All Episodes
Nov. 2, 2023 - Tim Pool Daily Show
01:14:51
Judge OVERTURNS ELECTION After Democrat CAUGHT Cheating, Trump Eligibility Trial Will DESTROY The US

BUY CAST BREW COFFEE TO FIGHT BACK - https://castbrew.com/ Become a Member For Uncensored Videos - https://timcast.com/join-us/ Hang Out With Tim Pool & Crew LIVE At - http://Youtube.com/TimcastIRL Judge OVERTURNS ELECTION After Democrat CAUGHT Cheating, Trump Eligibility Trial Will DESTROY The US Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Participants
Main voices
t
tim pool
01:12:17
Appearances
Clips
j
josh hammer
00:30
| Copy link to current segment

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.
This one's pretty big.
We have an election overturned by a judge because Democrats were caught stuffing the ballot.
Now the interesting thing here, it's a Bridgeport, Connecticut mayoral primary.
And it's really close to the election.
A lot of people are making the argument, well, you know, it's just a small election.
These things happen.
No one ever said fraud never happens.
But let's talk about where we're currently at.
The game being played to prevent Donald Trump from becoming president is getting very interesting.
The Colorado trial is on.
They actually played a clip from Timcast during the trial.
And that's in Colorado.
We also have the Minnesota trial has begun with very interesting and intelligent arguments made, which argue states do not have the right to determine eligibility.
This needs to be a federal question.
However, Trump was already tried federally, the impeachment hearings, and he was acquitted.
Now, as for this smaller town and this election fraud story, why it matters.
In this instance, we have a single individual seen on camera stuffing the ballots, and that was enough for a judge to say, OK, this calls everything into question.
We don't know the true numbers.
We've got to do it again.
Now, you'd think that if we know Democrats have done this or do it, well, then what about Trump's arguments about fraud in 2020?
Well, I'll tell you.
Most of the lawsuits that were brought up questioning several instances much like this were determined to have no standing, which seems like BS, if you ask me.
Now, I personally don't think Trump lost 2020 because of ballot stuffing or things like this.
I certainly think it happened.
I think even Bill Barr, who many people don't like, said, yeah, fraud happened, but was it enough to actually affect the outcome?
It might have been, but I lean towards probably not.
And the issue is just They look, they admit what they did.
Okay.
Ballot harvesting.
Now the question is, were they legitimate ballots from real people that were harvested?
And then we have questions of how the rules are being set up to disfavor Donald Trump.
To put it simply, the big narrative about fraudulent ballots and fake printed ones, I'm just like, look, I'm not I'm not interested, OK?
No, I've read a lot of these stories and I think they're too speculative.
Now, the stories about ballot harvesting, I think, are legitimate.
And so the issue comes down to this.
Is it fraud if someone goes and collects ballots from a bunch of old people who are not really all with it and they say, just sign it, just sign it?
We've seen those videos from James O'Keefe.
Is that fraud?
Well, legally speaking, in many of these states, it is not.
It's not.
So there are some deep questions, and we're going to get into this.
But my point is simply this.
When it came to Donald Trump's legal hearings, what they said in the cases where there was an actual ruling on the merits, guess what?
Trump actually won.
Yeah, they found that there were some really interesting things about ballot stuffing and things like this.
The problem was, at an individual level, these instances did not amount to a significant enough amount of fraud to have altered the outcome of the election.
Therefore, moot was the ruling.
If you're saying Trump lost by 3,000 votes and you found someone who's stuffed, you know, 400 ballots, doesn't change the outcome.
There's no point.
This is the stupidest thing I've ever heard.
It is lazy.
It is immoral.
Judges should absolutely say, in this instance, we must take action because it is not the macro, it is the micro.
If you get a hundred instances of, what do they call it?
I forgot what it's called.
When someone carries more than the legal number of ballots for individuals and stuffs them.
If you get one case and they prove it and they say, yeah, well, it's not enough.
Okay, but what if you have 10 in each of these different areas and each judge says none of it is enough?
It's the micro, not the macro.
This plays a role.
So I want to talk to you about this story and bring up the importance of whether or not you think this is how Trump lost in 2020.
It's much more complicated.
And let me walk you through it.
In the early days after the 2020 election, people were claiming Trump was still the president who was going to get reinstated.
Just weird nonsense.
People were claiming that there were Chinese servers and hacking and floats flipping.
People were claiming that China printed fake ballots and that Trump had watermarked them and they were going to catch him and then Trump was going to be reinstated.
Look, and I'm like, none of that is true, guys.
Then Time Magazine releases their article, The Shadow Campaign.
And this is where we get into the question of rigging and fraud and what it means.
First, did Donald Trump win in 2020?
No.
Simply put, Joe Biden's in the White House.
If you think win means get a bunch of votes or have the support, fine.
But I'm talking about actual conflict.
What's the real victory?
Joe Biden became president.
What do we know they did?
Changed the rules and ballot harvested.
And that was the bulk Of how they pulled off 2020.
And I'm not, this is not conspiracy theory.
The Shadow Campaign article published by Time Magazine outlined exactly what they did.
And it probably involves things like this.
Is ballot stuffing fraud?
Depends on your jurisdiction.
Some places allow people to do this.
So my point is simply this.
This should be litigated.
It should not be allowed.
One person, one vote.
You should have to deliver your ballots on your own.
And we should not allow these kinds of things.
In this jurisdiction, what this woman did, Fraud.
But it's not fraud in every single jurisdiction.
Or I should say, based on the termination of the judge, it would appear this woman committed fraud.
I don't know the actual legal statute, so I want to be careful.
But let's read this and we'll talk about it.
Connecticut Judge William Clark overturned the results of Bridgeport's Democratic mayoral primary on Wednesday after a video emerged showing a supporter of current Mayor Joe Gannon allegedly stuffing ballots into an absentee ballot drop box.
Let me just set the record straight on what I'm saying.
It is an allegation of ballot stuffing, but the judge made a determination.
I think thus it is fair to say as a statement of fact.
I don't know how else you determine statements of facts.
If a judge said it, then it must be true.
Or we operate under the assumption it is.
Judges can be wrong.
The videos, Clark said, are shocking to the court and should be shocking to all parties.
Clark ordered the parties to confer with each other.
And with election officials within 10 days to discuss scheduling a new primary.
This is mere days before the November 7th election day.
Clark overturned the results saying that these allegations were enough to throw out the primary results.
In that September 12th primary, incumbent Ganim won by 251 votes out of a total of 800, I'm sorry, 8,173 per Connecticut public.
What really sealed the deal for Clark, however, is that Ganim's win was secure by absentee ballots in his favor.
The volume of ballots so mishandled is such that it calls the results of the primary election into serious doubt and leaves the court unable to determine the legitimate result of the primary.
The surveillance video was obtained by Ghanim's opposition candidate John Gomes.
The Gomes campaign sued the city and demanded the results be thrown out and a new primary be scheduled or to be declared the winner himself.
A new primary date has not been announced, and if Ghanim loses the general election next week, a new primary may not be set at all.
Gomes, who won the endorsement of Minority Party, is also on the ballot.
You see how this is going?
While many people are like, they threw it out!
Dude is still going to be on the general ballot, and if he wins, it doesn't matter.
Ladies and gentlemen, the reason I bring this up is for a few reasons.
What really matters is, do we have elections?
And the answer is...
unidentified
No.
tim pool
Does that mean you should not vote?
No, no, no.
You need to go and vote.
And listen, I need to break it down for you, okay?
Elections are a group of people get together.
Let's say we got six chairs at the Tim Cass table.
Six chairs.
Okay, you see them on IRL.
We need a wide shot so you can see how big it is.
And we all say, what's for dinner?
And then everyone says, I would choose, you know, someone says beef, pork, chicken.
And we go, okay, we got two for beef, two for pork, and two for chicken, and it's indeterminate.
Like, we can't figure it out, we're gonna have to have another, we're gonna have to do another ballot.
Then we get three for chicken?
Oh, there it is!
One for pork, two for beef, ah!
All right.
And that sets it.
The election happened.
Okay.
Now, that's an election.
What we have in the United States is a game.
It's more of a game of ballots.
Who can convince the public they won the most?
That's the game we are playing.
You voting plays a massive role in whether or not we can convince the public that we won.
So you should.
But understand what this means.
Let's play this game.
John Gomes posts this video of a woman ballot stuffing.
How many ballots?
Do we know?
Perhaps in the case, they did determine how many ballots were stuffed.
Okay.
And then the judge says, well, we don't know who won then.
What if, let's say this, John Doe and Jane Doe are running against each other.
John Doe, the incumbent, is about to win when all of a sudden a video emerges of someone ballot stuffing.
And this person appears to be a supporter of John Doe.
Well, then there's a lawsuit and they say, look, this looks like a John Doe supporter stuff in the ballots.
We're going to have to have a new primary.
And then the reveal.
Jane Doe hires the person to ballot stuff for them.
But using a supporter of the other guy who is willing to take a little green.
And thus, if they don't pull off enough votes, they can contest the election claiming.
You see how this works?
Let me just break it down in terms of this.
This woman is apparently a supporter of the incumbent.
But what if she's just a corrupt worker?
unidentified
Hey it's Kimberly Fletcher here from Moms4America with some very exciting news.
Tucker Carlson is going on a nationwide tour this fall and Moms4America has the exclusive VIP meet and greet experience for you.
Before each show, you can have the opportunity to meet Tucker Carlson in person.
These tickets are fully tax-deductible donations, so go to momsforamerica.us and get one of our very limited VIP meet-and-greet experiences with Tucker at any of the 15 cities on his first ever Coast to Coast tour.
Not only will you be supporting Moms for America in our mission to empower moms, promote liberty, and raise patriots, your tax-deductible donation secures you a full VIP experience with priority entrance and check-in, premium gold seating in the first five rows, access to a pre-show cocktail reception, an individual meet-and-greet, and photo with America's most famous conservative and our friend, Tucker Carlson.
Visit momsforamerica.us today for more information and to secure your exclusive VIP meet-and-greet tickets.
See you on the tour.
tim pool
Sure, she supported the incumbent and then someone came and said, 10 grand if you put
these ballots in the box.
Then the person running as the newcomer could then say, see, look, aha.
When in fact it was a false flag the entire time.
We don't know.
All we know is it's indeterminate, right?
We don't, do not know who won.
And thus, welcome to the modern state of American elections.
That does not mean to sit idle.
It means you need to get everyone imaginable to go vote.
But let's talk about where we're currently at with Donald Trump.
Well, we have Colorado going on and we have Minnesota happening.
And an amazing, very, very interesting argument.
I believe this is Trump's lawyer or a lawyer in defense of Trump running.
And an interesting point was made.
Interesting argument.
I tweeted this just so I could have the collection of thoughts as I was watching it live.
The lawyer argues the Constitution does not give states the right to determine who is eligible for an election.
Arguably, this would mean a 14th Amendment eligibility case would have to be federal, a federal court, not state level.
So Colorado suit, Michigan's and Minnesota are moots.
The state does not have the right to determine, though.
The Constitution does say that state legislatures run the elections.
States do not determine eligibility.
That's brilliant, I agree.
The Constitution at the federal level determines who is eligible, right?
Okay.
This would mean even if you think Trump is an insurrectionist, there has to be a determination by the federal courts, and if the states are removing a candidate, this is unheard of.
Look, the argument they made, if someone is 27, you don't need a federal hearing to determine eligibility because there's no fact-finding.
Basically, everybody knows they're 27, and you gotta be 35.
Insurrection, however, is disputed.
That would require a federal case to determine whether the candidate was actually ineligible.
If states can determine eligibility, it basically nullifies the purpose of an election.
If every state determined eligibility, then there would be no elections anymore, just blue-state single-party rule and red-state single-party rule.
Elections would just become eligibility hearings where the votes from the public do not matter.
Now, that's interesting.
Now let's be real.
It does not matter what's true.
It does not matter what must be upheld.
All that matters today is that we are dealing with power versus power.
The community of the United States is dead.
The willingness to work together is gone.
You now have two factions.
The crackpot evil cult and everyone else.
My favorite part.
I mean, if you've done any amount of digging and looking into the culture war, then you know what I'm saying.
Maybe a little crass, but it's true.
They would say, uh, Tim Pool far right, despite having leftist opinions on certain issues.
And they say, uh, Hassan Piker calls Ian Crosland a conservative.
Ian Crosland is very far from conservative.
Very far.
Especially when he said Palestine should be the 51st state of the United States.
And he seriously meant it.
Yeah, we try to be an eclectic bunch of varying ideas to solve problems.
But the left is a cult.
That's why they don't allow interviews, and this is the issue today.
The judges in this case don't care what matters.
They care about winning.
That's it.
So you can make all the arguments in the world that you want.
It's not going to matter.
So here's where we are.
If Colorado, Minnesota, Michigan, any one of these states determines Trump to be ineligible, there will never be an election again.
You know why?
Oh, we'll have our elections.
They'll be like North Korea, but let me lay it down for you.
You get a swing state, but some of these swing states have Republican-controlled legislatures or Democrat-controlled legislatures.
OK, so what will happen is they will start getting ready for the election.
A lawsuit will happen a year in advance, like we're seeing now, and they'll say John Doe is not eligible to run under these provisions.
And the state will just say, you know what?
We agree.
And they remove the main the front runner for one political party from the ballot.
That's it.
Oh, you can go out and cast your ballot all day and night and you can write in Donald Trump if you want, but I'll never appear on the ballot again.
Blue states and blue-leaning swing states will make sure that Trump does not appear on the ballot if states are allowed to determine eligibility.
In 20 years, that's all it'll be.
Because that's the lawfare and that's the way you win.
Donald Trump won in 2016 by targeting the Electoral College.
They complained, but he didn't win the popular vote.
He says that's not what it takes to win.
Trump said, if I wanted to win the popular vote, I would have gone for the popular vote.
No, I went for the Electoral College.
He went for the message that would resonate in the states he needed to win to win the Electoral College, and it worked.
Because elections are not about getting the majority of the popular vote.
If it comes down to this, and these courts agree with the Democrats, it's done.
What the Democrats are doing is destroying this country.
No question.
Oh, they'll say, Trump tried waging an insurrection.
OK, well, Trump had his hearing in in federal government and they acquitted him.
Have a nice day.
Yeah, but that was Republicans who could.
No, you needed two thirds representation.
You needed two thirds of Senate to agree.
Trump did something and they did not.
So it's in dispute.
Thus, there is no federal determination as to whether or not Trump committed an insurrection other than to say he was acquitted of doing it and therefore eligible to be president.
The Democrats then say, we're going to the states, but the states don't have the right to make that determination.
The federal constitution does.
That's it.
These judges, if they agree with the Democrats, every election from now on will have to be an eligibility hearing where judges and wealthy individuals decide amongst themselves if you, an American, are allowed to appear on the ballot.
And guess what?
You won't be.
We have a clip that, um, let me see where I have it pulled up.
This is from TimCast IRL Uncensored with J.R.
Majewski, who breaks down how they cheated.
And I want to play for you this clip.
It's six minutes long, and the reason I'm doing it is because it did not appear on YouTube.
It was the uncensored TimCast portion of the show.
And so, well, I probably, I think you should just go to follow Raymond G. Stanley on Twitter.
He's got the clip.
I retweeted it as well.
It's six minutes long, so I don't want to play the whole thing, but I'll give you the breakdown.
JR Majewski served in Afghanistan.
He served in Qatar, and he recently, this is what he says, received the Global War on Terror medal.
He was leading in his district when he says Kevin McCarthy teamed up with a Democrat to spike and sabotage his campaign.
They pulled his records, ran a fake story claiming that he did not actually serve in Afghanistan and lied.
Again, this is his story.
And this caused him to tank in the polls and ultimately resulted in his defeat.
And then only after did it come out, no, he did serve.
And they lied.
And Kevin McCarthy was working with them to stop him.
Why?
Because this guy is America first.
This is an American who wants to run and he's not a political class elite.
The Republicans and the Democrats would love for the states to determine eligibility.
And this is where we're at.
When it comes to federal governance, the federal Constitution dictates.
But imagine this.
J.R.
Majewski says, you know, I'm going to run for Congress.
And they say, OK, first, the eligibility hearing.
Are you, in fact, eligible to run?
Oh, sorry, this court finds you're not.
That's it.
What ends up happening is, the ballots will just be Democrat.
That's it.
Republicans will not fight back.
They will struggle to engage in any kind of meaningful lawfare like they do now.
And every election will be, you'll go to your local polling place, and you'll look at the ballot, and it'll say, for President, Democrat.
Nothing else.
No, they'll have their mock candidates.
Come on, North Korea does this too.
We know China, they have elections.
Actually, I don't think China does.
But North Korea has elections.
Nobody believes they're real elections because you can't vote for anybody else.
And then they're like 100% approval.
They have the fake candidate.
The dictator will have the fake candidate be like, I think we have to do this.
And then everyone will clap and cheer.
And then the fake candidate loses and says, well, you know, it's an honor and a privilege to have run.
You're the best.
unidentified
But it's fake.
tim pool
And that's what you'll get.
You'll get your stock Mitt Romney Republican, and they'll be like, this is the eligible Republican, so we're putting him on the ballot.
And there it is.
This is why we need to pay attention.
This is why we need to ramp up lawfare.
This is why you need to vote.
Now, some people believe because of widespread fraud, there's no reason to vote.
I think there's a lot of fraud, I do.
I don't believe that fraud is the determinate factor in... We gotta clarify this.
It's so annoying when people are like... Because these people believe that China made fake ballots.
Okay, fraud is like fake ballots.
Someone ballot-stuffing...
Is it fraud?
I don't think they even said it was fraud in this trial.
The point is, fraud is usually deceiving for some gain, right?
If someone fabricates ballots, yes, fraud.
Does fraud exist?
Yes, it does.
Does voter fraud happen?
It absolutely does.
Some of these people have been caught.
Some people use fraud to mean a wide range of things, like ballot harvesting.
But in most states, ballot harvesting is legal.
There are limitations in some states on how many you're allowed to harvest.
That is the question.
Then it becomes, is that fraud?
If your argument is voter fraud is anything outside of the confines of the rules of elections in which you act to gain votes, then yes, it would be.
I'm trying to be careful and use more legal distinction of manipulation and deception.
So, is it illegal ballot harvesting?
Then yes.
I don't know that we have that.
There was actually a hearing where you actually had a Republican being like, guys, stop!
It's not illegal!
They were like, but look at this video!
They're putting a bunch of ballots in a box!
And he's like, yes, they're allowed to do that.
If you don't want them doing it, pass legislation.
But a lot of these states, they go to nursing homes, they ask these people, oh, you want to vote?
So I think the solution is simple.
It's very simple.
One person, one vote.
Everybody has to deliver their votes themselves.
That's it.
No absent, I'm sorry, absentee ballots only in extreme circumstances like military service.
That's it.
But I'm not gonna sit here, you know, and convince everybody.
I can only tell you this.
If these cases are not stopped, the Trump eligibility cases, if they are not quashed immediately.
If they result in Trump being removed from a single state, you will never have an election again.
You will only ever then have eligibility hearings.
And that'll be your future.
Every president who wants to run will be like, November, the year before the election, is eligibility season.
That's when we gotta really ramp up our defenses as to why we're eligible to be president.
And then you'll have to convince a judge to let you on the ballot.
That's insane.
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.
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 What if I told you that the world you live in is fake?
That the ideas you see in politics on social media are not in fact real opinions of real people?
Subscribe and download your episodes wherever you get your podcasts.
It's America on Trial with Josh Hammer.
tim pool
What if I told you that the world you live in is fake?
That the ideas you see in politics on social media are not in fact real opinions of real
people?
What if I told you that when you go on X, Facebook, Instagram, whatever, and someone
responds to your post, they are in fact an illusion meant to control your mind?
I know it sounds funny and silly, but I'm trying to make it as ominous as possible.
This story is very important.
HBO staffer was forced to write meme tweets under anonymous accounts to TV critics who trashed the cable network's shows.
New lawsuit reveals.
But there's something deeper here.
The truth is, large corporations employ people to make fake accounts to manipulate public opinion.
It's been going on for some time.
Governments do it.
Intelligence agencies do it.
And here we can see, HBO had a woman complain about journalists or critics who were critical of HBO shows.
And it's just one example of how bad the problem really is.
Some of the tweets were relatively woke.
And thus, that's the game being played.
That's why I don't care for anonymous accounts.
And you know what the funniest thing is?
The funniest thing?
Look, having an anonymous account, I don't care.
But back before Elon was in charge of X, it was Twitter.
I said, stop interacting with anonymous accounts.
No, no, I said something like, stop interacting with accounts that have cartoon pictures and fake names, and your experience will greatly improve.
And oh boy, did the bots get so mad!
I think it's funny when the left calls everyone bots, because they're not always bots.
But my point is to be intentionally divisive.
Maybe divisive isn't the right word.
To sling insults and invective.
At bots specifically, not people who use anonymous accounts.
But my point is this.
I understand there's a lot of people who want to use anonymous accounts for important reasons.
The Founding Fathers wrote under pseudonyms because of fear of persecution.
Sure.
I think we're at a point where you cannot, you cannot, if you want to win, hide.
You have to be public about what you believe to overwhelm the cultural mechanisms in this country.
But my point is simply this.
I know for a fact, a large portion, maybe even a majority, Of accounts with stupid names and cartoon pictures are probably not real people.
I've known this because I've been on the internet my whole life.
I know what sock puppets are.
And now, there's just more and more proof that it's happening.
This time, allegedly, from HBO.
So my friends, Look, when I tweeted about stop interacting with these accounts, I'm willing to bet a large portion of those who got really mad were in fact fake accounts run by intel agencies, media outlets, and corporations, terrified that someone of influence would be saying stop working with these people.
Now, me tweeting this is not on the scale of Elon Musk buying the platform, but this is why they're so mad.
Elon Musk's core mission is to eliminate the bots.
And guess what?
He's doing it.
They're freaking out because Elon Musk wants to charge a dollar per year to all accounts.
And he said it's the only way to get rid of bots.
It's brilliant.
They'll make the argument, he's destroying the platform!
They said when he bought it, a year ago, that it was the end of Twitter.
A year later, even though the platform's massively successful, they're like, it's the end of Twitter again!
Okay, whatever you want to say, I'll tell you this.
When Elon Musk goes to advertisers and says, the numbers we deliver you are guaranteed to be real people.
His ads are going to be worth gold.
I'll tell you, I'll tell you.
We do ad reads on Timcast and what I hear from all of our sponsors, go to castbrew.com and buy coffee today to support the show.
What I hear from our sponsors all the time is they're like, dude, the return was massive.
What's this all about?
You know, you did a shout out for our company and then we sold way more than we normally do with these ads.
Here's what happens.
You'll spend, let's say a company will spend $5,000 on a series of ads to appear on a particular network.
And they'll be like, we spent $5,000 and we sold $6,000 in product.
So, you know, or it's like we made $6,000 in profit.
It's a better way to put it.
Cause if you were, if that was the margin.
And so they're like, we made a thousand bucks.
It's like, it's okay.
We'll keep buying ads.
Then they spend $5,000 on Timcast IRL.
And they're like, we sold $20,000-$30,000 of the product for the same price.
How is that possible?
Because our viewers are real.
Because our numbers are real.
And this is one of the reasons I was like, we should probably launch our own company.
Castbrew.com.
Because we know we have a premium audience, you guys.
We know that at the rare time we do shoutouts on TimCast or TimCast IRL, The sales are through the roof.
I don't want to I don't want to call anybody's companies out or anything like that.
Some of our friends and they're like, we'd like to buy spot.
We rarely do.
We almost never do them now at all.
And so you have some companies and they're like, how is it that we were selling, you know, like this generic product?
And it was five or six times as much.
When you buy ads on these other networks, it's bot traffic.
And so what happens is, you get these, uh, like, you know, you'll buy- I don't want to name any social networks, because I don't know their exact numbers, but you'll spend five grand, they'll say you got five million views, and you'll go, wow, well, not really, that's 500,000 views.
And you'll go, wow!
You know, that's a lot of views!
But I only sold a hundred, you know, bags of product.
I guess most people don't like my product.
No, it's actually that most of the views are fake.
They are bots, they are farms, they generate traffic, so the whole game is rigged.
Elon Musk attacking the bots triggers these companies because they're scamming everybody.
Now what's going to happen is advertisers are going to say, I'm going to spend a hundred bucks on Twitter.
I only got a thousand views, but I sold 600 products.
How is that possible?
The margins are so high.
And Eon's going to say, those other numbers are fake.
These are the real numbers, which helps you improve your business.
That's why what Elon is doing is so important.
Aside from the free speech stuff, far from perfect, but good.
Check this out.
HBO staffer was forced to write mean tweets.
Check out this story.
Claims made by a former HBO staffer reveal the network's CEO demanded an employee make secret social media accounts to respond to online criticism.
In papers filed at the LA Superior Court, Sully Tamori claims Casey Bloys, the studio's CEO, was commanding a secret army.
Now here's the best part!
Let's, uh, let's look at some of these tweets.
Funny.
HBO titles. Now here's the best part! Let's uh, let's look at some of these tweets.
So, Alan Seppenwald says HBO's The Nevers should have been Joss Whedon's
triumphant return to television. Instead, it's very messy for both creative
reasons and an accumulation of real-world allegations against its
creator. Fake account Kelly Shepard says, Alan is always predictably safe and
scared in his opinions. Funny. I love this one. Adam Sternberg says, question, if they
are called the touched. Why is the show called the Nevers?
Seemed like it should have been called The Touched.
Fake Account says, answer, don't get your panties in a bunch, the show just started.
And again, how shocking that two middle-aged white men are ishing on a show about women.
Fake woke outrage for profit right there in front of your faces major corporations Pretending to be people on the internet to make money my friends the dead internet theory is real Everyone's an illusion the world the reality is all around you fake And the only thing you can do is go outside and touch grass, apparently.
I don't know the degree to which people are fake, but I think Elon Musk is doing one of the most important things someone could be doing right now, and it's mostly due to the fact that he has the capability to do it.
Thank you for building satellites, Elon Musk, for which you have generated copious amounts of loose change, as it were, for which you could buy Twitter and then purge the corruption from the system.
Facebook is fake.
YouTube is fake.
Instagram is fake.
And it's really funny.
I see these shows, these other podcasts.
It's the funniest thing.
The funniest thing.
These big podcasts, they get so many views.
Tim Guest IRL is consistently the most viewed live show on YouTube primetime, in terms of concurrent viewership and audience.
We average, I think, on YouTube, this week's been a little slow, it is what it is.
It also depends on the scale of stories, who the guests are, but we do probably like 500k to maybe like 700k per episode.
And then they usually do podcast tracking by like 90 days.
So within 24 hours, IRL episodes usually get on all podcast platforms around 100,000 views.
And then on YouTube, it's about 300,000 views.
But then over the span, it goes up to around half a million, plus the clips get another half a million or so.
I look at this, and I think what's really interesting is the reaction.
First, revenue we generate relative to other channels' revenue.
I think a lot of people are faking it.
I think a lot of what you see online is fake.
And perhaps we may be some of the... There are a few channels that are doing it legitimately.
But here's how the game works.
Podcasts will pretend to get a lot of views to sell ads.
Yeah.
And when the advertiser doesn't sell product, they say, well, maybe people just don't like your product.
But if you want access to a million views, I don't do any of that.
I just go on the internet.
I just talk or whatever.
Sometimes you get a lot of views.
Sometimes you don't get a lot of views.
Views have been split.
Rumble has taken like 30% of the views from YouTube.
So, you know, when I say those numbers, also, you know, if we include all cross-platform, it's like much bigger than that.
But it's funny to me.
That we have the amount of interest we have on people wanting to come on The Culture War and TimCast IRL, people posting their screenshots from IRL on Twitter as their avatars, and I know it's a political space, so we're not, like, general entertainment.
But there's two things.
One, not every podcast or every media platform is fake followers.
It's just less engagement, more passive.
Whereas our followers probably are more engaged.
But I think the reality is this.
I think most of these companies, most of these platforms are lying about their ratings, lying about how many fans they have, how many followers they have.
Take a look at, like, the New York Times Twitter account.
Millions upon millions of followers!
X account, sorry.
And then look at how much engagement they get.
That's the reality.
I want, with this, this segment, I just want you to understand, the numbers are meaningless.
It really is.
It's meaningless to me.
When I look at some of these other companies, and they're like, we made this many views, and I'm like, then why is your revenue so low?
Why is Tim Kass getting half of the views you get with ten times the revenue?
Why?
We have real people.
Real people do real work.
Real work generates real revenue.
Fake views don't do nothing for nobody.
But the mainstream media wants to maintain the image among the general public that they are the big dogs.
They're not.
Ultimately, the point is this.
Be discerning.
Many of these people are lying to you on the internet.
They're not real.
Don't argue with 14-year-olds using fake accounts.
But the other thing is, we are the mainstream media.
It's us.
They want to create the image that these shows are getting millions of views, so that when people watch a show like mine, they say, oh, Tim doesn't get that many views.
But the reality is, HBO had fake, allegedly, fake tweets!
You think the rest of it is real?
Look into the phenomena 10 years ago of ad rights distribution.
I know big people who have followed me for a long time know this story, but I'll tell you again, for those that don't.
Big media companies would buy the rights to views.
Here's what happens.
A company will make a page, and it's like 25 celebrities with big noses.
And then, you ever see these?
You'll click it, and every, every, like, ranking is a new page.
So, like, number 25, click next.
Reloads a new page.
Number 24, click next.
What this does is it generates 25 ad impressions per ad for one story.
It's a trick.
A person, the page will have 10 ads, 25 pages, one person generates 250 worthless impressions.
They then sell the rights to distribute ads against those impressions to a major company.
The major company then says to the big advertisers, you know, we're getting about 100 million views per month.
So you should advertise with us, because we're the big dogs.
When in reality, they were getting $30 million, and $70 million were coming from these jacked-up fake ad rights distribution models.
Talk about a scandal.
They were all doing it.
And they all claimed, well, we have to, because if we don't, they will, and then we lose.
The argument was, the advertiser is going to get a package.
10 grand for 10 million views.
And if we tell them the truth about our views, we're going to say it's 10 grand for 100,000 views.
And they're going to say, well, it's not worth it, right?
Even though ours were real people and theirs were fake.
So what happened?
Everyone started lying.
Welcome to the dead internet, my friends.
It is all one big lie swirling all around you.
Now, how do I know y'all are real?
Apparently y'all live in Pittsburgh.
I went to Pittsburgh and everybody was like, oh hey, it's Tim Poole.
Really cool, and I think it's kind of obvious, we talked about this, the highest density of viewership is Chicago, for us, and the coasts play a role in this, but then I'm like, it's kind of obvious, right?
East Coast, West Coast, they have their cultures and their sensibilities, and then there's Midwestern, which is separate.
Midwestern overlaps with some Southern and some East Coast, but it makes sense.
I'm from Chicago.
I have Chicago sensibilities.
Fairly moderate.
We're all kind of regular, salt-of-the-earth, working-class people.
It's like the Blue Dog Democrats, and it's like the Blue Collar Democrats, working-class guys.
Yeah, Democrats who are pro-2A.
Well, the coasts have taken over the Democratic Party.
They've become the liberal limousine elites in the woke left.
And now you can see what's happening.
I think for the most part, though, you know, there's deep conservative shows, then there's leftist woke shows, and then there's, like, perhaps we are the midwestern sensibility show, I suppose?
I don't know.
Whatever.
That's neither here nor there.
The point is this.
I love this story.
There's the proof for all of you.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment is coming up at 6pm on this channel.
Thanks for hanging out, and I'll see you all then.
I won't sleep with a man, says this lady, unless he spends $2,000 on me.
And I think it's funny that the New York Post has Kamala Harris's face for this article.
But no, it is not about Kamala Harris.
It is about a woman who is simply saying men must spend money on me before I will sleep with them.
And I kind of think it's a crappy standard, but I understand what she's saying.
My friends!
This one may not be too family-friendly, but I don't think it's, um, as that bad.
But we got to talk about Joe Rogan and what he talked about, which led to this woman saying, if you're a dude and you want to hook up, you got to spend two grain of cash.
Here's the reality.
Before I even read any of this, you should just, you know, be intimate with people you're having a real relationship with because the purpose is bonding and having a family and it's pleasurable and all that good stuff.
But look, you're going out and having a fling and doing all this stuff, irresponsible, reckless, and come on, self-control, I guess.
But that's the thing about the left, right?
They're less likely to engage in self-control.
But I digress.
We must start with the Joe Rogan experience here, because Joe Rogan explained something called Post-Nut Syndrome.
Ah, yes, this is for the adults in the room.
And he says, you realize you made a mistake, especially if the woman is really into you and you're really not into her and you're like, oh, I made an error, and then you feel like an a-hole, but I'm just being honest, I got tricked by genetics.
Yeah.
This is more of the guilt that is described.
That's what Joe Rogan's talking about.
And he says, because there are guys who are like, they really want to hook up, and then they do, and then afterwards they're like, like, I can't commit to this, and like, What was I thinking?
Shouldn't have done it.
Yeah, you're feeling guilt for a reason.
Because there's responsibility tied to what it is you're doing.
But let's talk about what this lady says.
She says, She discovered, last weekend during a road trip listening to a dating podcast, this woman, called Tinks, that's her name, says, she was going through a list of dating non-negotiables and casually mentioned that a friend of hers has now made a point of not sleeping with a guy until he has spent at least $2,000 on dates with her.
Yes, you read that white, right, read that white, right, a whopping $2,000.
Everybody said I was simping, not everybody, but there are people who are like, you're a simp.
When I said the woman, In Miami, who was like, a dude's gotta spend $200 on our first date.
That's what she expects, because she takes care of herself, she gets all gussied up, she wants that guy to also do something of value, and that is to pay for the dinner and pay for the meal.
I agree, men should be paying for things.
Women can if they want to split the bill, all that stuff, it's really up to you, but I think, traditionally, The guy takes the woman out, and that's how you do it.
If you are of the mindset that men and women should split the bill, because you're like, well, women want to be feminists, then fine, we're going to split the bill.
Feminists go, thank you, that's exactly the point.
This creates a pressure on women to have to get jobs.
Now, I say, if you want to do that, that's fine, but dudes should pay the bill.
unidentified
Why?
tim pool
Because then it relieves the pressure on women, so they don't have to get jobs.
That's kind of the point.
But I'm not saying it's absolute.
I'm saying people do whatever they want.
$2,000 now.
We're up in the game, huh?
First of all, I don't think you should use a monetary standard to determine whether or not someone's qualified for intercourse.
That's silly.
But she does make a good point about the amount of money spent.
I absolutely think so.
She says, yes you read that right, $2,000 has no one heard of a cost of living crisis.
No longer are we basing the decision on time, aka 3-5 dates, we're basing it on cash.
Cash money, specifically $2,000.
So like I said, at first I was feeling a little outraged.
Surely you can't hold a man to that.
Plus in this day and age, shouldn't we be paying for half the bill anyway?
You see?
You see?
But $2,000 on dates before you get rooty-nooty seems a little extreme at first.
Then I let my mind wander to the couple of gents I've jumped into bed with after three to five dates and thought, sheesh, if I was living by that theory, I probably could have avoided a couple of mistakes.
Again, you know, I understand why they use money.
Here's what I think.
The first reason is why this new rule is kind of growing on me is that if a guy is willing to go on enough dates to
warrant $2,000 out-of-pocket expenses, then there's a fair chance the guy is properly invested in
you.
That's funny. Doing it monetarily.
Here's what I think.
Women...
We've created this standard where it's not about whether women can work, it's that women have to work.
And the standard, as I mentioned just a moment ago, is a pressure on women that results in more of this split the bill, split the bill stuff.
I like the monetary limit to an extent, because it reduces one-night stands.
If every woman adhered to this principle of a certain degree of investment, you would dramatically reduce hookup culture, one-night stands, dramatically reduce dating apps.
I think this standard, although it is far from perfect and is bad in its own ways, is an improvement upon the existing system.
Now, let me be clear here.
I'm a libertarian, man.
Not big, a little.
If you want to live the way you want to live, for the most part, I say, okay, fine.
Right?
People want to go party and do that thing.
I like the Ron Paul statement on abortion that it should not be illegal, it should be unconscionable.
And that's kind of how I apply it to a lot of things.
Our society should not tolerate certain bad behaviors.
If you want to go and have, you know, swinger parties and do that, you should be allowed to do it, it shouldn't be illegal, but keep it private, keep it to yourself, and keep it out of the general public.
What's happening now is everything's become willy-nilly, do whatever you want, sex parties, blah blah blah.
I don't think that's the way we should go about doing it.
We should keep things private, reserved.
There should be a certain degree of shame associated with it, but you should be allowed to do it.
Get it?
The reason for it is we want a public standard of appropriate behavior so that we can stabilize our civilization to a certain degree.
If we go the full route of do whatever feels good, then you're going to have people doing drugs everywhere, people are going to become irresponsible, they're going to become communists, all of that stuff.
There has to be a standard.
She goes on to say, Eek.
The second reason I like this rule is I think most importantly,
spending that amount of time together without getting distracted by nakedness might actually help us
get all those ics out of the way nice and early.
For example, I went on a couple of dates with a guy last year and felt comfortable in my decision
to sleep with him after three dates.
On the fourth date, however, I discovered he still lets his mom do his laundry for him
in his late 30s and calls rose wine rose.
unidentified
Hmm.
tim pool
Eek.
I can't be dating a man-child.
Uh-huh, well, you know, maybe you should have thought about that before you jumped in bed.
unidentified
Thank you.
tim pool
That is an issue.
Had I waited until we reached that $2,000 mark, I would have discovered all this long before he showed me his dad's bod.
His dad's bod?
And I could have walked away feeling slightly less guilty.
Perhaps if we want to be a little less, dare I say, shallow, rather than basing the decision on money, we could base it off a checklist instead.
What do they do for a job?
Do they maintain basic adult responsibilities?
Where do they live?
I mean, all of these things are good.
Have they been to jail?
And if yes, what for?
Have they ever had an AVO?
I don't know what that means.
How long was their last relationship?
Why did they break up?
What's their take on contraception?
Do you feel safe around them?
I love this.
This is the revelation of a woman.
That is, build a relationship with someone before having sex with them.
Okay, let me break down what this article is really about.
Now everyone may be shocked by the title and the headline and say, oh, don't simp for these women.
Yo.
This lady is realizing she should not go around sleeping with everyone right away.
She's realizing she needs to know the guy, know the guy is invested.
I'm like, ladies and gentlemen, a revelation.
This is how it is supposed to be, for a lot of reasons.
Let me show you this one.
This is a post Don Johnson says, a recently divorced woman with two children shared her monthly budget sheet on FB and it went viral.
I repost these because it's perspective on the median and mean.
Social media focuses on the fake and the 1%.
Okay.
Here's this very neatly written budget.
Monthly bills, income $3,000, child support $400, total $3,400.
She says, all of her must-pays, rent, utilities, phone, internet, childcare, Before and after school, food, car note, etc.
$3,325.
She has $75 left over.
She cannot then budget for new clothes, laundry supplies, school snacks, field trips, car repairs, Christmas, kids want to play ball, etc.
It's not enough money!
Child support just doesn't cut it!
Cry me a river, lady.
Cry more.
Keep crying about it.
This is the point of marriage, and no-fault divorce destroyed this, and I ain't shedding a tear.
Now I'll shed a tear for the kids.
The kids shouldn't live this way.
Jason Howerton, high-value dad, says, A man who doesn't take care of his children, married or not, is a coward.
I would live in a cardboard box before I let my kids go without what they need.
$400 a month to take care of your kids in this economy?
F off.
Sure, I hear what you're saying.
Why is she getting $400 in child support?
Is it because the guy is rich and got a good lawyer?
Or is it because the guy's broke and poor and his kids are taken away from him?
I don't- I don't- I don't accept either.
The fact of the matter remains, child support, in my opinion, should be eradicated.
No more child support.
Period.
Okay, okay, that's a little extreme.
There are certainly circumstances where child support is warranted.
But the system is completely broken, and we need to reassess it.
What is the purpose of child support?
Let's be steel-man-completely-honest.
The original idea of divorce was something really egregious.
Infidelity?
Okay, well, there's divorce.
Abuse?
A woman is being beaten by her husband, and she did not see this in him, and it's terrible?
Okay, divorce, protection, get away.
But that guy's on the hook for those kids, he's gotta pay child support.
What's happening now is no-fault divorce.
Guy gets married, has a wife, they have kids, and then she goes, you know what?
I'm just not into it anymore.
See you later, alligator.
By the way, I get the kids, you get nothing, and then you gotta pay.
I don't play that game.
What should happen is no more no-fault divorce.
If you get married, that's it.
That's it.
Contract.
You can't just break it.
But now you can.
That's ridiculous.
Imagine a business merger.
Two guys say, we're gonna combine our law practices together, and then we're gonna pool our resources.
Then they do, build this office, and then one day, one guy goes, you know, I've severed the contract, get out, the office is mine, all of the clients are mine, and you get nothing, and now you've gotta pay the utility bills.
That is insane and makes no sense.
So, why do I combine these stories?
This lady talking about a threshold?
Men, do the same thing!
If women are saying that it's a $2,000 threshold, that's easy because men are supposed to be the providers, traditionally.
That doesn't mean they are today.
And again, be feminist.
What do you want to do?
My point is, if you're looking for a more traditional relationship, I'm not surprised a woman says, I want a monetary value.
I want to understand this guy's gonna be able to provide for me.
If you're a guy, figure out what that threshold and standard is.
Most importantly, these questions matter more than the money.
Do they have a job?
Are they adult?
Are they responsible?
Do they have a savings?
Take a look at the parents.
I love this.
The end result of this article.
A woman realizing you should not just go and bang random dudes.
How about that?
The same goes for guys.
There's a clip from the whatever podcast where a woman's like, all of you, all of you guys and all your haters, fund me.
Pay me.
She's like, I'm gonna make a million bucks this year because guys are giving me money.
unidentified
Yup.
tim pool
Guys shouldn't.
But they're gonna.
You're always gonna have bad people doing bad things, but if you live by your standards and your values, not only will it spread your values and morals, but you will live better.
So don't play this game where you're like, well everyone else is doing it so I better, nah.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment is coming up at 8 p.m.
tonight over at youtube.com slash TimCastIRL.
Thanks for hanging out and I'll see you all then.
I'm not saying Israel is innocent or anything like that.
And you don't have to be for or against Palestine or Israel to be angry at the deaths of civilians.
But this is why I just really, really am very anti-intervention and I'm like, hey the US shouldn't be involved in any of it!
Because, look man, civilians be dying.
And it's awful.
That being said, if someone put up posters for Palestinian kids who were killed, I ain't gonna cry about it.
I'm going to be upset at the kids who died.
I see these tweets.
I'll tell you what the problem is for me right now, is they lie about everything.
That's it.
You know, I'm not saying Israel doesn't lie either, but it's just like every single time something comes up.
They were saying in the news that Israel bombed a refugee camp.
It wasn't a camp.
It's something different.
I'm not saying what they did was good.
I'm just saying, ah, okay, they use this language to manipulate us.
Here we go.
And now we have this story from CNN.
White House announces national strategy to combat Islamophobia.
I just, I just, I can't even with these people.
I think the Democrats are evil.
I think the establishment neocons are evil.
I think the left is evil, but this one really takes the cake.
Islamophobia?
The second largest religion in the world?
24% of the global population.
Okay, dude, if people have criticisms of the second largest religion in the world, they're allowed to.
I've got criticisms of Christianity.
I'm allowed to have them.
I've got criticisms of basically every religion.
I have no irrational fear, that's what phobia is, of the world's second largest religion.
Now, at a time when we're getting front-page stories from, say, like the New York Post about far-left psychopaths tearing down hostage posters, the White House said, you know what?
We want to win elections, so we're going to side with the depraved lunatics on this one.
Okay, I don't care.
You know, we've had people on Tim Guest's IRL who are pro-Palestine, Max Blumenthal.
I do not believe that Max is depraved.
I do not believe, I think he's a good dude.
I thought he was fantastic on the show.
He was calm, collected.
He gave his opinions, his perspective.
I disagree greatly with him, but he was a rational individual, and I can respect his concerns and his views.
I really can, I really can.
He thinks Israel is lying.
He thinks these people are being killed in large numbers, and I think all of those things, I think they're bad things.
And I respect the position.
Cassandra Fairbanks works for Tim Cass.
She's very critical of Israel.
I respect it.
I disagree on a lot of these things.
I think we're being lied to quite a bit.
But if you're like, hey man, we don't want anyone dying, and we're mad about all of it.
You know, Max is like, what Hamas did was horrible, and it was a terror attack, no question.
And I'm like, okay.
Like, just be honest with me, right?
For the White House to come out now and play this dirty game.
These people are evil, dude.
Here you go, ladies and gentlemen, here's the story, and then I'm going to show you some of what's going on.
What's going on with people.
We got some crazy videos tearing down these hostage posters, and Amy Schumer is being attacked mercilessly.
Mercilessly.
I like that word, by the way, you probably noticed.
CNN says, the White House announced Wednesday the administration will develop a national strategy to counter Islamophobia in the U.S.
President Biden ran for office to restore the soul of our nation.
He is unequivocal.
There is no place for hate in America against anyone, period.
White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said in a statement.
The strategy, a joint effort by the Domestic Policy Council and the National Security Council, aims to create a comprehensive and detailed plan to protect Muslims and those perceived to be Muslim because of their race, national origin, ancestry, or any other reason from discrimination, hate, bigotry, and violence, said a White House official.
The White House will be partnering with local communities on coming up with this strategy.
Look, you know, I'm gonna read one more paragraph.
I got so much to say about this stuff.
I just absolutely...
Alright, let me read.
For too long, Muslims in America, and those perceived to be Muslims, such as Arabs and Sikhs, have endured a disproportionate number of hate-fueled attacks and other discriminatory incidents, Jean-Pierre said.
Moving forward, the President, Vice President, and our entire administration will continue working to ensure every American has the freedom to live their lives in safety without fear of how they pray, what they believe, and who they are.
Hey, I can respect that.
If somebody's Muslim, that's no reason to be a dick to them.
We have many friends of the show who are Muslims, and people of all different religious backgrounds, and it's fantastic, you know?
Like, hey man, do your thing, believe what you believe.
We'll disagree on a lot of issues, but we'll work to get along.
Good friends of the show, people that we admire, Muslim, and that is not a reason to attack them.
Not at all.
You criticise, I don't want to say attack, considering the context, but you're critical of people who are bad people.
And you're critical of people who you think are being disingenuous, and being inauthentic, and are lying, and want to steal power.
But if someone comes with a genuine opinion on something, and they're honest about why they think the things they do, well, you know, I think that's awful, but I can respect that you're saying it.
Some people will come out right and say that I want to seize power and do all these awful things, and you're like, I think that's evil.
But I appreciate you telling me.
You can call them evil.
Here's what we have right now in the United States.
Let me pull up some math here.
What do we have here?
Ah, here we go.
Google!
Total Muslim nations.
Oh, I love this one because I'm going to get a whole bunch of people who hate Israel yelling at me, but this is not the point to talk about Israel.
I should say, not the point to talk about, like, the history of the formation.
It's to make a point about politics in the United States.
Total Muslim nations, 49.
unidentified
Wow!
tim pool
That's a lot.
Now really what this just means is there's a large base of power pertaining to Islam, and the nations are broken apart.
Because when you look at the total Christian nations, 15!
That's amazing.
15.
I think the issue with this one is that Christianity in multiple forms is the state religion in the following 15 nations.
However, it's unofficially the religion of the country for a lot of countries.
Like, the United States is not... is a Christian nation.
It is.
It is.
And it may not be in the long run.
But what I mean is the majority of people here are Christian with Christian values.
We play Christmas music.
Okay?
We celebrate a whole bunch of Christian holidays as a national thing.
Like, Neither plan, Mariah Carey, all I want for Christmas is you, so yeah.
And I think you already know, obviously, there's only one Jewish country in the world.
Here we go, how many Christians?
2.38 billion.
That's a whole lot of Christians!
How many Muslims?
1.8 billion.
That's a whole lot of Muslims.
And how many Jews?
I like this because they have to use an expanded definition of what it means to be Jewish.
As of 2023, the world's core Jewish population, those identifying as Jews above all else, 16.1 million.
0.2% of the global population, whereas Islam is 24% of the global population.
And of course, Christianity is like, what, 27 or so.
Okay, I'm gonna break it down for you, my friends.
The White House is deeply concerned about this.
Okay, well, why Islam?
There are attacks against Christians all day, every day.
There are people who go on TV, who go on social media, who insult Christians, who lie, cheat, and steal.
The hatred towards Christians in this country greatly exceeds the hatred towards Muslims.
In fact, with people going out and tearing down these posters, These kidnapped Israelis, and not even Israelis, one guy, one poster was a Thai farm worker?
My point is, you're gonna get a lot of people saying, no, no, it's, you know, people are targeted for being Muslim.
I'm like, yeah, okay, that's bad, that's bad, right?
I don't understand why now the White House is playing this game.
I mean, if we're trying to be honest, right?
I can understand politically why they're doing it.
Far leftists are going down and tearing down posters of kidnapped People kidnapped in Israel.
The rotten's on the wall if you're Joe Biden.
Do not criticize these people.
In fact, passively support them.
Dude, I'm so sick of what I would refer to as Israel Derangement Syndrome.
Listen, Israel Derangement Syndrome.
There's a war going on right now.
Israel is not doing, it's not all good stuff.
It's bad stuff.
Bad stuff, okay?
Civilians are dying.
I got a big problem with that.
Palestine?
People are dying there.
Hey, guess what?
Hamas broke the ceasefire, stormed in, attacked, and killed a bunch of people.
And you know what the most annoying thing to me is?
I'm just like, my friend, I am the United States, okay?
I'm not saying that I embody all of it.
I am saying, in terms of my worldview and my perspective, I am of the United States.
I am not of Israel.
I am not of Palestine.
I don't like conflict in other nations.
But we ain't talking about Burma or Armenia.
Mel Gibson put out a video about Armenia, the Armenian Christians who are being killed.
Anybody gonna talk about them?
This is the crazy- Israel Derangement Syndrome is not just the pure hatred of Israel.
It is the obse- Well, actually, I'll put it this way.
I don't care if you are in the United States and you love Israel.
Really don't.
There's a lot of people here who live in the United States that love Somalia and Germany and other countries.
And you've got, like, little Italy and things like that.
I don't care if you like Israel.
You're allowed to.
And if you are concerned about what's going on there, you are allowed to say it.
I think we need to get more people talking about what's going on in Armenia and maybe Burma.
But the hatred towards Israel is so annoying.
I call it Israeliophobia!
I really don't, I'm kidding, but you get the point.
When I see these posts, I'm not gonna name these people, but they're on X slash Twitter.
And it's just like no matter what happens, Israel is some like demonic entity doing these crazy things.
And I'm like, dude, just listen.
I am not Israel.
I am not Palestine.
I am of the United States, right?
I am a United States-ian.
So, I'm like, I get that y'all are passionate, but why is this happening?
Why are people so psychotically deranged and obsessed with Israel that they have to go around tearing down posters of hostages who were kidnapped by an insane organization?
You know, I just can't even with this stuff, man.
I cannot even, I say.
It's derangement.
You know, right now you've got Christian persecution in Armenia.
Is the White House coming out and saying that there is a Christianophobia?
Nope.
And why not?
I just want to approach this all logically, right?
Why is it?
That there's this deep obsession with protecting Islam, the second largest religion in the world, with the most amount of state of nations.
And to be fair, we can mention there's a lot of nations that are Christian by population majority, but they don't have that.
They're not a theocracy.
I think almost all of these Muslim nations are theocratic, meaning their government is their religion.
Yet, here we are.
Here we are.
This is the front page story in the New York Post, but I want to show you some videos of what these people are doing.
This one's crazy.
This is Toronto.
This woman actually physically attacks a guy.
She's tearing things down.
She's basically like, I don't care about innocent people killed.
Look, I'm sorry, they're evil.
This woman right here in this video, this is what evil looks like.
She physically attacks a guy.
She says she doesn't care about innocent civilians.
And it's funny, in this New York Post video they put up, This guy's like, what about our civilians?
Shut your mouth.
We are in America.
In the United States, we're in the Americas.
Let's be nice to all the leftists.
In the US, we are not.
Unfortunately, we are involved.
I'm saying we shouldn't be involved in the dispute.
But for what reason?
You've got conflict going on.
How about this?
How about you put up posters of Palestinian kids who died instead of tearing down the posters of those who are currently being held hostage?
But it's because they're evil.
You see, here's what I think.
I feel like a good person would be like, hey man, it's really awful that this person was kidnapped.
What can we do?
What do we do?
I mean, there's a war going on.
I'm not sure we can't, but I appreciate the information being presented.
Hey, I got an idea.
I want to put up posters of the innocent civilians that died in Palestine, in Gaza, right?
And so we can all lament the death of these civilians.
And then, there you go.
That's your counter.
Why?
Look, if you want to highlight or if you're upset and you think Israel's doing something wrong, okay?
This is not the way.
Innocent civilians are who we want to protect.
They were attacked, targeted, killed, held hostage.
They are not.
They've done nothing wrong.
The left doesn't believe it.
That's the issue.
Why aren't they just putting up posters of the people of Gaza who are killed?
They're martyrs.
They don't care.
I mean, you'd think they'd put up posters.
No, the real issue is they think settlers are not civilians and the tourists are unworthy of our moral defense.
Yeah, I think that's the big point that I like to point.
Look, whenever I bring this up, it, like, offends pro-Israeli people to a certain degree.
Not everybody.
Not everyone's irrational.
Like I said, we've talked with pro-Palestine people.
I find them irrational.
But there are many, many irrational, anti-Israel, pro-Palestine types.
But, you know, talking about all of these issues, people just absolutely, on the left, I believe that they're They're not... I don't know how to say it, man.
I guess the issue is you can see the utter disdain they have for civilians and tourists.
People who are not Israeli.
But again, my point was this.
There are people who are pro-Israel who are like... When I say, hey, there were tourists who were kidnapped.
And they're like, yeah, but there were Jews who were kidnapped!
I'm like...
I'm not saying it's good or that I don't care.
Calm down.
The point I'm making is it is morally indefensible for the people on the left for these people to tear down a poster of a dude who was a tourist.
But they're not there.
They're on stolen land.
What do they know?
It's the craziest thing.
Dude flies to Israel and he's getting a falafel.
And he's just like, I've never been to Israel before.
And then Hamas comes in and kills him.
And this guy's from Germany.
Or this guy's from Thailand.
Well, you shouldn't have been here, they say.
And I'm like, well, look, I'll give you this.
You go into a conflict zone, even though Israel is in a weird place, like, you know, active conflict, like a war zone, yeah, you're in trouble.
But, you know, you have the presumption of some degree of safety in Israel, though it is one of the most intense conflict zones in the world.
They tear down these posters.
That's one of the videos that went viral was a poster of a Thai farmer.
A farm worker.
He was just there working.
He's not Israeli.
He's not a settler.
He's like, I don't know, I'll help you grow crops.
And they kidnapped him.
And these far leftists are, like, good.
No one should know.
No one should limit.
You have this young woman who's now reported dead.
They were spitting on her, desecrating her corpse.
And she was, uh, German.
She was a German, uh, she was a dual citizen, don't get me wrong, but she did not live in Israel.
That's my understanding, I could be wrong, but my understanding is that she was visiting from Germany.
Someone comes down to dance, having no idea, and they say, does not matter.
Hamas does not care why you are there.
They kill you all the same.
Okay.
I'll tell you, my friends, we've got problems.
Okay, we've got a big problem with what's going on in Israel-Palestine.
But guess what, my friends?
We ain't Israel, we ain't Palestine.
Now, I do think it's fair to say that you've got a holy war component, which creates this interest.
Because a lot of people have said to me explicitly, Israel is the holy land.
God has blessed it.
Jesus died there, etc, etc.
And I'm like, nah, I get it, whatever.
You got a lot of people.
You got a lot of people who care.
And the interesting thing is, how come Christians and Jews are mostly aligned on this one?
Seriously.
I don't know.
Don't ask me.
You know, Jews don't believe Jesus is the Messiah, nor was he a prophet.
Ben Shapiro, there's a video going around of him, he says that he was a guy who challenged the Roman Empire and he died for it.
And, you know, it's interesting.
Because I don't think that's a... I respect and understand that perspective.
I am not a Christian.
I grew up Catholic.
But after watching The Passion of the Christ, I totally understand exactly what Ben Shapiro is saying.
I'm like, interesting.
So it really is a question of do you believe that he was the Messiah who had come, the Son of God, etc., or do you believe that he was challenging the authority of the region and was killed for it?
I think, you know, I think Christians believe both, and Jews just don't believe he was the Messiah.
And if they did, they would be Christians.
That's about it.
So when it comes to Israel, the idea is, devout Jews and devout Christians, I shouldn't say Catholics, Christians, The Jews believe that this is the holy land, and the messianic era will come, and the Christians believe the same thing, and the second coming will happen, things like that.
I'm not gonna, you know, I'm not saying I know absolutely about all the religious ideas, but it does play a big role in this.
And so, now, there is a concern, I suppose, that the obsession, the religion-based ties to this, could lead us into a very serious and catastrophic war.
I don't think the U.S.
should be involved and I don't think religion justifies it.
I'm not saying the justification for it is religious.
I'm saying there are people who use religion as a justification that they've said to me.
Look, man, if you're a Christian and you believe it's the Holy Land and all of these things, I mean, I firmly believe that you should go there and assist the Israelis, if that's what you really believe.
As for the United States, Yeah, look, there's a strategic military reason that we know about a base that operates, a small one, in southern Israel.
There's a reason why we are working with Israel.
There's a reason why the U.S.
is funding Israel's defense.
It is effectively a large U.S.
military outpost in the Middle East.
That's basically what it is, my friends.
U.S.
interventionist policies.
With Israel in the region, a strong ally.
Don't get me wrong.
Egypt also loves taking money from the United States.
It gives us safe access in a lot of ways.
Now, we've also got military operations in Saudi Arabia, in Kuwait, in Qatar, Iraq, Afghanistan.
Oh, you get the point.
Afghanistan, where I think we're mostly out of, I don't know if there's anything left.
There's probably some.
Syria.
I just, I look at these maps of the U.S.
military presence and I'm just like, this is such stupid garbage.
Stupid garbage.
Anyway, man, look.
This is the big news.
Joe Biden is so deeply concerned with Islam at a time when Jewish people are being harassed, insulted, targeted.
Why?
You know, it's funny.
I'm going to wrap with this.
I absolutely despise despise.
The anti-semitic conspiracy theories, the Zionist conspiracy theories.
There are these photos that people post all the time, and it's like a collection of individuals in government and media, and they put stars of David on them.
They put out one with Luke Rudkowski on it, and they put a star of David on it.
Luke is not Jewish!
What the... I just can't stand this.
These people are absolutely insane.
The anti-Israel people... Look, there are people who are critical of Israel who are sane and rational.
I'm not saying you.
But there are conspiracy crackpot, anti-Zionist, anti-Israel people who are, like, out of their minds.
I am not saying all anti-Zionists are crazy.
I am saying that conspiracy people exist.
And so, the derangement there, the obsession, it is mind-numbingly insane.
But I just want to say this, to all of these people, they think that Jews secretly won the world.
Look, I had the conversation with Ye, and I want to stress too, before the show started, the conversation I had with Ye about the Jews or whatever, sane, calm, rational, interesting.
Then the camera turned on and he went from talking calmly to, I was just saying, you know, these guys are good, but the bang, you know what I'm talking about?
And I'm like, what the hell just happened?
He just, it's fake.
unidentified
I think it was planned out, whatever.
tim pool
But there are these people who believe that, you know, all the banks are run by Jews and whatever, and there's like this weird conspiracy that the land lease from the Rothschilds on Israel has expired, and it's just like, oh, just stop, stop, man.
The conspiracy theories, just stop, okay?
But no, like, whatever, you can believe whatever you want to believe.
I'm just saying, like, it is so annoying when you have these people, people who are kidnapped in Israel, and they put up posters, Leftists and people in cities tear them all down in college students and Joe Biden comes out and defends Islam.
And they're like, they think the Jews run the world.
And I'm like, we, we did this on the show.
We pulled up, uh, I think this is right after Ye left.
We pulled up the major banks of the U S and who runs them.
unidentified
And it's all Irish people like Brian Moynihan.
tim pool
It's a bunch of Irish guys.
Yeah.
Okay.
I guess, listen, There's a lot going on in the world.
A lot of what we do, pertaining to Israel, is about military dominance.
But of course, our government will exploit religious fervor if it gets them an advantage.
But I'll just leave it there, man.
I just think that the Democrats are... They're penderous, evil people.
And these far leftists are deeply evil.
We've got a lot more to talk about.
I want to talk about Amy Schumer, because she's getting absolutely roasted.
Celebrities and other stories.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment is coming up at 1pm on this channel.
Export Selection