Obama CIA Engaged In SEDITIOUS CONSPIRACY Against Trump new Report Reveals, This Was A COUP ATTEMPT
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
Obama CIA Engaged In SEDITIOUS CONSPIRACY Against Trump new Report Reveals, This Was A COUP ATTEMPT
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.
CIA and foreign intelligence agencies illegally targeted 26 Trump associates before 2016 Russia collusion claims, according to a report from Michael Schellenberger and Matt Taibbi.
The story is actually pretty shocking and damning, and it's a component of what we've long known, but of course the media says is not true, that Donald Trump was spied on.
They used nefarious methods to try and subvert his campaign and his presidency.
And the more information that comes out on this story as a bombshell is dropped in 2024, eight years later, It looks like the Obama administration engaged in what I would only consider to be an act of sedition, a crime against this country, its people, and perhaps even a coup of sorts.
I don't know what else to call it.
The allegation is quite simple.
U.S.
intelligence agencies contacted the Five Eyes spy club.
These are allies around the world, five nations.
They allegedly spied on Donald Trump's campaign and his associates, and this was the catalyst for starting the false Russiagate investigation.
We know that there was one individual who was actually sentenced to probation for altering an email to create a fake reason to spy on one of Trump's associates.
It would seem that this is not new information, but it is another layer to the story that would suggest Democrats knowing that they would lose to Donald Trump, who was refusing to play ball the way they wanted to, decided to set this country on fire and burn it to the ground.
It's funny.
When you read about Obamagate or SpyGate and these allegations, Wikipedia just says they're all false, debunked, baseless conspiracy theories.
How dare you?
The funny thing is, it looks like some of them haven't been updated.
Because the truth is, they were spying on Trump Tower.
They were spying on Donald Trump.
They did alter evidence to create a false reason to spy on Trump associates.
These are all facts.
Now we're learning that there's this alleged binder that contains all of the information as to how they engaged in this seditious operation.
I don't know where the rumor comes from, but Jesse Watters reported just the other night that the binder may be missing.
Donald Trump had ordered this information declassified The conspiracy theory as it were now, I don't even know if conspiracy theory is the right word because we know this stuff's happening, but the hypothesis is that the reason Donald Trump's home was raided is that they are panicked and desperately trying to find these documents which prove the Obama administration, the CIA, or elements of the previous administration were engaged in seditious actions and perhaps even treasonous actions.
The story is absolutely insane.
And if true, I don't even want to say if true.
I think we have more than enough information going back to prove that the Democratic Party engaged in a seditious conspiracy.
Call it a coup.
From the Wall Street Journal in 2022, Trump really was spied on.
Durham says techies linked to the Clinton campaign had access to White House and Trump Tower internet data.
There are so many of these stories.
We know at this point exactly what went down.
Now, of course, the corporate press is in decay.
CBS just announced they're laying off staff members, journalists.
Paramount will be firing many people.
We've seen the LA Times, even the Wall Street Journal announced they're laying journalists off.
At the same time, Matt Taibbi, Michael Schellenberger, many other independent reporters are exposing more information, dropping more facts as to what went down.
Now with this report that that was released through Public, that's the organization that has published the story, Matt Taibbi and I believe it was Michael Schellenberger's page.
They are going to claim that it's conspiracy theory, that it's baseless.
They'll say over and over again, present it without evidence.
But I want to remind you as we enter this story, which is one of the most consequential and significant stories in a long time in this country's history.
When and why do you decide something is true?
It's a very difficult question.
If I read something in the New York Post or the New York Times, do I assume it's true?
I don't.
I typically will run it against several other sources and try to find the first layer source material.
If the New York Times says a thing happened, then I'll look to see if this is confirmed by other independent reporting.
It's supposed to be that in journalism, three sources confirm a story and then you can run it.
I don't know if we follow those standards anymore.
And based on the current state of journalism, there's nothing you can do.
I'll put it simply.
I trust Taibi and Schellenberger, Barry Weiss, and many others infinitely more than I would trust anyone at any corporate media outlet.
The corporate press, of course, will say it's a conspiracy theory, it's debunked, it's a lie.
And I'm just going to remind them, we know that Russiagate was a hoax.
We know that it was not a real story, yet you pursued it for three years claiming it was.
You have zero credibility.
And as such, if these individuals said that they have sources in intelligence who have exposed this, I'm going to go ahead and lean on, I'm going to trust them on this reporting.
Here's the news.
The New York Post reports.
The U.S.
intelligence community asked foreign spy agencies to surveil 26 associates of Donald Trump in the run-up to the 2016 election, which triggered the allegations the former president's campaign had been colluding with Russia, according to the report.
Former CIA Director John Brennan identified and presented the targets to the U.S.
intelligence-sharing partners in the so-called Five Eyes agencies.
The intelligence-gathering organizations in the U.S., United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, according to a report published Monday on Michael Schellenberger's Public Substack.
It's the name of it's public, it's not a public, it's called public.
The report by independent journalist Shellenberger, Matt Taibbi, and Alex Gutentag has not been confirmed by the Post.
Nor do I think it matters.
If the New York Times wrote a story, then the New York Post would not even bring that up.
And this is an important distinction.
If the New York Times reported Barack Obama does a backflip, the New York Post will simply write that Barack Obama did a backflip.
But when it comes to esteemed journalists who are working for their own publication, now it's a, we've not confirmed this.
Sure.
They cite multiple unnamed sources, including ones close to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence led by Rep.
Mike Turner, Republican from Ohio.
Turner's office did not respond to the Post's request for comment.
The U.S.
intelligence community identified the 26 Trump associates as people to, quote, bump, or make contact with, or manipulate.
One source told the outlet.
In spy speak, bumping is when a reason is manufactured to meet with a target of interest in order to develop a relationship that could lead to intelligence.
They were targets of our own IC and law enforcement.
Targets for collection and misinformation, the source said.
Now, I want to pause for a moment.
Many of you may be saying, wait, wait, wait, wait, I don't understand.
Who's spying on Trump and why?
The five I's.
is an Anglosphere intelligence alliance comprising Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the UK, and the United States.
These countries are parties to the Multilateral UK-USA Agreement, a treaty for joint cooperation in signals intelligence.
Informally, Five Eyes can also refer to the group of intelligence agencies of these countries.
So they say it's been established since 1941.
Let me tell you how this organization operates and the purpose of Five Eyes.
It is unconstitutional, it is illegal, to warrantlessly spy on the American people.
We know that the NSA has been doing this thanks to the leaks dropped by Edward Snowden.
And I make the distinction very clear.
Not whistleblower.
Leaker.
A whistleblower is somebody who says, here is wrongdoing, here is the proof.
A leaker is someone who takes a set of documents and releases them to the public.
Now, the motivation for Snowden, very much so, was in essence whistleblowing, but there were many documents included in the leaking that did not pertain to these particular actions.
But it did prove the NSA was illegally and unconstitutionally spying on the American people.
That's a problem for the U.S.
government, so what do they do?
The U.S.
government will go to Australia or the U.K.
and say, oh, won't someone spy on this priest?
If you get the reference.
And then, oh, look, look!
We never asked anyone to spy on anyone!
It is not unconstitutional or illegal for the U.S.
to spy on a foreign individual.
So, in the U.K., where they have a little bit, I think it's a little bit easier to spy on people than it is in the U.S., they just ask the U.S.
to spy on their citizens.
You see how simple it is?
It's a big club.
And they decided, you know, we can get around these pesky human rights protections by simply spying on each other's citizens.
And we agree.
And this is how they try to pull it off.
As if we are stupid.
The Obama administration, it would seem, their intelligence agencies knew that they could not directly engage in these actions, so they asked foreign countries to do it instead, which generated the reason for the Russia collusion narrative.
In other words, The U.S.
and its allies engaged in a criminal, seditious conspiracy against the upcoming president, the frontrunner for the Republican Party, because this happened before he was even elected, and then sought to sabotage the U.S.
presidential administration and the will of the American people.
unidentified
Hey, it's Kimberly Fletcher here from Moms 4 America with some very exciting news.
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.
You've got this tremendous, tremendous story coming out of New York.
A Democrat won George Santos' seat because 103 Republicans voted to oust George Santos for no reason.
Meanwhile, Democrats would never turn on their own.
So long as that's the case, oh man, we're in trouble, I suppose.
They say, Quote, they were targets of our own intelligence community and law enforcement.
Targets for collection and misinformation, the source said.
Britain's government communications headquarters intelligence apparatus, GCHQ, was making contact with Trump associates as early as March 2016.
They were making contacts and bumping Trump people going back to March, a source told the outlet.
They were sending people around the UK, Australia, Italy.
The Mossad in Italy.
The MI6 was working at an intelligence school they'd set up.
A GCHQ spokesperson told the outlet that it claims it was asked to conduct wiretapping against the then-president-elect.
Claims that it was, quote, asked to conduct wiretapping against the then-president-elect are nonsense.
Told the outlet that claims that it was.
They do this weird thing with the quotes.
They're saying it's not true.
Intelligence related to the alleged surveillance effort is housed in a 10-inch binder, according to the outlet, which Trump ordered to be declassified at the end of his presidency and could contain evidence that multiple U.S.
intelligence officials broke laws against spying and election interference.
The whereabouts of the alleged thick binder are unknown.
The Trump campaign and the CIA did not respond to the Post's request for comment.
Warrantless surveillance of a U.S.
person is specifically prohibited by U.S.
law.
Former FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith was sentenced to probation in 2021 after admitting that he falsified an email to renew a wiretap against Trump campaign advisor Carter Page.
Page had been wiretapped after intelligence sources suspected he may have been targeted by Russian spies.
The wiretap, which was approved by the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, was reviewed several times after it was granted.
Last March, Special Counsel John Durham concluded that the FBI investigation of Trump's alleged collusion with Russia was seriously flawed and had no basis in evidence, even after a four-year review of the probe.
In response, the FBI said it had implemented dozens of corrective actions Since the improper Trump probe and that the missteps identified in the report could have been prevented.
In 2022, Taibbi and Schellenberger were involved in the publishing of the Twitter files expose, which detailed how the social media giants previous management team sought to silence controversial voices and suppress news items, such as the post reporting on the Hunter Biden laptop.
My friends, there is a deep state.
There is a criminal enterprise operating within the United States.
I don't have any answers for you.
I don't know how we deal with this.
I can only say, you know, maybe Donald Trump gets elected in November and we see some reforms.
But this is why I feel like the country will rip itself in twain before they ever allow that to happen.
As much as many people are like, Tim talks about civil war all the time, all the time.
Well, aside from the report that Georgia is sending about 20 National Guardsmen to assist with logistics and engineering the Texas National Guard and defiance of the Biden administration, those are shocking reports.
That's breaking information as of yesterday.
We read the Boston Globe report about the Democrat wargaming of the 2020 election.
And in their proposed scenario, should Donald Trump win the 2020 election, they would advocate that the West Coast states secede from the Union, or at the very least threaten to secede unless their demands were met.
Of course, Donald Trump didn't win in 2020.
I think it's fair to say that Trump won the election, but lost the presidency and lost the vote.
And I'll clarify that distinction.
When I say election, I mean in terms of what we think an election is supposed to be.
A gentleman presents his arguments, the people then vote.
Another gentleman says, well, I object and I propose my counter arguments and the people vote.
Trump certainly won on the grounds of his argument and he got more votes than any sitting president in the history of this country.
However, Joe Biden took the White House because Joe Biden won the game.
Elections are not these simple debates and then the people decide.
Never have been.
It's naive to think so.
So, my point is simply that Donald Trump certainly had the argument on his side, but the Democrats had the procedure and the strategy, and that's why Joe Biden ended up winning what really mattered, a seat in the White House.
For this, I think that we ended up seeing things simmer down a little bit.
I mean, of course, January 6th, after the fact, then you had a second impeachment of Trump, you have the insurrection, the criminal charges, You know, look, my friends, it is.
Call it whatever you want to call it.
It's not the same as 1861.
But we are in something, and you can call it whatever you want.
I think perhaps it's naive to say civil war because it's an archaic term, but we're certainly facing something.
This is perhaps a seditious conspiracy, an ongoing coup, a period of strife that will have a name in the history books.
I don't know what you call it.
Depends on who wins.
If Donald Trump loses, if the America first, the American people lose, if you and I lose, This story about the seditious conspiracy will just disappear.
Perhaps it will emerge later on as the noble effort to stop the Russian takeover of the United States.
Something like that.
I don't know.
Maybe they'll make the argument that brave men and women knew that the Russia collusion hoax was real!
Maybe.
History is written by the victors.
Norm Macdonald had a great joke where he says, I was just reading history and this is great news.
The good guys have won every time.
That's right.
If we win, perhaps we will expose what we already know to be true.
Barack Obama's administration engaged in a coup, a seditious conspiracy to subvert the will of the American people to retain power.
And they probably still do.
Now I think in 2020 they largely use, excuse me, procedural manipulations to win.
That is to say, the game was actually followed as per the rules.
Sort of, right?
There are a lot of people who think that ballot totals were flipped.
Democrats argue this in 2016.
Trump supporters argue this in 2020.
I'm not so sure that's actually what happened.
I view it more of the Democrats used an exploit.
They didn't rewrite the code.
Democrats did not enter a cheat code to subvert how the game was to be played.
They used loopholes and manipulation to play the game in ways that one would arguably say, hey, I think that breaks the rules, but they're like, technically it doesn't.
And that is.
Universal mail-in voting, mass ballot harvesting, and lax signature verification policies made it very easy for them to collect large numbers of mail-in ballots from people who typically would not vote, probably did not want to vote, and many of whom probably didn't even sign the dang envelopes.
That being said, You could argue this is fraud, you can argue it's whatever you want, but my point is simply, I would describe it as a shadow campaign.
That's what they wrote in Time Magazine.
A shadow campaign is not an election.
Let me, uh, I always have to pull this one up because I think it's, uh, important context for those who aren't familiar with the story.
But this story was published by Time Magazine.
It is historical canon.
The secret history of the shadow campaign that saved the 2020 election.
A shadow campaign is not democracy.
A shadow campaign is not an election.
In fact, Time Magazine specifically refers to this as the conspiracy that unfolded behind the scenes.
So, I don't know.
You tell me where we are.
You tell me what this means for this country.
Is it not civil war?
Because there's no fighting in the streets?
Okay, that's fine, I don't know.
We maybe need a new word for it.
When you have underground agencies engaging in illicit activities, subversive activities, seditious conspiracies to subvert the will and the laws of this country.
What do you call that?
A seditious conspiracy, I guess?
So, is it not a civil war?
Man.
It's really interesting.
Some have called it a Cold Civil War.
And perhaps that is the best way to describe it, because like the Cold War, it's a lot of espionage and underground manipulations.
And the Cold War never met the battlefield of U.S.
mobilization of U.S.
troops against Soviet troops.
But it did.
I don't know where this all goes.
I can't tell you my favorite thing about this.
line forces with US or Soviet support. We're fighting. I don't know where this all goes.
I can't tell you my favorite thing about this. Look at this.
Here we go.
Wikipedia, allegations of Barack Obama spying on Donald Trump.
As part of a large baseless conspiracy theory, Donald Trump posited that Barack Obama had spied on him, which Trump described as the biggest political crime in American history.
The series of accusations have been nicknamed Obamagate, blah, blah, blah.
Now, why does a Wikipedia article start with, as part of a large baseless conspiracy theory?
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. Why
Former FBI attorney pleads guilty in Durham probe.
The Trump administration and Trump's associates were being illegally spied on.
A lawyer fabricated evidence to get a FISA warrant against the Trump campaign to spy on him.
Really amazing, isn't it?
That we have Politico right here in 2020.
This is former FBI attorney pleads guilty in Durham probe.
He admitted to altering an email to seek a surveillance warrant against Carter Page.
It's absolutely remarkable that they still claim it didn't happen.
Well, literally speaking, Barack Obama didn't do it.
Is that the argument?
That Barack Obama was lurking around every corner peeking at Donald Trump?
That's not what anybody meant.
Oh, there's more.
I love this stuff.
Spygate.
Ooh, Spygate was.
I love this.
Okay.
Spygate was a disproven conspiracy theory peddled by U.S.
President Donald Trump and his political base on many occasions throughout his presidential term.
Do you know why it says Spygate was a disproven conspiracy theory?
Because it's a proven conspiracy theory, right?
Understand this and how they use manipulative language.
Spygate is a conspiracy theory.
If they wrote Spygate is a disproven conspiracy theory, that would mean that as of today, it was disproven.
They're doing something very special in saying WAS a disproven conspiracy theory.
Because they're arguing that at the time there were reports that had disproven it, so it WAS disproven, but ultimately got that wrong.
And it is true.
Trump really was spied on, says the Wall Street Journal.
Gotta be fair.
It is a bit silly.
I don't know why they put was, literally.
But they do this game where they argue that the Clinton campaign had no association with Barack Obama, that even though we know Biden, Obama, Yates, and I believe Comey and others had a meeting about certain operations against Donald Trump, that Obama wasn't involved.
My friends, You best start believing in Cold Civil War, Civil Stripe stories.
You're in one.
Now, where this goes, I don't know.
But what's amazing is, the speculation right now, and it's been speculated a little bit, but now it's getting juicy.
And maybe it's just nonsense.
Donald Trump ordered declassified Crossfire Hurricane, right?
This is the origins, this is the root of Russiagate.
He ordered it declassified.
Now, they say there's a binder.
I don't know if there actually is.
The statements produced by Public, reported by Jesse Waters and the New York Post, are not confidence-building.
You know, if there was a binder, they might say there is a binder, it is missing, and it's a little weak.
However, it seems the idea now is details about the operation and the Five Eyes Spy Club are housed in a binder that has gone missing.
I don't know.
This one sounds a little bit more fanciful, right?
We know about the spying stuff, but as for this binder, you know, we'll wait and see.
But the story is exciting, isn't it?
The binder's gone missing.
Perhaps Donald Trump took the information on how he was being spied on with him when he left, and they are panicked in trying to find it.
And perhaps something is going on behind the scenes that we don't know about and we won't know about, because Trump won't reveal his cards until he has the best opportunity to show this operation.
And even if it was revealed today, I don't know that it would do enough.
But maybe the reason his home was raided, maybe the reason they're trying to criminally charge him is that they know he took classified documents.
That's right.
I mean, he had plenary declassification powers.
The president decides what is classified and what isn't.
And as president, he can't take these.
They're trying to argue he can't do that, that there is some authority above him.
Remarkable, isn't it?
There's not.
But I wonder if Trump has this, and they are sweating bullets knowing he does.
And what we are witnessing right now at the courts, with the charges and the fraud case and the criminal attacks against Trump, are... It's war.
It is the coup.
It is the ongoing civil war.
Maybe the reason Donald Trump isn't playing any heavier cards is that if the Supreme Court rules he is immune, he doesn't need to.
And so he's keeping these things close to the chest.
Or perhaps it's all wishful thinking.
Trump is a bumbling dotard who is being roughed around by the deep state and he will eventually find himself in prison.
Maybe.
I don't know.
No idea.
But all I can say is, oh boy, it's getting interesting.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 1 p.m.
on this channel.
Thanks for hanging out, and I'll see you all then.
It's your final wake-up call, GOP.
The Democrats have just won a congressional seat previously held by a Republican.
That's right.
George Santos's seat has just gone Democrat.
Uh-huh.
The first thing I'm going to say is, anyone who voted to expel George Santos has effectively disqualified themselves.
Do not vote for any one of these people, and I'll give you the list.
Oh, we got the list right here.
Look at all these names.
CBS News.
Who voted to expel George Santos from the House?
Oh, wow.
I see Buck out of Colorado.
We're not fans of that guy.
Look at all these people.
Carter from Georgia.
Cole from Oklahoma.
Comer from Kentucky.
These people should never receive another vote again.
Miller, Miller-Meeks, Molinaro, Moore, Moran, any single one of them who voted to remove George Santos I will do everything in my power to campaign against you.
George Santos has not been convicted of any wrongdoing.
He's just a weird, goofy guy with several accusations made against him.
Fine, I guess.
But prove it!
They expelled him before any wrongdoing.
And if it turns out that he did engage in wrongdoing, okay.
But I don't care.
You do not get to retroactively apply standards.
Before this, the Democrats have taken back a seat in the House because Republicans are a bunch of...
Amoral crackpots, and they have no idea how to govern.
They are disgusting scumbags, and I despise them.
That being said, Frank Luntz's final wake-up call I absolutely love.
Don't fall for it, ladies and gentlemen.
While I'm certainly upset about the moral failings of the despicable Republican Party, I am not at all phased by it, and I'll explain it very simply.
The guy who won the seat in New York's 3rd District is the previous incumbent who's held it several times.
So it's no surprise, in 2022, people are kind of upset with Joe Biden.
You get, uh, Republicans.
And they narrowly take the House.
Now, because of George Santos and everything surrounding him, you know, he loses to the incumbent, the previous incumbent.
I would like to add this as well.
Democrats ran an old white guy.
Republicans ran a black immigrant woman.
Republicans lost.
Dude, come on.
Don't fall for the woke lies.
They don't actually care about diversity.
They care about power.
And so when the Republicans are like, okay, here is a well-respected Republican who happens to be a black immigrant woman, the Democrats' response is, we don't care about that.
We've been lying to you the whole time.
We're voting for the old white guy because he gives us power.
But here's what Frank Luntz had to say, which I think should absolutely fall on deaf ears because it's immaterial to the actual election.
I do think it's fair to say, you know, pay attention.
It's going to be an uphill battle into November 2024.
I love how they say Republican pollster.
Oh, come on.
Yeah, dude.
I did this segment yesterday.
Frank Luntz is the kind of guy who'd vote for bombing, you know, brown kids overseas.
The new era, the new wave of the Republican Party ain't all about that.
So when you say Republican, what do you really mean?
Republican pollster Frank Luntz warned Republicans that Democrats flipping George Santos' old congressional seat should be a final warning call to the party before the November elections.
Former Congressman Tom Suozzi I also don't know that this actually means anything.
It's a special election.
Democrats are riled up, Republicans are not.
November election will be very different.
Santos Tuesday night, winning over Republican candidate Mazie Pilip.
I also don't know that this actually means anything.
It's a special election.
Democrats are riled up, Republicans are not.
November election will be very different.
We'll see.
Suozi, I don't know how to pronounce it, I'm going to assume it's Suozi, was leading with
roughly 54% of the vote to Pilip's 46% Wednesday morning.
Luntz issued a warning to Republicans following their defeat in a post to X, saying that the results are not an endorsement of Biden, but instead a rejection of House Republican chaos.
While he believes voters in the district don't necessarily approve of Biden's policies, Republicans gave voters nothing to vote for, he wrote.
Democrats just flipped George Santos' House seat.
Tonight is the final wake-up call for the House GOP.
If they ignore or attempt to explain away why they lost, they will lose in November as well.
The issue agenda is on their side.
Their congressional behavior is not, Luntz wrote.
They reached out to him for comment, blah, blah, blah.
RNCC Chairman Richard Hudson wrote in a press release that the race was an uphill battle, blah, blah, blah.
I'd like to explain something to everybody as to why this story is so important.
This is the degradation of American values.
This is the collapse of the system that is the United States.
One step at a time.
Talked a little bit about it last night on TimCast IRL.
Michael Trace was on the show and he says, I disagree!
And I believe he was wrong.
I believe I am right because I had the idea.
So of course I will defend my idea.
The idea is simple.
When you capitulate, And give in to Democrats as they bring in more and more non-citizens.
The people who come here will vote against American interests, or I should say traditional American interests.
The Democrats argue that immigrant interests are American interests.
I disagree, but I can break all of this down for you by looking at the Republican candidates' political positions.
She's a Democrat.
I mean, she's kind of Republican.
But she's a Democrat.
And some have said that she supports Trump.
Yeah.
She also basically said of his indictments, well, he'll have to figure that one out.
Something to that effect.
And I'll read it all for you.
And this is what happens.
Now I don't care for white nationalism ideas.
I'm a big fan of immigration.
I think immigration is great.
I think historically immigration has been a massive net gain for this country.
I love the idea of brain draining other countries and extracting their talent and bringing it here.
But it has to be done in a controlled manner.
So that the individuals who come can assimilate properly, integrate, learn how to live in this country, what our values are.
And if we have massive, unchecked, illegal immigration, then the system can't maintain it.
These individuals will end up voting against you.
Now, as for this Democrats' victory, yeah, you know, the Republicans have lost a seat in the House.
It is disgusting.
I will absolutely stress, All of these Republicans, each and every single one, has disqualified themselves.
And, you know, I was praising some of these people.
Hey, this is a guy who was a Democrat and switched parties.
And I lived in South Jersey, so we knew all about this story when it was happening.
Nope!
Disqualified.
Don't know, don't care.
Not a single one of these people.
They could come to my show.
They're all facing re-election, and I hope they lose!
And I don't care who they lose to.
Certainly, I'd prefer it if the Republicans' MAGA types in America First candidates won.
I hope their careers end.
Unfortunately, reaching many people and having them vote against it is going to be very difficult.
I hope each and every one of these individuals face a primary challenge.
I hope all of you Who are looking for some way to contribute, launch those primary challenges if you can.
Shut these scumbags down!
I will tell you this.
I will gladly invite Van Drew of New Jersey onto my show, onto TimCast IRL, and I will call him a scumbag to his face.
And he can say anything he wants.
He can say, okay, well, you know, we thought this and I, there's nothing you can say.
You can say, we had the documents, we know Santos did it, and I'll be like, uh-huh, prove it first.
We do not imprison people.
We do not pass judgment until it is proven.
And this is the problem.
Now Democrats, Democrats gonna Democrat.
I guess.
What are you gonna do about that?
I don't think any of these people should be voted in either, but that's more because they support I don't know, foreign war?
I mean, the list goes on.
Child sex change surgery, things like that.
You go through this list, and I did.
And I called them scumbags.
And this is when we had a actual sitting member of Congress on the show.
And I'm like, I don't care, man.
I don't care what you think of any of these people.
I don't care if you like Ken Buck.
I don't care if Jeff Andrew did something good.
Each and every one of these people, no.
And I welcome them to come on a show like TimCast IRL.
And I'll stress this point again for each and every one of you.
I often have people say to me, Tim, you're too harsh on these guys.
They're not going to want to come on your show because you're so heavily critical of them.
And I'm like, then I resign myself to failure.
Have fun.
I do not produce this show or TimCast IRL for the purpose of pandering to anyone of status so that they can come and grace my presence.
I don't care who you are.
If you don't want to come on my show because I will criticize you, then run and hide like a coward.
But I can tell you this, we've certainly have people I've criticized who've requested coming back on the show.
Destiny?
That's why I like the guy.
The Omni-Liberal.
We disagree.
But you know what?
Despite our criticism and disagreements, he's more than happy to come on and face... face down and have that argument.
I respect it.
And for that, he has my respect.
Despite the fact we disagree on a lot.
Now let me show you.
We have this, uh, this is the list of who is in office in New York's 3rd District.
In 2012, it was Steve Israel.
He's a Democrat, Working Families Independence Party.
He beat Stephen Labate, or Labate, I don't know how you pronounce it.
In 2014, he was also the incumbent running against Grant Lally.
He won.
In 2016, Tom Suozzi ran against Republican Jack Martins.
And Tom won.
In 2018, Tom won.
In 2020, Tom won.
In 2022, George Santos defeated Robert Zimmerman on the Democratic ticket.
That is, Tom didn't run.
And perhaps the real reason that George Santos was able to pull off this victory was that they didn't have a Democrat with an incumbent advantage.
In the 2024 special election, Tom came back, scoring less votes than he had in the past, defeating Mozzie Melissa Pillup.
Okay.
I ain't gonna cry about it.
Okay?
He's the, he's, he's the, they, they know him.
They voted for him several times.
Frank Luntz is trying to get y'all scared.
I think the real issue is that these scumbags in Congress voted him out in the first, voted out Santos in the first place, but whatever.
But I'd like to talk to you about where we go as a country.
And what this means.
With all due respect to Mozzie Melissa Pillup, I have no disagreements, personally.
Professionally, we have many.
And I mean no disrespect.
But she represents this attempt to placate Democrats.
And I think what we see here is Republicans thinking, we should run a black immigrant woman who is pro-Israel in a district that's very pro-Israel, and this is how we win.
The pandering on DEI issues.
Now, I'm not saying it's absolute, but this is not, I think, someone... It's strategic, and let me talk more about what I really mean by this.
It is the political positions of this individual, and that is the point I am making when it comes to immigration, and when it comes to, you know, what ends up happening to a country with mass unchecked illegal immigration.
Abortion.
This Republican says, abortion is a very personal decision.
I'm pro-life, but I'm not going to push my beliefs on another woman.
So, that's not pro-life.
Okay?
I don't care to use political terms, but I'll say this.
If your position is that abortion is wrong, but that you shouldn't impose your belief on a woman who then gets an abortion, or you're saying should be able to, That's quite literally pro-choice.
That is the definition of what pro-choice is!
You believe a woman has a right to choose whether or not she carries that baby.
There's your Republican pro-lifer.
Uh-huh.
Anti-Semitism.
This one's fine.
Speaking out against anti-Semitism.
Crime.
Combating crime.
Very good, very good.
Gun control.
When an audience member asked during a debate whether she would support a ban on assault-type weapons, which is meaningless, she said, I don't see any reason why the average American or individual would have more powerful weapons than our cops.
But did not answer whether she supported banning weapons.
You see, that's a Democrat answer!
I get it.
You want to win a Republican and a Democrat district.
You know, I got an idea.
How about considering you're either getting Democrat, Light, or Democrat?
We just run an actual, I don't know, like America First candidate.
Look, I never want to serve in office, but part of me would love to debate and just say what needs to be said.
And that is, well, let me read more and we'll go through this.
Supporting Israel.
She absolutely does.
She served in the IDF.
I have respect for that.
I'm critical of Israel's military operations, but I'm not gonna play this stupid Palestine-Israel game like so many people play.
I think the issue is complicated, and you know what?
I gotta be honest.
I'm not involved.
The United States should not be involved.
And I think America First, even pro-Israel, like Vivek Ramaswamy pointed out, and the people who are pro-Palestine, we can all agree, how about the United States just not be involved in all this foreign stuff and we fix up our country?
Lowering taxes.
Agreed.
Donald Trump.
Regarding the multiple indictments facing Donald Trump, Phillips said, Trump has to go through his process.
No one's above the law.
We have great candidates right now.
Trump is one of them.
We'll wait and see.
Very nice.
In favor of the U.S.
funding in Ukraine.
My point is, Republicans want to run a Democrat as a Republican and claim it's a Republican.
Just, I'm not interested.
And I think this could be a large reason why Republicans lose.
Because they're just basically saying, we're just like the Democrat, but a little less.
Well, who's gonna vote for that?
They're gonna vote for the Democrat if they want a Democrat.
Mexico-U.S.
border.
Billup is opposed to the U.S.
Senate bill to oppose the border, and I can agree with that, but let's go through this.
If Tim Pool was a candidate, what would he say?
On the issue of abortion, I'll just be completely honest.
I am traditionally pro-choice.
Modern pro-choice people, like, they say they're pro-choice, but they're actually just pro-abortion.
I think there should be heavy restrictions on abortion.
But there also have to be heavy exemptions.
And that creates a conflict.
First, under the 14th Amendment, at a certain point, a human being has unalienable, inalienable rights.
For that, you can't just kill him.
So I think it's fair to say that if a woman without consent is impregnated, she can terminate.
And a lot of conservatives say that's not fair to the baby.
And I'm like, I agree it's not fair to the baby, but it wasn't fair to the woman in the first place.
And the state cannot enforce a person give their body to another person as the result of being victim of a crime.
And people say, yeah, but it will kill the baby.
And I'm like, I agree.
And it's unfortunate.
But again, I'll state this.
My view is more of a logic myth on, like, constitutional rights.
The victim of a crime cannot be held responsible for a third party's life due to the actions of a criminal.
And so people are like, why execute the baby?
No, no, no!
You know, I've made this argument so many times.
I understand it's unfortunate.
I put it this way.
Separate pregnancy and abortion from the issue.
There's three people.
Criminal commits violent act against victim, creating a circumstance in which a third party becomes life-dependent on victim.
The victim has no responsibility to the third party to protect their life.
They're both victims.
The perpetrator here is the person who violated the woman.
That being said, I think that abortion is way too lax.
Too many people, too many women use it as contraception.
And I do not agree with unrestricted abortion up to the point of birth or any of that.
I think a European standard is actually fairly decent where it's like, I think on average, 12 weeks.
And the issue there is as much as I don't like the idea of women using it as contraception, I also don't like the idea of the government requiring women to go to a panel or a judge.
To determine that it was non-consensual or there is some extraneous circumstance that would warrant termination.
I think it's a very, very difficult issue and I don't have any good answers for you.
Sorry.
That's the best I can give you.
I try to keep this constitutional and defend the rights of all, but it's an impossibility in the circumstance because an innocent child will lose their life.
I agree anti-Semitism is bad.
I agree crime is bad.
On gun control, if an audience member asked me, do you think, would you support a ban on assault, on the type of assault weapons frequently used in mass shootings?
My response would be, mass shootings are frequently carried out with handguns.
And it is not correct to say that they are typically carried out with long guns.
There are serious instances that are carried out with long guns, but they are in the absolute minority.
Therefore, I don't see what the argument actually is except for a person being grossly misinformed, making an argument on an issue and proposing something that doesn't solve the problem because the problem isn't actually the problem they think it is.
That being said.
The American people have a right to own cannons.
The American people have a right to own nuclear weapons and biological weapons.
And if you don't believe me, and you think I'm wrong, and you say you're morally opposed to it, I simply and humbly ask you why it is there are private corporations in this country that produce weapons of mass destruction.
Because...
The Second Amendment grants them that right to do so.
There's regulation on it.
I don't like the idea of someone having a nuclear weapon, but the issue is the Second Amendment makes it clear.
Privateers and corsairs have always existed.
On the issue of Israel, well, my answer on this one is quite simple.
I support Israel's right to exist and to defend themselves, and I wish them the best of luck in their endeavors, much the same as I would wish any other countries the best of luck in their endeavors, and everybody else who's involved in conflict.
I hope that they can find peace.
And that money that would be going to Israel, I would put towards southern border and jobs and housing, etc.
Or just not take it in the first place.
Taxes being low.
Agreed in a general sense.
It's more nuanced, but I'm not going to get into that one.
It is what it is.
Regarding Donald Trump.
The indictments should be immediately quashed.
Donald Trump should be held immune.
And no, he shouldn't go through this process.
It's corruption.
No, we should not fund Ukraine.
And I agree with her on the border.
My point about unchecked immigration and Democrat policies and where we're currently going is simply this.
If you live with a roommate, And your roommate invites in.
You and your roommate have lived in this house together for some time.
And, uh, you both are like, let's get the kitchen fixed.
Let's pitch in for it.
You do.
One day, your roommate invites a friend over.
Sleep on the couch.
And you say, hey, your friend's been sleeping on the couch.
I don't want them here.
You never asked me.
I'm not okay with this.
And they say, it's fine.
What's the big deal?
I'll ask them to pitch in.
They'll, like, cook breakfast for us.
And then you go, okay, fine, whatever, they can stay, but have them cook breakfast for us.
Next week, another person's there, sleeping on your other couch.
And you say, hey, who's this guy?
I never said you could bring another friend in.
And your roommate and the guy who cooks breakfast both look at each other and go, well, let's put it to a vote.
All in favor of third guy getting to stay?
And you go, no, no, no, no, no, no, no.
He can't vote.
Well, what do you mean?
He lives here.
You said he could stay.
Yeah, but he shouldn't vote.
Well, you said he could stay.
Two against one.
Our friend gets to stay.
Now it's three against one.
The next day, the dishes aren't done, there's no breakfast, there's spilled milk on the floor, and you walk in and say, guys, what's with the garbage and the trash?
And they go, you do it.
Well, I'm not gonna do it!
Like, well, let's put a vote.
Who should clean the trash?
All in favor of you?
All three people raise their hand, and now you are responsible for all the garbage.
You're the one paying the bills.
And so now, you lose.
You're in the minority.
Used to be a 50-50 vote, now you're 25%.
You can leave if you want.
That's what happens.
And so how do you respond?
Well, the issue then is a fifth person shows up and now you go to your roommate and you say, look, you know, we've kept this place clean and you let your friends in, they're causing problems.
And then he goes, you know what?
Maybe you're right.
Let's all get, let's all clean everything up together.
But now you're both outvoted.
And they say, yeah, you guys clean it.
It's your place.
We just sleep here.
It's your responsibility.
They came in for free.
This is the point.
Mass unchecked illegal immigration results in Republicans having to pander to communities with less and less ties to this country.
So instead of bringing out candidates who say, I believe in America, the Constitution, the flag, and here are my values, they pander.
Now, my point about Mazie was not to make it an immigration or racial point.
My point is, in a Democrat district, Republicans have to pretend to be Democrats or run Democrats in order to win in this area.
And I'm like, what does that do for anybody?
Just run the Republican and hope people care for the alternative.
But they don't.
This is where we're currently at.
In California, when they had a mass influx of illegal immigrants, in the 90s they passed a bill saying no public services to non-citizens and it led to protest and revolt.
Republicans have lost ever since.
The people who came into the state and lived there who are not citizens still had influence and the influence was exerted to the point where Republicans can no longer win.
That's the issue.
Republicans are going to keep pandering to the left and the left will not pander back.
Next segment's coming up at 4pm on this channel.
Thanks for hanging out, and I'll see you all then.
A man in Florida drove his truck over a rainbow street mural, skidding his tires, burning out, and leaving a black trail across this intersection.
There was already damage done to it, and he's now facing criminal charges.
This is from Local 10.
Man arrested after vandalizing South Florida LGBTQ pride mural, police say.
The first thing I want to say is, guys, I'm no fan of vandalism.
Alright, I get it.
People are saying you're criminally charging a guy for driving his truck on the street.
Don't paint on the street if that's the case.
And I'm like, no, no, no, no.
Come on, come on, come on.
The dude did a burnout, and he skidded across the mural.
Making a point, probably.
It's not the first time this has happened, and it's happening in Florida.
I assume this guy knows exactly what happened a couple of years ago when another man did basically the same thing and got two years probation.
That being said, I certainly think this is a slap on the wrist at most.
The other guy who got two years probation, that's insane.
Ron DeSantis should commute his sentence and say, you're done with whatever this is, guy.
If a local community wants to put rainbows on the street, it's their choice if they're going to do it.
Now what I will say is, I think this should be illegal.
I think it should not be allowed by the state to paint the road in this way.
I think the only thing that should be allowed to be painted on a road, in an active intersection especially, is traffic signal paint.
These things could be confusing to somebody.
I just think it's ridiculous that they would make this intersection the way they did, and they shouldn't.
That being said, I would also like to say if this man needs any assistance with his legal defense, which everyone is entitled to, I would be happy to assist.
But, uh, I will stress, you know, I'll put it this way.
In the video, you've got a truck.
I don't know if that's the guy in the truck.
The other guy pleaded guilt.
No, I don't think he pleaded guilt.
I think he had a jury trial and he got two years probation.
No jail time.
But, uh, come on, man.
Are you kidding me?
They tried to get the other guy to hate crime.
It's like, bro, he burned out his tires in the street.
No one would care ever!
People do this all the time.
And that's the fascinating thing.
Like, obviously he's burning out to deface the mural.
If a truck was driving through the intersection and peeled out, no cop would pull him over.
I mean, maybe the cop would be like, hey, what are you doing, buddy?
And he'd be like, ah, sorry about that.
And he'd be like, yeah, yeah, get out of here.
No one's gonna go, oh no, there's skid marks in the road!
Here's the story.
A man is facing charges in Palm Beach County after authorities said he purposefully damaged an LGBTQ Pride crosswalk by doing burnouts in his truck.
Dylan Brewer, 19, of Clearwater, is accused of damaging the Delray Beach mural on the evening of February 4th.
Video released by the Delray Beach Police Department shows the driver of a pickup truck with a large flag in the back performing burnouts in the intersection located at Northeast 1st Street and 2nd Avenue.
Police said in a news release, the reckless action caused significant damage to the streetscape painting, which serves as a symbol of unity and inclusivity for the LGBT community.
Well, I can play the video for you.
We have it right here.
And, uh, there's not really much audio to consider, so...
So if you look right here, you can see the lights.
When this car passes, this is what you get.
He turned left and he was burning out as he did.
did.
And the funny thing is, look, you can already see there's other damage to this mural or whatever.
Look, it is the stupidest thing in the world, in my opinion, that they are like, damage from a vehicle's tires was intentional on our painting.
And I'm like, I don't care if it was intentional or not.
And I gotta be honest, if I was this dude, my argument would be like, it was an accident.
And then the question would be, why are we having a court case over a guy who accidentally peeled out?
Yeah, it was an accident.
I'm sorry, I had my handbrake on.
I put the brake on because my foot was tired and then when I started driving, I just hit the gas and then I didn't realize what was happening.
Sorry about that.
How are you gonna prove beyond a reasonable doubt this guy was like, I'm gonna deface the street by burning out!
My point is this.
If the dude goes to a jury and says, I don't know, it's a street.
Like, I don't even know what the rainbow's supposed to be.
I just, it was an accident, I'm sorry.
They're gonna be like, okay.
That's it, okay.
Like, if any other car in any other part of the street did this, they'd say literally okay, and then no one would care.
It's so stupid.
Law enforcement actively worked the case for more than a week.
We received multiple reports from concerned citizens who witnessed Brewer engaging in these destructive acts.
Several witnesses provided smartphone video of the crime.
Oh, amazing.
He turned himself in on Monday.
Palm Beach County records show he was released from custody the next day after posting $5,250 bond on charges of felony criminal mischief and reckless driving.
It's not the first time the crosswalk has been vandalized.
Alexander Jarek, then 20, pleaded guilty to the same charges for performing damaging burnouts in 2021.
Okay, so it was, um...
I thought that he got a jury trial and that, uh, I didn't know that he pleaded guilty.
Okay, he did.
He pleaded guilty to felony charges of criminal mischief and reckless driving for defacing the intersection with skid marks last June.
Okay.
It is for this reason that I'm, you know, I'm not a fan of vandalism, okay?
If your intention is to say, I don't like they painted the street and you're gonna deface it, I'm not okay with that.
I'm not.
People are allowed to have things they want to have.
And you, you don't have a right to destroy it because you don't like it.
That being said, I know the far left engages in widespread looting and vandalism and destruction, and they often get away with it.
As for this, this dude should not get a felony charge over this.
That is insane.
I would be more than happy to assist in his legal defense.
There should be, he should pay a fine or something if they prove that he actually intended to cause damage to it by doing it, and I think it's a fair assessment.
It should be something like, bro, community service.
Here's what we're gonna do.
You're gonna go, and you're gonna repaint it.
Because the people who put it there wanted it there.
If it's, you know, if it was never voted on, then I'd say like, I don't know, nobody voted for it, you can't do it.
If this is the case, that the community in the area paid for and wanted this, imagine someone went door-to-door and said, we got a petition, we all agree, okay, we're gonna paint the intersection, fine.
People are allowed to do things they want to do.
And you should not damage the things they want to do.
I disagree with it.
That being said, I will not abide it.
Felony charges?! !
This is the crazy, it's so stupid.
And I wish I paid more attention to what happened to this guy.
This is a story from June 2022, probation and community service, but no jail for a man who defaced Pride Intersection.
It's the same intersection!
It's the same one.
And apparently, he's not even the only one who's done it.
You can see, they mention in this article, they say it's not the first time it happened.
Look at this right here, there's another streak on it.
It is routinely defaced.
People are not happy with it, clearly.
I wonder, it's important, does this dude actually live here?
19-year-old kid should not be convicted of a felony for doing a burnout in his car.
That is insane.
It's gonna impact his ability to get a job, his ability to own a firearm, his ability to vote, his ability to travel the world, and that is stupid.
I'd say, guy, don't do burnouts.
End of story.
You know what the penalty should be?
Clean it.
You go out, you clean off the skid marks you put on someone else's stuff, okay?
You know what, man?
They're gonna come after him hard with felony charges because it's a cult.
It's what they do.
I can say this.
I shouldn't have to spend a penny to assist this guy.
Ron DeSantis should bang the gavel right now, figuratively, and say, I commute the sentence of these individuals.
Buh-bye.
Shout out Ron DeSantis, okay?
We like him as governor.
I am very critical of what he was doing while he was running for office, for the presidency.
That was sad.
But let's see it, man.
Ron DeSantis do the right thing.
He can, I believe, you don't need a conviction here, he can outright just commute this guy.
He can outright just be like, guys, why are we spending money on this?
He was ordered to write a 25-page report on the Pulse nightclub massacre.
That's crazy.
You know what I would do?
I would write a 25-page report, and it would be mostly about the ideological capture of this country, the selective prosecution, etc.
The state asked for jail time, and groups such as the Palm Beach County Human Rights Council said it must make a statement.
In fact, its founder and president asked the judge to sentence Jarek to jail, noting he'd never apologized for what he did.
Jarek did stand before the bench and tell the judge he's not a cruel person.
His father said Alexander just wanted to fit in but did the wrong thing.
Jarek will have to pay $574 in court costs and $200 for his prosecution.
He'll have two years to do that.
He is getting his bond back.
We gotta stand up for this guy right here.
Okay?
We can acknowledge that there should be a penalty for vandalism.
We can acknowledge that a 19-year-old did something dumb, and there should be some form of restitution, but not a felony charge.
So I call on Ron DeSantis to commute this and the other guy's sentence too.
I think that guy, it's time served.
We'll be done with it.
Felony charges are insane.
This guy should not be facing this.
So let's see it.
Otherwise, I will stand by it.
I will assist in the financing of his legal defense.
And let's make it something big.
Let's make Florida, let's make Florida announce to this country that they support what they're doing to this guy.
Especially in an election year.
Let's see it.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 6 p.m.
on this channel.
Thanks for hanging out, and I'll see you all then.
You and I are going to enjoy this video together.
It's a terrifying video.
It is quite shocking, but the story is just so brutal.
On November 12th, 2023, a police officer, two officers, unloaded, mag-dumped their service weapons into their own vehicle with a handcuffed suspect inside.
Yo, this video is going mad viral, and it is straight out of Reno 911.
A cop, walking past his own vehicle, heard an acorn bounce off the car, screams, combat rolls several times, screams shots fired and I'm hit, and then just unloads his weapon into the car.
His, uh, partner, I guess, hearing him scream in terror, then begins unloading her weapon into the car.
And, um, so, you know, a lot of people are saying, wow, this guy's dangerous, he's stupid, apparently he resigned.
I got a conspiracy theory for you.
I'm like, my conspiracy theory is that this cop actually just wanted to murder the guy in the car.
And so he pretended like, shots fired, I'm hit!
So that he could do it and then go, oh whoopsie.
However, fortunately for the unarmed suspect in the vehicle, they missed every shot.
So very, very lucky.
Ford Fisher has the tweet.
So, uh, what you will be hearing is, uh, police activity.
Alusa County, Florida, Deputy Jesse Hernandez declaring shots fired and I'm hit and shooting
at the handcuffed unarmed suspect inside his police car.
He had not been shot.
Rather, it was determined that he heard an acorn drop onto his car.
So what you will be hearing is police activity.
No one is hurt.
Nobody got hurt.
Okay, so this is not graphic.
It's just bang bang bang.
You'll hear gunshots, and I want to stress Everybody was fine, but you you you you got it.
Dude, like, could you imagine getting arrested for something like, I don't know, like, maybe it was a domestic dispute.
I'm not saying this guy's getting arrested as a good dude.
I don't know.
I don't know if he's guilty of anything.
But you're, like, sitting in the car and you're like, man, I'm getting arrested when all of a sudden they're like, and they start just shooting at you like crazy.
I don't believe I find it hard to believe this cop heard an acorn and thought it was a gunshot Seriously, I'm wondering if he just wanted to kill the guy in the car and he needed an excuse to do it.
Both Deputy Hernandez and Sergeant Roberts were cleared of criminal wrongdoing after the shooting, prompted by an acorn falling on their police car.
Hernandez, whoever, who erroneously said, however, I'm hit, resigned from the Sheriff's Department.
After the Ecalusa County Sheriff's Office investigated Ecalusa County Sheriff Deputy Hernandez and Sergeant Roberts, they did determine that Hernandez' use of deadly force was not objectively reasonable, but Roberts was.
This is the crazy thing.
No one's in trouble?
No criminal?
Ah, dude.
The cop who scre- who screen- like, he's gotta- there's gotta be something.
The argument people make is, well, like, if a cop's in the line of duty, and there's shots fired, we need them to act appropriately to save lives.
And if you tell someone that if they get it wrong, they'll be criminally charged, they're gonna be like, well then, I don't know if I should ever call it out.
What do you do, man?
Yeah, it's not easy.
Combat, conflict, these things are not easy.
That being said, look at the scenario they've just created.
A cop can falsely accuse you of shooting them, and their partner can then execute you reasonably.
No.
Sergeant Beth Roberts, like, logically, we understand what they're saying, and it makes sense.
Deputy Jesse Hernandez' use of deadly force was not objectively reasonable.
The guy was handcuffed, unarmed, in the car.
I guess maybe, what, he had a gun up his butt?
That's what the cop's thinking.
And Sergeant Beth Roberts hears shots fired and I'm hit, and she responds.
And so she uses deadly force against Mr. Jackson.
What if he died?
This guy, they'd say, well, he didn't do it.
The deputy just misheard something.
Beth Roberts, she did shoot him and kill him, and she was reasonable.
Nah, I don't accept this, dude.
This is wild.
Acorn, acorn.
So, in their paperwork, they're asking him, like, could this have been the sound you heard, perhaps?
And he was like, uh, maybe, I guess.
Sergeant Roberts, who was cleared in the shooting, described that she believed Hernandez had been shot because the tone in his voice was terror after he heard an acorn fall from a tree.
Like watching a baby giraffe trying to walk for the first time.
Ah, I just, I, every time I watch this video, I'm laughing.
Because it's, it's like... Like, the combat rolls, and then just, ah, just unloading his gun.
Holy crap, dude.
There was no assessing the situation.
You're like, you hear the acorn fall, you hit the deck.
Why does he then draw his handgun, point it right at the vehicle, and mag dump?
His partner's standing right there.
He could hit bystanders.
He could hit property.
You know what I find odd about this is I'm not a cop.
I've never been a cop.
But I've been in combat situations.
I should say... I don't know.
I guess conflict situations.
I don't want to say combat, but... You know, people shooting at each other.
I can tell you, man... Maybe I'm wrong, because I'm not in law enforcement, but... Would you just immediately unload into where you thought the shots are coming from without assessing the situation and figuring out where the shots are coming from?
What shot where?
You don't really hear anything.
There's no breaking glass.
But he immediately starts just unloading into the vehicle.
The shot could have come from anywhere, couldn't have?
You know, in Baltimore, in Ferguson, I've been in many places.
I was in Wisconsin, and I think it was an 18-year-old kid got shot in the neck.
This was a Black Lives Matter riot, and they were screaming, get the white people.
And someone shot a gun and shot a kid in the neck, a white kid.
It was wild because one of the houses opened the doors and brought the kid in to protect him during the riots.
And then this armored vehicle, APC, pulls up.
Guys in a circle with guns come out, walk past me.
I'm filming.
Go up to the house, take the kid, and bring him the car.
And fortunately, he was alright.
It was a .22.
Dangerous.
You know, this kid got shot.
Ain't none of these cops that were there just started randomly unloading in the direction of where they heard the shot.
So maybe I'm wrong.
But part of me kind of feels like this cop was like, you know, he wanted to kill the guy.
And so by screaming shots fired, it gave him justification to use the gun for which he was not criminally charged and simply resigned.