Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

Jan. 30, 2024 - Tim Pool Daily Show

01:22:02

Biden May Ignite WORLD WAR THREE, Plans DIRECT STRIKE On Iran Navy Over Drone Attack On US Troops

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 Biden May Ignite WORLD WAR THREE, Plans DIRECT STRIKE On Iran Navy Over Drone Attack On US Troops Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Participants

Main voices

tim pool

01:19:26

Appearances

Clips

josh hammer

00:31

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Show episode speakers

Speaker	Time	Text
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		Make sure to go to TimCast.com, click join us and become a member to support this podcast and all the work we do.
		And you'll get access to exclusive uncensored segments from TimCast IRL and way more.
		Now, let's jump into the first story.
		Right now, the Biden administration are considering a military strike directly against Iran targeting their naval forces.
		For the most part, the conversation has been that Iranian-backed militia groups and the Houthi rebels were the targets.
		The U.S.
		and the U.K.
		were striking Houthis in Yemen.
		But now, following the death of three American soldiers and the injuries sustained by 34 U.S.
		soldiers, Joe Biden is considering a direct strike against Iran.
		Now, of course, Congress should authorize any act of war.
		They won't.
		And many are asking now, are we on the brink of World War 3?
		I'm a bit tired of saying World War 3.
		I actually think it's more apt to discuss internal politics and say civil war because that's an active conflict we're in.
		The World War 3 thing is a bit nebulous and difficult to understand.
		Now, If we go to war with Iran unilaterally, Biden just says, strike, and he might.
		We were waiting all last night to hear if Biden was going to directly retaliate against Iran.
		If he does, it could be the inflection point, the shot heard around the world, which sparks a wave of conflict, ignites China, Venezuela, Russia ramps up its efforts.
		Or maybe, my friends, we are already in World War III.
		We won't know.
		Fighting had been happening all across Europe in various forms, conflict, political conflict, before World War I, but perhaps we know the start of World War I because that's when armies amassed and actually started making moves against each other as opposed to, you know, skirmishes, regional conflict, politics, etc.
		In the U.S.
		Civil War, 1860, for seven years up to the Civil War in 1861, there had been violence all across the country, but no armed factions marching towards each other.
		For some time now, over the past year or longer, with Vladimir Putin making his moves on Ukraine, with NATO forces actually being deployed to assist Ukraine, with U.S.
		Special Forces on the ground, The U.S.
		was directly involved in a war with Russia.
		Some suggested around the world, this meant we were in World War III already.
		The Pope had made some kind of comments related to this.
		Many other world leaders did as well.
		However, this seems more like proxy war, which we have seen over the past several decades and even during the Cold War.
		I don't know if it's fair to say World War.
		Then the question becomes, what does World War III even mean?
		I don't know.
		Some suggest it's when Russia, China, and the U.S.
		finally go to war.
		The big powers of the world are at war with each other.
		I don't think that's true.
		I think world war means the world is at war.
		So you have multiple factions across the planet fighting for various reasons.
		I mean, the Japanese and the Nazis, the axis of evil, but what did they have in common at all?
		And I don't believe they ever actually interact- interacted.
		They may have traded weapons and things like this.
		I'm not a historian, so forgive me.
		But my understanding, I mean, they're on the other side of the planet.
		The world- World War could be specifically that Venezuela moves on Guyana.
		We then get China moving on Taiwan, Russia already in Ukraine, Israel, Gaza lighting up with Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, etc.
		These countries are getting involved.
		The Houthi rebels, Iran, and when the U.S.
		strikes Iran, which is a very large country.
		That's when the dam breaks.
		China's got four warships surrounding Taiwan.
		They have escalated their efforts.
		Venezuela is amassing troops, arguing that this territory in Guyana is actually theirs.
		I don't think that Guyana issue is the biggest and most pressing, but it shows every region of the planet will have war.
		Is that World War III?
		And what does that mean for you, my friends?
		Well, unfortunately, I hate to say it, there are a lot of people talking about how the U.S.
		Armed Forces, I believe specifically the Army and the Navy, removed the high school diploma requirement for joining up and enlisting.
		Many people are saying this is a strong sign the U.S.
		is planning to go to war.
		Maybe.
		Recruitment numbers are way down.
		The US military is laughable at this point because of their weird woke policies that have been ridiculed endlessly.
	But I think there's something else here with the removal of the GED or high school requirement.
	Do you know what group of people will not have a high school diploma or GED?
	Criminal aliens, which are flooding the border in massive numbers with support from the Biden administration and Customs and Border Protection engaged in a massive human smuggling operation.
	Perhaps.
	Joe Biden, the Democrats are suggesting, Interesting concept, isn't it?
	To propose to these individuals that they take up arms against the enemies of the United States, they will be granted citizenship.
	And then, if and when war breaks out, you go to these groups and say, you want citizenship?
	Then you engage in service.
	Interesting concept, isn't it?
	To propose to these individuals that they take up arms against the enemies of the United
	States, they will be granted citizenship.
	I think that's very likely.
	But right now, the U.S.
	could be finding itself in a serious conflict.
	People need to understand, Iran is not Iraq or Afghanistan.
	If Joe Biden really does make a direct strike against Iran, we are talking about, I think it's fair to say, World War III.
	Right now, we are looking at a global strife.
	I guess you could call it.
	Akin to a bleeding Kansas in the Civil War.
	There is regional conflict bubbling up, people are fighting, people are dying.
	It's bad.
	But, despite the fact that we have boots on the ground in most of these countries, it is not yet gone full-scale war.
	If the U.S.
	strikes Iranian naval assets, that could be the damn breaking.
	During Donald Trump's administration, he called off a strike on Iranian targets.
	He said, the amount of people that would be killed, it's not worth the retaliation, and so he said no.
	Perhaps the real issue is Trump knew.
	If he were to strike Iranian targets, it would be a declaration of war against this country.
	And what would that mean for him?
	The president who started no new wars, rather remarkably avoiding this conflict with Iran.
	And he did kill Soleimani and did target many in the Middle East.
	No new wars though.
	Old wars, not good.
	But here we are.
	The question we have then, what will this mean for the presidential election?
	I believe it's fair to say, before the year is done, before we get to the election, we will have full-scale war.
	Why?
	Well, my friends, I have zero faith in the Biden administration, in the political uniparty, and in the military-industrial complex, the establishment.
	They love war.
	They want war.
	If Donald Trump gets elected, they don't get war.
	What can they do?
	It's not so much that wartime presidents win elections.
	I don't think that'll save Joe Biden.
	In fact, I think it might hurt him.
	The theory goes that when a war breaks out, the president, who's the incumbent, tends to get massive support.
	There's fear in changing the administration in a time of war.
	But we've been in a state of war forever.
	And I wonder, if Joe Biden does start a war, people are going to get mad about it, and they're going to say, I don't trust him to lead it.
	It may result in Trump actually winning.
	I don't know that the adage of wartime presidents winning would apply to someone as broken as Joe Biden.
	Then why do it?
	Because, like I said, if Donald Trump wins, they'll lose their chance.
	So here's the play.
	Start the war just before Trump gets in.
	Oh, Trump can come out and say, look what they've done.
	They've started a war.
	Sure.
	And then Trump will inherit a new war, and he will have to contend with what that means.
	Oh yeah, and he may try to negotiate and try and end these wars, and I hope he does, but it's going to be a challenge.
	My point is, Trump may be the guy to stop World War III, if they are to start it, but the military-industrial complex, the deep state, etc., the establishment, they're thinking to themselves, starting the war gets us our war first.
	Trump may stop it, but at least we tried.
	The reason for war?
	Oh, we don't live in a comic book universe, my friends.
	These are not comic book villains who are simply twirling their mustache saying, we want war!
	Well, there's reasons for it.
	The liberal economic order, expansion of U.S.
	military operations, the silencing, essentially, or the crushing of the BRICS nation's economic growth, establishing a unified global order.
	That's what they've long called it.
	They want to maintain that as the world's police.
	Stopping Iran is one way to go about doing that.
	Iran, they call, they say it's a state sponsor of terrorism.
	And yeah, I think that's a fair point in a certain degree.
	But I think the bigger truth is, the reality here, is that Iran refuses to accept or be part of the United States and the West's global economic order.
	And so is true of Russia.
	I don't know about China, but maybe.
	But you basically now have the NATO nations versus the BRICS nations with Iran now aligned with BRICS.
	If this war were to kick off, I have to wonder what it would be like.
	Who would fire the first nuke and what would the target be?
	I don't believe in mutually assured destruction.
	I believe in the threat of mutually assured destruction as it pertains to someone nuking a major Hey, it's Kimberly Fletcher here from Moms 4 America with some very exciting news.
unidentified		Tucker Carlson is going on a nationwide tour this fall, and Moms 4 America has the exclusive VIP meet and greet experience for you.
		Before each show, you can have the opportunity to meet Tucker Carlson in person.
		These tickets are fully tax-deductible donations, so go to momsforamerica.us and get one of our very limited VIP meet-and-greet experiences with Tucker at any of the 15 cities on his first ever Coast to Coast tour.
		Not only will you be supporting Moms for America in our mission to empower moms, promote liberty, and raise patriots, your tax-deductible donation secures you a full VIP experience with priority entrance and check-in, premium gold seating in the first five rows, access to a pre-show cocktail reception, an individual meet-and-greet, and photo with America's most famous conservative and our friend, Tucker Carlson.
		Visit momsforamerica.us today for more information and to secure your exclusive VIP meet-and-greet tickets.
		See you on the tour.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		Capital city or major city.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		But why would that happen?
unidentified		Thank you.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		You know, people look to Hiroshima and Nagasaki and they're like, see?
		The US nuked cities.
		Therefore, with intercontinental ballistic missiles, And more powerful weapons, which I'm sure exist, hypersonics.
		If anyone were to nuke anyone else's city today, they would immediately retaliate by nuking the cities of their enemies.
		I don't see that happening.
		There was a reason for the U.S.
		to bomb Japan.
		It was to shut them down and show the power.
		A shock and awe campaign, essentially.
		There's nothing beneficial from that today, especially with the prospect of retaliatory nuclear strikes.
		But, what that means?
		On the battlefield, nukes will be used.
		Why wouldn't they be?
		And you're not going to get China retaliating against the United States for nuking its naval fleet in the Pacific by striking a U.S.
		city.
		Wouldn't happen.
		It would So this is the idea that if nukes are used, mutually assured destruction?
		No.
		If nukes are used on Beijing, perhaps, but what's the strategic value for the U.S.
		doing something like that?
		Fair point.
		Maybe if they could, they would.
		I don't know.
		But the reality is, there are a wide array of nuclear weapons of varying degrees of power, and if there was a large fleet in the Pacific, and the U.S.
		was like, we can take them out right now with one nuclear strike, they would.
		They absolutely would.
		And China would not respond by targeting U.S.
		domestic forces.
		They'd use nukes in their own fashion.
		We'll see, I guess.
		But maybe we just hope and beg and pray that it never comes to that.
		And for that, the only thing I can say is, vote Trump, I guess.
		You vote for Biden, you get war instantly.
		It's really amazing when I'm talking to the people I know who voted for Biden, and I'm just like, we're looking at the economic numbers, which Colbert is trying to claim are good.
		Nice try.
		We're looking at the economy.
		We're looking at rent.
		We're looking at industry collapse.
		We're looking at the migrant crisis and war.
		And I said, Joe Biden might go down in history as the worst president we've ever had.
		And it's funny to say that in front of someone I know who voted for him.
		Yeah, so the news comes on, and I'm watching Fox News, and they're showing a map of the Houthi rebel strikes, talking about the soldiers in Jordan who were killed, the U.S.
		soldiers who were killed.
		And, you know, this individual I know, Joe Biden, is like, what happened?
		And I'm like, here we go, World War III.
		I wonder what they must be thinking, moving now into the election.
		The Daily Mail reports Joe Biden is weighing up launching strikes on Iranian military assets in the Persian Gulf after three Americans were killed.
		The president has demanded advisors present him with options on how to respond to the attack without dragging the U.S.
		into battle in the Middle East, political reports.
		Insiders revealed Any revenge bombings will take place in the coming days as the commander-in-chief and military brass study a range of targets.
		Fears of war were sparked over the weekend when an Iran-backed suicide drone killed three American soldiers at a remote base near Jordan's border with Syria.
		Yeah, question is, how does that happen?
		Well, they apparently thought it was a U.S.
		drone coming in.
		They let it.
		And then it injured 34 and killed three.
		You want to know what the craziest thing here?
		It's not this report from CNN.
		It's from last night.
		Biden's response to Jordan attack is likely to be powerful, but U.S.
		is wary of triggering wider war with Iran.
		Oh, I get that.
		It's this.
		Biden sparks outrage with reports that he may not attend ceremony honoring troops killed in Jordan.
	This man may be one of the worst, if not the worst, president we have ever had.
	Of course, there's Buchanan, who was a feckless president, who effectively watched the U.S.
	descend into civil war and did very little.
	You got Woodrow Wilson.
	There you go.
	I mean, a lot of people think he may be the worst president ever, but it could be Joe Biden.
	Right now, AP News is reporting, an Israeli strike on a Damascus area where Iran-backed groups operate caused casualties, Syria says.
	This is from yesterday morning.
	You look at these maps, I gotta tell you, it's happening.
	I don't know if it matters that the U.S.
	strike Iran.
	I don't know if it matters.
	You take a look at the wide range of strikes that have already been happening, the battles that are already happening, and, you know, it's wild.
	The U.S.
	and the U.K.
	are already bombing Yemen.
unidentified		U.S.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		troops have reportedly been in Yemen for some time now, though, in January, they denied it, and in December, they said, yes, we have troops there, and then in January, they denied it.
		Russia's already at war in Ukraine.
		That's not abating.
		And it's funny how they show the brink of World War III, and you can see the blue and red factions, the targets.
		Man, I don't know that we, uh, I don't see an off-ramp.
		What is the scenario in which these things begin to calm down?
		Now, what's really fascinating is we have this story.
		Joy Reid apologizes after cursing on hot mic, starting another effing war.
		How weird.
		In this segment, Joy Reid was talking about a border deal and border crisis, and then with her mic on, she said, quote, starting another effing war.
		Interesting.
		No one knows exactly what the comment was related to, but it appears to be related to Joe Biden starting another war.
		I think this shows you everything you need to know.
		Joy Reid is evil.
		I don't like saying evil, you know, I don't say that lightly, but she is.
		Behind the scenes, you know, she laments, fears, is angry about what may happen under the Biden administration starting another effing war.
		But publicly, she does everything in her power to defend this administration and protect what they're doing.
		Sure, I look at it like, you know, a Nazi soldier complaining about going against Russia.
		You know, he's still aligned with everything they're doing.
		Just think it's bad strategy.
		Joy Reid, behind the scenes, critical of what Biden may be about to get us into.
		Publicly, though, does everything in her power to defend and attack Trump and the right.
		I think this one's going to go crazy.
		And I genuinely fear where we are heading.
		Biden doesn't care about our troops.
		He doesn't care where we're going.
		China has deployed warships, according to Newsweek, surrounding Taiwan.
		They've already been flying jets overhead.
		We know that they are waiting for the moment to strike.
		If the U.S.
		strikes Iran, and Iran retaliates in the immediate, China could move in instantly.
		And what's going to happen?
		Is the U.S.
		really going to decide to go into war, 90 or so miles off the coast of China?
		People need to understand this.
		The U.S.
		wants to defend Taiwan, but it knows it can't.
		China has amassed all of this military power just on the other side of the Taiwan Strait.
		In China.
		What's the U.S.
		gonna do?
		How far away are their military assets?
		I don't know.
		South Korea?
		Good luck.
		China will be able to continually amass powerful forces.
		The U.S.
		won't be able to defend Taiwan when China makes that move.
		But China doesn't want to spark the war.
		At least yet.
		But I fear that it is coming.
		We are on the brink of World War III, says Donald Trump.
		Why, he's right.
		From the Hindustan Times, news card certified, huge political war cry has broken out in the United States after the death of three U.S.
		soldiers in Jordan.
		Pitting the blame on Joe Biden, Donald Trump said, he is leading us, quote, on the brink of World War III.
		Yeah.
		Our country cannot survive with Joe Biden as commander in chief.
		The GOP presidential primary frontrunner, primary frontrunner?
		He's the presidential frontrunner.
		Biden has blamed radical Iran-backed militant groups for the attacks.
		He has vowed to hold those responsible for America's deaths and injuries, for the America's death and injuries, to account at a time and in a matter of our choosing.
		Trump posted on Truth.
		Three years ago, Iran was weak, broke, and totally under control.
	Thanks to my maximum pressure policy, the Iranian regime could barely scrape two dollars together to fund their terrorist proxies.
	Then, Joe Biden came in and gave Iran billions of dollars, which the regime has used to spread bloodshed and carnage throughout the Middle East.
	This attack would never have happened if I was president, not even a chance.
	Just like the Iranian-backed Hamas attacks on Israel would never have happened.
	The war in Ukraine would never have happened, and we would, right now, have peace throughout the world.
	Instead, we are on the brink of World War III.
	I agree.
	I really do.
	I think if Trump was president, we wouldn't be here.
	There's a reason why war was escalating in Ukraine up until Obama left, and there's a reason why it kind of stopped.
	I mean, the conflict simmered off, slowed down under Trump.
	Kind of wild.
	Near the end of the Obama administration, I went to Ukraine and I watched the unrest.
	I filmed it.
	I was there personally.
	I saw the toppled statue of Lenin.
	Then they stormed the president's house.
	He fled to Russia.
	Conflict and chaos consuming Ukraine.
	Well, the president there would not give NATO what they wanted.
	And then Trump got elected.
	It stopped.
	They were calling it a civil war in Ukraine.
	Trump got elected.
	And then it stopped.
	I visited Ukraine during the Trump administration, beginning of 2017, I believe.
	And I was talking to a friend in the country, and they said, no, we don't call it civil war anymore.
	Like, don't call it that.
	It's just regional conflict now.
	It was not that big a deal.
	Russia had mostly backed off.
	Why?
	Because Donald Trump had backed off the U.S.
	pressure in Ukraine.
	The NATO pressure.
	No new wars.
	Abraham Accords.
	Peace deals.
	Economics.
	But the liberal economic order, the powerful U.S.
	and Western interests, don't like that.
	They want brute force control.
	It's really simple.
	Donald Trump's strategy was, guys, we're all gonna be rich.
	We're gonna let you have what you want.
	For us, we want America to be wealthy.
	Secure our borders, build our manufacturing base, bring our jobs back, make Americans better off, and you guys do your thing.
	And this works for a lot of countries.
	You know, Russia, for instance, says, okay, we don't got NATO breathing on our back in Ukraine.
	We're chill.
	And they chilled out for years.
	Four years.
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 and affecting the 2024 presidential election.
		We do all that every single day right here on America on Trial with Josh Hammer.
		Subscribe and download your episodes wherever you get your podcasts.
		It's America on Trial with Josh Hammer.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		Joe Biden gets in.
		What does he do?
		We will crush you with an iron fist.
		Do as you're told.
		Doesn't work.
		Here's what I think, I really do think this.
		I think that Donald Trump has these conversations with intelligence agents and assets.
		He gets in, he gets elected, even before he's elected, and they say, we have to crush them.
		They must know that we are more powerful and will always be.
		And Trump said, this is insane.
		We are losing control here.
		Our enemies are growing rapidly.
		We are not going to be able to stop the development in China due to failed policies.
		What can we do?
		Secure our borders.
		Bring our jobs back.
		Build up a manufacturing base.
		Help the working class.
		No new wars.
		Make America stronger.
		Then, when American hegemony collapses, we'll at least be secure and comfortable, strong and safe within the United States.
		Makes sense.
		And they said, we would rather burn the world down than let anyone oppose us.
		You know what else I think?
		I think a bunch of these people in the United States cut backroom deals with China.
		That in the event of an economic collapse, they will be secure in their wealth in Communist China.
		I suppose we'll see.
		I suppose we'll see how this goes down.
		Wow, man.
		It's kind of crazy.
		I don't know if there will ever be a shot heard around the world moment.
		I mean, the U.S.
		and the U.K.
		already bombed Yemen.
		Unilaterally, there's no congressional approval for this.
		If we strike Iran, Iran may retaliate.
		And the reality is, we could be in World War III without ever actually seeing any kind of declaration.
		We could be sleepwalking into World War III right now.
		And someone may say, in the future, October 7th was the start of World War III, when Hamas attacked Israel, sparking a chain of events.
		Today, it's just the Israeli-Gaza War.
		But now the Houthis are blocking Red Sea traffic.
		Iran is now getting involved.
		The U.S.
		is going to retaliate.
		This could spiral out of control fast.
		So I hope you're all paying attention, and I hope you're ready.
		Next segment is coming up at 1 p.m.
		on this channel.
		Thanks for hanging out, and I'll see you all then.
		The cyborg revolution has begun.
		I know it's fair to say that since the dawn of cell phones, the cyborg revolution probably already began.
		We became attached to these digital devices, which networked us all together.
		But now Elon Musk says his Neuralink startup has implanted a chip in its first human brain.
		That's right!
		A human being has been chipped with Neuralink.
		They are now wired in.
		He says that the first technology will be telepathy, allowing people to communicate very quickly.
		I have questions about this, and of course there are a lot of implications.
		I don't know that we can stop what's coming.
		I mean that sincerely, and it is quite worrisome.
		Like dominoes falling over.
		Especially now with the AI race, no one is willing to back down.
		It's an arms race.
		We build nuclear weapons.
	We know what they're capable of.
	Everybody else wants to have them too.
	All of a sudden now, everybody's got their finger on the trigger, and the planet could be destroyed.
	The same thing with AI.
	We know what AI is capable of.
	We know how dangerous it will be.
	Yet everybody sits there saying, if I don't do it, someone else will.
	And so they decide, I would rather have the keys to this machine than someone else.
	And that's true.
	It's a fact.
	If Google stops, Microsoft or whoever else, they're gonna make their own.
	If the U.S.
	bans AI and says, we can't do this, China will make it, Russia will make it, and they will use this powerful weapon against us.
	So, welcome to the dawn of a new era.
	One in which I think humanity may end up something like the Borg from Star Trek, networked in and broken-brained people.
	But let's talk about this.
	Let's read the story first.
	CNN reports, Elon Musk's controversial startup Neuralink has implanted a chip in a human brain for the first time, the billionaire said in a post on his X platform late Monday.
	Musk's announcement could mark an important milestone for Neuralink's efforts to usher potentially life-transforming technology out of the lab and into the real world.
	But he offered few details, and it's unclear from Musk's post how significant of a scientific advancement the implantation represents. The company had received approval to study the
	safety and functionality of its chip implant and surgical tools. Initial results show
	promising neuron spike detection.
	The world's richest man and Neuralink founders had annexed the social media platform he owns.
	Neuralink's first product would be called Telepathy, he said in another post,
	adding that its initial users will be people who have lost the use of their limbs.
	Imagine if Stephen Hawking could communicate faster than a speed typist or auctioneer.
	That is the goal, he wrote. Whoa. All right. All right.
	I gotta be honest with you, my friends.
	To all the people out there who are paralyzed in some way, they probably shed a tear at this news.
	They are probably begging Elon Musk, help me.
	I don't blame him.
	It's kind of amazing, I mean, this is what Neuralink technology is currently working on.
	And it is very rudimentary at this stage.
	But, it could be amazing.
	And I don't want to start off just by being absolutely negative on this technology.
	I think it's fair to say Elon Musk is going to perform one of the greatest feats in medical technology with the implementation of Neuralink and all the scientists that are working on it and engineers.
	There exists a man, I mean, I'll put it this way, I've seen so many videos.
	I watch action sports.
	Dude try to pull off, you know, a front flip on a dirt bike.
	X Games, you know, big air stuff.
	Crashes.
	Partially paralyzed from the waist down.
	He gets some movement in his limbs, but he can't walk anymore.
	Elon Musk steps up and says, I have this device we've been working on.
	We can surgically implant it, reconnecting the nerves, and you can learn to walk again.
	And you can have your life back.
	They're prominent athletes that I've been a fan of my whole life, who have suffered nerve damage or paralysis, and I wonder what they could do if given this technology.
	Where we start?
	Communication.
	Everybody's familiar with Stephen Hawking, and how he would communicate.
	He had the robot, and it would say, Hello, I am Professor Stephen Hawking.
	And it's funny because even though technology improved to the point where it didn't need to sound like that, Hawking apparently said, No, we'll keep it that way.
	The issue is that most people don't realize, he would actually have to plan out over a long period of time what he was going to say, and have pre-prepared responses for generic questions.
	So when you watch a video, and you see him talking to people, they would ask a question, and you would wait a long time.
	Imagine with Neuralink, Stephen Hawking could actually communicate in real time, despite the disability he suffered.
	Now I do have questions about this, though.
	Because could you imagine, like, how do you filter this?
	What is the mechanism by which you can control your brain perfectly to prevent intrusive thoughts, or just your thoughts in general, from leaking out?
	You see, we all think things sometimes, like, that dude's a piece of ish.
	That dude's a effing prick.
	You know what I mean?
	But you don't say it because of, uh, you know, appropriate behavior in the workplace or something like that.
	Could you imagine?
	You got some guy and he's like suffering some injury and you're like, we're gonna give you a Neuralink so you can talk and he's like, oh, thank God.
	And then he's sitting in the room and he thinks, hello, thank you for meeting me.
	And the computer says it.
	And then someone farts and he's like, wow, these people smell terrible.
	Who farted?
	What is going on?
	No, wait, I can't believe I just said that out loud.
	Stop.
	Stop saying things.
	La la la la la.
	I can't stop.
	I can't stop thinking.
	Yeah.
	Cause like, that's the joke in like sci-fi.
	Oh no.
	I thought that out loud.
	Wait, everyone can hear me.
	Oh no.
	Start thinking about something different.
	I imagine that kind of might be where things go.
	I don't know.
	Neuralink has been working toward using implants to connect the human brain to a computer for half a decade.
	But the company faced scrutiny after a monkey died in 2022 during an attempt to get the animal to play pong.
	In December of 2022, employees told Reuters the company was rushing to market, resulting in careless animal deaths and a federal investigation.
	I don't believe it for a second.
	I really don't.
	In May last year, Neuralink received FDA clearance for human clinical trials, and a few months later, the startup began recruiting patients with quadriplegia, caused by cervical spinal cord injury, or amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, ALS.
	The trial is part of what Neuralink is calling its prime study, short for Precise Robotically Implanted Brain Computer Interface.
	Okay, that's, that's, uh, that's, that's, PRIBSI.
	Sure.
	Which aims to study the safety of its implant and surgical robot and test the functionality of its device.
	The company said in a September blog post about recruiting trial participants.
	Trial patients will have a chip surgically placed in the part of the brain that controls the intention to move.
	The chip, installed by a robot, will then record and send signals to an app With the initial goal being to grant people the ability to control a computer cursor or keyboard using their thoughts alone.
	Right, we are not yet at the point where they would connect the nerves so you can walk again.
	That's what we all hope for.
	For the time being, if you're paralyzed, you can get a chip in your brain giving you digital control.
	It's kind of wild.
	You know, these people, powerful elites, they want to upload their brains to immortal bodies.
	I suppose that means they don't believe in the soul, or that the soul can be implanted.
	Perhaps?
	I don't know that I agree with that.
	I don't know that I believe the soul can ever be properly moved.
	And it's because I believe the soul and what makes you you exists outside of the confines of your body.
	So the way I imagine it is that there is this extra planar existence, and this is a really light explanation, but just to give you the general idea.
	And whatever makes you you is connected to this body But you can't take it out because imagine there is like a long stem coming out of your brain.
	It's one way to explain it.
	Now, in reality, I view this connection as multi-dimensional, in which case it wouldn't actually be a stem, but, you know, a ball of light or energy pulsing within you.
	It can't be moved because it doesn't exist in this plane.
	I think Christians believe something similar, but perhaps they believe it is possible, and perhaps it is.
	What do I know?
	I only have... I don't know.
	We don't know that much about the universe.
	Trial patients will have a chip in the brain.
	Neuralink did not respond for a comment.
	Before Neuralink brain implants at the broad market, they'll need regulatory approval.
	So I know right now, this is the challenge we face.
	A lot of people desperately want this to exist because they've suffered injuries and this could improve their lives dramatically.
	People who are blind, people who are deaf, this can repair.
	This can repair the damage and give people a better quality of life.
	What I fear with this, however, once we get read-write capabilities, and I think we're basically entering this position, I think we would be, I don't know, five to ten years out.
	Maybe sooner.
	You know why?
	The data collected by Neuralink will be fed to an artificial intelligence.
	It will start recognizing patterns and finding things that a single human cannot see.
	Technology will rapidly escalate, rapidly develop beyond our wildest dreams.
	And with the advent of AI, we'll come to a point where we genuinely don't understand the technology we have.
	Took a long time.
	But every day, someone adds a grain of sand to the heap of technology.
	We stand atop the shoulders of giants to build new and better things.
	Someone discovers copper, way back in the olden days.
	And then eventually, someone figures out copper wire, and someone figures out electricity.
	And from there, we all learn a little bit more.
	But with AI, you'll simply say, here's everything we know.
	The AI will then say, compiling.
	We've discovered that there's correlations between these elements and these elements and this technology and that technology.
	And they can give you the schematics for building something.
	You have no idea how or why it works, you just build it and it works.
	Because the AI jumped several generations in technology.
	Yeah, we'd be building some kind of god.
	When you do that, you add in Neuralink technology.
	The AI will give you a whole bunch of simulations.
	It will easily develop technology for read-write capabilities to the brain.
	Once it has enough data on the brain, and enough data on Neuralink, it can start to map out the appropriate ways to go about doing things.
	Of course, there will be trial and error, but it will be substantially faster than we can even realize.
	And then?
	And then the reality is, I think most people plug in in an instant.
	No matter what they think, no matter what they say.
	Now, of course, there'll be a lot of people who won't do it.
unidentified		Right.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		A lot of Christians, a lot of conservatives, a lot of Muslims, um, a lot of Jewish people.
		They're gonna be like, no way, we're not doing this, we're not plugging into the machine.
		The Amish, of course.
		Mennonites.
		But I think the overwhelming majority of people just say, please plug me in.
		Why?
unidentified		Everything you've ever wanted and more.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		And it will destroy you.
		Because what'll happen is... You know, I haven't had a slice of pizza in a while.
		I've eaten the cheese at the time of pizza, but I try to avoid eating the factory bread garbage and too much bread.
		I'm trying to increase the amount of protein I take in, right?
		But boy, do I love me a mean slice of pizza.
		So, the average person would say, I'm on a diet, plug me in, and they would eat 10 whole pizzas, just non-stop, just shoving pizzas in their mouth.
		The dopamine.
		It'll shatter your brain.
		If we discover this, I mean, people are gonna rot their brains from the inside out.
		And it's not just about pizza.
		I mean, obviously there's chocolate cake, and there's white cheesecake chocolate lava bombs.
		Woo!
		I saw one of those when I was in Miami.
		It's like, cheesecake, crusted in white chocolate, with chocolate in the middle, and I'm like, man.
		Dessert's good.
		But you know, those of us of willpower and want to exercise and improve ourselves, we, you know, sparingly.
		I've been trying to eat a lot more protein, a lot more raw meats.
		Safe raw meats, cured meats, not too much salt.
		You know, steak, medium rare, chicken, fish.
		Because I don't get enough protein, so I'm also having protein powder and protein shakes to supplement.
		I'm not the kind of person that would probably want to plug into the Neuralink and eat a bunch of pizza, to be completely honest.
		But, uh, it's like in The Matrix, when the guy's eating the steak, and he's like, I know it's not real, but I don't care.
		It tastes good.
		I think the reality is porn.
unidentified		Yep.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		I think the reality is, overwhelmingly, people are gonna go in for... It's a little, a little extreme.
		I think that would be a component of it.
		But I think the overwhelming majority of people plug in for relationships.
		And, I gotta tell you, You know, they want to talk about how the guys, how guys are obsessed with sex and all this.
		I got a bigger bet for you.
		I would be willing to bet, more than porn, men would simulate love for themselves.
		Of course, there's the trope, the guys are going to want to watch weird, creepy stuff, and some women would too, but mostly guys.
		Yeah.
		I'd be willing to bet more than that, seriously, that men will... There's going to be sex involved, but I'm willing to bet Waifus.
		And not literally, like anime women, but a lot of guys would do that.
		But I think most guys would plug into the Neuralink, and then they would... They'd go right for... Man.
		They'd make a love interest.
		Their ideal woman.
		She would be, you know, depending on the guy.
		I don't think trad guys would do it.
		They're like, I don't want to be, you know.
		Some would, some would.
		Some guys are going to fantasize about a 1950s wife.
		But I think most are going to be liberal guys.
		And they're going to have these perfect, busty, beautiful women who are smart and capable and say, I love you.
		And they're going to say, I can plug into this reality.
		Why would I want to be in the real world when I get everything?
		And they'll rot.
		They'll be plugged in the machine.
		They'll have their brains plugged in, and their bodies will wither, and their brains will be dopamine blasted non-stop.
		They'll have cockroach goo tubes straight into their stomachs, and they'll say, why would I ever leave?
		Why would I leave?
		I don't know, you'll get something weird like, for every minute you're in the pod, you generate cryptocurrency, which funds your pod existence.
		Now, why would they do it?
		Useless eaters!
		They're referred to as.
		How do you get rid of all of these useless eaters?
		Well, there you go.
		Now, I don't- I don't- I don't think we need to even get conspiratorial.
		I think it's dominoes falling over.
		I think new video game comes out, and it's a Neuralink game.
		Are you gonna get the Neuralink?
		I think with AI technology, we go beyond implantation, and we go into wireless technologies.
		Implantation seems to be... Yeah, I don't know.
		It's hard to say.
		I think you may still need some wiring tech.
		But it could be that we come to a point in the future where a baby is born, and the doctor says, so we need to do the implant within the first two hours, and then the kid grows up with the Neuralink implant, and I believe it will be wireless after that.
		So basically, you'll get a chip connected to your body that is charged through bioelectricity, naturally.
		It doesn't need that much energy.
		It can receive electricity through the wireless node attached.
		And maybe you don't even need one.
		But imagine this.
		A small chip is implanted in the base of your brain when you're a baby.
		And there's upgrade periods, but they're long.
		And it's because this chip, it's very basic.
		All it has to be able to do is integrate with your central nervous system.
		And then, there will be a small little device you just attach.
		You know, in the movies it's always in the temple, maybe.
		I think it'd be in the base of the neck.
		And you just take it, and you connect it, and it starts sending signals and electricity to the chip in your brain, which then starts to overwrite, readwrite to your brain, and now you're in the Matrix.
		And you lay back and close your eyes, and now you're in your dream world.
		We're already almost there.
		With ChatGPT, with AI and all this stuff, it's getting pretty crazy.
		You can already get an AI companion in, I think Skyrim they've done it?
		Where you can speak, and using ChatGPT, it will respond like a person.
		That's crazy.
		And then think about what you can do.
		You can get an app.
		And you can call on the app, and you can say, Hey, what's going on?
	And you're calling into your video game, where the character is, and the character will talk to you like a real person.
	I think this is, uh, oof, we got a dark future ahead of us, man.
	And it's all this AI, and Neuralink is a key component.
	Without Neuralink, we're already at the phase of digital AI girlfriends, and it's creepy.
	Guys are downloading these chat GPT girlfriends because it makes them feel it.
	That's why I'm saying I think love more than sex.
	I think guys, yeah, guys get horny all the time, sure.
	But what they really want is emotional satisfaction.
	Who doesn't?
	Women, the same thing.
	I think these guys are going to... You know what I think too, what's interesting is...
	Women and men have this... I think it's going to be very, very different.
	I think women are going to be less susceptible to this Neuralink stuff.
	The reason is... Women want to have babies.
	Men want to have babies too, but men don't literally make the babies within them.
	So the emotional satisfaction for a man can be... falsely applied.
	And I don't know if it's 80% or 20%.
unidentified		Maybe it's 51-49.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		What I mean is...
		You plug a woman into the Neuralink, and she gets this loving man, and he says, I am everything you'll ever want, but she knows you can't give me a baby.
		For a guy, he can have that, only can't.
		I suppose they could give a woman the experience of being pregnant with the Neuralink for sure.
		And maybe that would be it.
		But I do think there's going to be an inversion here where guys are not going to feel the same drive for having a kid as the woman does.
		And I think women are the principal driver of families, historically, and it's because women want to have kids.
		Especially when they get to a certain age.
		Something they want to do.
		Guys want to have kids, too.
		I'm not saying they don't, but it's not the same biological imperative because guys can have kids up to the point that they die.
		A guy could be 70 years old and still have kids, so they never feel the same pressure to get pregnant and have kids.
		Maybe the neural link just satisfies that woman's desire, but I feel like anytime she exits the neural link, she's gonna be like, no!
		Whereas a guy could be like, oh.
		Oh, whatever.
		A guy could be thinking, yeah, I'm 35, I'll have a kid whenever.
		I'm 40, I'll have a kid whenever.
		And they do that now!
		So it's gonna get wild, man.
		I think guys will be the most susceptible to this.
		Especially with the way things are going now in dating apps.
unidentified		It's gonna be wild, man.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		Man, it's kind of depressing.
		But I have to think.
		Future generations won't care at all.
		You take a look at everything we do today.
		I mean, how about this gay marriage?
		Go beg to the founding fathers and say, hey, good job, founding fathers.
		You will create a country that expands civil rights to the point where two men can get married and then have babies through surrogacy.
		And they're gonna say, what?
		Yeah!
		We scientifically implant genetic material from a man into a woman.
		She gives birth to the baby and the two men will raise that kid.
		And the founding fathers are gonna, like, they'd lose their minds.
		They could not ever imagine.
		Right now we have this debate over surrogacy.
		But it is socially acceptable and publicly available.
		So we will come to a point.
		Where everyone's plugged into the Neuralink.
		They live in fake realities.
		They barely ever talk to each other.
		Why would you?
		And then sometimes they pop out, and there's some argument.
		You shouldn't be Neuralink.
		Neuralink is banned.
		Get out of here.
		I like Neuralink.
		I'm sorry, dude.
		You know how prominent popular video games are.
		MMORPGs.
		I guarantee you.
		All these young men.
		Hikikomori, they call them in Japan.
		Young men.
		Incels, I guess they call them here.
		They're gonna plug themselves into the digital world, and they're gonna make themselves... not gods.
		Because that's not a fun game to play.
		They're gonna make themselves... I don't know.
		Somewhat important.
		Like an actor.
		But not gods.
		Some people would play in god mode.
		When you play these video games, you get console commands, they're called, where you can type in, you know, basically whatever you want, and then affect the game how you want.
		So in Fallout, for instance, you may play the game, but anybody playing on desktop can actually input debugging codes or whatever to generate items, to make characters appear or disappear, things like that.
		Games like that are only fun for so long.
		When you have the cheat codes, you're like, yeah, that was fun.
		Typically what you do is you play the game, you beat it, you do everything you want to do, and then you implement cheat codes and, you know, explore the game in other ways.
		Most people would probably just plug themselves into some kind of reality where they could be successful and feel good and have love and challenges and then isolate themselves from the world.
		I wonder.
		I really do.
		You, dear viewer, maybe one day, you'll be lying on your deathbed, surrounded by your loved ones, your family, and you'll think to yourself, I led a good life.
		And your sons and your daughters will be there, your loved one, your spouse will be there, and will say, thank you for everything you've done.
		You've truly given us a good life.
		And you'll smile, and you'll close your eyes for the last time, Only to open them in your pod, with a tube in your throat pumping cockroach into your belly, and you my friend, were the incel the whole time.
		Plugging yourself into the AI to give yourself a life where you felt loved, and it was all gone and all fake.
		And when you wake up from that game plugged into your pod, and you immediately remember everything that you really are, And the whole life you lived starts to fade from your mind, you'll say, that was fun.
		I guess I'll go again.
		Plug yourself right back in.
		It's a crazy world that we live in and I think that's where we're headed.
		Maybe we're already in it.
		I'll leave it there.
		Next segment is coming up at 4 p.m.
		on this channel.
		Thanks for hanging out and I'll see you all then.
		Well, we wait to see how Joe Biden will respond to Iran.
		Perhaps we'll get World War III.
	In the meantime, of course, we have to talk about civil war here in this United States.
	Putin ally warns Texas border battle could spark civil war in the U.S., even more destructive.
	I believe that's Russia, China, communists just in general, the left.
	This is their hope and their goal.
	Because the win condition for the left in the United States is civil war.
	That is not winning a civil war.
	It is starting one.
	I know it sounds kind of weird.
	Like, what do you mean?
	The win condition for them is starting a war?
	What if they lose it?
	Doesn't matter.
	Once the war starts, they've gotten everything they've wanted.
	First, they hate this country.
	They hate Israel.
	They want the U.S.
	to stop funding Israel and many other countries.
	They want the U.S.
	to stop being involved in intervention in general.
	And I don't completely disagree with anti-intervention, but it is a component of what they want.
	And the U.S.
	breaking apart or fighting a civil war shuts down U.S.
	foreign policy to a great degree.
	It fragments it to going from world police to, please help us, I beg of you, we need weapons.
	The other issue is that it immediately allows the suspension of all civil rights in the country.
	And we've already seen this.
	So my point, national divorce, whatever you want to call it, civil war, secession, interstate conflict, whatever, interstate conflict, it results in the left winning.
	And that's really just it.
	You know, I've had this conversation with many people who have been in favor of national divorce.
	That's the goal.
	The goal is the U.S.
	rips itself apart.
	You know, following that, it's not an argument, still, for or against.
	Because there are many people who say, so what?
	Why?
	In the event of a civil war, even if it does give the left consolidated power over the federal government and the U.S.
	military, it still allows people who oppose them to live in their own way.
	That is to say that if a fight were to break out in the United States and the states formed factions, the left may get what they want in their states, but it would still create enclaves where people on the right get to live the way they want.
	Because the federal government would not have the capabilities of actually seizing control of every single secessionist state.
	It wouldn't work.
	Maybe slowly over time, if the battle was lost, they could go march one by one with massive power into each of these states and take control of them.
	But I want to talk about all of this and exactly what's going on right now at the Texas border battle.
	Because it's not just a Putin ally.
	Take a look at this from The Nation.
	GOP border theatrics have escalated to threats of civil war.
	Now, sure, I think the nation is lying.
	I think the left is lying.
	It's what they do!
	It's what they do.
	You get all these leftists who, for some reason, push the lie that I advocate for civil war.
	Yeah, quite literally the whole opening of this video is me explaining why you don't want it.
	Why I've repeatedly stated that national divorce, peaceful divorce, balkanization, whatever you want to call it, there will be nothing but war following this.
	And it is the left winning.
	And that's, of course, why they lie.
	They need you to believe it is actually I or people like me who want civil war, so when it happens, they can justify the suspension of your rights and weaponization and war against their perceived enemies.
	That is to say, when war happens, they'll say, oh no, these dangerous right-wing MAGA-chud-blah-blah-blah maggots You don't want them to come in and cause harm, do you?
	We need to suspend rights just for a little bit.
	And these people will say, you know what?
	You're right.
	You're right.
	These people are bad.
	They wanted civil war the whole time.
	The Nation Writes.
	It's shaping up to be a banner week in the theater of incoherent rage known as Republican border politics.
	To begin with, a bipartisan accord on the border enforcement that GOP leaders loudly and repeatedly stressed was the baseline condition for backing a $100 billion plus funding package.
unidentified		Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		Lies, lies, lies, lies, lies.
		I don't even...
		The border deal?
		The bill that Biden says he needs?
		It allows 5,000 criminal aliens to enter the country every day.
		I don't see that as a deal.
		I see that as status quo under Joe Biden.
		But I digress.
		The GOP's desperate backpedaling on the border deal, which is, again, it's a lie.
		You know what?
		And we called this too.
		Joe Biden comes out and says, I got a border deal!
		We're going to secure the border!
		And then Republicans say, this is not a border deal, this is you saying 5,000 criminal aliens per day, we say no.
		Then Biden comes out, Republicans said no!
		And Democrats go, duh, why?
		Because they read stuff like this.
		Backpedaling blah blah blah.
		Oklahoma GOP Senator James Lankford.
		Succumbed to a rare moment of right-wing candor as he marveled over the heavy-breathing opposition in his own party during a weekend Fox News program, blah, blah, blah.
		It is interesting to see Republicans four months ago would not give funding for Ukraine, for Israel, for our southern border because we demanded changes in policy.
		A few months later, when we're finally getting to the end, they're like, oh, just kidding, I actually don't want a change in law because it's a presidential election year.
		That's just not true.
		The issue is, Joe Biden has utterly failed on the border.
		CBP is assisting.
		Human smugglers.
		And where we are right now is there is no deal.
		The Nation also writes, Texas is spoiling for a civil war.
		As Governor Greg Abbott escalates his fight with the Biden administration, he is sounding a lot like an old confederate.
		Oh boy.
		Many Democrats treat the Empire of Texas as an alarming sideshow.
		The nation is impossible to read, by the way, because they don't just tell you what's going on.
		They give you this stupid garbage.
		I don't care.
		That opening sentence is pointless.
		I just want to stress this, too.
		Okay, guys.
		Ellie Mistel?
unidentified		I don't know.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		Whatever.
		Many Democrats treat the Empire of Texas as an alarming sideshow.
		What idea was conveyed by telling me that?
		Sure, the state executes the most people in the country, places bounties.
		None of this does anything to tell me about what is going on.
		Texas doesn't want to leave, it wants to invade the rest of the United States and remake the country in its own Christo-fascist image.
		Moreover, as is typical with these states' rights types, the definition of freedom envisaged by the white guys running Texas is one where they are the ones, the only ones forever free, and they are allowed to subjugate women and people of color and blah blah blah, you get the point.
		Garbled, incoherent nonsense.
		Well, here we are.
		This is an interesting thread from James Lindsay, breaking down the plan.
		James is, I believe he's correct on his assessment.
		He says, here's a fun fact, being super frustrated about something effectively lowers your functional IQ by at least 20 points.
		That said, it's time to talk a bit about the terrible idea of national divorce, secession, balkanization, civil war, blah blah blah.
		I'm gonna summarize, make it really quick for you.
		There's a few ideas to consider.
		First, before we get to the idea of secession or civil war, we have the big sort.
		Conservatives leave New York and move to Florida, liberals leave West Virginia and go to California, and all the blue people live in the blue areas and the red people live in the red areas.
		That's just precursor to civil war.
		I've long said this.
		Yes, we can talk about leaving cities, that I understand, and going to places that are better suited, but be warned, this is geographic hyperpolarization.
		And so a lot of people are like, Tim says move and get out of the cities.
		Yes.
		I have absolutely said, get out of the cities.
		Because they will destroy you.
		However, I don't know exactly what should be done.
		I don't have a good answer for you.
		Forgive me, I can't see the future.
		Getting out of the cities does not mean leaving your state.
		It doesn't necessarily mean going to Florida.
		And I don't know that in the end it's a good thing.
		And we have actually mentioned the benefits to staying in cities and pushing back.
		But here's how I feel right now.
		If you stay in these cities, they will crush you.
		If you get out of the cities, moving somewhat aways, but still in the general area, you can be more successful and resist.
		But it only works if you do resist, speak up, organize, and challenge these machines.
		In the end, it may be impossible.
		And the only thing you can do, I suppose, is move to a red state.
		It feels like when I look at the math of all of this, the end result is... Again, it's dominoes falling over.
		I don't know what you think you can do.
		The big sword is National Divorce Light, as James Lindsay calls it, but it's actually an idea from a book, where like-minded conservatives move to right-wing areas and left to the left, and then you get geographic hyperpolarization, which results in civil war.
		Why?
		The scenario I often give is Oklahoma and Colorado.
		Oklahoma has banned abortion.
		Colorado now permits it, up to the point of birth.
		You get a scenario where a woman and a man are in a relationship.
		Seven months into a pregnancy, she decides this guy's actually really bad.
		Her friends talk to her and say, you are living.
		You cannot be with him.
		She's embarrassed.
		She's ashamed that she doesn't like the guy anymore.
		And so she says, if I have a baby with him, we are stuck here forever.
		So she decides to get an abortion.
		Hey, it's her body, her choice.
		So the left says.
		The man, surprised, says she's going to kill my son.
		She flees to Colorado.
		Oklahoma says leaving the state to commit murder is murder.
		Just because Colorado says it's allowed doesn't mean we allow that.
		And they demand her return, her extradition back to the state.
		You end up with budding conflict where Colorado says no, Oklahoma says how dare you, and what happens when Oklahoma State law enforcement troopers are chasing this woman in her vehicle as she's rushing full speed to the border, knowing that if she gets caught, she's having that baby, and if she can cross that border, she can terminate the pregnancy.
		She makes it to the border.
		The car breaks.
		She gets out.
		She's running.
	She's 10 feet.
	And the police say, freeze!
	And she refuses.
	She crosses the border.
	Colorado law enforcement is waiting.
	And they put their hands up and say, stop!
	We're not going to allow you to take this woman.
	Maybe the woman's a resident of Colorado.
	Maybe she's from Colorado.
	Her family's there.
	She moves to Oklahoma.
	It's not too far.
	I don't know.
	It's an extreme scenario, I suppose.
	But it could be as simple as what we've already seen where, I think it was, it might have been Arkansas or Alabama.
	I think it was Arkansas.
	The governor said, a woman planning to leave the state for an abortion is a conspiracy to commit a crime.
	And she will be held legally liable.
	That woman can never go back to that state.
	hyperpolarization. The tensions escalate until you get a bleeding Kansas type scenario.
	Eventually, the separation results in, let's say, though, it gets the abortion. The doctor
	terminates the baby and that guy drops to his knees, tears pouring from his face,
	screaming and pounding on the ground, knowing that his child was just killed.
	Do you think it ends there? Do you? You know, I've asked conservatives,
	do you believe abortion is murder?
	They say yes.
	They're lying.
	I really do think so.
	Or they're unwilling to say.
	And I get it.
	We've mostly ever talked about this on the Members Only Uncensored Show over at TimCast.com.
	Support our work.
	But the issue is as such.
	Do you believe abortion is murder?
	If the answer is yes, the question then becomes, do you believe the use of force, up to and including lethal force, is justified to prevent a murder?
	And of course, they believe the answer is yes.
	I mean, that's common self-defense law.
	That presents you with a serious problem.
	A doctor is about to perform an abortion, terminating the life of a baby that is viable outside the womb.
	Let's say it's seven or eight months.
	Do you believe it is justified to use force against that man to prevent this?
	And therein lies the impasse.
	I don't believe conservatives genuinely feel abortion is murder, because if it was, there'd be a lot different things happening in this country.
	But that's the point.
	And if we get to the point where geographic hyperpolarization results in 100% in Oklahoma, 100% in Colorado, no overlap, then Colorado says, our neighbors next door are mass genociding babies.
	And if they truly believe that, why would they not say, we must stop such an atrocity?
	Or more importantly, like Bleeding Kansas, it is not an official government position, it is abolitionists versus abortionists.
	You'll have abortion abolitionists, like with Bleeding Kansas, anti-slave forces going in and just murdering slave owners.
	Why would you not see something similar?
	Moving down, he goes on to talk about, you know, NPR talked about it in 2022, which brings us to how the post-crash economy will change the way you live and work, The Great Reset, by Richard Florida, well before Klaus Schwab.
	After the Great Sort, there's conflict and crisis, and then a Great Reset.
	He says, Florida outlines, the guy, the answer to the big sword is the Great Reset, which seems to outline an early draft of the plan that we'd recognize today as smart cities, 15-minute cities.
	That's right.
	In essence, by fleeing your blue state, because of conservative influencers told you to, you are hastening the project and allowing communists to take over those states.
	Yep.
	And when the communists take over those states, what do they do?
	Expand their power and press upon right-wing states.
	That being said, James, Telling someone to live in a communist state doesn't solve the problem.
	It just means you're telling them to suffer slowly instead of fleeing, living comfortably until the collapse.
	I don't have a good answer for you.
	I'm sorry.
	He says, you're not actually consolidating red team power anywhere.
	Non-communists don't act like communists, so power consolidation isn't a thing.
	This leaves red states with a constant pressure to turn, internal and external, or go all bad.
	Eventually, in other words, the path results in rupture.
	It'll be secession, civil war, national divorce.
	He's using it as a catch-all term.
	The U.S.
	becomes fractured.
	I'm gonna stop from there, because I agree with him up to that point, and say this.
	The end result then becomes something quite simple.
	As we saw in 1861, Abraham Lincoln suspended habeas corpus in a corridor stretching from D.C.
	up to P.A.
	For any reason, you could be arrested, detained, charged, or I'm sorry, detained without charge.
	They would just take you.
	They arrested, I believe it was 26 members of the Maryland legislature because Maryland was a slave state.
	They didn't care.
	The Constitution, your Bill of Rights, will be suspended immediately.
	That's why I say the win condition for the left is starting a civil war.
	It allows them to instantly, in these blue states, just consolidate all power in an instant.
	Uniparty rule, under the threat of civil war.
	They'll say neo-confederate.
	They'll say racists and white supremacists, that they've already been doing.
	And I don't have any good answers for you.
	Civil War is truly fascinating, because as most of you know, I've already talked quite a bit about it, and I'm not like a historian or anything, I've just read a few academic papers and read the history on it, lightly.
	Great stories.
	Fort Sumter, the start of Civil War.
	Despite the fact that we say it started there, after this, the next battle, the Battle of Bull Run, the first Battle of Bull Run, people did not believe a civil war could happen, even though we say they were already in it.
	And so they picnicked on the hillside as the war started and people's guts were ripped from their bellies and Bloody massacre.
	The Union forces fled back to D.C.
	and the Confederates cheered their victory.
	Everybody was surprised at how bloody the battle was.
	The Confederates got serious.
	But not serious enough.
	They decided not to march on D.C.
	For anybody who knows, Manassas is fairly close.
	They said, that proved our point, we're done.
	Abraham Lincoln then immediately said, two arms.
	And the South was crushed.
	It's a long story short, but basically the North invaded the South, and began to say, you did not secede, you cannot secede, and we will quash this rebellion.
	After being invaded, the Confederates, they did not have the same support, the same weaponry or industry, nor the resources.
	Ultimately what ends up happening is the South is being defeated, and then at some point they decide we need to actually invade the North, To show them what the cost will be to this war.
	Gettysburg.
	Utter failure.
	The North had better communications, better weapons, and there's a lot of stuff, you know, in the nooks and crannies of history that I'm not going to get into to simplify things.
	But that was it.
	Man, it's crazy.
	Gettysburg is not far from here.
	And you go there, and you can see the hills, and they talk about all the men that were marching, and it was tens of thousands or a hundred thousand.
	It was nuts.
	And, uh, well, the South needed food and resources.
	We're hoping by stealing supplies and seizing territory in the North, they could stop the North.
	Too little, too late, I'm afraid.
	They ended up losing.
	Shermans march to the sea.
	Talk about psychotic and brutal and evil.
	But that's war, baby.
	Sherman was burning farms.
	Civilians were being killed.
	As he marched and just scorched earth everything.
	Punishment, but also strategy.
	Prevent their ability to ever rebuild.
	And then, of course, reconstruction.
	Texas secedes, the federal government says, active state of rebellion.
	Several states then start lining up next to Texas, as already done, and the federal government goes in and immediately seizes control from the Republican governors.
	Does it even get to the point of civil war?
	Or does the federal government just go in and say, you now report directly to us, we are federalizing the state government because of insurrection.
	Declare insurrection, move in with National Guard.
	Maybe war.
	Maybe just a suspension of all of your civil rights.
	No more free speech.
	Hate speech is banned.
	No more internet.
	No more jobs.
	Central bank digital currencies.
	In an instant.
	So what's the answer?
	I don't have one for you.
	Good luck.
	That's my answer.
	Because as James Leslie pointed out, communists consolidate power, and the post-liberals and the conservatives don't.
	So there, I don't know what you do.
	I think the win condition for us right now, electing Donald Trump, I hate to say it, but that too could just result in them pushing for civil war.
	And they may be lining things up right now for, in the event that Donald Trump wins, they use that as justification for them seceding and launching civil war.
	And the same game is played.
	But for the leftists, they'd be happy to see this country burn to the ground, because they hate it as it is.
	And they'll align with whatever establishment forces to trigger a civil war, because civil war gives them carte blanche.
	They'll do whatever they want, whenever they want.
	You will have no rights.
	The news media in these states will say things like the far-right threat, the terror threat, the white supremacist threat, the neo-confederates, etc., etc.
	And what can you do?
	I hope you've asked yourself some of these important questions about what happens in an event something like this does take place.
	We here, we're in West Virginia.
	For proximity reasons, West Virginia will likely not be in one of these rebelling states.
	It's too close to D.C.
	What does that mean for commentary outlets like ours?
	We had someone call into the Members Only Show and say, yeah, but, you know, the people who train in the National Guard, they're friends with each other from these other states.
	You know, if it really went to civil war, they would disable area codes.
	You take your phone, you dial a Georgia area code, phone doesn't work.
	Can't make the call.
	Not only that, they would say these kinds of communications are treasonous, acts of sedition for National Guardsmen.
	They wouldn't let you communicate.
	It would be interesting how X would operate in Facebook.
	I'd imagine they'd start cutting off these states and shutting down the internet.
	The challenge would be financial infrastructure.
	If a civil war were to happen, does the state have the means to facilitate an economy outside of the federal government, the swift payment system, visa, MasterCard?
	I don't think so.
	So if whoever controls the flow of money will shut them down in two seconds.
	That's why the Confederates made their own money.
	And then, you know, we're trying to promise that.
	Hey, let us win.
	Help us out.
	They would go to foreign countries and say, give us weapons.
	The Union blockaded the South in the water, the Navy, so they couldn't get supplies.
	It's one of the reasons they lost.
	The Navy would play a major role in shutting down any, you know, rebellious state.
	I gotta tell you, man.
	The prospects are not great.
	But Donald Trump winning does give him legitimacy, control over the federal government, which will make it much more difficult.
	So, first step right now.
	Nobody should be advocating for civil war, national divorce.
	It would not work out the way they think.
	We should be advocating for voting.
	I know!
	And everyone says, dude, you have to do it this way.
	You vote, you get your friends to vote, you register as many voters as possible, you elect Donald Trump, and you seize the legitimate claim to the authority in federal government, and we hope that Trump can clean things up.
	And, in the event the left tries to cede, Trump can invoke the Insurrection Act and shut them down.
	We'll see.
	Next segment's coming up at 6 p.m.
	on this channel.
	Thanks for hanging out, and I'll see you all then.
	Donald Trump was recently ordered to pay E. Jean Carroll $83 million because he defamed her when he said that she is a whack job who made up the story and never raped her.
	Now, here's the crazy story.
	Let's set aside all of the partisanship.
	Let's set aside the arguments about whether or not there was any evidence or whether or not Trump actually knew this woman, whatever.
	We'll get to those.
	A trial determined Trump was liable for sexual abuse, not assault, that they had not satisfied
	the claim that Trump had raped this woman and that the only thing they could determine
	was that he uses hands.
	I'll put it that way.
	I'll try to keep it, you know, kind of light to start things off.
	Thus, there is no statement in the courts, at least reportedly, that Donald Trump ever
	raped this woman.
	Yet she has repeatedly made the claim, and when Donald Trump said, factually, based on the court, he did not, she sued him, the judge awarded her, ruled a summary judgment, and then said the facts of the case are indisputable.
	Despite the fact, they're absolutely in dispute.
	When Donald Trump tried to file a countersuit because he says she claimed that he raped her, despite the fact the court said no, the judge dismissed it!
	Well, here's the story from Fox News.
	E. Jean Carroll gleefully invites Maddow on shopping spree with Trump's $83 million.
	Penthouse, it's yours.
	This woman is insane.
	She is a crackpot.
	And I think the fact that we are currently in this... I don't know what you want to call it.
	Donald Trump reportedly said at trial, this is not America.
	It's not America.
	I'll tell you my opinion on this.
	Eugene Carroll fabricated the story.
	Or... I don't know.
	What we know is that there is a very similar plot coming from Law & Order SVU in 2012.
	There's no evidence of this event ever having occurred.
	There's no evidence that Trump knows this woman.
	Ah, yes, but you may be saying, but Tim, what about the photograph from 1987?
	You mean Donald Trump, the most famous guy in the city, in New York, was at a party somewhere, and someone said, here's a person, and that proves they knew each other?
	If that were the case, I know everybody.
	I can't tell you how many times I've been out and someone's been like, can I get a picture with you?
unidentified		Sure.
tim pool ▲ ● ▼		I can't tell you how many times I've been out and I've been with someone I knew and they were like, oh, here's a friend of mine.
		Let's get a picture.
		And I'm like, whatever.
		I don't know.
		You don't take pictures when you're at parties or on boats or, you know, doing vacation things.
		Like, I don't know everybody.
		So that's the claim Donald Trump knew her.
		And now she's getting roasted because when asked by Maddow what she was going to do to help women's rights with this money, she said she's going to buy everything she ever wanted.
		And the lawyers for her go, she's kidding, she's kidding.
		It's getting crazier, crazier.
		Donald Trump is now going to be counter, they're going to be appealing because it turns out the lawyer in this case actually worked, let me, actually I didn't have this one pulled up, but let me pull this up.
		It's a conflict of interest.
		Trump lawyer from Reuters.
		Let's see if we actually can get the Reuters on this one.
		Here we go, check this out.
		This is Trump lawyer says judge's possible conflict may taint $83 million Carol verdict.
		Okay, okay.
		I'm going to tell you my opinion.
		She made it up, it's all a book.
		That's it.
		She knows she can say it.
		She knows she can get away with it.
		Let me show you here from the Wikipedia page on the sexual abuse and defamation by Donald Trump.
		We'll jump down to, let's see, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
		Her expenses were paid by Reid Hoffman, a Democrat donor.
		May 9th, 2023, a jury of six men found Trump liable for sexual abuse, battery, and defamation.
		On the issue of rape, they found it was not proven Trump had raped her.
		Later on, when asked, Carol said, yes he did, rape her in response to a question.
		Trump sued, and Kaplan dismissed the lawsuit ruling Carol's rape claim against Trump was substantially true.
		Despite the fact a jury said it wasn't.
		How about that?
		I don't understand why Donald Trump doesn't file suit and say, like, West Virginia.
		Clearly, you're not going to win a game going to a communist state with a bunch of communists.
		But anyway, I digress.
		Here's the story that I think matters substantially in this.
		In a letter filed in federal court in Manhattan, the lawyer Alina Haba cited a January 27th New York Post article discussing U.S.
		District Judge Lewis Kaplan's alleged prior working relationship with Carroll's lawyer Roberta Kaplan, who was not related.
		Both worked about two years at the same time at the law firm Paul Weiss Rifkin, Wharton & Garrison in the early 90s, before Judge Kaplan was appointed to the federal bench in 1994.
		The article quoted an unnamed former Paul Weiss partner who said Roberta Kaplan sought to distinguish herself, like all associates, and Judge Kaplan had been like her mentor.
		They are not related, by the way, despite having the same last name.
		Haba said this particularly concerning matter could justify a new trial on liability and damages, which the judge's overly hostile treatment of Trump's side and preferential treatment of Carroll's side could also support.
		Trump plans to appeal last Friday's verdict, which stemmed from his June 2019 denials that he raped Carole and Bergdorf Goodman, department store dressing room in the mid-1990s.
		Judge Kaplan's chambers did not immediately respond to a request for comment after business hours.
		Spokespeople for Carole and Roberta Kaplan did not immediately respond to similar requests, but one spokesperson told the Post that no conflict existed.
		Paul Weiss also did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
		Blah, blah, blah.
		We get it.
		We get it.
		Here's what I'm gonna tell you.
		I think anyone with a brain can see this is fake.
		Completely fake.
		Let's start with the fraud charges against Trump in New York, and we can talk about what's going on and why.
		Yo, we're headed for... I mean, we're in something truly dark.
		We're dealing with evil.
		Abject evil.
		I don't know how you win.
		I like to believe that good often does win, but maybe it doesn't.
		This woman, E. Jean Carroll, was writing a book.
		She made some claim about Trump, which she could not prove.
		Perhaps it's true, but so long as she can't prove it, then I say, unless it's proven in a court of law in a criminal context, I don't see it being true.
		Now, a jury trial in New York argued that Trump was liable for sexual abuse.
		With what evidence?
		There's a few people that said that after it happened, she confided to them.
		Hearsay?
	That's it?
	Is there any evidence?
	There's no surveillance footage.
	The story doesn't make sense at all.
	Trump was the most famous guy.
	Nobody recognized him.
	The floor was empty.
	The door that was supposed to be locked wasn't locked.
	None of it made sense.
	She doesn't know exactly what had happened because it happened a long time ago.
	She said it.
	They said fine, sure, whatever.
	That's insane!
	But here we are.
	You know, I was talking earlier about civil war in these communist states, and I don't know how you... I think the goal of all of this is to make sure that you leave.
	You leave places like New York.
	They are corrupt, authoritarian, Soviet-esque states.
	It's not an exaggeration.
	Bill de Blasio stole taxpayer money to paint Black Lives Matter in front of Trump's building.
	They're trying to make sure they can consolidate power.
	They are.
	It's working.
	I don't know how we go anywhere but civil war with things like this.
	We had Joy Reid get caught on hot mic saying, starting another effing war.
	They know behind the scenes exactly what the elites are doing and how evil they are, but they're party to it.
	They like it.
	And Donald Trump may not be a saint, but innocent until proven guilty.
	Civil liability in a matter does not prove anything beyond a reasonable doubt.
	That's criminal court.
	Let's see you bring that up.
	Oh, they didn't.
	There's no evidence.
	It's kind of wild, because if we even gave the benefit of the doubt to E. Jean Carroll, let's say a guy who looked like Trump did attack her, and she could just say it was Trump, and this is where we are?
	You just make up a story and people just say, bang the gavel, yes.
	How wild is it?
	The Trump fraud case I was mentioning a moment ago.
	They said Donald Trump committed fraud in his business dealings by inflating the size or the value of his buildings.
	The value of his buildings, I believe.
	Size was like how much of it was working and how much was it was non-rentable, etc, etc.
	And the judge ruled summary judgment.
	Trump did it.
	We don't need to see the evidence.
	Now, after that trial's been determined, default summary judgment, Trump loses.
	We're gonna have a trial to determine how much Trump owes us.
	Now he can argue.
	And when the witnesses came in, financial institutions, they said not only did Trump do everything on the level, it was greatly profitable and everyone was happy.
	Too bad.
	I already banged the gavel in a different trial and said, he did.
	You see how they set it up?
	Now this woman is going on TV and gloating about buying all these fancy things.
	Because they're evil.
	Smiles on their faces.
	Depraved evil.
	Okay.
	There was this tweet where a guy said, how could it be?
	That the current frontrunner for the presidency has to pay an $83 million fine, penalty, for raping a woman!
	That's not what it's for.
	He didn't rape the woman.
	It's for defamation.
	Should have been thrown out based on the Times v. Sullivan standard.
	It's really amazing.
	Absolutely amazing.
	But the judge said, no, because it's substantially true, you've got to pay the money.
	I don't know why Donald Trump is even entertaining any of this stuff.
	I'll tell you the problem with Trump.
	He's an old school man.
	He's an old man.
	He's an old school man.
	He seems to think, I'll just play the game!
	Are you kidding?
	He keeps giving interviews to the corporate press who lie about everything he says.
	He just keeps doing it.
	If there's one reason why I would not vote for Trump, it's exactly that.
	Let's be honest.
	Trump's the best bet we have.
	Ain't nobody else.
	You can make all the arguments in the world about DeSantis.
	That guy could not lead himself out of a cardboard box.
	Sorry.
	I like he's saying some good stuff now that he's not running anymore.
	He's done some good jobs in Florida, but that dude could not run a campaign to save his own career.
	And this is where we're at right now.
	This, this stuff, man, this latest clip, it's going viral.
	Talk about despicable evil.
	Next segment's coming up at 8 p.m.
	on this channel over at YouTube.com.
	I'm sorry, not at this channel.
	8 p.m.
	over at YouTube.com slash TimCastIRL.

▲