On today's show, we talk about the Waukesha, Wisconsin attack, the R. Kelly vs R. Rittenhouse verdict, and we have an update on the Kenosha shooting of a black man. Plus, Cash is back!
00:00:34.000But also trying to make it seem like he was fleeing from some kind of domestic issue or some kind of knife fight, which makes no sense because he was not being pursued.
00:00:42.000In that case, maybe the story is an angry man decided for no reason, just in the heat of the moment, to ram through a parade instead of turning off onto any one of the side streets.
00:00:50.000Or as one BLM activist put it, they think it was retaliation over the Rittenhouse verdict and that the revolution has started.
00:00:57.000I don't know if I take that all too seriously, but I think what I do take seriously is the fact that on both the left and the right, it is being viewed as political or terror.
00:01:06.000I shouldn't say entirely on the left, of course, the establishment left is trying to downplay this and say, oh no, no, nothing's happening, nothing's happening.
00:01:12.000But when you have a lot of, you know, activists on Twitter saying he was just defending himself, or this is what you get, or things like that, or, quite literally, it sounds like the revolution has started is the full statement.
00:01:23.000Uh, maybe it sounds like the revolution has started.
00:01:26.000Not because of what happened, but because of what people are saying.
00:01:28.000So we definitely will get into that, and we also have an update on, uh, the Kyle Rittenhouse, uh, Kenosha.
00:01:33.000Not so much Rittenhouse, but there are civil lawsuits being fired off already.
00:01:36.000I believe one, one, more than one so far?
00:02:26.000Last week, Tuesday, we had Alex Jones, Joe Rogan, Michael Malice, Blair White, me, Luke, you know, Drew Hernandez.
00:02:34.000We had 110,000 concurrent viewers for this big, you know, crazy battle royale.
00:02:37.000You, on your stream of lawyers, 130,000-plus people watching because you guys were giving insightful and excellent commentary into what was going on with the trial in real time.
00:03:23.000We're going to get into it, but I launched my merch site tonight, fightwithcash.shop.
00:03:29.000Special discount only for TimCast viewers.
00:03:31.000Type in TimCast, you get a discount tonight on all the merch.
00:03:35.000You also, aside from working for the Trump administration and in government, you were a trial lawyer?
00:03:39.000Yeah, I pretended to be one for a while.
00:03:41.000I was a public defender and then I became a federal prosecutor, so tried about 60 jury trials to verdicts in criminal cases, state and federal court.
00:03:49.000It was awesome, and then I was just like, I really want to go make some money, and so I stayed in government.
00:04:08.000I'm really excited about today's show.
00:04:10.000And the shirt that I'm wearing today, I think pretty much says exactly the situation we're in as it highlights the Hunger Games, Animal Forms, They Live, Brave New World, The Matrix, V for Vendetta, 1984, Fahrenheit 451, all depicting your current reality.
00:04:22.000If If you think this is an accurate statement and want to highlight it with the rest of the world, you can on TheBestPoliticalShirts.com.
00:04:33.000Get yours before the supply chain shortages stop you from getting it.
00:05:14.000I used to say I put it in my smoothies, but I'm like, I haven't been having smoothies that much lately because I've been cutting out the sugar.
00:05:19.000But this stuff actually adds a kind of creaminess to your coffee or drink.
00:05:29.000Haven't so much in the past week because we are traveling.
00:05:31.000But as I'm getting old now, I try to make sure I have this.
00:05:34.000So make sure you go to Stronger Bones and Life.
00:05:37.000You get a 60-day money-back guarantee, the healthy aging support of collagen in its ideal forms, the five key types of collagen you need from four different sources.
00:05:46.000For every order today, BioTrust will donate a nutritious meal to a hungry child in your honor through their partnership with NoKidHungry.org.
00:05:52.000To date, BioTrust has provided over 5 million meals to hungry kids.
00:05:55.000Please help them hit their goal of 6 million meals this year.
00:05:59.000It is non-GMO, free of artificial colors, flavors, preservatives, and sweeteners, free of gluten, antibiotics, RBGH, and RBST, nearly no odor or taste, unlike bone broth or other collagen supplements, and there's no clumping.
00:06:12.000You get free shipping with every order, free VIP live health and fitness coaching from BioTrust team of experts for life with every order, and their new e-report, The 14 Foods for Amazing Skin with Every Order.
00:06:25.000And as I always say, these are the companies that are willing to back these important conversations.
00:06:28.000If we talk about this stuff, defending Kyle Rittenhouse, talking about these court cases, these are difficult subjects, and you know they are ripe for cancel culture.
00:06:36.000So these companies are the companies that truly support us.
00:07:46.000I mean, it is horrifying watching what happened in Waukesha.
00:07:50.000If you haven't heard, a man took an SUV and he plowed into people just running them over.
00:07:55.000There's several casualties, dozens of injuries.
00:07:59.000There is a very horrifying video where a little girl is just bouncing, a little toddler bouncing in the street.
00:08:04.000And the car passes within, you know, maybe a foot or two of this kid, and I'm just thinking the parents must have been crying seeing what happened and knowing how close their child came.
00:08:14.000It's just horrifying, and we want to know what the motive is.
00:08:17.000Everybody's speculating, and it's hard to say for sure, but this guy has a criminal record involving kids or a child, so that's very serious.
00:08:25.000But he's also a Black Lives Matter supporter.
00:08:32.000And there's been a lot of speculation.
00:08:33.000So here's the story from the examiner.
00:08:36.000Black Lives Matter activist wonders whether Waukesha attack was linked to Rittenhouse verdict.
00:08:41.000Sounds possible the revolution has started.
00:08:45.000I'll call out the examiner a little bit here.
00:08:47.000His exact quote is a little bit different from, sounds possible, and then they stop, the, then quote, revolution has started.
00:08:53.000He says, I believe his exact quote is, but it sounds possible that the revolution, okay, to be fair, they're only taking out a couple words.
00:09:01.000He says, but it sounds possible that the revolution has started in Wisconsin.
00:09:05.000It started with this Christmas parade.
00:09:10.000Now, I don't think it's fair to say this guy is calling for it, agreeing with it or otherwise, but I think it's important to note that this guy, not like he's a powerful influencer, that's his frame of mind.
00:09:19.000That he sees this, and his immediate reaction was retaliation over the Rittenhouse verdict.
00:09:23.000Many people on the right have pointed out the same thing.
00:09:26.000It is two days, not even two days, not even two full days from the Rittenhouse verdict, when already tons of leftists were saying, I'll be careful about how I phrase it, but threatening death.
00:09:39.000You have people going on Twitter saying retaliation, revenge, something like this happens from a guy who's been promoting this stuff on his social media.
00:09:57.000He supported BLM causes, George Floyd, black nationalism, and he has a post about how to run away, about running people over on the street and getting away with it.
00:10:07.000So, that being said, the big takeaway is not what his true motive was, and I say this often when it comes to this stuff, it's how people react.
00:10:15.000If the left and the right are both reacting that this is political, it becomes political.
00:10:19.000Yeah, I think not just how they react.
00:10:24.000How people react, it becomes political.
00:10:26.000It gives us a pulse check on the country and where we are.
00:10:29.000We've been hearing this sort of rhetoric kind of bubbling beneath the surface in, you know, internet forums and stuff over the past couple years, but it's becoming more and more of a mainstream idea.
00:10:41.000But the other aspect of this is the media's culpability, because the media has been misrepresenting the Kyle Rittenhouse case for the past year, and they've been misrepresenting the case after the verdict, after the facts have come out, over and over again.
00:10:59.000If you watched our show, we had the entire trial streaming and you could see the actual facts coming out in real time from the witnesses who were there.
00:12:35.000Five people died, 48 people were injured, and this kind of thinking, it's not just an exception to the rule, it is the rule for the corporate media.
00:12:44.000This guy, he's speaking because he probably watches a lot of corporate media.
00:12:48.000There was another Illinois Democrat that almost said the same exact thing, Mary Lamansky, who said that this was karma, And that this was an act of self-defense because Kyle Rittenhouse was acquitted.
00:13:03.000So these are mainline white women Karens even talking about the same points as this BLM guy that you just played that just released that video.
00:13:12.000Now how the police gonna come out and say, yeah, the guy's political.
00:13:15.000Yeah, all these political people are celebrating it, but it's not terror.
00:13:20.000Well, look, he's not wearing a turban.
00:13:38.000But no, I don't know if you know this, but that's why I started fightwithcash.com.
00:13:43.000I'm suing New York Times, Politico, and CNN for $150 million for defamation because of my work during Russiagate and the Trump administration.
00:13:49.000They've literally defamed me across the board.
00:13:51.000And then when I left government earlier this year, people were like, I want to sue for defamation.
00:14:21.000I mean, you know, normally, I remember going back a few years, and it's like defamation and stuff, and it's like, well, how do you prove damages, and how do you prove this, and how do you prove that?
00:14:29.000And these days, it's like, just give CNN five minutes to report on a story, and then you can sue them, and it's clear, actionable, it's easy to prove that they were wrong, they knew they were wrong, and you just make some money.
00:14:44.000Yeah, well, we have a bunch of people doing that work, right?
00:14:47.000Sandman paved the way for going after journalists.
00:14:51.000Project Veritas has been making huge headway, winning a lot of pretrial motions in New York that people didn't think they could win.
00:14:58.000New York reinforced its anti-SLAPP statute, made it a lot stronger, and they went ahead and steamrolled right over it in their case against New York Times.
00:15:08.000And so the biggest bar to a defamation lawsuit has been Can I afford the lawyer to do it?
00:15:16.000Because lawyers, you know, unless it's a really clear case and a really clear case of defamation is extremely rare, you're not going to find a lawyer taking it on contingency.
00:15:25.000If you're going after someone like CNN, the amount of resources that have to be expended to fight those guys is massive.
00:15:32.000So you can't just assume that you're going to win and be able to recover.
00:15:36.000I want to talk about a lot of that in greater depth, because we do have a story.
00:15:38.000There's civil lawsuits filed in the Rittenhouse case, so we'll get much more in-depth on this.
00:15:43.000But I want to shift it back to, you know, this tension that's rising between the left and the right following this.
00:15:49.000What scares me is that, for the longest time, we have seen instances of some kind of violence.
00:15:54.000And immediately, I mean, let's be honest, The establishment, the corporate press, is much more likely to do this than the right is, to the right's disadvantage.
00:16:05.000He crossed state lines with a gun, he shot black people, like none of which is true, but they just keep saying it over and over again.
00:16:11.000Then when it comes to, you know, other instances, you'll get the right, or not even necessarily the right, but the anti-establishment, the establishment critical, whatever.
00:16:20.000Saying, you know, this might not be political, this might be random, and we'll try to make sure we're getting the facts correct.
00:16:26.000Now I'm seeing a lot of people say, no, revenge.
00:16:28.000Now I'm seeing all these tweets from conservatives saying, I don't care why the guy did it, if he has any posts that are pro-Black Lives Matter, this was a Black Lives Matter attack.
00:16:37.000If we escalate to that point, and I think the establishment's driving it, this is going to contribute to more chaos, more clashes, and it actually will invoke more attacks and just make everything worse.
00:16:48.000Yeah, I mean there's a lot of details here that we should talk about, but we should talk about it in an honest perspective.
00:16:55.000that he was deliberately turning into people when he was driving. He wasn't being chased. He called
00:17:01.000for political violence on white people before. He did refer to white people as quote the enemy.
00:17:06.000He was a huge Colin Kaepernick fan. There's a lot of- That last one, that's it. Yeah. That's
00:17:10.000the most offensive thing I've heard. Is it all Colin Kaepernick's fault? Of course not.
00:17:15.000But some of these details do matter and they do deserve to be talked about in an honest,
00:17:20.000real way where it's not just pointing at people. But he was an extreme criminal.
00:17:24.000He had he had an extensive criminal past.
00:17:27.000He was just released two days ago on $1,000 bond, which the Milwaukee.
00:17:32.000County DA was bragging about his bail reform now of course he just came out publicly and he admitted what he did was a mistake bailing him out his his record is is huge why was this man walk in the streets with such a crazy extensive record.
00:17:47.000I'm even saying that as not a fan of the prison industrial complex, but there's something that needs to be discussed here that obviously the corporate media is not willing to discuss, doesn't want to discuss, that highlights a lot of nastiness within our society that does deserve to be surfaced.
00:18:03.000Don't forget that one of the things that he was being charged with was skipping bail.
00:18:08.000So he actually has a record of not honoring the bail agreements that he has.
00:18:15.000And so for them to go ahead and then grant a reduced bail to an absurd amount, a thousand dollar bail, to put it in perspective, in my tiny town, my town is, or the big town near me is about 20,000 people.
00:18:29.000And I had a guy on a, it's the lowest level of felony drug possession charge you can have, like a class E felony.
00:18:37.000And the bail for this was possession of a little bit of THC, was $20,000.
00:20:11.000On the defense and prosecution side, right?
00:20:13.000And there's some nasty guys that get let out, and then there's some really rich guys who shouldn't get out but get out because they got a lot of money, right?
00:20:19.000And this kind of conversation we're having actually goes back to that, which is where the conversation should be.
00:20:24.000But when CNN and everybody else jumps in and starts talking about race and hurling fake news and making up facts that don't exist, then we overlook the biggest problem.
00:20:33.000Yeah, I don't think there's like a normal human being on planet Earth that thinks this guy should have been out on bail.
00:20:39.00021 years as a convicted felon, running around town, skipping bail, convicted of serious aggravated felonies.
00:20:45.000And oh, by the way, what was he on bail for previously?
00:20:48.000Punching the mother of his child and running her over twice, allegedly.
00:21:40.000But look, there's a lot of things he said that are just so outrageous and obvious, it's like, man, and this guy claims to be a media reporter?
00:21:46.000Truth be told, people need to understand this about Brian Stelter's show, is that it's often about nothing.
00:21:50.000Like, when I was flying back from Austin, I was watching it, and he was talking about something that was totally irrelevant.
00:21:57.000So, irrelevant to people who work in media.
00:21:58.000But then when he gets into, like, fake news, and then he just makes stuff up, or just lies, or whatever, it's like, does this guy even really care?
00:22:04.000Now, I don't think he does, but, We've seen the Veritas videos of people who are like, man, we used to do news.
00:22:11.000There's like a guy sitting in a room and he's just like, I remember we used to go out and do reporting.
00:22:15.000Now it's just, we just do panels about Trump.
00:22:17.000Like, I'm willing to bet that there are some people who are just producers, man.
00:22:21.000They're just people who want to operate the camera and want to get the story out.
00:22:33.000They used to have, like, Republicans, Conservatives, Moderates.
00:22:37.000There are people who have probably been in that company for a decade, 15, 20 years maybe, and they've watched all this happen, and they're probably crying at night.
00:23:00.000But you meet a lot of the people, the everyday people that make it happen, the cameramen, the editors, the writers, the people who've been there for 10, 15, 20 years.
00:23:07.000And most of them have been subjugated by the big corporate media, CNN, MSNBC, and the like.
00:23:12.000They basically don't allow you to work there unless you agree with their top line, which is what they're promoting at the end of the day.
00:23:26.000And they don't fire them, they don't bury their voice, they just come in and do their job, and they know who the Hannity's of the world are.
00:23:33.000But during Occupy Wall Street, when Geraldo showed up, and the activists all surrounded him, screaming fake news, and they were throwing water on him, the sound guy yelled, I needed a job.
00:24:01.000I wanted to work there because they were, you know, Shane Smith, the CEO and one of the founders, said on Stephen Colbert, we're not left, we're not right, we're not Republican, Democrat, we just, you know, we're storytellers, we want to talk to people, and we don't want to be a part of that.
00:24:13.000And I'm like, man, that spoke to me, right?
00:24:16.000And then I go and work there, and I watch the changes, and I watch the slow things, and then eventually I'm like, I should go somewhere else.
00:24:21.000I go to an ABC company, thinking it was a new joint venture, it was not the same as the corporate HQs, and in the first few months they really were like, do your thing, you know, it's like, they called it nice vice.
00:24:32.000Like, don't cuss and do the weird stuff with hookers, but, you know, go do the field reporting.
00:24:39.000Within eight months, they were like, we've decided we're all going to become woke feminists.
00:25:07.000Nah, they're crying themselves to sleep.
00:25:08.000Well, another thing to really kind of think about here is that a lot of these high-level people, a lot of these like top journalists, majority of them have major substance abuse problems.
00:25:18.000I remember once I got drunk with the White House press corps at Bilderberg and they could drink like Fish.
00:25:27.000And then when you look at the inner workings, all of them are using one substance or another, whether it's big pharma, whether it's illicit substances, they're off getting high to the extent where they don't have to realize what they're doing.
00:25:37.000Because if they did, they would be absolutely mad with themselves.
00:25:40.000Because, I mean, look at the headlines.
00:25:42.000MSNBC had another headline today talking about how Thanksgiving is white people celebrating genocide and violence against blacks.
00:25:49.000How does that make any logical sense at all?
00:25:54.000CNN, MSNBC, all these people are literally regurgitating scripts that they're given and the scripts are becoming more ridiculous by the day.
00:26:03.000So to see them as drug addicts actually makes a lot of sense when you see what actions they're capable of doing and the atrocities that they're responsible for on the general public, in my opinion.
00:26:32.000I haven't pulled it up or anything, but I was scrolling through Twitter and someone posted a quote, and it's like Rachel Maddow saying much of the dossier, you know, blah, blah, blah, was created, was it sourced by Christopher Steele or whatever, but it was actually coming from Russian sources or something like that.
00:26:48.000I mean, so yeah, as the guy who ran the Russiagate investigation, this one always, you know, rings true with me.
00:26:53.000We knew five years ago that the DNC and Hillary Clinton campaign paid for it, screwed up the FBI, perpetuated the biggest fraud.
00:26:59.000But for five years, this is everything we're talking about today in like, you know, in less than 30 seconds, the media just ran with it.
00:27:05.000They just ran with the false narrative.
00:27:07.000Even though we had the information we produced with the American public, they didn't want to review it.
00:27:10.000It's not that Rachel Maddow didn't have access to some of the facts.
00:27:37.000What New York Times is basically saying there is, because we're a gang and we can all beat you up at the same time, you can't blame me for swinging the crowbar because 10 people were already swinging it.
00:27:48.000It's like, uh, I understand that Snowflake doesn't blame itself for the avalanche.
00:27:52.000But, uh, yeah, we'll just sue everyone with the crowbars.
00:27:55.000You can't claim that because all of the media is smearing Veritas you get to as well.
00:27:59.000To the judge in that case's credit, and again, the reason they were going with libel proof is it would be, if the judge were to determine they were libel proof, then they would dismiss the case and New York Times would be able to go after Project Veritas for their attorney's fees.
00:28:14.000To the judge's credit, he basically said exactly what you did.
00:28:18.000Yeah, they're only libel proof because you're citing each other.
00:28:21.000All of these news publications are just citing other news publications all saying the same thing with the same kind of basic source behind it that you guys don't like them.
00:28:30.000That doesn't make someone libel proof.
00:28:32.000If a whole bunch of people gang up on someone and say the same thing, that doesn't make you libel proof if the underlying thing isn't true.
00:28:56.000There were some updates in the Veritas stuff.
00:28:58.000I think a court ordered the New York Times to stop publishing their privileged communications, and the New York Times said no.
00:29:05.000And then I think the judge responded with, excuse me?
00:29:10.000I was, so this is a really big part of the whole defamation process, what's happening with Veritas and like the defamation as a whole, that the New York Times is being sued by Veritas.
00:29:21.000They are given access to Veritas' privileged legal communications, which basically just interfered entirely with the court's process, with Veritas' process, and they did it with a smile on their faces.
00:29:34.000I have to imagine when the judge found out He was probably like, yo, you're spitting on me now!
00:29:39.000Like, I gotta deal with this stuff, and you have access to their... You know what's gonna happen if I rule on this?
00:29:44.000Veritas is gonna file so many complaints that I'm gonna get overruled on everything.
00:29:49.000I mean, what are your guys' thoughts on how the judge would react to someone getting their, you know...
00:29:53.000I mean, I had not heard about the privileged communication thing.
00:29:56.000Do you know how they got access to it?
00:30:48.000I mean, look, judges, you know, the one, whether they were appointed by a Republican, a Democrat or whatever, it doesn't matter.
00:30:54.000The one thing they hate more than anything is getting reversed.
00:30:58.000It doesn't matter at what level, or state, federal, county, local appeals court, they hate being told, I got it wrong.
00:31:04.000And what this guy's doing is, if I have to rule on this, like you said, Tim, he's going to issue all these rulings, and then they're going to contest them, and he's afraid that they might actually, some crazy appeals court might actually come down and say, actually, legal privilege communications in this instance are okay, for whatever Mickey Mouse reason that the media trumpeted.
00:31:21.000I think he's playing it pretty good and pretty safe in that he's probably avoiding trying to issue an actual ruling that can be appealed, but he's trying to get the lawyers to get in line with the FBI and support the privileged communication.
00:31:34.000And we saw this with the Rittenhouse case, right?
00:31:38.000Judge Schrader, he was so hesitant to issue a definitive ruling on anything, even on the evidentiary issues pre-trial.
00:31:44.000He says, I'm going to I'm going to hold off on this with a predisposition towards keeping them out.
00:32:02.000I think a lot of us are happy with some of the rulings from the judge in the Rittenhouse case, but his inability to issue a ruling on the fake evidence admitted by the prosecution has resulted in... I see it.
00:32:13.000This is what Antifa is putting out in spades.
00:32:16.000They're posting news clips that say, prosecutors showed video, they say, is of Kyle Rittenhouse pointing a gun at activists.
00:32:27.000And now they're saying, now all the antipos going, Kyle Rittenhouse was waving a gun around threatening people, and when they tried to stop him, he killed him, and the judge let him get away with it.
00:32:36.000The judge, if he had a stronger spine, I'll say he has some of a spine, because he did dismiss the gun charge, he did do some rulings, he could have said, that's a computer generated image, Ow.
00:33:14.000They had tons of evidentiary issues in this case.
00:33:17.000Normally, you have to have someone who will testify that the thing that you're looking at is a fair and accurate representation of the thing that happened.
00:33:27.000And the only guy that they had testify about this footage was a detective who looked at it on his iPhone.
00:33:34.000And when you really factor in the fact that a capital murder case, the entire theory of the prosecution got blown out in the first half.
00:33:43.000And they had to change their entire strategy.
00:33:45.000And a kid's life in a capital murder case hangs on the idea that a detective, who was not present that night, pinched to zoom on an iPhone and thinks he saw something that he can't replicate because he didn't record that pinch to zoom.
00:33:59.000There's no way for the defense to look at it, challenge the authenticity of it, say that there's interpolation adding pixels.
00:34:05.000Um, they, they tried sort of to ham fist their way into that argument.
00:34:11.000Uh, but, but at the end of the day, what they needed to do was just say, your honor, there's no way anybody here can testify that the picture we're seeing now is a fair and accurate representation.
00:34:45.000He's not like he basically is not really wanting to rule on the fact that the New York Times has access to their legal documents, which in my opinion, I don't know how they can continue the court proceedings at that point.
00:34:58.000So the judge seems to be doing nothing.
00:35:02.000I don't know what the judge has said about it.
00:35:04.000I've just heard about the disclosure, allegedly by the FBI, to Project Veritas' enemies.
00:35:12.000With that being said, I mean, if the judge is not issuing a gag order on some of this stuff, then he's hesitant to try and restrain the press.
00:35:19.000And I think at this point— Well, he did.
00:35:34.000New York Times urges no prior restraint against Veritas' coverage.
00:35:39.000Basically saying, Veritas' claims do not implicate the kind of extraordinary public harms, such as national security, that American courts have suggested.
00:36:09.000Attorney in Massachusetts, he actually had a criminal case where he surveilled a client and their attorney's conversation and utilized it in the prosecution.
00:36:35.000All you need to ask New York Times is if they're okay with this, then what Project Veritas
00:36:39.000should do is be like, fine, give us all of New York Times' privileged communications.
00:36:42.000Oh, and the judge could be like, yes, you can.
00:36:44.000And release it to the general public and make everyone see it.
00:36:47.000I mean, that's what the New York Times is doing.
00:36:51.000Then we just see all the emails where they're like, don't cover Epstein.
00:36:56.000That story, we got to make sure it doesn't go anywhere.
00:36:58.000Just like, of course, CBS News, which Project Veritas exposed, was hiding a huge expose, which they had, according to one of their reporters, How do you think I'm joking?
00:37:35.000Here's the only good thing that comes with this.
00:37:38.000If, like you were saying earlier, you know, lawyers are expensive, these suits are expensive, but when you bring them and they're credible, they take one to two years.
00:37:45.000At the end of it, you actually get some really good rulings on what we call case law precedent, if these cases survive.
00:37:52.000But what these guys try to do is drown them out.
00:37:56.000These guys are actually, if I was The Times' lawyers, I'd be like, you need to sit down and shut up, because we might squeak out of this case, but you are going to mess up the future of defamation for defendants if you keep down this track, because the judge will force, he might not issue now, or in a month or six months, but in a year, he's going to have to make some rulings, and those rulings will likely get appealed, and then affirmed, and then it's law.
00:38:16.000Are judges obligated to stick to case law?
00:38:20.000Like if someone says in the case of- They're supposed to.
00:38:24.000They're supposed to follow binding authority.
00:38:28.000And the idea is that they'll get reversed.
00:38:30.000And as Cash said earlier, if they get reversed, that's the worst thing a judge wants to do.
00:38:36.000There's not much practical effect for lifetime federal judges, but New York state judges aren't lifetime appointees.
00:38:42.000And so there could be real effects for them.
00:38:46.000But imagine, just rolling it back, if this stands, If what New York Times is doing stands, what's to stop any news publication who ever gets sued from just illegally obtaining the privileged communications of their opponents and publishing and shaming them?
00:39:02.000That's why this judge has to go ahead and issue the order.
00:39:06.000And if New York Times doesn't like it, take it to the Supreme Court.
00:39:09.000Go ahead, appeal it up to the New York Court of Appeals, and then appeal it to the United States Supreme Court, call it a First Amendment issue, freedom of the press if you want, and let them determine it.
00:39:20.000Because then, you know, if we get that case law in the books, okay, fine.
00:39:24.000But at the end of the day, Judges do have some limited ability to issue a gag order when there is sufficient justification.
00:39:33.000And I can't imagine how illegally obtaining your opponent's privileged communications and then trying to publish those privileged communications to shame them would not meet straight scrutiny.
00:39:43.000Maybe I'll get my lawyer in my defamation case against the Times to file for the Times' privileged communications and then send them out.
00:39:52.000And what's the Times' argument going to be?
00:39:53.000They're going to be like, well, we previously argued this is okay.
00:39:57.000Like, here's an article from the New York Times.
00:39:59.000No, I have to imagine that when it comes to losing in court, it's when you directly try to affect the judge's powers and their ability to do their job.
00:40:08.000So it's like, you know, you go in front of a judge and you're like, this guy kicked my dog.
00:40:12.000And the other guy is like, I didn't kick his dog.
00:40:14.000And it's like, here's a video of him kicking my dog.
00:41:23.000But there's a little more freedom because they also get, like, a little... I mean, this guy's, like, one of the most famous judges in America right now.
00:41:29.000These guys, first of all, they're lawyers, so they have egos going in.
00:41:34.000Second of all, they're given a robe that tells them they get to decide the fate of lives every single day, and that their decisions have the force of government behind them.
00:41:43.000So you can imagine, like, just the audacity of telling the government no, and the government having a mouthpiece with a human ego behind it to say, no, yes.
00:41:53.000I mean, so basically, the New York Times gets a hold of Veritas' lawyer communications about how they operate, what they're doing, while they're being sued by Veritas, which directly impacts the lawsuit.
00:42:06.000And the judge said, stop publishing this stuff.
00:42:10.000And New York Times said, shut up, judge.
00:42:12.000I have to imagine it's like, you're going to lose!
00:43:17.000You know, because it's like, we can agree to disagree on a lot of things, but when you're like, your fundamental rights are void because I'm a journalist, I'm like, nah, you're just evil.
00:43:29.000Like, the idea that, okay, so, when it comes to the United States, comes to the Constitution, comes to what we believe other people are afforded, they're afforded their legal defense, their right to due process.
00:43:36.000If you think, we have a First Amendment right to take away your right to due process, I'm like, nah, that doesn't work that way.
00:43:42.000That would be like someone being like, I have a right to guns, so I'm going to rob people.
00:44:41.000Denver attorney files civil action in Kyle Rittenhouse shooting.
00:44:44.000Now, before I actually read what it's about, I want to stress, I was browsing Reddit earlier, and there's a tweet from a guy, not even a link to the story.
00:44:52.000They don't even have the decency to actually post the link.
00:44:54.000They post a screenshot of a tweet, not even a link to the tweet, no decency to even put the tweet, post the tweet link.
00:44:59.000And the guy says, breaking news, the first civil lawsuits in the Rittenhouse trial have been filed.
00:45:05.000And all of the comments are saying things like, Kyle Rittenhouse is going to lose this lawsuit because civil lawsuits are easier to win than criminal cases.
00:45:12.000And it's just a wave of people being like, Kyle's going to lose, Kyle's going to lose.
00:45:16.000And then finally, like, you know, I'm down a hundred or so comments.
00:45:20.000I see one guy say, who's going to tell them they're suing the city and not Kyle Rittenhouse?
00:46:00.000If the police were actually out stopping riots, there would have not been anything happening.
00:46:04.000And if Huber hadn't been rioting, then there wouldn't have been a problem.
00:46:07.000Well, the Supreme Court ruled that police officers have no duty to protect and serve the citizen.
00:46:14.000So that's also going to be something that's going to be leveraged here, I think, because again, that's something that was said as a president.
00:46:21.000I mean, probably an uphill battle when they're like, we're suing you.
00:46:25.000And it's like, well, maybe we should have been protecting you, but you were the one doing what needed to protect people from.
00:46:31.000Yeah, right now, by nature of being dead, I think Huber has the best lawsuit against the city.
00:46:37.000Not that that's saying he has a good chance, but Gage, who's alive, went on the stand and admitted that he lied in his civil lawsuits against the city by omitting the fact that he had a gun with him, that he brought that.
00:47:15.000I was just going to ask you guys, is he going to face any charges?
00:47:19.000Oh no, no, he's not gonna get perjury because it'd be the Kenosha County Prosecutor's Office.
00:47:23.000Let me, uh, tell me, you guys, you know, you're a lawyer, you're a recovering lawyer, tell me if you think I'm on point here.
00:47:31.000I think some of this is obvious, but here I'll speculate.
00:47:35.000Gage Grosskreutz had a second DOI in January of 2021, I believe.
00:47:39.000It was six days before the Rittenhouse trial.
00:47:41.000It was dismissed on a motion to the prosecution.
00:47:44.000Gage Grosskreutz had a signed search warrant against him for his cell phone that the prosecutor told the police not to execute.
00:47:54.000Gage Seems like, you know, he had this, he also had this $10 million, let me slow down, he did have, I believe it was a $10 million lawsuit, was it against the city or the police?
00:48:07.000He had a $10 million lawsuit against the city over what happened.
00:48:11.000But then he testifies under oath, contradicting his own lawsuit, which clearly means he's going to lose.
00:48:15.000So it sounds to me like they went to him and said, you have two choices.
00:48:20.000You can plead the fifth, move forward with your lawsuit, maybe win 10 million bucks.
00:48:24.000And your second choice, enjoy that money while you're rotting in prison, because we're going after you with the full weight of everything on your second DUI, on your gun charge.
00:48:31.000We're going to get you on attempted murder of Kyle Rittenhouse.
00:48:33.000And he probably said, I will do anything you say.
00:48:37.000Yeah, so there's an interesting thing with pleading the Fifth.
00:48:41.000You have an absolute right to plead the Fifth in criminal court, and it cannot be used against you.
00:48:45.000You cannot draw negative inference from it.
00:48:47.000In fact, we saw that Binger just towing the line of mentioning Kyle Rittenhouse's Fifth Amendment rights almost got the case entirely dismissed at that point in time.
00:48:56.000But when you plead the fifth in a criminal suit or in a civil suit with pending criminal charges or anything like that, the other party is allowed to draw a negative inference from the issue.
00:49:08.000So if I ask Gage the question, you know, did you provoke this incident?
00:49:14.000And he says, I plead the, you know, I plead the fifth.
00:49:53.000And I, I think Binger was out making tons of shady deals and, uh, and various threats to certain witnesses, um, and, and just ignoring Jumpkick Man entirely.
00:50:03.000The defense actually came out and said that was withheld from them.
00:50:05.000Yeah, well, to be fair, when he went into the DA's office asking for a deal, they all looked up at the ceiling so they didn't know he was there.
00:50:15.000But yeah, in that case, if he were to plead the fifth in his criminal lawsuit, it would basically tank his civil lawsuit because the city gets to do it.
00:50:22.000But from a prosecutor's perspective, look, I did it too.
00:50:26.000You know, your flex is to go to other people and say, I'm going to prosecute.
00:50:30.000I would go into a massive conspiracy and be like, here's 16 defendants.
00:50:43.000I was saying, I can use some assistance, and I don't need to put 16 people away.
00:50:47.000Because you also know that not everybody is as culpable as the next guy.
00:50:51.000There's different levels of it, right?
00:50:53.000So from a prosecution's perspective, not everyone should go down for the same amount of time just because they were involved in the whole thing.
00:50:58.000So that's where you get some wiggle room.
00:51:00.000I think this prosecutor is crazy, And probably just went in there, didn't have his case together, and was just, like, walking the big walk and trying to say, I'm going to do what I want, I'm going to pound my chest, I'm going to go on TV, I'm going to make the world's greatest case since OJ, except he, you know... I think Krause tampered with all the evidence.
00:51:19.000I don't know if you saw my Twitter thread about it.
00:51:21.000It's speculative, to be completely fair, but I think it's speculative only in one key area.
00:51:26.000The drone footage, they admitted, which was their special key evidence that showed Kyle, they claimed, to be pointing a weapon, which it didn't show, by the way, it was too blurry, it was nonsense.
00:51:35.000It was 1920 by 844, so it was cropped.
00:51:40.000Someone took footage that appeared on Tucker Carlson, cropped out the top, presumably from Tucker Carlson's show, and removing the Fox graphic.
00:51:49.000It was then further cropped and compressed, renamed, and sent to the defense.
00:51:55.000Krauss has a cropping software format factory and compression software handbrake on his laptop.
00:52:01.000So here's what I was talking to this Antifa guy and he said, yo man, like that's wildly speculative for you to be claiming that stuff.
00:52:06.000And I was like, well, hold on, hold on, hold on.
00:52:09.000Evidence that was given to the defense was cropped and compressed.
00:52:12.000The prosecutor who gave the evidence to them that way has cropping software, specifically for cropping, and compression software, which is specifically... It's transcoding, but one was like, it does cropping and mixing, one does compression.
00:52:25.000If I see a person on the ground with a stab wound, and then I see a guy holding a bloody knife, Okay, I'll admit, it is me speculating to say that guy with the knife stabbed the person on the ground.
00:52:36.000It's what they call being caught red-handed.
00:52:37.000But I also think it's fair to say the person with the weapon in question that was used, presumably the same kind of weapon to kill someone, and they're right there!
00:52:47.000I mean, I don't know if you agree with me on that one.
00:52:50.000Well, the thing making it even worse is whether or not Krauss cropped the footage and compressed it.
00:52:58.000One, it was idiotic of them to use a laptop that had anything other than—we saw it with the defense, right?
00:53:04.000During the jury deliberations, they said, we have a clean laptop.
00:53:22.000Why the state had a laptop with that software on it, along with other evidence, is baffling.
00:53:28.000But the problem with it is that Krauss stood up and he said, I don't know anything about compression.
00:53:34.000I don't know anything about, you know, how you manipulate these video files.
00:53:38.000And then we see because of their mistake of having this stuff on this computer, we see it there and it's like, Look, I know about compression.
00:56:35.000this person lied to you for 18 months and we just proved it and the case just got tossed.
00:56:39.000And every time they're like, well, let's talk about it later. I got to work with the
00:56:45.000C.U.S. Attorney's office. I got to work with the defense bar. You know, I don't want to be out
00:56:50.000there. When I got falsely arrested, I told you the story off air because I've said it on air
00:56:55.000too many times. But when I got falsely arrested when I was a teenager, I was told by the police
00:56:59.000the reason they so long story short, my brother and I got attacked, jumped and beat up by security
00:57:04.000guards because of mistaken identity or something to that effect.
00:57:07.000When we talked to the cops, they said, look, you know, we know that you guys didn't do anything wrong now, everything's been resolved, but we gotta work with these guys.
00:57:15.000You know, they're a big part of the economy here in the small suburb.
00:57:32.000The state is friends with the state and the system.
00:57:34.000Well, one thing to remember with these judges, and this is a problem with the system, is that they often work in the same, like in my town, they're in effectively offices are in the same building as the prosecutors.
00:57:48.000And they're in, when they're not in their offices, they're just in court and they have these cattle call hearings.
00:57:53.000And so you're sitting there with the prosecutor, they're co-workers for five hours straight
00:57:58.000as they go through this big stack of files.
00:58:01.000Defense attorneys file in and out and some of them get friendly.
00:58:04.000But the other issue that the judge can always fall back on is well, yeah, in this case, Kyle would have been prejudiced
00:58:12.000if he was found guilty, but he wasn't prejudiced because the jury came to the right conclusion.
00:58:17.000So since there's no harm, it really doesn't look good to do it,
00:58:34.000Dismiss the jury for the day, for a week, whatever you need, however long you need to get an expert.
00:58:39.000Let's put these prosecutors on the stand.
00:58:40.000Let's get them under oath talking about how they emailed it to their personal Gmail account from their .gov account and then sent it when everything else was sent by Dropbox.
00:59:38.000But what you can do, I mean, suing for a violation of your civil rights is also very difficult, but it's very, it's very real in this case.
00:59:44.000This guy, this kid was charged with capital murder and the prosecution doctored his evidence.
01:00:17.000So the news can kind of feed this in and if he's got civil attorneys or if he's got prospective civil attorneys who are thinking about things like this, you know, hopefully they'll be capturing those things.
01:00:29.000And it's not going to go against the news companies, but it's going to say, this is the result of the state infringing on my client's civil rights, and here's the damage that was done because now it's all over the major media that he provoked an attack that he never did.
01:00:42.000And real quick, you can quantify damages from a media sense in terms of PR rectification, Basically, if they dedicate one minute in defaming you, and you need to then pay one minute to counter that lie, it's very expensive.
01:01:03.000If you guys were Kyle's lawyers, what would be your first step?
01:01:05.000Who would you go after first in this entire matter?
01:01:08.000The prosecutors, the media, the state?
01:01:20.000And we were talking about libel proof earlier.
01:01:23.000Part of the problem with the way we prosecute things is if any opinion out there is based on the prosecution itself, based on what's in the complaint, people are able to formulate reasonable opinions based on that.
01:01:37.000Now, there are issues because a lot of the stuff that's being reported by some of these places never happened.
01:01:42.000For example, saying that Kyle shot three black men.
01:01:49.000But, I mean, for my money, I'm going after Krause and the county of Kenosha, and by extension the state of Wisconsin, on the deprivation of civil rights.
01:02:19.000OK, so you might be able to go after them, but you're really going to have to do very
01:02:24.000careful sifting, as we saw with Sandman, right?
01:02:27.000They had something like 57 statements and only three went through because almost all of them are opinion.
01:02:33.000Anything that says Kyle's a white supremacist, that he's a racist, that he was racially motivated, those are going to probably be opinion statements.
01:02:40.000But they all said he crossed state lines with a gun.
01:03:05.000So once you become a public figure, Man, that defamation hurdle is huge.
01:03:10.000In order to show damages, you have to satisfy this bar that's almost impossible to satisfy, even if you prove Kyle did not cross state lines with a gun, Kyle did not shoot three black men, Kyle is not a domestic terrorist, he's not a racist or a member of whatever.
01:03:23.000That's what I would recommend to Kyle and his crew.
01:03:27.000is that I would write an open letter to the Department of Justice for them to initiate a federal civil rights investigation of the Kenosha County Prosecutor's Office and the police that investigated this case.
01:03:36.000Because they have done that repeatedly in the past when there has been racial unrest and cities were burning.
01:03:47.000I would just make this, I would do that as part of a sort of a grander media strategy to be like, we asked the department to come in and do X, they said no.
01:03:55.000Now I have my rights under defamation and this and that, and what other options do you have?
01:03:58.000Do you guys think the Tucker Carlson documentary complicates this because it kind of paints him as a public figure?
01:04:04.000Look, whenever you're making statements, like, you never hear me talking about my defamation cases except to say the pleadings are public, the instance is there, they lied about this meeting, that's all I say.
01:04:14.000If you give an interview on that, these lawyers are going to go in there and just tear you apart and use that in pleadings.
01:04:19.000Yeah, because Tucker Carlson was filming a documentary on Kyle during the entire court proceeding.
01:04:24.000Which I agree with Kyle's defense lawyer.
01:05:00.000But a defamation case can be a way to launch himself into, if he wants to embrace a media spotlight, he can become a spokesman against stuff and a defamation case is a way to do that.
01:05:13.000Talk about the broken prosecution system.
01:05:16.000Talk about the fact that media can run roughshod over people, raise a lot of money doing it, get some sponsorships behind them, and become a media figure in the way that some of the Parkland kids have done.
01:05:29.000They've taken that obviously different side of the political spectrum.
01:05:34.000There is a way to make a career out of that when otherwise his career's prospects got chopped down considerably from the average 18-year-old kid.
01:05:42.000Let me ask you, if you're a public figure or involuntary public figure, I think that's what they call the Covington kids, then the standard would be actual malice or gross negligence regarding the facts, right?
01:05:54.000It's actual malice for any public figure.
01:05:58.000But doesn't that also include gross negligence?
01:06:12.000Even though, if you watch the trial for even 10 minutes, even though you could look at any of the filings, when they lie about, when they say he crossed state lines with a gun, right now, even though Dominic Black is currently being prosecuted literally for giving the gun to Kyle in Wisconsin, that's not actionable.
01:06:34.000So the the actual malice standard from a journalistic perspective is that the journalist and this is this is so frustrating.
01:06:42.000The journalistic outlet has to have a standard that they would typically do to conduct research and they have to fail to meet that standard.
01:06:51.000That's the gross negligence I think you're talking about.
01:06:54.000Is is that they still that's how you show actual malice is if they have a standard and then they fail to meet the research standards that they would otherwise do.
01:07:05.000Then if Kyle Rittenhouse files a loss, he absolutely should sue every single one of these outlets because I will love it when they're like, our standard doesn't include using Google.
01:07:15.000We don't take 10 seconds to Google search any of these things.
01:07:17.000We just say them because we made them up.
01:10:31.000It depends on the polarization of the figure.
01:10:32.000I mean, Trump is an extremely polarized figure, more than probably anyone else on earth, right?
01:10:39.000But for for Devin Nunes, you know, for someone who's maybe 75 percent of the way to Trump's level of polarization, I think there's value there.
01:11:02.000He just came out and said he supports Black Lives Matter.
01:11:05.000He also said he's sick of the left and right using his case in order to push their political agenda.
01:11:10.000So he's coming out and making a lot of statements which are shocking and surprising a lot of people, including people on the right.
01:11:16.000And those statements are the ones that actually carry weight in court.
01:11:19.000And when you get rulings, that's when people start paying attention.
01:11:22.000You're never going to get his message of that message of saying, I'm on the left and the right or I'm in the middle out there unless you actually get rulings in court.
01:11:29.000And that's why he's got to bring those cases.
01:11:31.000It's a mistake for Kyle Rittenhouse to come out and say that he's supporting Black Lives Matter or criticizing one side over the other.
01:11:38.000Probably should just avoid the polarization subject altogether.
01:11:43.000One of the problems I see with, I guess we'd call it the right, was one of the jurors, this was going around, when asked in jury selection, he said he wouldn't be a good juror, he wouldn't be fair because he's pro 2A and he supports gun rights.
01:11:58.000And that right there is like, I agree with our constitutional rights, so I shouldn't be involved in this because only people who don't agree with Kyle's rights should be judging him.
01:12:10.000Yeah, there's this weird proclivity of people who are honest to be honest to the fault of themselves.
01:12:18.000No one is going to be able to remove every bit of bias from their decision making.
01:12:23.000Anybody who goes into a jury—the person I trust least is a person who's like, oh yeah, I can ignore all of my biases when making this jury decision.
01:12:51.000Like that's never going to be the guilty vote.
01:12:53.000If the guy's like, I hate this guy, he's not going to go, oh, I, I, I, you know, I, I just can't be partial on or impartial on this.
01:12:59.000I'm going to stay on the, or I need to leave the jury.
01:13:02.000No, if, if you, if you hate the defendant, then you're going to want to be on that jury.
01:13:06.000And most judges, look, the job of the prosecution defense, when you're doing jury selection is to strike people you don't like, or you think you don't like, or there's a possibility of you not liking them.
01:13:15.000What happens though, 99% of the times is you get someone to say, Yeah, you know what?
01:13:19.000I'm not going to be fair in this case because of my pro-2A position.
01:13:23.000The judge jumps in and says, well actually, I'll remind you this is jury service, it's a constitutional right, goes through a litany of legal things, and then basically asks him again, are you sure you can't set that aside?
01:13:36.000We're not asking you not to be pro-2A.
01:13:37.000Are you sure you can't set it aside and be impartial?
01:13:56.000The judges want, see, what the judges don't want to do is dismiss everyone, because you could pretty much dismiss 95% of all jurors in any trial at any given time if you didn't apply that standard, then there would be no jury trials ever.
01:14:08.000So the judge's job is to be like, we got to really keep these people in the box.
01:14:11.000And despite all of the crap that Schrader got from the media about being pro-Kyle or whatever,
01:14:18.000in that jury selection, one of the people stood up and said, I just don't believe that anybody should have a machine gun.
01:14:23.000And the judge took the time to say, well, just so you know, like there's no allegation that anyone in this case had a
01:15:15.000We were talking with Michael Malice on the show, and he was telling the story that he... I think it's mostly fictionalized for legal purposes, but he basically said to a prosecutor in a grand jury, I'm an anarchist, and I will not return an indictment.
01:15:27.000And he was like, well, too bad, you're on the grand jury.
01:15:29.000And so he convinced everybody to return no indictment.
01:16:34.000There's crafty ways to get around that.
01:16:36.000The other thing about jury selection is About 80% of your reversals come from improper jury selection.
01:16:43.000This is why judges are so guarded against it, because they want to make sure it's the racial thing.
01:16:48.000It's called Batson Challenges or whatever.
01:16:51.000Every juror has a racial profile under the law, and you can't strike one just for some race decision.
01:16:59.000And a lot of reversals come because the defense and the prosecution don't do enough to what we call state the record of what the case actually is and the judge screws up and that's where a lot of reversals come in.
01:17:10.000This is the first I've heard that jury nullification is illegal.
01:17:16.000The premise is you have to be able to argue the facts that are presented in the case, right?
01:17:22.000And the facts that are presented in the case as to whatever the charges.
01:17:25.000You can't go in there and be like, this guy has had the worst life in human history.
01:17:30.000This is why you should acquit him of murder because he's just, you know, has had the worst luck, has been stabbed, has been, you know, shot at.
01:17:42.000You can say you should acquit him because he's had a rough life, but in the instance of the murder thing, he actually didn't do it.
01:17:48.000What if it's like a drug charge and you don't believe in the law?
01:17:52.000Like you don't believe the law should have been implied here because you don't believe in victimless crimes and you don't think this should be used on him.
01:18:00.000So that's why you want to nullify this by voting as a juror and saying this shouldn't be applied here.
01:18:05.000Then what should happen is the state should be very careful in what questions that they ask the jury on voir dire.
01:18:13.000And if they don't ask you those questions, then you don't have to answer those questions, but you keep it to yourself.
01:18:18.000You don't stand up and say, I believe in jury nullification.
01:18:21.000If you're going to go nullify a jury, and by the way, I fully 100% support jury nullification.
01:18:28.000This show is brought to you by jury nullification.
01:18:33.000If you believe a law is unjust and you are on a jury for it, then you have that right, but you cannot stand up and tell the judge and the prosecutor and the defense attorney that you're going to do it.
01:18:45.000And if they do, that's one of the few ways that a defense can get a mistrial and a redo at it.
01:18:53.000What would happen if you were on the jury?
01:18:55.000Like you got on the jury, you were selected, and then when you were walking in one day you said, I'm going to nullify, I'm going to fuck with them.
01:19:03.000Same deal they had with the guy who- Really?
01:19:04.000There's one way to get out of it, huh?
01:19:05.000Yeah, getting out of jury duty is really easy.
01:19:07.000What you do is you go to the bailiff and you tell a racial joke.
01:19:12.000For those that don't know, that's actually what happened in one of the jurors.
01:19:14.000Yeah, it's part of the Kyle Rittenhouse case.
01:19:16.000But it's also important to know that a lot of people who were charged under very heavy drug charges, under very heavy crimes, were many times allowed to let go because of jury nullification.
01:19:28.000Because people said, hey, this is obscene that this man was using this substance for, let's just say, medicine.
01:19:34.000But there's been so many different cases And then the jury said, there's no way I agree with this morally.
01:19:39.000I'm going to impose jury nullification.
01:19:41.000I don't know if they announced it or didn't announce it, but I also heard of cases of people being arrested outside of courthouses because they were advocating for jury nullification.
01:20:08.000Look, I would try cases all the time and be like, the way you beat the cops is you put the cops on trial and make the jury feel worse for your client than law enforcement.
01:20:18.000You're playing to jury nullification by trying to address facts that show that.
01:20:22.000And juries are going to be hip to that, and they can make that ruling on their own.
01:20:28.000You can pitch it, and of course, juries do that all the time.
01:20:30.000So you could say something like, you could say, you know, a guy was arrested with CBD And they're arguing it's an illegal drug, which is completely unfair.
01:20:41.000So even though technically the state is correct, the jury's probably going to be like, yeah.
01:20:45.000But you can't tell them that they have, they could do that.
01:20:48.000You can't say it and you can't, if you're, you're on a pretty thin line because a smart prosecutor will jump up and be like, that's jury nullification.
01:20:58.000But as a citizen, a lot of people don't even know what it means.
01:21:01.000A lot of people don't even understand what jury notification is or victimless crimes.
01:21:05.000So I think, you know, talking about it and spreading this kind of word, letting people know that the average citizen, if they participate in our court proceedings, have a right to throw down unjust laws.
01:21:24.000Like how are they going to I mean, to be honest, the judge says if you believe the state has proven, you know, these things about a reasonable doubt, so you can just be like, I don't believe them.
01:21:35.000But remember that when you're under voir dire, you're under oath, and you are required to answer those questions truthfully under penalty of perjury.
01:21:44.000And so, you know, it's really up to the state to craft their questions to try and eliminate things like jury nullification.
01:21:50.000And that's why you saw, in fact, some of these race-based dismissals cropping up is because, you know, in the South, for example, during Jim Crow, you might have a white defendant and a black victim and you would have a jury that they would try and strike any black jurors from that jury because they would want a jury notification even if the facts mixed up based on race.
01:22:19.000So, jury notification, it can be used in an inappropriate way.
01:22:23.000But now we tend to think of it as more of a liberty-minded position, attacking things like victimless crimes.
01:22:29.000And that, frankly, lies at the feet of things like mandatory minimum sentences.
01:22:33.000When you've got people who have, like, four marijuana plants going a mandatory minimum of 20 years in a federal prison, someone goes, that's not really justified when a Joseph Rosenbaum gets out and ate.
01:22:47.000You know, they sit on a jury and the judge says, it doesn't matter what your opinion is on the law, it matters what I instruct you, and they say, okay, I'll lock the guy up.
01:23:01.000You'll have this on your conscience for the rest of your life that you destroyed this person's life over what, a substance or something?
01:23:06.000And then people were like, yeah, I don't want to.
01:23:08.000My attitude on this is, the reason why I would almost, like if I was on a grand jury, I'd almost never indict, is because I'm not the judge over other people, sorry.
01:23:16.000Like, I can certainly have my opinions and be judgmental, but like, to actually tell me, we are gonna grant you partial power, along with this other group, to condemn a person to either a court proceeding, which is arduous and difficult, or, as a jury itself, to jail, prison, or death, I'd be like...
01:23:34.000But that's why grand juries are so big, right?
01:23:37.000That's why there's like, you know, 32 members of a grand jury.
01:23:40.000The preponderance of the evidence standard is 51%, 49%.
01:23:42.000Not, you know, did he maybe do it versus did he not do it?
01:23:46.000And also you only need like 17 of the 32.
01:23:57.000I mean, and obviously I think crime is bad, property crime and stuff.
01:24:01.000If it's like victimless stuff, like literally someone chilling in their house minding their own business with some weird thing, you know, that they're not supposed to, the government says you're not allowed to have, I'd be like, nah, government's wrong.
01:24:10.000What if they're playing videos from facial abuse on a big screen outside in their front lawn?
01:24:42.000I think you can potentially argue like minor disorderly or something or disturbing the peace, which I really am not a fan of as a law because like, dude, tell me what I did wrong.
01:24:50.000Cop, you know, like I was telling that story, the cop claimed that because I was yelling, call 911, I was being disorderly.
01:26:20.000Because in New York City they're allowed to.
01:26:22.000So if somebody wants to make a statement about what they deem is socially acceptable or not, and it's a public statement, I would argue it's a civil issue, and there's potentially disturbing the peace there, but I probably would not indict.
01:26:33.000There's that entire feminist movement, right?
01:26:56.000Did you see the, have you ever seen my favorite Femen clip is when the one runs at Putin and he gives her the thumbs up right before she gets tackled?
01:27:10.000If it involves kids, if someone's doing something, you know, wrong with kids, I'll be like, consenting adults, I, consenting adults can do what they want to do, man.
01:28:54.000That was the first thing I thought of when we were talking about it earlier.
01:28:59.000You have to have, you actually, the city would actually have to have a law that states that showing this type of stuff, you know, the public display of these images is not allowed.
01:29:07.000And some of those get struck down as being overbroad.
01:29:11.000And even if you're prosecuted for them and they've been on the books, you have an overbreath.
01:29:16.000There are federal pornography statutes on the books that basically say if you
01:29:20.000if you show the wrong audience and I forget what the wrong audience is off
01:29:24.000the top of my head but basically kids of a certain age X or it's shown to X
01:29:30.000number of people you can get into a federal crime.
01:29:33.000So a smart prosecutor or a savvy one would be like, you might just be showing it on your house, but there's probably like a thousand people coming by seeing it.
01:29:41.000So you could basically be in what's called the distribution business.
01:29:44.000So you get them on the violation of the broadcast rights.
01:31:03.000You're only conscious because I'm holding your legs up.
01:31:05.000But so that's an interesting question.
01:31:07.000If that, if it is known among these like hostile, these are like special forces guys, if it is known among them that you can trigger a reaction of people which can be serious and medically problematic by showing a video, maybe it's flashes and someone could be epileptic.
01:31:23.000Now we're talking about potential criminal intent to do harm to others.
01:31:27.000Well that's what happened to Eichenwald, right?
01:31:29.000People were tweeting at Kurt Eichenwald the flashing images and he allegedly had an epileptic seizure response to it.
01:31:53.000The federal battery statutes on that one by saying that the photons from the thing hitting his eyes, because that was intended for those lasers where we're actually directing a beam into someone's eyes for the intent of injury, in my opinion.
01:32:13.000Well that's that's that's him and uh for all uh we'll just we'll leave him to his vices I suppose him and his family uh let's go to super chats if you haven't already smash the like button subscribe to the channel and go to timcast.com become a member we are gonna oh louis you look just get in front of the camera not even paying attention Yeah, go to TimCast.com, become a member.
01:32:35.000We're going to have a members-only segment coming up, and we're going to talk a lot about some of the darker stuff in the Rittenhouse case for sure, and the law.
01:32:42.000Like, we already started getting into some dark territory right there, but we're going to talk about some stuff that's probably not family-friendly in the member section.
01:32:50.000Become a member, but let's read some Super Chats.
01:33:37.000The funny thing is though, it's because it depends on which selfie they've seen with me.
01:33:41.000So like when Charlie Kirk and Vosch are here and they're both 6'3 or whatever, like Charlie's 6'5 and Vosch is 6'3 and I'm 5'10 or whatever, I look very small and I'm like, hey!
01:33:52.000But then we have like, you know, Michael Malice or someone like, you know, with Joe Rogan and they're I think like 5'7.
01:34:33.000You know, um... A little late, but yeah.
01:34:35.000Yeah, I was kind of bummed because we were talking a lot about the Rittenhouse stuff and we were waiting for the verdict because it was recorded last Wednesday and so it comes out on a Monday and...
01:34:46.000The verdict came in last week, so... It's all over.
01:34:48.000I mean, I guess it's a good Monday for a lot of people who didn't know a lot of details.
01:34:51.000There's a lot of people who probably watched who believe the lies.
01:34:55.000And I was able to clear a lot of things up about a lot of what happened.
01:34:59.000Though, you know, I don't know, I'd probably be called biased because a lot of what I focus on was how they were lying about Kyle, how Kyle was, you know, being smeared in the prosecution and stuff.
01:35:09.000And I think, you know, there probably could have been more points made about the defense's screw-ups that didn't come up because I just didn't care.
01:35:15.000Did you happen to see the CopeFest that they had on Brian Stetler with David French?
01:37:17.000That was real. There was like no way that's where I'm like, that's real. We'll explain more and the members
01:37:22.000When your children are not listening. Yeah, I don't I think it's fuzzy
01:37:28.000I want to I want to mention something though. I have a friend who's you know, pretty Antifa and
01:37:36.000Just all of his posts are like written house bad written house this he was posting the state has a really strong
01:37:42.000case I know just really bad law and his friends were also antifa
01:37:46.000were like dudes stop like But he was saying like no. No, no, hear me out
01:37:51.000We were arguing over the facts of the case And then I said something like, you know, the prosecution was, in my opinion, tampering with evidence.
01:38:01.000And that sets horrifying precedent for the future.
01:38:03.000And then he responded with, that's irrelevant to the facts of the case because the state is illegitimate.
01:38:08.000And then I said, well, hold on, we agree.
01:38:12.000Can we just be like, we both think I'm exaggerating a little bit.
01:38:16.000You're like, you know, I'm not a I'm not a statist for the most part, but I'm like limited government.
01:38:21.000But like when we get to the point where we're both just like the prosecution, the whole system is broken and bad, I'm like, we don't need to argue about the rest of this.
01:38:28.000Kyle Rittenhouse was found not guilty.
01:38:42.000Pop Raider says, Tim, this is an example of the lefties blanket statement, criminal justice reform, buy one felon and get nine free doesn't work.
01:38:59.000Oh, maybe if you, maybe by, uh, maybe it's what you were talking about earlier where you've got 16 people and you go, okay, first one to come to me.
01:39:08.000So you, you buy one guy and then you get the rest of them.
01:40:24.000And the key though is once you get on the record a piece of evidence, you get to use it in closing argument.
01:40:31.000And that's kind of the lawyer strategy is get these statements, these moments in time that I can then use to build my story at the end to the jury and remind them what they saw and let them ignore a bunch of stuff that they saw too.
01:40:44.000And the key to this that everybody needs to understand is that All of this comes from one detective looking at a drone video that's grainy and tiny already on an iPhone that no one can verify.
01:40:56.000That's the only testimony that he raised the gun.
01:40:58.000And they had the opportunity to bring in the Zeminskis.
01:41:01.000They could have granted immunity on the one arson charge for Joshua Zeminski.
01:41:05.000He's got a million other issues in his past.
01:41:44.000This morning, with the guy in Waukesha, he wasn't arrested, he was a person of interest.
01:41:48.000And a lot of people were like, he was politically motivated, they're outright saying it, he's a BLM supporter, and I'm like, he was a BLM supporter.
01:42:13.000If I was sitting on a jury and said, here's the photo that everyone's posting on the internet and here's a photo of him, I'd be like, nah, not guilty.
01:42:19.000Like, it's a blurry, low-resolution photo.
01:42:36.000They were able to get computer-generated images admitted in evidence because none of them had the experience.
01:42:42.000What happens if the prosecutor, let me ask you guys, what happens if the prosecution says, we've uncovered this video and it is, I mean, you've seen the deep fakes and they're like, and it shows the defendant plotting, you know, the attack.
01:42:54.000Well, I mean, look, if it's an actual deepfake, you know, a prosecutor should never use it, but that's not saying it won't happen.
01:43:00.000Well, first of all, I think the amount of forensic tools you have at your disposal as a prosecutor, you can find out.
01:43:08.000Basically, what you're saying is, like, an agent brings you a video that the agent knows is a deepfake, doesn't tell the prosecutor, and the prosecutor's just like... No, no, no, no, no.
01:43:16.000They get a unicorn bit of evidence on a Friday, you know, five days into the trial, that appears, and it's a video, and it's low-res, but clearly depicts the defendant, and he's saying, like, I'm going to walk over to these guys, I'm gonna get him triggered, I'm gonna get him, and then as soon as they come after me, I'll take him out and claim self-defense.
01:43:36.000What if the prosecutor gets that and goes, whoa, we got him?
01:43:40.000Well, the way this is supposed to be handled and was not handled in this way in the Kyle Rittenhouse case is the defense is not supposed to stipulate to the authenticity of pretty much anything, especially when... So when you're in court trying to introduce evidence, you have to lay foundation.
01:43:55.000You have to say, where did this come from?
01:43:59.000That's why you have to introduce evidence through a witness.
01:44:02.000The witness for the prosecution on all of the videos was a detective And they said, how do you know that these are accurate?
01:44:10.000And he said, well, I went on Twitter and YouTube and downloaded the videos.
01:44:14.000And again, this is another detective who's not there that night.
01:44:18.000If anybody on the defense bar is watching the Kyle Rittenhouse trial and not understanding how damaging that The allowance of that evidence in through those means was, especially when the drone video came in the same way, even though it's an emergency piece of evidence and should be put through higher levels of scrutiny because it's coming in in the middle of trial and they've had no time to prep for it.
01:44:43.000If they're not looking at that, they're insane.
01:44:46.000You need to get the person who took the video, who was there that night, like Drew Hernandez, like Richie McGinnis, like Gage Groskowitz.
01:45:55.000But if you can subject yourself to cross-examination and be credible in saying, yes, that's what it looks like for all these reasons, you can be the chain of custody witness.
01:46:04.000Yeah, but you have to be able to testify that what is on the screen is a fair and accurate representation of what happened.
01:46:11.000And when you get attenuated by a detective whose sole testimony, and this is, again, the defense's fault in this case, the guy's sole testimony is, I went to Twitter and YouTube and downloaded the videos.
01:48:30.000We built the blimp, but Luke's idea is to put the Let's Go Brandon on it.
01:48:34.000And another statement, which we can't tell you here on this family-friendly platform that I think I'm very proud of as well, that usually hangs up on my RV.
01:48:42.000I think we should, I agree, we should, yes, put that banner on the blimp.
01:48:47.000And if you're wondering what that is, I guess we'll have to bring us all up in the less family-friendly earmuffs for your children, if you want to listen to an episode.
01:49:01.000In some sense, but as Cash stated earlier, there are no cameras in federal courtrooms, so we will not be able to cover it in the same way that we were able to cover the Kyle Rittenhouse case.
01:49:12.000So I will be looking for another full trial, and the biggest one on the horizon for me is Kim Potter, the taser, taser, taser lady.
01:49:20.000I have heard there will be cameras in the courtroom for her, so we might be able to do a full trial of her.
01:49:26.000But for Jelaine Maxwell, it will be tough.
01:50:14.000So if we have a reliable source, it's not filtered through like, you know, CNN, ABC, MSNBC, then I'm certain we can put some stuff together.
01:50:25.000Yeah, but remember, in federal court, so if you send anybody in there that's not the lawyers, no cell phones, so they'd have to literally be there writing everything down, then run out at lunch, give you an update.
01:50:36.000It would have to be someone with legal experience.
01:51:35.000The Rolling Stone wrote that the media establishment and people in high society are afraid of what's going to come out because of this trial.
01:52:16.000If you are of the opinion that someone like Mark Ruffalo has simply made an honest and ignorant mistake, not realizing who he was supporting, you are the internet's definition of insane.
01:52:26.000Constantly touching the flame and going out.
01:52:30.000Maybe it won't burn this time, because this dude does this a lot.
01:52:33.000And not just him, but a bunch of other people.
01:52:35.000When Hollywood actively supports covers for Weinstein, the media covers for Epstein, they know all about it.
01:52:42.000And now you hear them cheering for Rosenbaum, I'm like, maybe it's time to stop desperately assuming they're people who are just ignorant and realize, yeah, they know exactly what they're cheering for.
01:52:53.000But we'll talk a bit more about that in the members segment.
01:52:56.000Hollywood is filled with some really nasty, bad people.
01:55:11.000Missykin says, Tim, based on the idea that people act different in front of a camera, do you think that Vice News embedded with the Supremacists in Charlottesville, hoping it would provoke them?
01:55:24.000Actually, I don't know enough about the people who embedded with the Charlottesville crew for that stuff, but I actually trust them a little bit more than I don't.
01:55:33.000I don't know them enough, but there's a few reporters who were involved who had done things of principle that I remember.
01:55:39.000I can't get specific, it's been too long.
01:55:41.000But I remember talking to them and being like, that was a class act.
01:55:44.000They said something, they called out some fake news, and we're like, that's BS.
01:55:47.000But Vice as a whole, man, really went down the gutter.
01:55:49.000It's kind of crazy to think that like, You know, I was the first person they hired for VICE News.
01:55:55.000They had an idea they wanted to do something, but they didn't want to do on-the-ground reporting.
01:55:58.000So when I came there and basically argued with them for six months about why they should hire me, long story short, they said, OK, all right, maybe VICE News will be field reporting and less just documentary.
01:56:08.000And so I actually went on the ground in Ukraine and Venezuela and Brazil and all these countries.
01:56:13.000And then to see where it is now, and just like what it turned into.
01:56:57.000And so they decided one way to protect our image with these lawsuits coming is to embrace feminism wholeheartedly and make that a core part of our message.
01:57:33.000I do know what I experienced, but I was told by someone who was a former higher-up that lawsuits were a big deal, and that they had accusations against people in the company over harassment and things like that, and they were like, we gotta get in front of this.
01:57:48.000They also had, um, Vice had a really big PR blunder when one of their hosts of Vice on HBO admitted on YouTube that he raped a masseuse.
01:58:04.000Yeah, it was, um, you know, the dude who painted Facebook and then like they were like, we'll give you stock in exchange for painting this place.
01:58:29.000Facts Check Man, this one, and I will preface this with it's been a long time since I've, you know, this is years ago, this is nine years ago, whatever, eight years ago, but I remember being at Vice when this went down and he's on YouTube in a podcast being like, so there I am at this, you know, massage therapy place.
01:58:45.000And he goes into detail, which I won't, what?
01:58:48.000Detail here what about how he grabbed the woman and was like very excited and then they were all like, uh Definitely David chose the Facebook guy.
01:59:11.000We'll grab a couple more here Yes, It's Tess says, Tim, you should have Amazon's Utopia writers on your show and discuss what would be revealed in season two.
01:59:22.000There was also a British version, but it only lasted one season.
01:59:25.000It would be an interesting conversation.
01:59:30.000Utopia is a show that aired on Amazon recently, I think it was this past year, about a tech billionaire who is concerned about overpopulation, who's working to make fake meat, decides that the way to save the planet is to create a fake pandemic so that he can rush through a vaccine without proper approval or testing, and the vaccine actually sterilizes people.
01:59:52.000It's a pretty good show, but it's a little, well, no, some of the acting, well, it's not really, I mean, it's just like, they had to put a disclaimer saying this is not real life in any way.
02:00:09.000Did you know that there was a book called the Titan and it was about a large cruise ship that hits an iceberg and then sinks with all the rich people on it?
02:00:59.000For a lot of people who don't know anything about Illinois, they're assuming that, you know, he got in his car, drove a hundred miles to a city he's never been to.
02:01:41.000Do you think there will be any charges or indictment?
02:01:44.000I don't think they'll do it against Alec Baldwin.
02:01:46.000If they do any charges or indictment, it would be maybe negligence, criminal negligence against one of the armor or the more likely that assistant director, whatever, who's he's a guy who said the gun was clear without and admitted to the police that he didn't check it.
02:02:30.000If you have not already, you can help out by smashing the like button, subscribing to this channel, and sharing the show with all your friends.
02:02:35.000Take that URL up top, paste it on Facebook and Twitter and Instagram.
02:02:39.000Well, you can't really put it on Instagram, but you can click that share button.
02:03:45.000Real quick, FightWithCash.com with a K. Basically what we're doing, traveling around the country, raising money for people who have been defamed and deplatformed.
02:03:54.000All the money, I keep nothing, all of it goes to lawyers who are skilled in defamation suits.
02:03:59.000We will pay for them and we want nothing in return.
02:04:01.000We want you guys to have your day in court and help fix the correct media.
02:04:04.000If Kyle's Camp is in need of funding, let us know.
02:04:08.000More importantly, The best announcement I've had in a while, which I said at the beginning of the show, the merch store went online at fightwithcash.shop and all of TimCast audiences gets a discount tonight.
02:04:19.000Just jump in the discount code TimCast.
02:04:21.000And you get the jacket, you get the beanie, you got the hat, you got t-shirts and all the proceeds, all of it, go to right back to the Offensive Legal Trust for fightwithcash.com.