DeSantis ENDORSES TRUMP In Viral Concession Speech, Accidentally Quotes BUDWEISER IN Hilarious Gaffe
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
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
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.
Today is a big day.
The GOP primary, which technically doesn't exist, shouldn't exist because Donald Trump is going to win and we're all just wasting our time.
Nikki Haley is siphoning off money from moderate Democrat types to try and challenge Donald Trump.
Whatever.
I suppose it is, in the end, a good thing because with as many Democrats vowing to support Nikki Haley as there are, that money will go from Democrats to Republicans and then maybe it'll be used somehow for a GOP candidacy or something.
What a silly, silly time to be alive.
But the big news, of course, Ron DeSantis has canceled his campaign as of yesterday.
And exemplifying just how apocalyptically bad Ron DeSantis' campaign was, he quoted Budweiser Closing out his speech thinking that he was quoting Winston Churchill.
Let me repeat that for you, my friends.
As Ron DeSantis was giving his speech announcing the suspension of his campaign, he says Winston Churchill once said, quote, but as it turns out, he was in fact quoting Budweiser beer.
I kid you not.
Now look, just because you're a beer company doesn't mean you can't come up with good quotes.
But I find it absolutely hilarious that the team running the DeSantis campaign were so abysmal, apocalypticly bad.
Wow.
This is going to be, historically, one of the worst campaigns we have ever seen for the presidency.
And now, of course, tomorrow is the New Hampshire primary, which, I have to imagine, Nikki Haley is going to drop out.
If Nikki Haley continues, I can only assume it's for one of two reasons.
She is milking money off of Democrats, as I mentioned, or They fully expect Donald Trump to be removed from this election, leaving her the only standing candidate, which would be catastrophe.
I mean, literal catastrophe for all of us, but just political catastrophe because the Republican base will revolt.
I don't know what they would do.
They're going to have to remove Donald Trump just before the Republican National Convention.
If they do, and Nikki Haley is the only one who shows up, sure, maybe she's the nominee, but I have to imagine it is going to be bedlam come Milwaukee.
But let's talk about the big news today, and I want to do kind of a post-mortem here on the DeSantis campaign.
I want to show you something that I find to be truly fascinating.
The betting odds.
Did you know that Ron DeSantis was over a 50% favorite beginning of January 2023 and he crashed collapsing every single day and part of what I want to express here is schadenfreude
Schadenfreude at all of the whinging, ridiculous Trump campaign supporters.
I'm sorry, DeSantis campaign supporters, not Trump.
Although he has his, sure.
DeSantis' whinging campaign supporters on social media.
And no matter how hard you tried to help them understand, they would not accept it.
Feels like it was on purpose.
Ron?
I don't know what you were thinking.
You've destroyed your political career.
It is laughably bad.
Jeez.
And you know he should have fired Christina Pasha a long time ago.
Talk about the stupidest person in politics.
Ron DeSantis.
But I'll tell you why.
My friends, if, uh, if you're in politics and you're a leading governor and you've been endorsed by Trump and he boosts you up, and then you decide you're gonna take a shot at the king and take that throne, you're a dumb guy.
Especially not realizing what's going on.
But then, you go and hire someone as stupid as Christina Pichot.
Okay, now of course you can say that she is the stupidest person in politics because of how horribly she ran things.
But of course, the buck stops with Ron.
He had an opportunity at any point to say, Lady, you're not doing your job right.
Instead, he decided, I'm just gonna let it roll with it.
And here you are.
Look at this apocalyptic collapse of Ron DeSantis, and he is wiped off the map.
The predicted betting odds have him equal to literally any other random person with one cent.
Talk about failure.
But to exemplify this, of course, we could talk about the fake quote.
Now, within this story, there is more.
A looming conspiracy.
Not this story, but this segment that I'm producing.
Laura Loomer has gone off on Twitter about Alexander Soros, the son of George Soros, posting some kind of veiled threat against Donald Trump.
I gotta be honest, I think she's reading a little bit too much here, and I mean, like, a lot of it too much.
However, the conspiracy theorists who believe that Donald Trump is the Antichrist...
Yes, it's true.
Believe that there will be an attempt on Trump's life.
If Nikki Haley is the only one left standing, and Vivek Ramaswamy has predicted that he thinks they will stop at nothing to remove Donald Trump, while I certainly don't think Alexander Soros was actually posting a veiled threat, he just posted an article from The Atlantic, we will break this down, I do think it's important to note that while there may be many overly excited Trump supporters, And I don't mean excited as a positive, I mean like agitated over the fears against Trump's life.
They may be wrong about looking at what Alexander Soros posted, but I don't think the sentiment is wrong and I understand why there's a fear there.
As Vivek said, they will stop at nothing.
Tucker Carlson, Alex Jones, many prominent individuals have warned they will try to take Trump's life.
It's a scary prospect.
Let's get started here.
Ron DeSantis posts fake Winston Churchill quote after suspending campaign.
Now, what I'd like to point out first and foremost is, as we were driving back home, we were hanging out in PA yesterday, over the weekend, when Ron DeSantis announced that he would be suspending his campaign.
I played the audio in the car, and some people thought it was AI generated.
I gotta be honest, it sounds AI-generated.
Ron DeSantis' speaking voice is so canned and generic, it sounds like they typed it into a machine and pressed go.
But, that being said, let me play for you the final quote from Ron DeSantis as he ended his campaign.
Well, to be honest, he was the best that they had in Florida at the time.
Who else was running?
Who else could win?
Donald Trump steps up and says, this is your guy right here.
Thanks in part to the Florida legislature, As well as, I can agree, Ron did good things.
They ended up with a remarkable track in Florida, politically.
This led to Ron DeSantis winning, remarkably, his re-election campaign.
But it wasn't because he is a great leader.
It is mostly because Donald Trump endorsed him, propped him up, and then, with the Florida legislature, They eventually pushed towards opening up the state before every other state.
Now, they were locked down.
They were in favor of mandates.
That's a fact.
But Ron did start to open up things early on, creating a haven.
People then moved from California and New York into Florida, turning Miami Republican.
Thanks in part to Ron DeSantis.
I absolutely think he deserves some of the credit for this.
Some.
But Donald Trump created this man.
And Donald Trump... Listen.
He did what he had to do.
And then DeSantis went rogue.
That's right.
Instead of saying thank you, Donald Trump, for the support and helping me get here, he decided he was going to break off onto his own.
And it is so infuriating.
All of the troubles of the Ron DeSantis campaign culminated by him quoting Budweiser.
And I have fact-checked, and I believe I can say I have verified.
Oh yeah, baby.
He quoted Budweiser.
Of all companies.
So, in the community notes, credit to other users for finding this.
The quoted words in the tweet do not appear in this phrasing in any of Winston Churchill's books, articles, speeches, and papers, although they have been frequently misattributed to him.
Someone responded, they do appear in a Budweiser print ad from 1938.
Oh boy.
Well, my friends, I give you Etsy.
So first thing I did was I typed in, you can't tell him there's no fission.
I searched for the ad to make sure it was real.
The person who said it was found in the Budweiser ad posted a digitized version which could easily be made in Photoshop.
So I found this on Etsy.
You can't tell him there's no fission.
That's what the ad says.
At the bottom it says, men with spirit of youth pioneered our America.
Men with vision and sturdy confidence.
They found contentment in the thrill of action.
Knowing that success was never final and failure never fatal.
It was courage that counted.
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.
Isn't opportunity to America today greater than it was?
Okay, okay.
What did he say?
It's the courage to continue that counts.
Well, it's not verbatim.
They say it was courage that counted.
He is, in essence, quoting Budweiser.
I also found this from eBay.
In fact, I even ordered one of these.
And I hope one day, perhaps, Ron DeSantis will autograph one of these things.
A piece of history.
Now, much like Dukakis, I don't think there will be great reference to Ron DeSantis in the future or in the history books.
But to those who do look back at this time period, there is a story to be told about the Ron DeSantis campaign and its failures.
We can see here an actual physical version of the ad.
This was posted well before Ron DeSantis quoted it.
So I think it says it was last updated December 25th, 2022.
So this is over a year ago, over one year ago, this was posted.
This is a real ad, and there's more than one available to be purchased.
This one was last updated July 17th, 2023, well before Ron DeSantis used it in a almost, quote, thinking that it was Winston Churchill.
What a sad failure!
That is the Ron DeSantis campaign.
With 50.8% in the betting odds, January 3rd, 2023, how did he fail so miserably?
My friends, when you're starting so high, and dropping so low, I have to say, this man is as dumb as a box of rocks.
Running only ensured the end of his political career, He could have worked with Trump, likely would have been Trump's VP pick.
And it would have been something.
Although I'm glad we saw this because you do not want a man as stupid as Ron DeSantis running.
All of these DeSantis supporters are on Twitter going, GRRR!
I can't believe how stupid these people are.
I'm sorry, I got no respect whatsoever.
We are watching a man, from the beginning, trying to push a cube of stone uphill, and we're like, listen, my guy, I'd understand if that was a boulder you were trying to push uphill.
We can understand an uphill battle.
Trying to roll a boulder uphill.
But yo, you're pushing a gigantic cube.
It ain't rolling.
You're just pushing straight against the ground.
Hey, it's not impossible to push a cube of a gigantic pyramid block uphill.
It's possible.
But as we're pointing it out, and trying to give advice saying, maybe you should try this, that, or otherwise, the Rhonda Santa supporters would just shriek like banshees, really stupid ones, on the internet.
Good riddance.
But my friends, we now have questions about what's going to happen as Nikki Haley remains in the race, and tomorrow we have the New Hampshire primary.
I don't see a reality in which Nikki Haley actually wins, except, in the instance, Democrats flood the system to vote for her, which they may do.
Then you've got to ask yourself something interesting.
Even if they do, Nikki Haley can't win, because not enough Democrats are going to do this.
If Democrats are donating Nikki Haley, perhaps we are looking at a trap.
Yeah, I think people should consider this.
Democrats donate to Nikki Haley thinking they're sabotaging Trump.
Nikki Haley, knowing full well she's going to drop out of the race, she's not been bad-mouthing Trump.
The media has pointed this out a little bit, but not as much as she should be.
So she makes millions off Democrats, drops out, and then can use all of that funding for some other race.
Now, I don't know for sure.
But I wonder if her campaign would be allowed to use that for other Republicans or give it to the RNC.
I know that they do something with the leftover campaign funds.
It'll just go in the toilet.
So could they be funneling Democrat donations away from Biden by doing this?
Perhaps.
Perhaps, perhaps indeed.
New Hampshire Democrats vow to vote for Nikki Haley in GOP primary.
Well, I say good luck to them!
But Donald Trump is gonna win.
It's a waste of time that Nikki Haley is running.
But it, you know what, fine.
Whatever.
There's no real primary, and now we have the issue of, uh, come March, we're gonna be doing the Super Tuesday event.
There's- there's literally no reason to do a Super Tuesday event.
I- I guess, you know, we're- we're preparing it, we're getting insurance, there's a lot of stuff you gotta do for live events, and I'm just like, call it Super Tuesday, I guess?
March 5th?
But Nikki Haley won't be in the race by then.
Who knows?
Who knows.
Well, my friends, I have more for you.
Alexander Soros tweeted this.
He said, last year the crime and inflation crisis largely evaporated.
So did the leading theories about what caused them.
But did you notice the veiled threat in this post?
Why it would appear that Alex Soros has just put out a hit on the former president.
No, I gotta be honest, it actually doesn't look that way, but Laura Loomer thinks it does.
I can respect that people are concerned there will be an attempt on Trump's life.
And perhaps you can make the argument that Laura's pulling a big ask.
A big ask is basically, you push something to the extreme, and that moves people towards it without actually getting to it.
And what I mean by this is, by saying that this is a veiled threat against Donald Trump, it sparks a conversation around whether or not someone will try to take Trump's life.
People are going to mock Laura Loomer for having done it, but it will drive that conversation.
I think Laura's looking too deeply into this, to be completely honest.
But the big ask basically is, let's say you want to sell a car that's worth $1,000.
You say, I want $2,000 for the car.
Someone goes, what?
That's double the price of what it's actually worth.
I'll give you 12.
And you go, oh, okay, I'll take it.
The big ask pulls them down.
You still made $200 more than you actually thought you would.
Now, what in this image could possibly be a veiled threat against Donald Trump?
Well, Laura says it's even more... Let me start from the beginning, I suppose.
I think it's... Here we go.
Soros assassination threat against Trump.
Basically, what she's pointing out is that in this image, you have a bunch of statements made.
I'll then jump down.
She's saying he is offering 100 million dollars net to anybody who does this.
Again, I do not believe that this is real or correct.
She points out there's a four and a five.
Let me give you the general idea that she is trying to convey, which again, I believe is not correct.
In this image from the Atlantic, they show a bullet hole in glass and they show a person holding money.
Now I gotta be honest, these are interesting photos to choose.
To which Laura says Trump would be the 47th president.
You can see a four and a five on the bills.
It says, will pay the bearer on demand, which was removed in 1963, the year that JFK lost his life.
This is what Laura's saying.
And you can see that, uh, what else is it?
Silver certificate.
She says means silver bullet.
Okay.
Well, I gotta be honest.
This is an article from the Atlantic.
This is not something that Alexander Soros wrote.
It was written by Roj Karma, January 18th, so four days ago.
And it's talking about, last year the crime and inflation crisis largely evaporated.
So did the leading theories about what caused them.
It would appear that the Atlantic pulled stock images showing crime and money.
There are interesting photos to choose from.
I have to be completely honest.
I don't quite understand why the Atlantic chose these photos.
I mean, seriously.
If you were to talk about crime and inflation, wouldn't you just use, like, an image of New York City and the crime that's been going on?
A modern reference to what's happening?
I certainly don't believe that this is, from the Atlantic, some kind of threat at Donald Trump or whatever.
But I can understand a lot of people are responding to this tweet saying that there's something serious.
Donnie Darkened believes that Donald Trump may be the Antichrist, says possible foreshadowing of the deep state's attempt on Trump's life, as also inferred by numerous examples of predictive programming.
Quote, and I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death and his deadly wound was healed and all the world wondered after the beast.
Well, what he's basically saying... This is... These videos are wild, dude.
So, uh... Charismatic Leader.
There's a card game.
What is it called?
The Illuminati or something?
And it's from the 90s.
And one of the guys, like the Antichrist or something, or... I think it's Assassination.
I don't know.
A card... It looks like Donald Trump and Charismatic Leader's got blonde hair.
Like, it doesn't mean... A man with blonde hair doesn't mean Donald Trump.
But the idea here is, the Antichrist will be wounded upon his face and arm.
And what's interesting is that people have made up a bunch of reasons as to why this may refer to Donald Trump.
Donald Trump does that thing with his arm where he goes, and he like mocks somebody, and maybe that's just it.
Others are saying that someone will make an attempt on Trump's life, scarring his face and his arm, damaging his arm, and then he will win re-election and he will be the Antichrist.
Donnie Darkin points out, we had him on the Culture War podcast, That the Antichrist is not some evil figure who destroys the world.
In fact, he's a great uniter.
But he pulls people away from the true mission of Christ and God.
Something to that effect.
That the Antichrist essentially elevates himself to this position and everyone is focused solely on him.
But he does unify.
He does fix things.
It's a particularly interesting idea.
But, uh, not for me.
I think it's all just a bit too silly as far as I'm concerned.
And, uh, I just... Look, man, I do think that there's a real risk to Trump.
That they may try to take his life.
Who knows?
I certainly think there are many people who live in a different world than I do.
And they're allowed to.
But I think Trump does have risk.
I think we should be paying attention to it.
I think we should be vigilant.
And Trump should up his security.
Because Nikki Haley is still in the race when she shouldn't be, and we have to wonder why that is.
Perhaps she is just tricking Democrats.
Whatever.
Either way, I don't want her to win.
Now as to who Donald Trump could choose as his VP, I honestly don't know.
We thought for a long time that it would be Ron DeSantis.
Not so much anymore.
I don't know that it could be Vivek Ramaswamy.
Some people are saying Tim Scott.
Perhaps Ben Carson.
Maybe.
Maybe.
But for now, the race is down to Donald Trump and no one really else and there's no real race and it was a waste of everyone's time.
But the New Hampshire primary is tomorrow.
I don't know that I even care to cover it.
I gotta be honest.
You know, for the Iowa Caucus, we went down and we did a big show.
We had Vivek Ramaswamy, and there was a lot of interest around Vivek, Ron, Nikki.
Not so much Nikki, but I mean like the interest in the story.
Now it's just Nikki, and she's just, there's no point even bothering talking about her.
So, I don't know that we're gonna do a New Hampshire primary show.
I think we'll probably just do the show as normal and then passively, oh look, Nikki lost again.
Sure, whatever.
We'll see though.
Tonight should be interesting.
We've got a lot to talk about.
Sean Strickland, UFC.
I think it's funny because people are saying Sean Strickland wasn't robbed, and he was, because that's quite literally what it means.
It was a split decision.
He was robbed in that many thought he should have won.
Dana White said he should have won.
It is what it is.
It is what it is, but I'll talk about that in a moment, because we do have some political UFC news coming up later.
They're trying to get Dana White to call out Sean Strickland.
I thought it was a good fight, but we'll get into that later.
I'll leave that there for now.
Next up, it's coming up at 1pm on this channel.
Thanks for hanging out, and I'll see you all then.
Hey guys, Josh Hammer here, the host of America on Trial with Josh Hammer, a podcast for the First Podcast Network.
Look, there are a lot of shows out there that are explaining the political news cycle, what's happening on the Hill, the this, the that.
There are no other shows that are cutting straight to the point when it comes to the unprecedented lawfare debilitating and affecting the 2024 presidential election.
We do all of that every single day right here on America on Trial with Josh Hammer.
Subscribe and download your episodes wherever you get your podcasts.
Well, of course, I was rooting for Sean Strickland.
I made a wager on this man to win, and he did not win.
Although, I think, in our hearts, he did.
A lot of people are saying that he got robbed, but it was a really close fight.
I do want to talk a little bit about it.
I am not a big UFC guy.
I am a layman who watched the fight, and I got some things to say.
I think that Sean Strickland should have won.
Ooh, controversy for you, big UFC fans.
But the news that I'm here to cover, because that's more my forte, is the politics of it.
Following his defeat, many people are saying the reason why the judges didn't want Strickland to win, they had a bias against him, it's because of the things he said publicly about politics.
Dana White, of course, was asked about this following the fight.
They said, Sean Strickland's saying all this bad stuff.
Dana White says, hey, you can say whatever you want.
The controversy here is that a reporter says, you give your fighters a long leash to say these things, and he goes, I don't put anybody on a leash.
There's no leash.
They can do whatever they want.
Of course, the reporter's trying to make a point, saying there is a limit.
Like, implying there is a leash or a long leash is to imply that Dana White actually has a point at which she would tell someone, you've gone too far.
Dana White says, no, there isn't.
They can say whatever they want.
This is where things get interesting.
The question is... Was this a robbery?
Should Sean Strickland have won?
In my personal opinion, yes.
And I'll explain why.
But this is totally outside of the world of UFC.
So it's not gonna be any legitimate scoring or competition argument.
I'm just gonna give you my personal thoughts as someone who doesn't watch.
And I think if you're a big UFC fan, you should hear what I have to say.
In that, I have no idea what's going on.
And this is how it looks to me.
That being said, understand, this is how it may look to a lot of people who are trying to watch UFC and trying to understand this and get into it.
And then I totally 100% respect that if you think Drikus won based on scoring and the judges were right, totally fair point.
I don't know.
I'll just tell you how I felt about it.
But anyway, I kind of lost my train of thought.
My point here is, Is this, the other point I was going to make is, is this actually about politics?
Because this is what some people are saying.
Sean Strickland is controversial.
He's in, he jumps up and starts punching a guy, I think he was punching Du Plessis, in the, I can't remember, he tells the kid to move out of the way, and they're saying this guy causes a lot of trouble.
He makes video, he's mocking Bud Light.
And there it is.
This is the question.
Bud Light puts down, what, $100 million on UFC.
Sean Strickland comes out and says, I'm gonna fix you, I'm the champ.
And then, in a controversial decision, loses.
And I can only tell you what I see, as somebody who's into politics sees that, and then hears that from fans.
People are saying Strickland got robbed, other people are saying, no he didn't, shut up, what does robbery even mean?
Oh boy.
Let's break it down.
We'll get started here with the pink news, and we'll talk to you about what Dana White said in response to this fight.
Ultimate Fighting Championship CEO, President Dana White, has defended Strickland and his right to free speech after the fighter faced backlash for his, quote, homophobic and transphobic comments.
Let me just play the clip for you so you can hear it yourself, because I think bravo to Dana White for smacking down these reporters, for roasting them.
I don't know if there's a better way to boost the audio.
Like, hey!
Normally I get the audio, it's not working too well.
This time, it's actually just... This is how it always is on... Oh, look at that!
Elon Musk says he's right.
Let me see if I can pull up a better clip here, because the audio on this is not normalized.
And I just want to give a shout out to our friends at Twitter.
For whatever reason, people go on Twitter, they don't normalize the audio properly, so you can't hear it.
But, uh, I don't know if we actually... You know what?
I'll just read the quote.
I think we have the quote here.
I'll read it.
While White made it clear that he neither condoned nor denounced Strickland's comments, he told the press he has no interest in policing fighters' beliefs.
Quote, I don't, I think, tell any other human being what to say, what to think, and there's no leashes on any of them.
That's ridiculous to say I give anybody, I give somebody a leash.
Free speech, brother.
People can say whatever they want.
They can believe whatever they want.
And so, uh, you know, I think the reporter...
Didn't intentionally mean, he didn't think about this, he wasn't meaning to say quite literally that there's restrictions, but the implication is absolutely there.
He's like, you give your fighters a long leash to say what they want, as if to imply, as I stated, there is a point at which Dana White's gonna be like, you can't be saying those things on stage.
Or at the press conferences.
Whatever.
Now here's what I find interesting.
There are many people who are claiming that this is actually about politics.
Let me see what we got here.
This is, uh, just look at some of the tweets because UFC 297 is trending.
And we got this guy, Slav Trap God, follows me.
Good name, sir.
This is why the judges robbed Sean Strickland.
I pulled up just this one tweet.
But there are many other tweets.
He is wearing a shirt that says, a woman in every kitchen, a gun in every hand.
He also wore a shirt that said, make Canada great again, and defended the people and called out Trudeau to massive fanfare.
During the fight, check this out.
Canada, get your ish together.
Joe Rogan revels in UFC crowd chanting, F Trudeau.
So this guy's causing trouble.
Here's what I don't trust.
I watched that fight, and all I saw was Sean Strickland winning.
I'm not saying Drikus didn't do really, really well.
I mean, that dude was amazing.
Absolutely amazing.
Strickland won.
Let me explain.
Let me see.
Let me read what Dana White said.
Because after I watched the fight, and then at the end, when they're like, it's 48-47, 47-48, and the final scoring is Drickus Duplessis, I was like, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, what?
Even Sean Strickland said, I felt like I won that fight, but maybe I'm just being a pussy.
And then he walks off.
He took it in stride.
Mad respect, dude.
Sean Strickland is a great role model.
He's a good dude.
I have tremendous respect for how he handled it.
He stated, I thought I won, but you know, maybe I'm just being a pussy.
I'm like, that's one way to put it!
And then he walks off.
He's not whinging about it.
I respect that.
But I think he won.
Dana White, this is from MMAFighting.com, Dana White reveals he had Shawn Strickland winning at UFC 297, but doesn't plan immediate rematch.
Dana White said after watching that, if he was judging, he said Strickland won.
I find that fascinating.
Is he playing politics here because this is a controversial decision?
What I find fascinating is, again, as somebody who's not like a diehard UFC guy, I've watched a handful of fights in my day, mostly following this because many of these MMA fighters are based AF and are calling out the corruption in various governments.
Strickland calling out Trudeau.
Colby Covington defending Donald Trump.
These are guys who are not scared to call out the corruption and I respect it.
And so I want to see them fight.
When I watch this fight and then I hear that Dana White says that he won too, I'm like, that's what I saw.
Dana White maybe is saying this because it is controversial, and he's like, well, if at least I come out and defend him, then it will keep fans like, yeah, you go Dana White, you're right, he did when those judges were wrong.
If they didn't know why I came out and said, nah, here's what I was thinking.
Don't look at me.
But you know how they love to say the undisputed champion of the world?
Yo, I gotta tell you right now.
Drikus, amazing fighter.
Tremendous job.
Great, great fight.
Tremendous skill.
Disputed champion.
No question, it was a split decision.
Two judges for Du Plessis, one judge for Strickland, and I say it's disputed.
The fact that you can go online and see all these videos and articles where people are debating whether or not Strickland won or lost, I say Du Plessis is the disputed champion of the world.
Uh, what is it, Welterweight?
Here's MMA fighting.
Sean Strickland lost a split decision in his battle with Drikus Duplassie at UFC 297 main
event, but UFC CEO Daniel White believes he deserved to get the win.
Quote, we were just looking at how the media had scored it and right down the middle, White
said at UFC 297 post-fight press conference.
I had it 2-2 going into the last round, and I thought that Strickland won the last round.
Guys who were sitting at the same table had it the other way.
It was a close fight.
Strickland started the fight strong with a lead jab that poured a lot of punishment, but Duplessis weathered the storm and then delivered damage of his own during the bloody back and forth battle.
White praised Strickland's performance, particularly regarding his best weapon on the feet, which also played a massive part in winning his title last September.
Quote, I thought Strickland looked great in the first two rounds, White said.
That jab was effing beautiful.
You don't see jabs like that in MMA.
That jab did what it was supposed to do.
Both of Du Plessis' eyes were swelling shut.
He was slowed down the third and fourth, and Du Plessis kept coming forward and started mixing up takedowns and punches.
White felt the fight really came down to the final five minutes, and all three judges actually agreed that Strickland won that round.
He says, I had it even going into the fifth round, and this is the round to see who wants it, White said.
They both started to turn it up a little bit.
It's just one of those tight fights, but I'm also one of these guys.
I believe you've got to take it from the champion.
I completely agree with that!
Look, this is how I felt.
Before I even heard Dana White say it.
You are talking of the champ, okay?
Strickland is the champ.
You want to take that title, you prove you took that title.
A split decision?
Man.
I mean, look.
There's money, there's endorsements.
Accept the judges, accept.
If the judges called it for Strickland, everybody would be saying that he won.
But, now that it's called for Duplessis... Man.
I'm not a fan, I'm not a fan.
He says, despite his feelings on the decision, White didn't cry robbery or feel like Du Plessis didn't deserve to celebrate his victory in becoming the new UFC middleweight champion.
It's also safe to say Du Plessis disagreed with White's assessment after learning the UFC CEO scored the fight for Strickland.
Just for the record, are there some people that think I lost the fight?
Du Plessis said at the post-press conference.
Dana said I lost the fight?
Well, BS.
You did.
Oh, dude, I think Du Plessis was amazing.
Bro, I think you fought amazing, amazing.
Some of those body shots, the punch to the face, I mean, you ripped blood straight from the head of Strickland.
It was pouring out.
Brutal.
I don't think it was enough.
Let me tell you what I think, okay?
I'm a layman.
I don't know much about how scoring works.
I tell you, I watched that fight, and at the end of it, I'm just like, if I saw these two dudes in the street fighting, Strickland won.
That's all I really have to say.
Why?
I'll tell you why.
People are saying, well, it's not based on total strikes, it's based on, you know, rounds, and who won each round, and I'm like, yup, yup, yup, and all that stuff means little to me, but I accept it, and I'll say this.
Let me see.
We have the scorecard pulled up right here.
Let me see if I can zoom in and get a better image for you guys.
Here's the UFC scorecard.
And everybody gives round one to Sean Strickland.
No question.
I was actually super excited and impressed.
Don't get me wrong.
Look, I know I put a bet on Strickland.
I liked the guy.
I wanted him to win.
And I lost that bet.
It's fine.
I got no... It is what it is.
I only did a little bitty bet.
Okay?
I did a little bitty bet.
I didn't do anything big or substantial.
I wanted to, but I actually wasn't able to.
So I didn't.
I lost a couple hundred bucks.
For all the people who are like, Tim goes to the casino too much, dude, I don't play that much money.
A couple hundred bucks here and there, calm down.
More than the average person probably because I can afford to, but I put a couple hundred bucks down on Sean Strickland to win, and that's about it.
We played a couple hundred bucks last night, I ended up winning like a thousand dollars, calm down.
But anyway, I digress.
Have fun at the casinos.
You don't go there to win money.
You go there to be entertained and get free drinks.
So here we go.
Take a look at this.
Strickland wins the first one.
Everybody agrees Duplassie took the second round.
I didn't even think that.
I didn't.
To be fair though, when I'm watching on pay-per-view, the camera angles don't do justice to Duplassie's fighting.
And I totally respect that.
Because I made sure to watch some of the replays and I'm like, wow!
Du Plessis.
Real great.
Round 3, I thought absolutely went to Strickland.
And I guess that's where I'm with this other judge, Saul D'Amato.
Maybe he's just, you know, biased for Strickland or whatever.
Round 4?
Toss-up, I had no idea.
But I gotta tell you, the first few rounds, what I saw was Sean Strickland clearly dominating, but I agree, I didn't feel like he was... It felt like he was carved out of stone, but it didn't feel like he was punishing, like he was beating him down.
The first one, no question, those jabs?
Wow!
To see Du Plessis come out with his face swollen.
Final round, no question, went to Strickland.
And they all agreed Round 5 went to Strickland.
I thought so.
I could not believe they gave Du Plessis the fight.
Because, take a look at this.
According to these first two judge cards, it did not matter!
That's insane.
According to these two judges, Derek Cleary and Eric Collin, Going as soon as Round 4 ended, Du Plessis already won.
No matter what Strickland did, it was over.
Suppose you could have a finisher, but I could not believe that.
So here's what I think.
I can respect and accept.
That Strickland didn't go hard enough.
People were saying, and again, I'm not a big UFC guy.
I was just reading the articles and they said that Du Plessis is a finisher.
He doesn't go long.
It was the first time he ever went into the fourth round.
I guess he finishes these fights.
He takes them down.
Power.
Okay, and he was saying things like, I don't need a judge to tell me I won, I'm gonna end this fight.
I think, and I read other people say the same thing, because again, I'm just some layman, that Strickland was going for, wear this guy down, he's not a fifth round fighter, wear him down, and then in round five, take the decisive victory.
I think that strategy didn't work out.
I don't see how Strickland lost this one.
You know, my view is, I guess I suppose, Me as a layman watching a fight, no question Strickland won.
Oh, I get it, he's covered in blood.
And people are posting this picture where he's bleeding and they're like, close fight, are you kidding?
Look at his face!
I'm like, dude, bleeding doesn't mean you lost a fight.
Swelling eyes shut doesn't mean you lost a fight.
What I see here is, you go six, seven, eight rounds, you keep the fight up.
If this was fight until it's over, Strickland wins, no question.
No question.
That's why it's just like, dude, that's so stupid.
I can't with this stuff, man.
I understand there's gotta be judging criteria, but how about this?
How about you put two guys in a ring, you don't do rounds, you say, fight.
I don't like any of this stuff.
Because when it gets to the technical, we have to score how much damage was received in body shots and blah blah blah.
It's just like, get out of here, dude.
If two guys fight, and then eventually they're just too tired and standing there, you call it a draw.
This is just me.
I'm not, I'm not interested in the technicality stuff.
That's just me.
What I want to see is, two guys trying to fight, I want to see them fight, I want to see somebody win.
I want to see somebody win.
I know not every fight could go down with a finisher.
There were a few takedowns Du Plessis had.
I respect those.
They were good.
Sean got pulled down.
I think he pulled out of them very well.
If I'm watching this fight in the street, Strickland wins.
And then they come out and they're like, well, technically because they're round based and there's a scoring mechanism, we have to make sure that when we're judging the certain hits and the damage given.
And I'm like, that's so stupid.
Sorry, guys.
I'm not a fan of this stuff.
I don't care to watch it.
I don't know.
Tell me I'm wrong.
That's fine.
You guys do your thing.
You watch what you watch.
That's totally fine.
No beef.
No beef.
I'm saying for me personally, I think this is stupid.
I was reading about what it means to be robbed in a fight.
And Strickland got robbed.
A lot of people are saying, it's not a robbery, calm down, it was a close fight.
That's what robbery is.
Robbery is when the guy you think should have won does not win.
Typically, the fair assessment is a split decision.
I get it.
There have been fights I was reading about where one guy clearly won the fight, brutally beating the other guy, but the other guy wins on points through technicalities, and everyone's like, that's a robbery.
I'm like, okay, I agree.
A lot of people say it's a robbery when there's one fight where the whole crowd is booing as one guy is giving his post-fight interview.
And it's like, clearly that's a robbery.
But what I mean is, yo, what's the other circumstance in which you'd call a fight a robbery?
Okay?
If it was clear that Strickland lost and it was definitive in the judge's scorecards, you wouldn't call it a robbery.
You'd be like, wow, that guy got beat.
If it was the other way around, you'd say, wow, it got beat.
In fact, if Strickland won this by one point in the other direction, people would say Duplessis got robbed.
Yeah!
Because it was a close fight, and you think a judge didn't score it properly in one area, making the winner lose.
What else would you describe as a robbery?
And I think the issue is the implication that robbery is that it was an intentional taking of it.
Sure.
I gotta be honest, guys.
I think there is a strong possibility they didn't want the guy who roasted Bud Light to win.
You gotta talk politics, man.
Think about it this way.
I'm not saying Dana White did anything.
I don't know.
But come on.
You think when people play in these big-buck games, they want to leave things to chance?
Let's talk about this.
Let me pull this up.
Let me see if I can find this story.
Uh, let's see.
There's a story right now.
Here we go.
Let me pull this one up.
Breaking news!
NFL fans convinced TV station has leaked Super Bowl teams after spotting script in live broadcast.
So, this television station in Canada accidentally posted this on TV.
Reba McIntyre, Usher, Post Malone are slated to perform at San Francisco 49ers and Baltimore Ravens Super Bowl matchup on February 11th.
Guys, let me see if I can find this one.
NBA Game Fixing.
Hey, this really happened.
NBA betting scandal.
The NBA, an accusation that an NBA referee uses knowledge of relationships between referees, coaches, and players to bet on professional basketball teams.
Okay, yeah, the FBI and the Republic.
I don't know if this is actually the one.
Okay, okay, right, right, right, right.
This might be the scandal that a ref was basically Like, betting on the games?
Anyway, there have been accusations for a long time that these major league sporting events know exactly who's advancing because judges, referees can always just decide who's gonna win.
Now, if Strickland came out like a shotgun blast and took this guy down, well, that's too bad.
But you can always control a certain degree.
And when you've got a close fight like this, ultimately the judges can be like, Well, we knew before going in, if it was a close fight, we were giving it to Du Plessis no matter what.
I'm not saying they did.
I'm just saying, dude, I don't trust people.
So let me tell you a story.
We're hanging out in Iowa, and we're at the casino playing what's called DJ Wild.
Table game.
Again, my friends, calm down.
These people like to claim that because you play a couple hundred bucks on the weekend, that you're doing something wrong.
Now, enjoy yourselves and find your entertainment.
Would you prefer I spent the money at Taylor Swift?
No, I'm gonna hang out with my friends, we're gonna have some drinks, and we're gonna play money.
And then if you end up winning, you don't lose anything.
You only play what you can afford to lose, and you only play for fun.
Don't go to casinos to win money.
But, these machines they use at casinos.
Here's how it works.
They can be pre-programmed to play a game.
So, uh, there's many different games in table games at casinos many of you are probably familiar with, some of you may not be.
Some games require that you get 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, or even 7 cards.
The dealers don't deal the cards out to you in most instances.
What they do is, they have a shuffle machine.
They put the cards in.
The machine shuffles the deck for you.
They press a button, and the first hand comes out they give to you.
Then, as soon as that comes out, it automatically dispenses the next hand.
They give each player at the table a set of cards.
Let's say you're playing DJ Wild.
Everybody gets five cards.
Once the dealer has handed out all of the cards to available players, let's say there's three players, he deals out three sets, he presses a green button on the machine, triggering the machine to feed the remaining cards into the dispenser, which he then picks up and puts aside.
I was explaining.
The dealer is... So the way the game works is, every player gets a hand and the dealer gets a hand.
You're trying to beat the dealer's poker hand.
I explained.
At the moment the dealer does this, he has told the machine how many players there are.
The machine then knows which hand to give the dealer.
The shuffle machine can control the actual hands that are dispensed.
It can actually preset the deck.
One of the supervisors walks over and says, it doesn't know how many people are playing.
I was like, yes it does.
He pulled out four sets of cards and pressed a button.
As soon as he pressed the button, the machine knew four hands had been dealt.
The last hand dealt goes to the dealer.
And he went, oh yeah, right!
I would not be surprised if these machines are all rigged.
The way slot machines work, they're allowed to- they have to make money off them.
So your guaranteed payout is like 92% or 90%.
That means, for every $100 you put in, you will win 90.
You're losing money.
It's part of casino gambling strategy.
And everybody's got a system.
But my point is this.
What makes you think the judges are going to be fair ever?
It's wild to think.
There's this guy who made a video about how casinos cheat.
And they do.
Not every casino.
Most of them probably don't.
They have the edge.
They don't need to.
But some will.
In these auto shufflers, you can watch these videos where they have this big, it looks like a snail almost, this big shuffle machine.
Because it's a circle that spins the cards.
Continuous shufflers.
And there will be one card sitting in the front that the dealer will slide out in, say, a blackjack game.
Let's say you're playing continuous shuffle blackjack.
That means the deck is always being shuffled.
Every card that goes in, it shuffles automatically.
The dealer, you can see a card and the dealer will grab it and he'll slide it out and then flip it over.
You can watch videos how the machine can pull the top card back and put in any card of their choosing so it looks like he's pulling that card out.
He's not.
They will do this.
Not always.
But people are criminals.
The world is not free from this stuff.
Long story short, my friends.
I think there is a possibility.
I think it's slim that they're just thinking.
Sean Strickland ragging on Bud Light as the champion threatens our money.
So I'll tell you this right now.
UFC taking Bud Light's sponsorship?
I said, okay, let's have Sean Strickland come and speak out, and he did.
And then he loses in this way?
Now I'm unhappy.
I'll just wrap up with this.
Ah, whatever, man.
You know, I think Du Plessis is one of the best.
I watched that fight.
I thought it was awesome.
There's some dude, some guy roasted him, some MMA fighter saying they were both fighting like amateurs.
Get out of here, man.
These guys are good fighters.
Du Plessis did an amazing job.
And, you know, while I can certainly say I think Strickland won, I feel like if it came down to the judges, I can understand Du Plessis winning.
I seriously do.
People are like, it was a close fight.
I'm like, totally agree with that.
I just felt like Strickland dominated.
You run this thing out to the end, Strickland owns that fight.
He waited too long.
I don't know if he realized that, you know, they weren't going to give him round three.
I think he was thinking like, I can switch.
He's like, I take a couple of them, and then in round five, I powerhouse.
And it was amazing.
Just those right hooks.
Bam, bam, bam.
And then he loses.
That means... Man, he needed a takedown in the final round.
I just... I just can't stand it, man.
I just don't like technicality.
It's just so stupid.
Whatever, whatever.
I'll leave it there.
Whatever.
Congratulations, though, to Du Plessis.
I think he's a good dude.
I think he fought really well.
I just wanted to see Strickland win.
And I felt like he controlled it.
Next segment's coming up at 6 p.m.
on this channel.
Thanks for hanging out, and I'll see you all then.
Another day, another shocking viral video of a micro apartment in New York City.
It has, what, like a five foot, six foot wide room that goes to a window, and that's it.
And it costs you $2,000.
The prices are going up.
Well, my friends, there are questions about why it is so many young people are now skewing towards Donald Trump in the polls.
How could it be that Donald Trump is winning the youth vote?
It's shocking, isn't it?
Well, my friends, I want to show you this video of a micro-apartment, but first, from the post-millennial, New York moves to provide free healthcare to illegal immigrants.
So, my young friends, you're entering adulthood, leaving high school, entering college or out of college, and you're asking yourself, where will I live?
Unfortunately for you that want to live in a city where your job is available You will not be able to afford it unless you want to live I don't know maybe you can get a couple roommates to live in one of these micro apartments and you'll be spending seven eight hundred bucks a month and You won't have a bathroom.
Take a look at this video Absolutely insane to see where you get an actual tour.
I'm gonna give you a full tour of Full tour of these, uh, micro apartments.
Check this out.
unidentified
This is a micro apartment in New York City.
And yes, the entire space you are seeing is the full apartment.
You have this one big window that lets in natural lighting, and that is pretty much it.
Along with this kitchenette, basically just a sink and a fridge, a small closet space, and no, there is no bathroom in the unit.
The bathroom is actually outside in the hallway.
Not just the bathroom, but also the shower, which is behind me.
And this apartment is renting for just under $2,000 per month.
Of course, there's a bunch of articles about this.
From apartmenttherapy.com, New York City's smallest apartment is 55 square feet and costs $1,400 per month.
A lot of people are surprised to see it.
I'm not.
There are some indications that inflation is improving, but my friends, I must break it down for you.
This message is for all the young people who don't understand what's going on politically and want some help in understanding why it is a vote for Donald Trump may actually improve your living standards.
So, I would say to anybody who has a friend who's concerned about this, maybe not super politically active, share with them this video, and I will break down for you a very, very rudimentary, simple way of explaining this.
Right now, you have a story about New York.
They're planning on providing free healthcare to illegal immigrants.
Now, I know you're saying, but what about my apartment, dude?
Two grand a month for an apartment with no bathroom?
Yeah.
To be honest, there's a sink right there.
So I'm kinda thinking, like, couldn't you have turned that closet into a bathroom?
Eh, well, you know, it's not so easy.
It's easy to run running water in a drain, you don't need that much, but, uh, you know, toilet plumbing's a bit different, I guess.
So no.
No toilet or shower for you.
Live in your box, eat the bugs.
We are moving towards Podworld, and you will live in it.
I mean, this is the end result.
It's not like one day you're gonna wake up and you're gonna live in a pod.
This is how we get there.
The younger generation won't be able to afford real housing.
They will already live in pods.
They'll be used to it.
Now, why is this happening?
Well, as you may or may not be aware, there is a crisis on the southern border.
It is porous, and they are bringing in hundreds of thousands of people every single month.
The Biden administration is engaged in human smuggling.
Texas has been fighting back.
Now, when this all started getting crazy, Texas and a few other southern states said, we're going to send all the migrants your way.
But it wasn't just Texas.
The federal government was doing it as well.
This resulted in a massive influx of people in cities like New York and Chicago and actually all over the country.
Now, it may be funny to laugh at all the uppity liberals who are like, oh, they're sending poor people to our towns.
But the problem is, all they were doing was helping the Biden administration smuggle these people.
Text appears to have stopped.
But for the time being, you may ask yourself why it is things are getting so expensive.
Well, there are hotels.
These hotel rooms have beds and bathrooms.
You, my young friend entering the workforce, perhaps you want to live in a room.
I mean, you've been in a hotel room, right?
It's one room, there's a bed, there's maybe, there's a sink probably, and there's a bathroom with a shower.
They are giving those to illegal immigrants.
That's right.
The hotels are being bought out, rented out by the cities.
Illegal immigrants are brought in and given these wonderful rooms.
You, on the other hand, hard-working young American, trying to enter the workforce, are paying taxes to fund their way of life while you spend $2,000 a month to live in a shoebox.
Now, I am of the belief that you, as a tax-paying young American, should be gifted opportunity for the future.
That means you need a place to live.
You want to be able to have a living room, play video games, relax, go to the bathroom at your own leisure?
They're taking that from you.
And it's unfortunate that so many young people don't understand the game being played.
That the Democratic Party, the Biden administration, are trying to convince you that voting for Trump will make all the problems worse when you are staring at a presidency with these problems in your lap.
When I was 18, between 18 to 22, it was kind of crazy, but we all had to get roommates.
And sometimes, we would have someone living on the couch.
And that was shocking to us.
It's like, well, you got someone who's couchsurfing because we need help paying the utilities and it keeps everyone's rent low.
But, we still had a living room, we had video games, and we didn't so much mind the couchsurfer because you go in your bedroom and close the door.
That was it.
You go in your room, you close the door, and if someone's on the couch, yeah, whatever, I'm not in the living room anymore.
You wake up in the morning, there they are in the kitchen having food, and it's like, I don't know, whatever, you sit down and play video games.
And that was what we accepted.
Rent was cheaper, higher crime areas, couch surfer, maybe someone was sleeping in a back room on a porch or something like that.
Because some of these apartments in Chicago, They have enclosed back areas, which I wouldn't call a room, but you can't close the door.
Today, it is crazy for me to see that young people have to choose these economy micro apartments and probably even share them.
Get a bunk bed.
That's absolutely wild.
I remember when I was living in Los Angeles, I was looking at apartments.
Los Angeles, okay?
I was in Koreatown.
Studio apartment was $700.
It's a studio, but it did have a small kitchen.
There were what they call bachelor and economy apartments that were available at these bachelor housing buildings, where basically meant like men only, but they didn't keep women out, but it was basically just dudes.
Laborers.
The rooms were $300.
And they were bigger than this, but didn't have bathrooms.
And that's what made them bachelor apartments.
It was basically like, the rooms I think were like 15 by... I think they were probably like... What's the room in now?
Like 15 by 30 maybe?
You'd go in the room, you'd have a bed, you'd have a TV, but... No, maybe not 15 by 30.
It's gotta be like 15 by 20 or something like that.
Like a good-sized room.
And no bathroom though.
No bathroom.
It was a studio box with a window.
You had no bathroom.
Now we're looking at what's going on in New York City.
It's just absolutely insane to see this.
I don't know that Donald Trump will save you, my young friends.
I don't know that voting for him will make things better.
I can tell you that a vote for Joe Biden guarantees that things get worse.
A vote for Nikki Haley is a guarantee that things get worse.
They will sell you out.
They will destroy your future because they want you to live in the pod and eat the bugs.
Now, if you don't want to live that way, we've got to change things.
Giving free healthcare to illegal immigrants?
You may be asking yourself, what does that have to do with rent?
Well, it's another component.
How old are you?
Many of you watching this, maybe someone shared the video with you, you're 22, you're 23, you're 24, who knows?
Do you have healthcare?
Maybe you're on your parent's plan.
Are you going to be able to afford health insurance?
How are you going to take care of yourself when you get sick?
Health insurance is a major issue.
Maybe many of you are just now leaving your parent's health care plan or they couldn't afford to begin with.
Don't worry, don't worry.
I know you can't afford it.
You're probably stuck on some garbage Obama plan or whatever.
I don't know how any of this stuff currently works, to be completely honest.
All I remember is when Obamacare came out, I went from having pretty good health insurance, and then when I signed up for my own under this, because they had this thing where they were going to charge me money if I didn't buy it.
What is it?
The individual mandate or whatever.
All I know is, I ended up with insurance.
Get this.
Where six years ago, I needed to go get a physical.
Look, you travel the world a lot.
You go around, eat crazy food in crazy places.
It's important you get a physical exam, okay?
And I was just like, I'm gonna go in for a checkup.
Um, I want to get like blood work done, something you should do periodically.
And uh, everybody was like, we don't accept your insurance.
And I'm like, okay.
And then here's where it gets crazy.
There was one local practitioner or whatever, I don't know, it's been a while.
And I said, okay, well look man, I called a bunch of places, can I just pay you cash?
I was like, I got a successful YouTube channel, you know, making good money, six figures.
And they said, no.
We do not, we could if you didn't have this plan.
And I was like, what?
That's right.
They said if you weren't on this plan, you could just come in and pay the bill.
But because you are, you can't.
I'm like, where am I supposed to go?
Absolutely insane.
I did some kind of like teleconference thing where I, they were like, have you been sleeping well?
Have you been eating right?
And I'm like, look man, I ended up just not getting anything I needed.
It was nuts.
Because like, you're supposed to get like blood work, they test your like, your iron levels and all these things.
I got nothing.
Later on I got it all taken care of.
I got taken care of last year.
But it is important you routinely, you get a physical, right?
That was crazy to me.
Guess what?
They're giving free health care to illegal immigrants.
Okay, so maybe you're someone, but what does that have to do with me?
They should give it to me, too, and them.
You pay for it.
It's not free health care to illegal immigrants.
New York is taxing you.
You're paying taxes.
And that money is being spent to give health care to non-citizens while you don't have any.
Look, man, I don't know that Donald Trump saves you.
All I know is Joe Biden is doing this.
Like, not literally him, of course.
The administration, the people he's hired, and the people in Congress to other Democrats.
I ain't saying there's any guarantee at all that voting for Republican is gonna fix this.
I can only tell you that voting for Democrats will just make it worse.
So the best pitch I can give you is stave off the worsening of the economy.
Vote Republican, I guess.
It's wild to watch this video.
I saw this, I was just like, man, that's crazy.
I couldn't imagine having to live there, but that's what Gen Z's dealing with.
The only opportunity to hang at $2,000?
Damn.
I had an apartment that was... It was like $1,000.
For like a two-bedroom.
And this is 10 years ago.
A little bit more than 10 years ago, to be completely fair.
In Chicago.
In Los Angeles, there was a two-bedroom for like $14,000.
Studio was $7,000.
Man, it's crazy.
And you could make it work.
You'd get roommates, but you could make it work.
Now it's just like... Dude, the videos I'm seeing, these are wild.
I'm gonna leave it there.
Next segment is coming up tonight at 8pm over at youtube.com slash timcastirl.
Thanks for hanging out, and I'll see you all then.
I'm gonna make this one easy for all of you.
Civil War.
Ah, that's right.
Tim Pool did the meme, but why is he saying civil war in this context?
We're talking about books and schools and curriculum.
Ah.
This one's actually quite simple.
I don't say it to mean quite literally that there are like armed factions forming over how government is being run or anything like that.
I mean this in the sense of extreme cultural divisions.
Human beings whose brains are so divergent We may as well be talking to a different species.
And this means there is no path forward that will be some kind of peaceful trade agreement or cooperation.
It very well may be a national divorce or something to that effect, or it could be full-scale war.
In this story, we have MSNBC's Joy Read defending books that depict graphic adult activities, adult toys, and child abuse in extreme detail.
She defends these books being given to children.
She complains that Moms for Liberty is actually trying to get some kind of distinction between adult books and books appropriate for children.
I'm sorry.
In this context, there is no world in which I can see myself negotiating with these people.
And I feel like Moms for Liberty actually does try to have that negotiation to a certain extent.
Going so far as to say, put the books in the library, but not in the children's section, not in the children's public school libraries.
And I just say, well, hold on there a gosh darn minute.
Is this really where we are headed?
I'm sorry.
I may have a bit of a more extreme view than Moms4Liberty in this regard.
I'd like to push them a little bit.
There is a book like... How about this one?
All Boys Aren't Blue.
Banned in 29 school districts.
Joy Reid brings this book up.
Moms4Liberty co-founder.
This is Tiffany Justice.
And Tiffany Justice aptly brings up that in the book there is a graphic depiction of a child that is abused by an adult and who is... Let's just... I try to keep it family-friendly, so we'll keep it to the innuendo on this one.
But an adult man engages in adult activities on a child, on a male child.
That book depicts this.
Joy Reid says, what if a child feels seen by this?
To which Tiffany Justice says, if a child feels seen by a graphic depiction of rape, something has been done to that child, we need to do more than just get him a book.
Joy Reid immediately loses it!
And she's like, no!
Children must read this!
Because Joy Reid is psychotic.
And what I mean by that is, Here's how I see the left and the right.
I am a rational person of a certain moral standing, and everyone's got different moral bandwidth, I suppose.
Joy Reid has zero moral bandwidth.
Zero.
None.
There is no question of morality, but morality is a real thing.
There is good and there is bad.
In my view, Bringing these books like Genderqueer to children and exposing them to these things will cause them suffering later on in life.
It will cause them pain.
You need to be at a certain level of development and understanding to approach certain subjects.
That doesn't just mean sex.
It could quite literally also mean, I don't know, murder and war.
Age appropriate.
Let someone grow up and develop natural barriers to protect their psyche before inundating children with this kind of information.
Joy Reid suffers no such feelings.
She thinks, no, parents can just decide whatever.
The problem?
It's a Mountain Bailey.
I believe parents should decide.
I believe Moms for Liberty also agrees parents should decide.
But the point is, there is a threshold by which parents opt in, not out.
Joy Reid says parents can opt out if they don't like this stuff.
They have to know about it first.
And unfortunately, most parents don't.
Now, here's what I want to push back on Moms4Liberty.
This should stuff should be in libraries?
Perhaps in the restricted section?
Fine.
Fair point.
But I don't think we should just blanket say a book depicting these things should be placed on the shelves of a public library where a 12-year-old can find them.
I got a funny story for our good friend Seamus Coghlan.
We were at a gas station and there were adult magazines in plain view and he was like, hey man, he said to the clerk, you should cover that.
Children come in here and they're like, oh, you're right.
Yeah, sure.
They didn't care.
You know, look, I agree with Moms for Liberty.
I've seen these books.
We have some of these books.
Joy Read brings up genderqueer.
She tries to frame all of these books like innocent ol' LGBT books!
Moms4Liberty points out, rightly so, and it's a good thing she did, in these books, there's dildos.
There's rape in graphic detail?
That is not appropriate for children.
What a crazy world.
When Stephen Marsh came on the show, and it's funny because I kind of cite him a lot.
He's the guy who wrote the Civil War book.
In fact, I got his book literally right here.
The Last Election.
Hey, shout out to Stephen Marsh.
Wrote this with Andrew Yang.
He did.
He came here, he said, yeah, I don't care for morality.
And he actually argued, full-throated, that children should have access to graphic sex content where they can read about, oh boy, you name it.
He's like, well, with the internet, they have access to everything.
I mean, why keep it from them?
I'm like, they should not have access to these things on the internet.
They should not have access to these books in the library.
But he believed they should.
And so that's where I kind of agree with him.
Yeah.
Yeah, maybe, uh, maybe civil war is inevitable.
Let me break down to you the issue of morality.
Morality is the simplification of attempts at creating a more positive outcome for the future generations.
It's an overly simplistic thing.
I break it down in this way because... Let me just start from the beginning.
If we have no morality, there is no right, there is no wrong, then what do we have?
Well, why wouldn't murder be allowed if it's practical?
You'd only have to pay restitution if you took someone's money from them by killing a family member.
My dad made $100,000 a year, you kill them, you owe me that.
Is that it?
No.
We lock that person up to prevent any more harm.
The reality is there is morality.
Stephen Marsh does have morality.
All of these liberals do.
It's just a very weak and eroded one that typically revolves around, have you wronged me?
If you have, then we will, you know, place that upon you.
In which case, I think it's fair to say probably not morality then.
Something else.
Something evil and dark.
Here's why I think it is morally wrong to have these books in the schools.
Let me start by saying, to call it morally wrong is to simplify for the average person an argument about what is beneficial to the betterment of mankind.
What is beneficial to mankind and future generations.
Exposing children to confusing materials and adult sex content will cause them stress and strife later on in life.
This is a fact, we know this scientifically.
Ergo.
We do not want children exposed to this as it will damage their minds, increase depression, suicidal ideation, and other things like this.
In which case, our morality is actually a concept rooted in fact-based thinking to improve human life.
Here's where we are now.
I know many people who don't like themselves.
But you know what's true is if it's out of sight, it's out of mind.
If you don't know about it, you can't miss it.
And there's pros and there's cons there.
The famous saying from Harriet Tubman, I have freed many slaves, I would have freed many more if only they knew they were slaves.
It's true.
That's why I certainly think age appropriateness.
Of course, we should inform anyone who is being enslaved that they are, and try to help them become free.
But we're not talking about slavery in this instance.
The moral line changes when it's about teaching children about adult sex content, which in no way liberates them, it actually shackles them.
It causes damage to them, and it should not be allowed.
The left argues, let them have whatever they want, no matter what.
Well, we know what ends up happening.
There's a website.
I'm sorry, there's a subreddit.
We talked about this in the TimCast IRL Members Only Show.
Become a member at TimCast.com to support our work directly and fund our operation.
In this story, a woman had the flesh flayed from her arm to be crafted into a pseudophallus, a neophallus.
That is, a chunk of arm flesh and muscle, sometimes leg, grafted to the female genitals to simulate the feeling of having male privates.
A post by one woman, a woman, said, I'm doubting this and having second thoughts and I don't know that I want to do it.
And the replies are all, I believe in you.
You can do this.
I believe in you.
A person who is suffering a mental disorder as listed in the DSM-5 and is seeking a dramatic irreversible surgical operation was thinking to themselves they did not want to do it and then got inundated online with people cheering it on saying, do it, do it, do it.
Now that is a nightmare scenario.
Will Ferrell's got a documentary that's coming out.
And he talks about his friend.
Will Ferrell had zero knowledge about trans community, then his best friend came out.
In this, he says a writer, Harper Steele, came out as transgender in 2022.
Harper Steele, of course, a biological male, now identifies as a woman.
What really is horrifying to me when I saw this story was Any other condition in the DSM-5 would not be defended, protected, affirmed.
The example I use, of course, is pica.
Now, I will always stress this.
I am no doctor.
Talk to a doctor about what is right for you.
But pica is a medical condition, a mental disorder, to clarify, in which an individual eats things that are not food.
Imagine Will Ferrell's friend said, Will, I no longer want to eat beef, bread, eggs, milk, cheese.
I want to eat hair.
And Will Ferrell said, wow, I don't know anything about it.
How can I help you eat hair?
Eating hair, of course, is one of the most prominent forms of pica.
It doesn't break down properly in the gut.
It builds up and then causes serious complications, which require surgery.
Just because someone feels like they should be eating this thing doesn't mean they should be.
In which case, an individual who wants to surgically graft flesh from one part of the body, I don't think the appropriate response is to just say, sure.
Of course.
If someone wants to engage in body modification, hey, more power to you.
Do your thing.
My point here is a question.
Why is it that anorexia is frowned upon, pica is frowned upon, gender dysphoria is praised upon?
Why is it that there is one category in the DSM-5 that results in affirmation?
Honest question.
This is what happens when you have children who are confused.
Actually may not want to go through with this, but are told they should.
I don't have all the answers for you, my friends.
But I can tell you, when it comes to as to why we don't want these books in schools, it's because we don't want humans to suffer and fail.
We want to reduce suicidal ideation.
We want to reduce depression.
We know that many of these things lead to depression.
So, should books be banned?
No.
But should they be introduced into curriculum?
No.
Who are the parents who advocated for these books to be brought to these schools in the first place?
And why is the argument centered on the parents who don't want them there instead of the parents or teachers who put them there in the first place?
Joy Reid says, why is it that only 10 parents are the ones deciding?
No, no, no, no, hold on there a minute.
It's not 10 parents, 11 parents who are deciding, it's 11 parents complaining.
Who are the adults deciding to put this in, and how come the parents didn't vote on it?
Same argument you're making.
Who are these people who decided to put graphic sexual books in schools?
This is where we're currently at.
I don't have a good answer for you as to how this country moves forward when this is what we're dealing with.
So, when I say civil war jokingly, in certain circumstances I mean that we are in this culture war to an extreme degree.
In this instance, my question to you is, outside of the context of politics and Donald Trump going to prison or whatever, how do you reconcile with a neighbor who wants to give your child dildo books?
If Joy Reid walked up to a school with any one of these books, she would be criminally charged as a pedophile.
A sex offender.
How is this then justified in any capacity?
I don't see how we mend this.
I really don't.
But, for the time being, there are people like Tiffany Justice and Moms for Liberty that are pushing back.
I think we do win in the end of this because I do believe we had Marianne Williamson on the show.
I do believe that when people like Marianne Williamson are exposed to this, they say no.
And the only reason Marianne Williamson exists in the political context she does is because she believes this stuff.
When Marianne Williamson came on TimCast IRL, we showed her the book and she gasped.
When we showed her the book, Not My Idea, which depicts white people as devils, she nearly cried.
Because we know that Marianne Williamson is a good person.
She's just trapped in the lies from the depraved psychopaths of the corporate press, notably MSNBC.
And so we believe.
Should good people like at MSNBC who watch this, who are just confused, be exposed to proper information, they may actually wake up.