to talk about the gun show loophole.
	Though some observers say the term is a misnomer, the phrase itself doesn't explain who is and isn't required to run a background check at gun shows.
	Federal law requires that people in the business of dealing in firearms be licensed by the federal government.
	Specifically, the law says that a license is required of a person who devotes time, attention, and labor to dealing in firearms as a regular course of trade or business with the principal objective of livelihood and profit through the repetitive purchase of the sale of firearms.
	The law specifically rules out a required license if a person makes occasional sales exchanges or purchases of firearms for the enhancement of a personal collection or for a hobby or who sells all or part of his personal collection of firearms.
	This can be sometimes a fuzzy distinction, but it sometimes means many sellers do need to have a license.
	Every federally licensed retailer, whether they're selling a gun at a brick-and-mortar store, or a gun show, or sales starts online, must complete a signed background check form from the ATF and get approval from the FBI National Instant Criminal Background Check System.
	We call that NICS.
	Said Mark Olivia, a spokesman for the National Shooting Sports Foundation.
	Gun shows can include either licensed dealers or private sellers.
	So at a gun show, the licensed seller needs to run a background check on buyers, and the non-licensed sellers don't.
	But that is a dramatic, dramatic misrepresentation.
	And anybody who's been to a gun show knows.
	If you walk up to someone and say, can you sell me this without a form?
	They're going to say, have a nice day.
	You are no longer welcome to purchase from me for a variety of reasons.
	And let's break it down.
	The ATF likes to go to gun shows and they like to target anyone who would sell without a background check.
	Because, as they've outlined in this, technically there are circumstances where you don't need it.
	But it is an argument, not a legal guarantee.
	When they say that if you're just selling it privately, part of your collection, you're fine.
	And what happens is, regardless of this, the law says you need a license.
	You can argue in court an affirmative defense that I'm just selling my collection, to which they will respond.
	With a collection as large as this, he's clearly soliciting and engaged in the active sale of firearms, and more than just a hobbyist.
	In which case, you're going to jail!
	How about this one?
	The person you are selling to has a criminal record and you didn't check.
	Felony!
	This is what they don't tell you.
	When you go to gun shows, you almost never, never see a circumstance where there's someone who's not licensed.
	Most gun shows will not allow this, and most sellers will not walk into that trap.
	Now, why is it that you can sell privately, and what is the actual limitation?
	In a place like West Virginia, where, let's say you live in central West Virginia, where your nearest FFL is four or five hours away.
	Your brother, who lives a mile from you, needs a weapon because they've got a coyote problem and their chickens are getting killed.
	The argument from the left would be that you would have to drive, both of you, five hours to do the proper paperwork and transfer the weapon.
	Or one of you would have to get an FFL.
	That is...
	The basic non-background check transfer of a weapon.
	Now if you want to make that argument, I'm going to say that's an absurd scenario you're describing.
	That someone can't just be like to my brother or friend or family member in the middle of nowhere.
	It's an unreasonable restriction.
	But fair point.
	It exists.
	When you go to a gun show, good luck buying a weapon without a background check.
	Because if a person sells a weapon to a person who is not allowed to own a weapon, they've committed a felony.
	What does that mean?
	That is the restriction that no one will sell to a stranger without filing the proper background check paperwork.
	Unless you find someone who wants to commit an illegal act.
	Do simplify.
	When you're buying a gun, basically anywhere.
	And there's also this.
	You are not allowed to solicit for the private exchange.
	So I think this is where they really lie.
	Go to a gun show.
	And my understanding is you're not allowed to sell a weapon to a stranger soliciting for the sale of a gun without a background check or an FFL.
	That is to say, if you go to a gun show and you wave to someone saying we're selling guns, you have now broken the law.
	At least that's how it's explained to me.
	But I'll just put it this way.
	I don't know what they're asking for when they ask for these things, because you can't just buy a gun at a gun show.
	They just keep saying that.
	You then, of course, have this from the Daily Mail.
	It brings renewed calls to ban America's favorite gun, the AR-15.
	They say that, uh, I believe, you know, let me, let me, let me, let me make sure I, I think I have this, uh, here.
	Is this, um, where is it?
	Uh, the America, the weapon of choice for America's mass shooter is what the Daily Mail called it.
	And this is another, another lie.
	Statista.
	Weapons used in mass shootings in the U.S.
unidentified		from 1982 to 2023.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		And guess what?
		It's handguns.
		I'm sick of all these lies.
		Okay?
		If you want to make an argument, there is a circuitous path by which you could possibly buy a weapon without a background check.
		Yeah, okay, dude.
		You can buy a gun on the black market.
		Thank you and have a nice day.
		What are you talking about?
		But they're lying about the prevalence of AR-15s in mass shootings.
		They say AR-15 style rifle to scare you.
		They're basically just saying rifle.
		The left wants to ban semi-automatic weapons.
		And they lie to you Would CNN call it a fully semi-automatic weapon?
		Semi-automatic means one trigger pull, one bullet.
		What they're arguing for, I guess, is what, lever action?
		It's the stupidest thing in the world.
		Okay, you know, they're gonna, no semi-automatic, now everyone's like, lever action, pump action, revolvers, spare me.
		This is all part of the lie to disarm you.
		Let me tell you.
		What's the solution here?
		You should be armed.
		That's the reality.
		Now, I'm not so blind as to not recognize serious concerns that we have with major cities.
		You have a right to keep and bear arms.
		If you're in New York, and you've got a 308 or something, Someone breaks into your house and you fire, that bolt's over-penetrating.
		And it's, it's, it, there's collateral damage, okay?
		You could injure people, but that's your fault, and you should be criminally charged for that.
		That's my view.
		Should people in New York City be allowed to have AR-15 semi-automatic 5.56?
		Should they be allowed to have fully automatic AK-47s?
josh hammer ▲ ● ▼		Hey guys, Josh Hammer here, the host of America on Trial with Josh Hammer, a podcast for the First Podcast Network.
		Look, there are a lot of shows out there that are explaining the political news cycle, what's happening on the Hill, the this, the that.
		There are no other shows that are cutting straight to the point when it comes to the unprecedented lawfare debilitating Yes.
		And what happens if someone uses a fully automatic AK-47 and harms people?
		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. America on Trial with
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		Josh Hammer. Yes. And what happens if someone uses a fully automatic AK 47 and harms people?
		They go to prison for that. If someone breaks into your house and you panic and grab your
		308 and shoot him and that bullet over penetrates your apartment into someone else's apartment,
		you should be criminally charged. That's the.
		You are responsible for everything that is beyond your target.
		It doesn't matter if you're in a city or you're in the country, it doesn't matter.
		You're responsible.
		When you choose to pull that trigger anywhere...
		When you're in the middle of nowhere, you live in a farm, someone breaks in and you defend yourself, you've got very little to worry about.
		But you still have to worry about that.
		That's your responsibility.
		Now, you can make the argument that if there's someone outside of your rural farmhouse who gets hit, you have less of a responsibility because of what is considered reasonable.
		You did not reasonably expect an innocent bystander to be standing outside of your property at 3 in the morning, or something to that effect.
		And you were defending yourself.
		But if you're in New York, you must understand the proximity and the risks you take when you fire higher-powered weapons and rifles in high-density situations.
		I think that you should be responsible for that.
		A responsible gun owner in New York is going to have hollow points and frangible rounds and bird and buckshot.
		Maybe, uh, maybe, maybe something, you know, you know, I don't know.
		I don't want to sit here and tell you what you should have in close proximity, high density situations, but I do not believe barring ownership solves any of these problems.
		And I don't think there's a real argument for it.
		I think what they're basically saying is, look, they're like, you can, you can buy a gun in New Jersey.
unidentified		Yeah.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
		No, you can't.
		Like, sure, they say you can get a concealed carry permit in places like New Jersey.
		They make it impossible to do.
		The Supreme Court recently had to rule on this.
		So if you can't get it, New York recently had a ruling against it.
		Then they come out and say, you can buy a gun at a gun show!
		They're lying to you, okay?
		They're lying.
		You go to a gun show, you're not buying a gun.
		No one's going to sell to a stranger.
		I'm pretty sure that the law says you can't sell to strangers.
		You can't solicit strangers to sell a weapon.
		That's my understanding.
		I'll quadruple check, but correct me if I'm wrong.
		And so when they make this argument that a private seller with a collection can sell it, I'm pretty sure they can't solicit the public to sell.
		So I'm pretty sure that's not true.
		I'm pretty sure in every circumstance.
		And then you have to add on to the fact that no one's going to sell to you because there are so many.
		Holes in which it is illegal to sell to you.
		Meaning, if a person does want to sell to you, and you smoked pot, Feds can go after them for selling to someone who's a known drug user.
		And that's why you have to fill out the background check form.
		Because it's like, well, are you committing a crime?
		Probably.
		And then, turns out the guy you were selling to is an ATF agent, you get arrested anyway.
		But I'll leave it there, guys.
		I hope everyone stays safe.
		We'll talk more about 2A stuff and, you know, whatever.
		But really, just, we got this big breaking story.
		I hope everyone's doing okay.
		My heart goes out to the victims.
		These are always horrifying stories, but a lot of people are just saying, bring back the institutions.
		If this really was the guy, and they knew he was the guy, they knew that he had mental health problems, then what else do we do?
		Next segment's coming up at 1 p.m.
		on this channel.
		Thanks for hanging out, and I'll see y'all then.
		The New York case against Donald Trump is falling apart.
		It's laughably bad.
		But were it not for the absolutely biased judge who hates Donald Trump, it'd be over already.
		But this judge is not allowing what is obviously a bunk case to be dismissed.
		Trump got so mad he stormed out.
		And here we have several interesting circumstances.
		Trump was fined $10,000 for criticizing the judge, and he should.
		And now the judge is threatening him with something worse.
		Speculation is that Trump will be jailed in contempt of court.
		Well, OK, if they want to go that route, they are losing and they are losing miserably.
		Take a look at this story from Forbes.
		Trump ex-fixer Michael Cohen admits to lying under oath and then denies it in testy fraud trial testimony.
		You see, my friends, there's only so much you can do.
		When you are corrupt and trying to paint a picture, but you need to claim multiple different things over a long period of time, your fake witnesses fall apart.
		See, you know, Jenna Ellis, Sidney Powell, some of these other Trump lawyers and personalities pleading guilty, lying.
		See, they either lied in 2020 or they're lying now.
		Here's the problem.
		You get someone like Michael Cohen, who works for Trump, and they want him to flip on Trump.
		So, sure enough, Cohen goes in, facing charges, flips on Trump, and says, I'll say whatever you want!
		Because, you know, he's a pathetic, spineless loser.
		And so, when he does, the problem is, later on, when they need to use a different narrative, you can't use the same witness, but you have to, because this was Trump's guy.
		Simply put, Michael Cohen was asked, In 2019.
		I believe it was 2019.
		We'll go through all, make sure I got the dates right.
		Did Trump order him to inflate the numbers?
		And he says, no.
		Now, because they're trying to get Trump on inflating numbers, they try using Michael Cohen again, and he's like, yes!
		And they're like, huh?
	But didn't you say back then?
	Oh, but I lied back then.
	So you're admitting to committing perjury, and it's like...
	OK, OK.
	Let me slow down and break this down for you because he's denying it.
	But I think this right now shows it's a big scam.
	And after this, their star witness basically says he's been lying half the time.
	You don't even know what he's telling the truth on.
	The Trump lawyers tried, I believe, twice to get this dismissed.
	But the biased judge, a psychopath, in my opinion, is just like, no, no.
	I'm like, dude, any reasonable person can see that this is BS.
	Forbes reports attorneys for former President Trump sparred with the ex-president's former lawyer, Michael Cohen, as he testified for a second day Wednesday in the fraud trial against former President Trump, including by accusing him of perjury after he implicated Trump in the allegedly fraudulent scheme to change the stated value of assets to give Trump the net worth figure he desired.
	Here we go, key facts.
	Cohen served as Trump's fixer.
	Prior to turning against the president and pleading guilty to criminal charges in 2018, took the stand Wednesday after giving damaging testimony Tuesday in which he claimed Trump directed him and then Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg to change the valuation of assets on financial documents in order to reach whatever arbitrary net worth Trump wanted for himself.
	Trump attorney Alina Haba sought to discredit Cohen as a witness in cross-examination Wednesday questioning him after he said he was not actually guilty of tax evasion despite pleading guilty to it in 2018 and getting him to acknowledge that it was the first time he said that in open court.
	Trump attorney Christopher Keist said Cohen has now admitted to perjury And after lawyers for the Attorney General objected to the line of questioning, calling it a circus, Keis said, there's nothing wrong with calling a liar a liar.
	Later in Haba's cross-examination, Cohen also said he was lying under oath in congressional testimony he gave in 2019, in which he denied any recollection of Trump ever asking him or Weisselberg to inflate numbers for financial statements.
	After the court's lunch break, however, Cohen reversed course and denied he lied in congressional testimony after saying he told the truth.
	The about-face led Trump's attorneys to ask the judge to issue a verdict in the ex-president's favor because it would suggest Trump did not play a role in fraudulently inflating assets, as Cohen claimed.
	Which the judge denied, causing the former president to walk out of the courtroom.
	Let me just state it clearly.
	Cohen said Trump did not do this.
	And they said, okay, judge, can you dismiss this?
	And the judge said no.
	Amazing.
	Absolutely incredible.
	Cohen clarified under questioning from the Attorney General's office that he told the truth because Trump did not specifically state to inflate the numbers, but that he speaks like a mob boss and I knew what he meant.
	Either way, Cohen has admitted in court Donald Trump never instructed this.
	Anything else would be Cohen's interpretation of a statement.
	You know, if Trump said something like, eh, it's too bad we don't have higher numbers on our buildings, you know, then my net worth would be a billion plus, you know, and then leaves.
	And Cohen goes, guys, that's Trump telling us to do it.
	No, it's not.
	Unless Trump told you to do it.
	And Cohen admits he did not.
	Here we are.
	I think this just ripped the heart out of the case.
	Now, the reporting is that Donald Trump storms out of the courtroom.
	Why?
	He's been proven innocent.
	Cohen said he did not say to do it.
	He said he lied to Congress under oath.
	And now he's saying, yeah, but Trump's like a mob boss.
	So what little evidence they actually have is that Trump may have insinuated and then Michael Cohen interpreted.
	That's it.
	So why is the judge not dismissing this?
	Take a look at this.
	Donald Trump could be talking his way into a jail cell.
	He could be.
	The judges fined Trump $15,000 so far.
	This is corruption.
	Abject corruption from an evil man.
	And Garan is not a judge.
	He is an evil, evil man.
	Anyone who sees this knows two things.
	The first, in my opinion, and perhaps biased, is that these claims are ridiculous.
	Absolutely, Mar-a-Lago worth 18 to 20 million dollars?
	That's insane.
	Ocean to lagoon property?
	Beach to beach?
	In the most expensive real estate market in the country?
	Nice try, man.
	But that's what the judge is saying?
	So first, we can clearly see these charges are ridiculous.
	Second, what they are doing is ripping this country to shreds and they enjoy it!
	Engron claims that Donald Trump's statements could result in violence against his staff.
	Uh, dude, anything that happens is the fault of the perpetrator, not a person who spoke negatively or criticized you.
	Spare me your psycho babble.
	To be fair, you know, Ron Coleman last night was like, Trump walks out of the courtroom and then tells reporters that the judge is partisan or whatever, and it's like, why would you do that?
	And I'm like, he should do that.
	Trump should be speaking out and calling this out.
	It's the only thing he can do.
	Newsweek reports, Donald Trump is at risk of being jailed if he continues to make disparaging remarks about those connected to the $250 million civil fraud suit against the former president.
	Judge Arthur N. Garan fined Trump for a second time on Wednesday after he violated a partial gag imposed to stop him from attacking court staff overseeing the lawsuit accusing Trump of fraudulently inflating the value of his property and assets in financial statements for years.
	Trump has denied all allegations.
	And I do not believe that someone who is running for office can be gagged in this way.
	I believe it is unconstitutional.
	I believe that is a massive violation.
	And Judge N. Garan is part of a seditious conspiracy or standalone complex To destroy the core of this nation and the Constitution and our norms.
	Why?
	Trump's running for office.
	He must speak to the public.
	He's been accused of wrongdoing.
	He must espouse his opinions to the public, for he seeks their vote.
	The judge is trying to deny Donald Trump the ability to communicate with his constituents during a massive election season.
	Judge Engron, were he a fair man, would simply say, Donald Trump has a right to speak as a presidential candidate.
	I encourage him to do so.
	But we will remain highly critical and push back on his statements as we feel they are damaging.
	They could increase the risk of violence, blah, blah, blah.
	That'll be fine.
	You can argue with him.
	Instead, Engron says, I will.
	I will drop the hammer on you.
	On a presidential candidate, the frontrunner, no less.
	During Wednesday's proceedings in New York, Engron ordered Trump to take the witness stand to answer questions about comments he gave to reporters about a very partisan individual sitting alongside the judge in the courtroom.
	An apparent reference to Engron's law clerk, Alison Greenfield.
	Trump had already been fined because he said Greenfield was the girlfriend of Chuck Schumer.
	I think he was trying to be cute, actually, not saying literally.
	Trump was fined $5,000 on October 20th.
	Engrun warned at the time that any further transgressions would be far more severe.
	On Wednesday, the judge ruled that Trump violated his gag order for a second time by publicly attacking Greenfield and fined him $10,000.
	Once again, he warned Trump he could face even greater punishment.
	Don't do it again or it will be worse.
	Who does this guy think he is?
	Who does he think he is?
	Whether the judge will take the unprecedented step of jailing a former president and the frontrunner for the Republican Party and the frontrunner in the general right now, polling at the highest numbers.
	The issuing of a gag order was previously criticized by Trump and his lawyers as an alleged attempt to violate his First Amendment rights.
	Trump has frequently claimed the proceedings in Newark are a politically motivated witch hunt, and he's correct.
	It's really a new frontier for the legal system, and the legal system is really struggling with how to control this man, who has no respect for the rule of law, Jimmy Carrull, a Notre Dame Law School professor, told the AP.
	Trump's legal team has been contacted for comment.
	While taking the stand Wednesday, Trump said his remarks to reporters that there is a person who is very partisan sitting alongside Engron, perhaps even more partisan than he is, were about the judge and Michael Cohen, Trump's former lawyer.
	The idea of the statement would refer to the witness.
	That doesn't make sense to me, Engron said, noting that his law clerk, not Cohen, sits behind him on the bench during the trial.
	So, once again, a person who is very partisan sitting alongside Engron, perhaps more partisan than he.
	Trump said that was Cohen.
	Okay?
	Nah, he's not saying that.
	He's talking about me.
	Uh, fine.
	This is absolutely insane.
	And Garan also noted that Trump and his, uh, that his rhetoric against staff members may result in violence being carried out.
	And here is the leftist's psychotic nonsense.
	That you criticizing someone puts you at fault for what a psychopath might do.
	Call the cops if you've got a problem.
	But as we're witnessing this, Donald Trump is posting quite a bit.
	You see, just this morning, Trump says, the judge in the New York State AG case refuses to accept
	the overturning of his decisions by the appeals court. This is the first in the history of the
	state. He has gone crazy in his hatred of Trump. Also, their star witness just admitted his
	statements were all a big lie. He broke down in court. The radical left judge said he doesn't
	care. He is trying to protect racist AG Leticia James, who has no case, lost the appeal, but has
	a tyrannical and unhinged Trump hating judge. She campaigned for AG on I will get Trump long before
	she knew anything about me. This is judicial misconduct coupled with prosecutorial misconduct.
	And somebody from the state of New York must step in and stop this complete and total miscarriage of
	justice. Oh.
unidentified		Uh-oh.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		Trump's coming after the judge again.
		Is he going to be held in contempt?
		Trump also truthed the radical left judge who should not be handling the fake and fully discredited case brought against me by New York State AG.
		It should be handled by the commercial division, but should never have been brought.
		Fined me $10,000 yesterday under his so-called gag order.
		He is a judge that found me guilty before the trial even started.
		Fact.
		And long before he had the real facts, like Michael Cohen collapsing and choking yesterday under cross-examination and completely admitting that I did nothing wrong, he committed massive perjury at a level seldom seen on the stand before.
		It was like watching the end of the best Petty Mason episode, Perry Mason, where the defendant breaks down and cries, yes, I did it, I did it, I did it.
		The case should be ended now, but this judge and his boss Letitia Peekaboo James will never let that happen.
		He even refuses to accept our big win in the appeals court.
		It is a disgrace to the legal system in the state of New York.
		This is a rigged case.
		And also...
		Donald Trump truthed.
		The New York State Attorney General's case against me is dead, but the radical left judge refuses to end it.
		He just can't let it go.
		Their star witness lied like a dog on the stand today, and then admitted that I did nothing wrong.
		A total sleazebag.
		I want to pause right there.
		Lied like a dog?
		I don't like that language, Trump.
		Don't you be smirching, dogs!
		Letitia James should focus on violent crime, which is out of control.
		So unfair.
		I don't even get a jury trial.
		A blight on the New York State judicial system.
		Businesses are watching all over the world and never coming in, only moving out.
		The governor should get involved.
		Election interference by my political opponent.
		Well, I have to wonder if they're going to arrest Donald Trump, hold him in contempt and put him in jail for attacking the judge.
		Now, I think the judge is mostly saying, don't go after my staff.
		But I wonder if these three statements from Trump, which are pretty bold statements, could result in him being jailed.
		Now Trump has an unlikely ally, the ACLU.
		Trump's gag order in federal case is unconstitutional.
		The Civil Liberties Group argued that the directive from a D.C.
		federal judge violates Trump's First Amendment rights and the public's right to hear what he has to say.
		And I don't see why that argument would not also apply in New York.
		But this one's more specifically about the federal case.
		They say for four years during President Donald Trump's presidency, the American Civil Liberties Union was one of his biggest courtroom adversaries.
		Now the group is taking his side in a high-profile fight over what Trump can say as a criminal defendant.
		The ACLU on Wednesday stepped into the battle over Trump's federal gag order, arguing that U.S.
		District Judge Tanya Chutkan violated Trump's First Amendment rights, as well as the public's right to hear him, when she issued the order earlier this month.
		Chutkan is presiding over the criminal case Special Counsel Jack Smith is pursuing against Trump for trying to overturn the 2020 presidential election.
		Quote, the obvious and unprecedented public interest in this prosecution, as well as the widespread political speech that it has generated, will continue to generate, and will continue to generate, only underscores the need to apply most stringent, the most stringent First Amendment standard to a restraint on the defendant's speech rights.
		The group urged Chutkan to re-evaluate her order, calling it both vague and overbroad, with aspects of its meaning unknown and perhaps unknowable.
		One particular uncertainty the ACLU seized on was the meaning of Chutkan's prohibition on statements that target Smith, his prosecutors, court personnel, defense attorneys, or witnesses.
		Reading the order, defendant cannot possibly know what he is permitted to say and what he is not.
		Trump's lawyers opposed the gag and have appealed to the D.C.
		Circuit Court of Appeals.
		Chitcon has temporarily lifted the gag order while she mulls a request to keep it on ice during that appeal.
		Trump has also run into trouble in connection with a separate gag order issued by a New York judge.
		This we know about.
		But I do find it all to be just oh so interesting.
		What do we know about these cases?
		They are bunk nonsense.
		They are misrepresentations.
		They are lies.
		And we are watching it all go down in real time.
		What should we do?
		And how do we handle this?
		I don't know that the actual intention here is to put Trump in prison.
		I think the gag orders... Here's what the court cases accomplish.
		Draining Trump's resources.
	And the gag orders seek to stop him from generating press and campaigning.
	But it seems that they have made a terrible blunder.
	They don't know how to play this game.
	You know, in poker, people think bluffing means just acting like you have a hand and throwing chips on the board.
	That's not entirely how it works.
	You have to have a line of play.
	You want your opponent to think, he bet here, he checked here, he bet here, he might have this.
	If you just keep throwing money at the board, they're gonna be like, he's got nothing, what's he doing?
	Barrel, barrel, barrel, there's nothing on the board, there's no draws, he's full of it.
	You have to be able to actually play a hand.
	Here's the problem.
	They thought that by bringing Trump in, they were going to strain his resources.
	What happens?
	Trump is able to walk out of the courtroom and say, here's the thing.
unidentified		It's a biased judge.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		You got to vote for me.
		And then what happens?
		Trump gets more press than he would have got otherwise.
		Oh, no.
		They were trying to stop him from campaigning and they've only helped him do it.
		Now Trump can rally every day he's in court to the entirety of the press sector.
		The press corps.
		And, uh, he gets that message out.
		So what do they do now?
		In their panic, morons like Engron then have to go gag order and shoot guns like gag order.
		Oh, Trump is able to rally more support because of what you're doing.
		They need to strain his resources and stop him from holding rallies.
		But all they did was give him a national platform every single day and put him in the news.
		The worst thing for Donald Trump is if people just stopped looking.
		But they can't.
		So what do they do instead?
		Ridiculous gag orders.
		Trying to silence Trump.
		And all this does is backfire.
		And if Donald Trump keeps talking, and they have to then jail him, it is going to be massive!
		Donald Trump's approval rating will probably, his favorability numbers in the polls probably go up another couple points.
		It's not true.
		A lot of people say every time they come after him with his cases, his favorability goes up.
		That's not necessarily true.
		Maybe in some cases there may be a correlation, but Trump is generally just improving.
		I think it's silly to think that charging him is the sole reason why his approval rating is going up.
		No, it's because Biden sucks.
		It's because we're on the verge of World War III.
		The economy is crap.
		They're putting out these numbers.
		They're like, the economy's growing.
		It's growing.
		It's like, dude, ask people how they feel.
		These numbers are meaningless.
		And in fact, they probably piss people off more when you go to someone who's like, I can't afford rent.
		And then you're like, but the economy is doing better than ever.
		We've known this for a long time.
		Stock market numbers, growth numbers, mean nothing to the average person.
		And the left has long brought this up, saying, you know, there'll be like, there's like a meme of like, the depressed looking Wojak, and it's like, stocks reach all-time highs, and the person's like, my pay is down and I just want healthcare.
		That message ain't getting out.
		No, Joe Biden sucks and is leading this country to ruin.
		Donald Trump is coming out and he's speaking and people are saying, you know what?
		It was better under Trump.
		I think even Joe Rogan, Joe Rogan could could tell you his opinion on saltine crackers and they're going to run a headline story about it.
		But Joe said it was undoubtedly better under Trump.
		Who can deny it?
		You'd have, like, if someone comes out and goes, it's way better now under Biden than it was under Trump, everyone's gonna be like, you're lying.
		There's no question that you're lying, and we're done falling for it.
		Trump's not a perfect guy.
		Trump's got his problems.
		And if you don't want to vote for Trump, by all means, don't do it.
		But what we're seeing here with these court cases is pure and abject corruption.
		And I hope, I really do, I hope that when Donald Trump gets elected in 2024, assuming it happens, he appoints a strong attorney general who then begins the process of federally indicting the people who are engaged in this corruption.
		But as we enter the possibility of World War III, who knows?
		Maybe we won't even make it that far.
		You know, Roseanne Barr came on this show with Michael Mao and said there's not going to be an election.
		And we're like, come on.
		Like, maybe we have normalcy bias, optimism bias, but no election?
		Like, there were elections during the Civil War.
		But maybe what she meant was, and I asked her, that, yeah, there'll be an election formally, but no one will believe it's a real election.
		Like Trump will be arrested or something.
		And then it's just like, Trump's removed from the ballot.
		Does anyone really think it's a lie?
		Like, does North Korea have elections?
	Well, technically, yes.
	But we know they're not elections.
	Or maybe war just gets so intense, it's just in the back of everyone's mind, and the system crumbles.
	We'll see.
	I'll leave it there.
	Next segment's coming up at 4 p.m.
	on this channel.
	Thanks for hanging out, and I'll see you all then.
	Gen Z isn't lazy, boomers.
	Just don't understand that hard work isn't enough to live anymore.
	Wrong!
	It's wrong.
	Sorry, Gen Z's lazy.
	It's just that Gen Z doesn't understand hard work.
	Sorry, that's a fact.
	Now, there are a lot of good points made in this viral TikTok video by this young woman, and I think she is correct in a lot of her assessment, but let me just stress, What it means to live is very different from a boomer to someone who is Gen Z. Gen Z individuals have a lot more access to technologies and things that boomers did not have, so what is defined as living is different.
	That is not to say that this young woman is wrong in her assessment about how hard it is to live.
	I agree, but to blame boomers and act like they don't understand, it's not so much that it's harder for you to live, it's that what boomers are describing as living is very different from what you're describing as living.
	What I will say, however, Gen Z is lazy.
	Millennials are lazy.
unidentified		There is an increase in laziness.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		And I mean it.
		I mean it.
		Look, man.
		People crossed the ocean on boats, landed on shores with literal nothing.
		And I think 20% died on the way here.
		I was thinking about how crazy it is, like, you've got, uh, like Native Americans, and the more peaceful tribes versus the more barbaric tribes.
		How would you survive?
		Imagine living in open wilderness, no law enforcement, no police, no military.
		You have a small settlement, you have a couple hundred people.
		You build walls around your, uh, around your settlement.
		And every day you worry that when someone rides up on horseback, they may just try to murder everybody.
		And so?
		You have to sound the alarm!
		Halt who goes there!
		How do you trust them?
		It's not so easy.
		You want to talk about what it means to live and hard work?
		People just died back then.
		You'd be out riding your horse, you'd fall off and be dead and gone.
		You'd be walking down a dirt path to trade your wares when a bandit would jump out, knife you to death, take your stuff, and never, they'd never find out who did it.
		People just died a lot back then.
		I mean like way back.
		Let me play this video and we will have this debate and we'll discuss what it means to truly work.
		Boomers don't understand what Gen Z is going through.
		I think that's fair, but Gen Z is lazy.
		Sorry, not every single Gen Z person is lazy.
		I am saying that the majority of Gen Z people are lazy.
		And it's not- I don't- I don't blame Gen Z. Actually, for that, I kinda do blame boomers.
		And then even after that, it's not so much boomers, but what humans have done.
		Let me play this video.
		Let's roll.
unidentified		Let's play this video for sure.
		Okay, the previous creator has her stitches off, but if you haven't seen her stuff already,
		she's one of my favorite creators on this app, and I think we need to talk about this,
		because I am a Gen Z who has boomer parents, and what she says is true.
		Boomers are stuck in the past so hard that they can't even comprehend that us, like,
		Gen Z and millennials, it's not just that we're lazy and we don't want to work hard,
		it's that even if we worked as hard as possible, we still can't, like, afford to live right now.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		Wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong.
		You can easily afford to live.
		It's called, uh, she's gonna, she gets into the numbers, and she's like, you take home $2,300 a month if you're lucky, and it's like, Go live somewhere else.
		There's a lot to break down.
		There's a lot to break down.
		And we'll talk about what it means to have hard work.
		But let's play the video.
unidentified		Hard work isn't enough anymore.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		It is.
unidentified		And I hear these comments all the time as someone who's like parents, friends, or all that age.
unidentified		They think that we're all just lazy.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		You are.
unidentified		And they refuse to realize that like times have changed.
		It is not the same as when you were our age.
		Just to start, let's look at the rise of the average home value over the years versus the rise of the average household income.
		As compared to when boomers were our age and able to easily afford rent.
		So, boomers would have been our age sometime between the 70s and the late 80s here.
		So, this is the average price of housing or a house at that time, and this is the average income of the household, right?
		Here it is now.
		Do you see the difference?
		Do you see?
		Like, yes, it was hard back then.
		Not, it's just not even comparable.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		Okay, oh man, there's so much to break down on this.
		If you actually do the numbers, you see that the rate of growth for the price of homes versus income, it's a rate of about 10x.
		As of right now, it's actually slightly less than 10x, which means, yes, if you were making like 50k, the cost of houses were going up, but that's not the issue.
		To argue that the price of homes has increased faster now than it was back then, she's close to making an apt argument, but she's missing the point.
		This is not talking about the cost of the house versus how much income you make.
		It's the increase in wages with the increase in the cost of the house.
		That means for boomer parents who are in the 80s, you were looking at X dollars versus X times Y for the cost of a house.
		Whereas today, it's X times Y plus or whatever.
		So anyway, my point is growth in the cost doesn't actually describe the current values.
		So growth is relatively meaningless, because if you actually do the number by growth, you'd see that the growth is lower today than it was in the 80s.
		My point is, that's not a good argument to make.
		It's not completely wrong.
		But let's talk about the cost of houses.
		First, I will say, fair point.
		Houses are very expensive.
		It's harder to buy a house today, especially if you're a millennial.
		Two things to consider.
		Supply and demand, mass migration, and feminism.
		With doubling the workforce towards the end of the late 70s, getting more and more women in the workforce, this created a massive supply of workers with a limited demand.
		I'm sorry, a massive demand for work with a limited supply of jobs.
		Sorry.
		So you have a company.
		Ten openings.
		Five men are looking for work.
		And they're like, look man, all these companies need me, and what are you going to pay me?
		When it's only men.
		And I'm not saying that as an argument against them in the workplace.
		This is an economic point.
		When you have a bunch of job openings, the business says, I need you to work here.
		And they go, I can work wherever I want.
		I'll pay you $10 an hour.
		You know what?
		I'll take the offer.
		But there's 17 other jobs.
		I'm going to go ask them.
		Then go to the other company and say, dude offers me $10.
		I'll give you $11.
		Let me go back.
		He says $11.
		I'll give you $12.
		Because they desperately need the limited supply of labor.
		Double the labor overnight, ladies!
		And what happens?
		Now there's ten people for ten jobs and they're like, take it or leave it.
		I've got people sending in applications non-stop.
		I don't need you.
		Who wants to work for $3 an hour?
		Then incorporate mass migration.
		Now you've got a limited supply of housing with a massive demand, a limited supply of jobs with a massive demand, and you wonder why this is happening.
		I'm not blaming Gen Z for this.
		I'm blaming boomers, the silent generation, and current Democrats for these policies.
		But anyway, I'm not trying to say that with her argument about the increase in the cost of houses that she's completely wrong.
		I'm saying the argument doesn't quite make sense.
unidentified		The second chart I did steal from Madeline.
		Here's the average tuition for college, right?
		And the average full-time 40 hours a week job.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		Okay, let me pause right there.
		Did you actually pull up the numbers for how many boomers went to college?
		You're not comparing apples to apples, okay?
		Apples to oranges.
		First of all, college is a guarantee you're in debt and you lose money.
		Anyone who told you otherwise lied to you to sell you a package.
		They wanted you to take a loan out.
		So if your argument is, look, tuition's going up, no.
		The argument should be, the way you got ripped off, yeah, sorry, boomers, they convinced you to take out massive debt.
		This is why I'm in favor of student loan forgiveness.
		My plan?
		Abolish interest rates, but you gotta pay back the principal.
		Money was given, money was spent, money must be paid back, but interest rates?
		Ya gone.
		Anybody who's already paid more than the principal of their loan gets the remainder tax credit.
		So, if you took out $50,000 in loans, and you've paid down $70,000, that $20,000 excess is forgiven in your taxes, so when you file, bigger refund.
unidentified		Even do in college, so I don't know why this is relevant, but here's when boomers existed, and here it is now.
		It stops at 2010, too.
		It's probably gone up since then.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		And you know what?
		You know what's a component of that?
		Boomers were less likely to go to college.
		The reason for this is after World War II, the greatest generation could raise a family, raise multiple children off a high school diploma.
		Boomers were raised knowing you did not need college.
		Colleges then had a problem.
		Not everybody wanted to go, and they needed to get more people in.
		So what happens?
		The prices went down.
		They said, or the prices remained lower.
		They said, hey, you want to go to college?
		And people were like, nah, I don't need to.
		And they were like, Well, why don't you come?
		I mean, you can enrich yourself, and you can learn things.
		Okay, how much does it cost?
		100 bucks?
		Nah, too expensive.
		Have a nice day.
		Now, everyone is told you have to go to college, and they're banging on the door saying, please accept me, and the college is like, you can come.
		200 grand.
		And they're like, I'll figure it out.
		And they rush to get a loan, drown themselves in debt because they're desperate to get into college.
		Supply and demand answers so much of this.
		Again, not saying she's wrong about everything.
		She is bringing up points, but boomers did not need college.
		Now, we are seeing this inversion.
		We are seeing businesses say, no college degree necessary, just experience.
		Can you do the job?
		Wake up call.
unidentified		Let's do the actual math to prove that you cannot budget in this economy.
		For argument's sake, I was making $20 an hour working 40 hours a week, right?
		That's twice what minimum wage is in my state.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		Minimum wage is completely immaterial to any argument about whether or not you can survive, but let's continue.
unidentified		Let's just pretend everyone's making twice minimum wage for whatever reason, like argument's sake.
		So you're making that much every two weeks.
		Which, here's the math.
		This is your take-home after-tax every month.
		So let's budget it, shall we?
		Average rent in my city for one bedroom is about $2,000, but luckily I live in a shoebox, so after paying for parking, utilities, and all that, it's about $1,500.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		And yes, you need You are choosing to live in a city where you can't make enough money to pay your rent.
		Have you considered moving somewhere else?
		Why do you insist on living in this city?
		I've told this story before.
		I had a friend who was like, I really wish I could do what you do and travel the world.
		And I said, okay, then go do it.
		And they're like, I can't afford it.
		And I'm like, what do you mean you can't afford it?
		I was like, how much do you think it costs?
		I had a buddy of mine.
		He was like, man, I really want to travel.
		I want to go to Bali.
		And I was like, so go.
		And he's like, I can't afford to go.
		And I was like, why not?
		And he's like, bro, it's too expensive.
		And I was like, okay.
		And I pulled up my phone, opened kayak and went trip to Bali in one week.
		$800 round trip.
		And he was like, what?
unidentified		$800?
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		And I was like, did you even check?
		No, just assumed.
		I have this friend who's like, I can't travel the world and report on news like you do, it's so hard.
		And I'm like, dude, it cost me a thousand bucks to go to Spain for two weeks.
		Hostels exist, they're dirt cheap.
		And they go, well yeah, but I gotta pay rent.
		I'm like, pay rent where?
unidentified		What?
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		The hostel's ten bucks?
		No, no, my apartment.
		Your apartment?
		Yeah, I got a really cool apartment in Williamsburg.
		Okay, well if your apartment in Williamsburg is more important than traveling, then of course you can't travel.
		The question for her is, have you not considered going and living somewhere cheaper?
		It exists.
		The problem is, these people want, not need.
		I'm not trying to be a dick, but if you're like, it would be so cool to live in Wynwood, in Miami, it's like, well, good luck affording that.
		You want nice things you can't buy?
		Bro, I'd love to have a flying car.
		They exist.
		I can't buy it.
		You want to live in a nice place?
		It's no different.
		It's an item you want, not need.
		You can choose to go live somewhere where it's substantially cheaper and the economy is better, proportionally.
		But people keep choosing to live in high-demand areas.
		So what happens?
		Everyone wants to live there.
		So you've got apartments that are like, I've got 500 applications.
		I'm just gonna charge what I can charge in this market.
		There's legal restrictions and stuff, but you know, you get my point.
unidentified		parking because you gotta have a car to get to and from work.
		So now we're down to this.
		Then there's food. I only ate about one and a half meals every day.
		So that was 20 bucks for food a day because making meals for one person is expensive.
		20 times 7 times 4 is 560 bucks.
		So knock that off of here.
		And we're down to 654.
		Sadly, we're not done.
		The average student loan cost in the country is about $300.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		So we'll say- And there it is.
		You didn't need your degree.
		You're you're making 20 bucks an hour.
		You can get 20 bucks an hour doing a lot of jobs that don't require degrees.
		And therein lies the big problem.
		Let's just say that $300 student loan debt is immaterial and you've got $654 left over, but let's let her continue.
unidentified		$300 off of that.
		Now we're down to $354.
		Luckily, insurance for cars in Minnesota is only $70, because you gotta have a car to get to and from work every day.
		And thankfully, I drove a hybrid, and I didn't do much driving outside of that, so I only had to fill up my tank twice a month, which was $50 roughly each time.
		Actually more, but we'll round down.
		So that's $100 as well.
		And now we're down to $184, but wait, I have medication that literally keeps me alive that I have to pay for every month, and now that I'm looking at the budget- I'm gonna pause right there and say I don't believe you.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		I, uh, my immediate assumption, and this is my bias, so don't, we don't need to factor into the argument, but I'm assuming she's on some kind of like mind-altering or mood-stabilizing drug she doesn't need.
unidentified		I'm thinking that might be what we should cut out at this point.
		But for now, we'll pretend we want to keep going and knock another 50 bucks off this.
		This is what we're at, but don't forget, we still need basic things like toilet paper, soap, tampons, things like that, so we'll just pretend that's only 50 bucks a month.
		Woo!
		And now at this point we're just praying we never need to go to the dentist or the doctor or replace any clothing or anything bad happens at all like a flat tire.
		But wait, there's still more.
		Because these boomers promised us that it was possible to retire with this much money left at the end of every month.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		No, they didn't.
unidentified		Okay, let's go do our basic retirement calculator.
		We're gonna pretend we want to retire at the age of 67, because that's what they're trying to raise it to now.
		And I'm gonna just pray that I pass at 88, even though every woman in my family has lived well into her 90s.
		Given that I can't budget in a doctor, this would probably be a good bet.
		According to those calculations, I need to be saving this much money per month in order to retire at that age.
		So we'll have to knock that off too.
		And that leaves us with, drumroll please, this much money in our bank account at the end of every month.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		Excuses!
		Excuses, excuses, excuses.
		I love the excuses.
		I never made excuses.
		You know what drives me, uh, makes me so angry?
		When I was younger, hearing from people, I could do it if only I had the money.
		And it's just the weirdest thing to me.
		Maybe it's because I grew up skateboarding, and whether or not you accomplished something had nothing to do with whether you had the money.
		It had everything to do with whether or not you had the gumption and the force of will to do it.
		That is to say, how did I get started doing all of this?
		Did I have a $1,500 apartment?
		Did I make $20 an hour?
unidentified		No, I didn't.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, I'm homeless several times.
		That's so weird, though.
		How did I make it to this point?
		How is it possible?
		I don't have a college degree.
		I didn't even finish high school.
		And then the response I get every time is, yes, but you're the exception, not the rule.
		I say, funny how everyone who goes down this path tends to survive and make it to varying degrees, and everyone who goes down your path complains we're all the exception.
		I reject that.
unidentified		You want to advise us on how to budget this?
		Because I'm thinking maybe taking out the life-saving medication.
		So no, Boomers, it's not that we're not working hard, it's that we don't have any hope or money.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		Now, here's what I actually think.
		What I actually think is a lot of this is the fault of boomers, and the reason why this young woman doesn't understand the world is because she was raised poorly.
		I blame her parents.
		But not just her parents, the majority of the boomer generation.
		Boomers did some awesome stuff.
		They created a lot that resulted in people like me.
		I exist because of boomers.
		So I like a lot of the really great things boomers did.
		That being said, millennials are the worst.
		Gen Z's actually pretty good, I gotta be completely honest.
		You know, if I got a generational bias, Millennials are awful, Gen Z actually kind of alright.
		Could be better, but, you know, fairly alright.
		I swear, it's kind of funny.
		You see, Gen Z is a bit more...
		What's the right word?
		You know, there's a lot of weird woke behaviors in Gen Z and all that stuff, but millennials are substantially worse.
		So here's what happens.
		How does she not know how to survive and navigate the system?
		Her parents didn't teach her to do it.
		So now she's confused about everything going on, and she's got boomer parents criticizing her.
		So what does she do?
		She says, you don't understand how hard it is.
		Yes.
		Both boomers, I would say, boomers are responsible for the attitude of the generations that they have created.
		Ultimately, fault lies with the boomers because boomers created millennials and Gen Z. And to a certain degree, Gen Xers created Gen Z. All the generations, you know, bleed together and stuff like that.
		But ultimately, the point is this.
		If boomers raised us better and were better stewards of this nation, you would not be having this conversation.
		These ideas would not be so prevalent.
		I could sit down with this young woman, guaranteed, and construct a plan in probably an hour that would allow her to retire with a million bucks, that would see her making double her money, 40 to 80 bucks within a couple of years, but she doesn't know how to do this.
		Why?
		Well, she's an adult.
		She went to college.
		She has student loans.
		They did not prepare her for life.
		They wasted her money, dragged her down in debt, and screwed her over.
		The lessons needed to learn to survive are relatively simple and free.
		You don't need money.
		How to survive.
		One thing I often say to people to help them understand this, because when I was 16, when I was 17, this was the craziest thing to me.
		I'd ask people, like, hey, you wanna go do this, do that, and they'd be like, no, I don't have any money, and I don't know how to do it, and it's like, I gotta find a job.
		And I'd be like, what do you need a job for?
		And they'd be like, well, I need money.
		And I'm like, so what do you need a job for?
		Like, you need to make money, is what you're saying.
		And they're like, well, yeah, how else am I gonna do it?
		And I'm like, I don't know, sell cookies?
		What do you mean?
		Like, do a bake sale?
		They're like, huh?
		I'm like, go stand in a street corner and rap!
		Just beatbox!
		People will give you money!
		Ask someone for it.
		Not begging.
		I wouldn't recommend.
		I prefer hard work.
		The point is this.
		I would always tell people, dude, the way you make money is simple.
		You convince someone to give you money in exchange for a thing.
		You don't need a job to do that.
		But the mentality of all of the kids around me when I was growing up was, you have to have a job to get money.
		And I'm like, uh, no, someone has to hand you money for you to get money.
		It could be a friend, it could be a family member, it could be a stranger, it could be someone buying a delicious ice cream bar from you that you've sold.
		You know, it's funny.
	Maybe it's because I grew up in Southside Chicago.
	You got these kids, they're hustlers.
	They go to the store, they'll go to the dollar store, and they'll buy a bunch of candy bars.
	They'll then get boxes and walk around the park and make money.
	It's so crazy to me.
	And they make a lot.
	Now, you know what I don't respect is those kids who'd be like, I'm fundraising for my high school basketball team and we want jerseys and we need money.
	I'd be like, I ain't falling for that one, dude.
	Sell me a candy bar, I'll give you a couple bucks for it.
	It's the convenience of not having to go to the grocery store to find one.
	I'm here at the park.
	You're my favorite.
	My favorite were the guys who would come with the Elotes carts.
	They'd buy a cart, they'd fill it up with corn, parmesan cheese, mayonnaise, and cayenne pepper, and they'd walk up, and for a dollar you get corn in a cup, and it was awesome.
	I couldn't get that anywhere else.
	That guy made money.
	Why?
	He gave me corn.
	And, uh, you know, it really was that simple.
	But you see, people like her say, we're not lazy.
	Okay.
	All right, let me ask you something.
	Would you move out of your apartment, uh, share a studio shoebox, share it to cut your rent in half?
	She said, I live in a shoebox, rent is $1,500.
	Okay.
	How about you get a roommate?
	No, I don't want to do that.
	Okay.
	I equate that comparably to laziness.
	Are you willing to do what you must to survive, save money, sacrifice to do better?
	If you're not, then don't come to me and say you deserve, because life is not fair and life is not easy.
	It's never been.
	That's never been the case.
	How did I survive in Los Angeles?
	Three people living in a studio apartment.
	Rent was a couple hundred bucks.
	There was a closet that was about six feet long and two and a half feet wide, which I was like, you know, honestly, I could sleep in here.
	Basically got my own little private room.
	Is it undignified?
	I don't care if you think it's undignified.
	I've slept on park benches.
	Is that undignified?
	I don't care what you think.
	Because I had a plan and I did whatever I had to do to survive.
	And that meant sleeping in a car.
	Now let me talk about when I got a job at Vice.
	You want to talk about budgeting?
	I'll tell you about budgeting.
	A good friend of mine allowed me to sleep on his couch for 300 bucks a month.
	And that's the easiest and fastest thing I was able to get.
	And so, when I was working at Vice, and I was getting paid probably not as much as they should have paid, let's be honest, Vice didn't pay very well, I said, I am going to save all of this money.
	I was at Occupy Wall Street.
	I had saved $5,000.
	I had it in the bottom of my backpack.
	I have never spent that money.
	And I said, no matter how bad it gets, this money never gets spent because this is the money that keeps me from dying.
	And so, if I needed something to eat or whatever, I'd find an odd job, I'd figure it out.
	And, uh, I actually had a bit more than five, and I was whittling it down, and then eventually started getting donations for the work I was doing in covering protests, and I used that to survive, and it wasn't super easy.
	And there was the kindness of strangers, always, but I'm, I'm, I'm, I'm very, uh, you know, I, I believe in hard work, and I don't like taking handouts to a certain degree.
	But let me ask you, my young friend, Are you willing to sleep on a couch for $300 a month to put that extra $1,200 in your savings?
	How about this?
	You needed $1,000 to get to retirement?
	Have you considered sleeping on a couch, putting that $1,000 per month into a savings account, building that buffer?
	And then, after you've cleared that, guess what?
	We're now looking at, let's say you sleep on a couch for a year, or a couple couches you bounce around.
	And I'm not talking about imposing on people, I'm talking about friends who are like, hey man, I need supplemental income, would you wanna crash on my couch for a couple hundred bucks?
	Maybe, you could let someone sleep on your couch for a couple hundred bucks, bang!
	Now you got a couple hundred more bucks per month.
	The idea that young people are like, I should be able to buy a house right now, it's like, maybe, but none of that matters.
	If you are not willing to do what you need to do to survive, then perhaps it's fair to say boomers are wrong about the challenges you face, but the idea that you should be able to get a college degree, a high-paying job, buy a house, afford for retirement, you're saying, I want it all!
	No, here's what happens.
	Let's actually factor in where she's at.
	Young person, fresh out of college, with student loan debt.
	That's your first mistake.
	If you started working at 18, After four years, I love this analysis.
	You get a job at McDonald's at 18 years old, and you're making a little bit more than minimum wage.
	Most of them, it's like 12 to 15 bucks an hour.
	Within four years of working at McDonald's, you are an expert.
	An expert.
	I don't know about a master, but an expert on McDonald's policy.
	And people say, it is undignified.
	I don't want to work at McDonald's.
	Well, then you don't deserve money.
	Go cry somewhere else.
	Working means doing what you have to do.
	How about Starbucks?
	Make coffee.
	After four years, guess what?
	You have the requisite experience to be a general manager and get a salary of, by today's standards, like $50,000 to $60,000.
	Are you gonna cry about it now?
	I mean, you got out of college at 22.
	You're in debt.
	The dude who went and worked at Starbucks is now your boss.
	Same age or even younger.
	You're a 21-year-old shift supervisor or assistant manager and you're out of college saying, like, I'll take whatever job I can get.
	College was a mistake.
	I don't blame you that you were lied to.
	I can respect that.
	Boomer has told us all to go to college.
	It was a mistake.
	When I worked for Vice, I slept on a couch.
	I saved all that money knowing at some point I'm going to need to figure this out and I need a buffer zone.
	Guess what?
	I do the exact same thing I've always done.
	The first paycheck I get, I save, I don't touch.
	It's for emergencies only.
	I do not want to come crying and begging to someone saying I'm going to be homeless or die or whatever.
	I want to make sure that I have that money and I know where it's at.
	If she rented a couch out, she could save $1,000.
	Let's say $500 to sleep on a couch.
	Or a sunroom, or we curtain off a portion of the living room.
	I've done all these things.
	She then saves $1,000.
	Five months later, she's got $5,000 in savings.
	Ten months later, she's got $10,000 in savings.
	You want to buy a house with $10,000 in savings?
	You can buy a cheap small house and then Airbnb it.
	Hey, there's a strategy.
	Now you've added a little bit more income.
	Uh-oh, now you're working more.
	40 hours a week ain't gonna cut it.
	And saying boomers just don't understand, there's so much wrong with this.
	Gen Z was raised by boomers, so they really don't understand, and I can respect that.
	But so many of these Gen Z people, man, they really don't understand what it means to work hard.
	40 hours a week is hard work to you?
	It's not.
	I mean, maybe boomers had it better.
	That's no excuse for you not working harder.
	I could go on this for a million years, though.
	But I want to say, you know, like, with respect to this young woman, it is difficult.
	I get that.
	But it's harder than you realize.
	And what you're describing is, you want luxuries.
	I work 40 hours a week.
	I can't afford it.
	Then work 80.
	What about me?
	Yeah, I work more than that.
	16-hour days?
	I would, if you want to be fair and say that my exercise and lunch period, I have about three hours per day, is not work, no problem.
	Then let's just call it 13-hour days.
	I got no problem saying that.
	I'm not here to win a contest.
	And then on weekends, probably a couple hours of work every weekend.
	You gotta go to the bank, I'm still checking the news, monitoring things, talking to people, but mostly the day's off.
	You want to work as much as me?
	Fine, go ahead and do it.
	But here's what you need to do.
	You can't just sit here and strain yourself.
	I need an apartment.
	I deserve it.
	Do you?
	If you give yourself five months of sleeping on a couch, or having a roommate and sharing a studio, you cut your rent in half.
	You add that to your savings, and eventually, you can afford to seed invest.
	This is how all of this comes to be.
	Where I am now.
	You need to get the snowball rolling down the hill.
	I'll leave it there.
	Next segment is coming up at 6 p.m.
	on this channel.
	Thanks for hanging out, and I'll see you all then.
	In New York City, in Cooper Union, Jewish students were told to hide in the attic from far-left extremists who are supporting, chanting, free, free Palestine.
	I would argue that many of these people overtly support Hamas.
	I try to draw a distinction between those who care about Palestine and those who support Hamas, but what do we see from these protest groups in New York City?
	They refer to Hamas as the resistance.
	When they're saying, free, free Palestine and from the river to the sea, they're chanting the exact same thing as Hamas.
	Maybe it's not fair to claim that all these people support, you know, terror and stuff like this, but a lot of them do.
	In this story, we talked about it last night, we have some developments.
	Students were locked in the library as the far left banged on the door, was banging on the door.
	Some of these students were carrying, the far left, were carrying sticks.
	Like, small wooden sticks for some reason, I don't know.
	They weren't flagpoles, they didn't have flags on them.
	I believe it's fair to say, that if the doors were opened, the Jewish students would have been mercilessly beaten.
	Why?
	Because I've been to events like this.
	And I know, Then immediately you're going to get a bunch of pro-Israel, pro-Palestine.
	I'm not even talking about Israel-Palestine.
	I am talking about the far left in this country and Jewish students who are forced to hide from the far left.
	Have your arguments about Palestine and Israel.
	It doesn't matter for this segment.
	Just whatever is going on in the Middle East has nothing to do with American leftists threatening and terrorizing other students.
	Here's the story.
	The Daily Mail says, a group of Jewish students were forced to flee a brain mob of pro-Palestine activists inside a New York City college on Wednesday, locking themselves in a library while the crowd hammered on the door.
	Ugly scenes unfolded.
	They were chanting, free, free Palestine.
	Here's the video.
	Let's play it for you.
	Here we go.
	So that's one of the videos where you can see, you can hear them banging on the door.
	Here's another clip.
	I don't know if you can see some of the students that were pro-Palestine mob, they call it, chanting, free, free Palestine.
	Some of them have signs, but some of them were carrying sticks.
	It's possible the sticks they were carrying were from signs.
	I'm not trying to act like they were coming outside with weapons or anything.
	Upstairs, a group of Jewish students had taken refuge in the library.
	The mob can be heard pounding on the doors.
	This is Cooper Union.
	I think anybody who's been to New York knows where this is.
	Big college area.
	Uh, I think you might be able to see in this video some of the sticks they're carrying.
	I don't know.
	It's hard to see.
	There's like one or two.
	They say, outside the college on Wednesday evening, a passerby could be seen tearing away a pro-Palestine sign, which was placed next to the posters highlighting the plight of those kidnapped.
	The sign said, killing children is justified.
	NYPD officers could be seen entering the building and were standing outside.
	I want to break this down for you.
	Okay?
	I'm America.
	You want to have an argument about Israel-Palestine?
	I-I-I-Whatever, man.
	Stop foreign funding.
	Here in the United States, you have far leftists celebrating Hamas and then complaining that Israel's killing children.
	Hamas killed a bunch of children.
	Hamas killed a bunch of civilians.
	Hamas kidnapped a bunch of people and the photos are horrifying.
	We get it.
	Will Chamberlain has an excellent tweet.
	He says, they call for gun control to take away our weapons while also celebrating what Hamas did.
	We're not stupid.
	I'd like to give you this tweet from Jake Novak.
	Jake Novak, uh, says his profile's dad, Jake Novak, New York.
	He says, a couple key highlights from my interview with a major eyewitness to the incident.
	Cooper U. Dean said before the protest that he could not stop it because it was not slated to enter the school property, which it obviously did.
	NYPD was called as soon as the protesters stormed the main Cooper Union building, but did nothing.
	Librarians bolted the doors and approached the identifiable Jewish students and told them they could hide in the attic if they wanted to.
	Welcome to the Modern Era.
	The far left, right now.
	I don't care about the Zionists, whatever arguments you make.
	Hamas killed a bunch of civilians.
	Then, Israel responds, and the left says, but they're killing children.
	Excuse me?
	You know, these pro-Palestine protesters are cheering on Hamas having killed children, then complaining that Israel's killed children.
	And the funny thing I hear a lot is they say things like, you know, but Israel kills more, and I'm like, what is the number, the utilitarian argument they make, have to do with the morality on killing anybody?
	Nothing!
	Killing children is bad, I don't care who's doing it.
	But you can't come out and celebrate the death of children and then cry crocodile tears to me that Israel's killing children.
	I think y'all are evil people.
	I'd like Israel to stop bombing Gaza.
	I really would.
	I don't know the solution.
	Hamas is firing rockets.
	Israel just launched their ground invasion.
	I don't have the answers, but I will say it explicitly to these far leftists.
	When y'all cheer for Hamas and then cry about Israel, your words mean nothing to me.
	You are celebrating the death of innocents while pretending to care about the death of innocents.
	Me?
	I actually care about all the innocent people that are being killed.
	I want it all to stop.
	I wish Hamas wasn't flying in and killing a bunch of civilians.
	The problem?
	It's war.
	There's no simple answer.
	And you know what?
	I don't know why the U.S.
	should be involved.
	Ben Shapiro does.
	He's concerned about World War III.
	I see his point.
	But I think it's simple.
	These people are never going to stop fighting over this land because Hamas isn't going to negotiate peace.
	Hamas's charter originally said that they wanted to end Israel.
	Black Lives Matter says they want to end Israel.
	So, look.
	The far left lies.
	It's what they do.
	And you know, I have a lot of friends who had to delete a lot of tweets.
	I cannot stand Israel Derangement Syndrome.
	Let me explain what Israel Derangement Syndrome is.
	And we'll start by saying many children have died in Gaza for a long time.
	Many innocent civilians have died in Gaza for a long time.
	They call it collateral damage.
	That's the name for it.
	And they get mad when you say it, and they're like, no, call it murder!
	Collateral damage is when civilians are killed because of military actions.
	That's what's happening.
	All of it is bad.
	We don't want any of the civilians dead, and there needs to be a solution.
	Fact.
	Hamas also, bad, killed a bunch of civilians.
	I think it's fair to point out, in this current circumstance, I ain't going back in time, on October 7th, Hamas killed a bunch of civilians indiscriminately.
	Israel then launched a bunch of airstrikes on Hamas targets, which resulted in the death of civilians.
	Two completely different things.
	Both bad, one evil.
	Returning fire on military targets, resulting in collateral damage, is a horrifying tragedy.
	Intentionally invading Israel and killing civilians and children is malicious evil.
	Then the left comes out and says, oh no, they're killing civilians in Gaza.
	I say, oh yeah, Hamas killed a bunch of Israeli civilians too, but they cheered for that.
	You see the point?
	They're going to come out and say, you only care about when Israelis are killed.
	I care about when they're all killed, but you're cheering for the death.
	You're cheering for the dead Israelis, and you're crying for the dead Palestinians.
	I'm actually crying for both dead.
	And Hamas did not have to do this.
	They did not have to kill civilians.
	So don't give me that.
	When you celebrate rocket fire over Tel Aviv, don't give me that.
	I ain't buying it.
	When I see the far left chase a bunch of young Jews into a library, I have to lock the door and tell them to go hide in the attic.
	I'm like, we know who the evil ones are here.
	Ron Coleman made a really good point.
	You see, the problem we have here is, there are people who are like, Palestine overwhelmingly supports Hamas.
	And Hamas is not Palestine.
	Yet these protesters in New York, they actually among themselves say the opposite.
	They say we are the resistance.
	These students in New York are not Israeli.
	You see the point?
	The protesters who were banging on that door and screaming because of these Jewish students were doing it because they were Jewish, not because they were Israeli.
	They were not Israeli students.
	At least that's the, uh, reporting.
	Maybe, I don't know, maybe one of them was a dual citizen or something, but the reporting is, Jewish students, who are American, were chased into a room, told to hide in the attic, the doors were barred, in fear for their safety.
	Not because they were Israeli.
	I don't, I don't care to hear these arguments from these people who just hate Israel SO MUCH they lose their minds.
	I don't care.
	You wanna have a conversation about Burma-Myanmar?
	You don't?
	What's with your obsession with Israel?
	Could it be it's the Holy Land, perhaps?
	Could it be that the U.S.
	sends money there?
	We send money to a lot of places.
	Ain't nobody talking about Sudan.
	Ain't nobody talking about Yemen.
	Unhinged.
	Unhinged derangement over Israel.
	You know, it really bothers me that people so blindly believe all the war propaganda.
	I don't care if it comes from Israel or Palestine.
	But the obsession people have.
	It's like, you can't have a real conversation with people.
	Hey, Hamas flew over the barriers, killed a bunch of civilians, and they were like, well, they were the resistance.
	And I'm like, oh.
	Israel's returning fire and civilians are dying.
	How could they do that?
	They're evil!
unidentified		Uh-huh.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		Spare me, dude.
		They come to me and they're like, did you know that Israel killed X many people, but only X many Israelis died?
		And I'm like, you act as though the amount of people dying defines morality.
		One person dying is the problem.
		And then they take the utilitarian approach, but look, I get it.
		I get it.
		You get it.
		The far left is lying about everything.
		That's what they do.
		It's disgusting stuff, man.
		You get it.
		I'll leave it there.
		Next segment's coming up tonight at 8 p.m.
		over at youtube.com slash TimCastIRL.

▲