Timcast IRL - Tim Pool - Timcast IRL - Florida Bill Grants Immunity If You Drive Through Protesters w-Will Chamberlain

00:00:00.000 you you

00:00:41.000 you the Florida Senate has passed the anti-riot bill

00:01:02.000 Ron DeSantis is expected to sign it sometime next week.

00:01:06.000 And the bill is considered controversial because, of course, the left and Democrats think it stifles free speech, whereas it actually increases penalties for a lot of riot-related activities.

00:01:15.000 So, Hey, maybe it's a good thing.

00:01:17.000 A lot of people are sick and tired of the far-left, Black Lives Matter and Antifa, going around smashing things, rioting non-stop, and they keep getting cut loose, but there are some drawbacks. 0.54

00:01:25.000 I mean, the things they're doing are already illegal, and if many of these people aren't being prosecuted, then maybe the problem is the DAs aren't prosecuting the law.

00:01:31.000 So we're going to talk about this, but I also want to get into, as this is the week of the Chauvin trial has come to an end, and now the trial itself has effectively come to an end, to the extent that the deliberations begin next week, And there's an op-ed from Fox News saying that Chauvin's lost.

00:01:48.000 The state has proven their case.

00:01:50.000 And we're going to have to go through this because I think that's absolutely not the case.

00:01:55.000 And I think one of our guests actually agrees with that.

00:01:57.000 We've got Will Chamberlain of Human Events.

00:02:01.000 You want a quick introduction?

00:02:02.000 Sure.

00:02:03.000 Will Chamberlain, I'm a lawyer.

00:02:04.000 I'm the co-publisher of Human Events and run the opinion section.

00:02:08.000 And I'm also senior counsel at the Internet Accountability Project and the Article 3 Project.

00:02:12.000 Does it have to do with stopping censorship?

00:02:14.000 Exactly.

00:02:15.000 Article 3 project was getting Trump's judges confirmed.

00:02:17.000 We were big in the Kavanaugh fight.

00:02:19.000 And the Internet Accountability Project is still ongoing.

00:02:21.000 And that's big tech and censorship.

00:02:25.000 We're working on something in that area to guarantee access to platforms and create an open source networking thing.

00:02:32.000 So cool stuff.

00:02:33.000 We also have Jordan Lancaster of The Daily Caller.

00:02:36.000 Hello, I'm Jordan Lancaster, reporter at the Daily Caller.

00:02:39.000 I've covered the riots, media, pretty much a wide variety of stuff.

00:02:45.000 So, happy to be here.

00:02:46.000 Awesome.

00:02:47.000 We have Ian Crossland of Shamanistic DMT Trips.

00:02:50.000 Holler back at ya, boy!

00:02:52.000 Alright, alright.

00:02:52.000 Crossland up in the house.

00:02:55.000 I do like DMT trips, by the way, Lydia.

00:02:57.000 Okay, that's fair.

00:02:58.000 I believe that.

00:02:59.000 And that's iancrossland.net, right?

00:03:00.000 It is, yeah.

00:03:01.000 Yeah, I was thinking of something last night.

00:03:03.000 I came up with a brilliant pun about Ian Crossland.

00:03:05.000 You can find him at Ian Crossland across the land.

00:03:08.000 No joke.

00:03:09.000 I'm a genius.

00:03:10.000 You're very welcome.

00:03:10.000 I'm sorry.

00:03:11.000 Thanks, guys.

00:03:12.000 Back to Tim.

00:03:16.000 Hey, before we get started, go to TimGuest.com and become a member to get access to exclusive segments for members only.

00:03:21.000 We are building up the site.

00:03:22.000 We're going to be launching a lot of really cool things.

00:03:23.000 We got some sitcoms we're potentially going to be funding.

00:03:26.000 We're going to be doing a new show on paranormal, weird murder mystery stuff.

00:03:30.000 And we're going to bring on writers to produce that content.

00:03:32.000 And we're going to have general news, commentary culture, probably films, probably documentaries.

00:03:37.000 Like, we're taking this thing all the way.

00:03:38.000 It's going to be a big digital media empire.

00:03:40.000 With your help, that's the direction we're going.

00:03:43.000 So if you like what we do, then become a member at TimCast.com.

00:03:45.000 But don't forget to like, share, subscribe, smash that notification bell, and, well, smash the like button.

00:03:50.000 I guess smash the notification bell as well.

00:03:52.000 But if you're listening on iTunes, Spotify, or Google, or whatever podcast platform, leave us a good review, give us five stars, tell all your friends how awesome we are, because that really does help.

00:04:01.000 Let's jump into this first story.

00:04:03.000 And it's kind of a crazy story, I suppose.

00:04:06.000 It's either really, really good—unless, I guess, you're a Democrat, then you're probably really angry about it if you're a Black Lives Matter protester—the Florida Senate has passed the controversial anti-riot bill pushed in the wake of Black Lives Matter protests.

00:04:19.000 Governor Ron DeSantis championed the legislation and is expected to sign it as early as next week.

00:04:22.000 One of the things it does that Democrats are really mad about Is that if you are in your car and a group of protesters are in the street and you're trying to escape them, you are immune from civil liability if you drive through them.

00:04:37.000 So it's, you know, you want to make sure you get all that context in there.

00:04:39.000 But they're freaking out because they're trying to make it seem like they're granting immunity to people literally slamming the gas and like crashing into people.

00:04:45.000 That's not the case.

00:04:46.000 But there are a bunch of other provisions that make certain things a felony.

00:04:50.000 Now, I'll say this because I'll need your help on this one, Will.

00:04:53.000 I tried looking up.

00:04:55.000 What the bill does specifically, like a breakdown.

00:04:58.000 Unfortunately, if you go to right-wing sites, they tell you very specific things like, this becomes a felony.

00:05:02.000 Certain left-wing sites say very biased things.

00:05:05.000 And reading through it, it's like, I don't know, it's not that many pages, but it's very poorly written.

00:05:11.000 So, can you give us the gist of what this anti-riot law does?

00:05:14.000 Sure.

00:05:14.000 Well, I actually found like their summary, you know, I went to the Florida legislature and got an idea of what they're doing.

00:05:20.000 Um, I think the biggest thing it does, I mean, it's really, first off, there's a lot of enhanced penalties.

00:05:25.000 So if you're, you know, committing one of these crimes, like inciting a riot, participating in a riot, uh, it's gonna, there's like a mandatory minimum for assaulting a police officer now of six months, for example.

00:05:36.000 It also means that if you're participating in a riot and you get arrested, you can't get bailed out before you appear in court, so it's like the sort of in and out.

00:05:43.000 I like that.

00:05:44.000 I think that's a great one.

00:05:46.000 It has this anti-defunding the police provision, which essentially makes the state, before a city wants to defund its police, it needs permission from the state government.

00:05:58.000 This is an interesting one, and I think this is the one that has to do with the whole the defense about like if you run someone over it says it

00:06:04.000 creates an affirmative defense in a civil action arising from a riot if the plaintiff's injury or

00:06:08.000 damage was sustained as a result of participating in a riot so that that's sort of interesting

00:06:12.000 that sort of shuts off any sort of lawsuits by rioters like if you're in a riot and you you

00:06:17.000 get assaulted or something so it's actually beyond so so the democrats were the ones framing it as

00:06:21.000 though you could run a car your car through Right.

00:06:23.000 But actually it's much broader than that.

00:06:25.000 Well, it's civil liability too, right?

00:06:28.000 I think that's a good example, right?

00:06:29.000 You're participating in a riot.

00:06:31.000 And I don't actually know the extent of this affirmative defense.

00:06:33.000 I'd actually need to read it.

00:06:35.000 You know, how far that goes.

00:06:36.000 But the basic concept, if somebody is escaping, you don't have the right to sue them.

00:06:39.000 Because you were participating in a riot, and they were trying to get out of it.

00:06:43.000 Why do we need a law for that? 0.99

00:06:44.000 If you're committing a felony, and I'm trying to escape, why am I liable for this?

00:06:48.000 I mean, apparently, you know, I think it's good to just make it really clear, actually.

00:06:53.000 You know, because people, one of the things, I have a very strong view about people stopping traffic.

00:06:58.000 I consider, I mean, that should be false imprisonment.

00:07:00.000 It should be treated as a very serious crime.

00:07:02.000 I really disagree with you on that one.

00:07:04.000 You know, I think, no, like, I think protests are stopping traffic.

00:07:06.000 It's like, straight to jail, everybody, and throw the book at those people, because that's, it's, it's incredibly selfish.

00:07:11.000 There are people who are trying to just get to work, go to their jobs.

00:07:14.000 It's incredibly scary, right?

00:07:16.000 You're just like, you're, you're at the mercy of this mob.

00:07:18.000 And it's just it's the most selfish way to protest possible It's completely indifferent to like the amount of time and

00:07:25.000 energy you're taking away from everybody who's blocked You're just you're just deciding you're more important than

00:07:29.000 they are that becomes a felony right blocking traffic. I think so

00:07:33.000 I think I'm like a third-degree felony. I think they've been much more aggressive about it

00:07:36.000 And I I really disagree with that when I I think that, you know, if it was just a bunch of, say, like, I don't know, Code Pink, and they're holding hands in the middle of DC singing songs, and the cops have to walk up and one by one arrest them and remove them, and it takes, you know, 20 or 30 minutes, non-violent civil disobedience is a good thing.

00:07:53.000 We don't want people to be getting violent.

00:07:55.000 Um, I mean, I'm okay with that, except do it on the sidewalk.

00:07:58.000 Like, get out of the road.

00:07:59.000 But that's the point.

00:08:00.000 The point is to create some kind of circumstance where it generates attention.

00:08:04.000 And my point is that I think that's not something we should incentivize, and instead that we should deter.

00:08:09.000 I think a fair point is that people standing in the road create a very serious risk standing in a road, and you probably shouldn't stand in a road, period.

00:08:16.000 My thing is more just like, we need to make sure there's a space maintained where people can be, to a certain degree, disruptive, peacefully and unviolently, and it's already illegal.

00:08:16.000 Right.

00:08:25.000 So typically what happens is when people are holding hands in the street, they immediately get arrested.

00:08:30.000 Sometimes it takes longer if they use chains to link their hands together, or those metal tubes.

00:08:34.000 But when a peaceful protester stands in the street, the cop walks up, cuffs them, and walks them away.

00:08:39.000 They clear the traffic relatively quickly, and the protesters get their point across.

00:08:42.000 They do get charged.

00:08:43.000 It's usually a misdemeanor slap on the wrist.

00:08:46.000 And then they're not going around smashing windows and beating people in the streets like they're doing now.

00:08:50.000 I mean, I think, like, well, there's already laws that are, you know, don't, we aren't seriously punishing people in the road, and they still, you know, I don't think that's a way to divert them from breaking windows.

00:09:02.000 No, a felony's kind of intense, though, for that, man.

00:09:04.000 Right, but, well, then, there's, don't do it.

00:09:07.000 Like, just don't do it.

00:09:08.000 It's the law.

00:09:09.000 You know?

00:09:09.000 Don't do it.

00:09:10.000 I think you have to think about the worst case scenario, right?

00:09:12.000 Like, what if an ambulance is trying to get through this traffic and they can't?

00:09:16.000 Or like, there was a video that went viral a while ago of some guy.

00:09:20.000 He got out of his car and a mob was blocking him from getting in the road, and this is a doctor.

00:09:24.000 And he was like, he worked in the ER or something.

00:09:27.000 He's like, I need to get to work.

00:09:28.000 You gotta have patience.

00:09:30.000 The challenge, I suppose, is the difference between an unruly mob in the street and, like, a bunch of hippies holding hands singing, and then the cops come and clear them out.

00:09:37.000 Yeah, I think those are different things.

00:09:39.000 But in this scenario, it was a giant mob of people in an intersection.

00:09:43.000 Right, that's a riot.

00:09:44.000 And what's stopping the hippies from getting a permit?

00:09:46.000 Like, if you want to march in the street, get a permit.

00:09:48.000 There's ways to do that.

00:09:49.000 I don't know, man.

00:09:50.000 First Amendment says peaceably assembled.

00:09:53.000 Well, do you guys remember the L.A.

00:09:54.000 riots?

00:09:55.000 More recently, not the actual L.A.

00:09:57.000 riots, like in the 60s.

00:09:58.000 But there were L.A.

00:09:59.000 riots.

00:10:00.000 In the 90s?

00:10:00.000 Yeah.

00:10:01.000 Sorry.

00:10:02.000 I'm a little bit off, like 30 years.

00:10:02.000 60s.

00:10:04.000 They blocked a highway in L.A.

00:10:04.000 What?

00:10:06.000 and there was an ambulance that was stuck in the traffic and a little girl died because of it.

00:10:10.000 Like, that's, for me, the biggest argument against, like, blocking traffic.

00:10:14.000 And I kind of agree with what a lot of us think.

00:10:15.000 Then they should be charged with murder.

00:10:16.000 Yeah, absolutely.

00:10:17.000 Like, that's a serious issue.

00:10:17.000 Right?

00:10:18.000 Well, I think we should just, you know, at the outset, just deter this behavior entirely.

00:10:21.000 Like, I mean, if people actually start going to jail for serious time for doing this, it will stop.

00:10:25.000 People will find other ways to make their point heard.

00:10:27.000 And there's plenty of ways in this world to get your point across.

00:10:30.000 Yeah.

00:10:31.000 My main thing is like, if it's already illegal, why are we making more laws for it?

00:10:35.000 Because people are still doing it, so the punishments aren't severe enough, apparently.

00:10:39.000 I'm not sure that they care.

00:10:40.000 I mean, I will say, a point I've made in the past few days is that the cost for riding is too low, and these people know this.

00:10:47.000 Even though it is a felony to go and do, you know, burn a building to the ground, they know they're gonna get cut loose.

00:10:53.000 You see that lady in Portland who burned down the, or set fire to the police union building? 0.99

00:10:59.000 They released her without bail!

00:11:01.000 They released her... yeah, it's just... Rioting is not drug addiction where people can't stop, right?

00:11:06.000 And therefore it's like overly punitive endocrinia.

00:11:09.000 No.

00:11:09.000 You don't have to riot.

00:11:11.000 You have no addiction to rioting.

00:11:12.000 You are just doing it because you want to.

00:11:14.000 So stop it.

00:11:16.000 We just need to change the law so that people go right to jail.

00:11:20.000 This woman, apparently she got informed on because one of these Antifa guys in Portland is apparently a snitch.

00:11:25.000 She was arrested apparently last year, I guess, and she was released and all the charges were dropped.

00:11:31.000 If this woman Was if the charges were not dropped and she got a year in jail or a year plus in prison, she would not have been there to set fire to this police association building.

00:11:45.000 They cut her loose, dropped the charges, and they knew she was a violent, terroristic extremist.

00:11:50.000 Then she goes and does it again.

00:11:52.000 And what happens?

00:11:54.000 She gets, I think it's five felony charges.

00:11:56.000 And they release her without bail on her own recognizance, I think that's called, right?

00:11:56.000 Wow.

00:12:00.000 Right.

00:12:01.000 And I mean, the beauty of doing this in, you know, conservative states, there's a lot of blue cities, and there's still blue cities in Florida.

00:12:07.000 But all of a sudden, they've got, you know, the State Attorney General can come in and tell them to knock it off, right?

00:12:12.000 Right now, essentially, Oregon is totally dependent on federal law enforcement, and the FBI run by a Republican administration at some point in the future.

00:12:20.000 Otherwise, you're just SOL.

00:12:23.000 Yeah.

00:12:24.000 I like the, uh, you can't get released until your first court hearing.

00:12:28.000 You're caught in a riot.

00:12:29.000 You know, there, there are challenges about this.

00:12:31.000 Uh, typically I, my thing is Blackstone's formulation, the presumption of innocence.

00:12:36.000 It's really difficult to, you, you, you might be walking through the wrong place at the wrong time and they'll charge you with being in a riot.

00:12:42.000 Then, you know, what then?

00:12:44.000 Right, well, I mean, I think the right answer is to really reduce the number of riots.

00:12:48.000 Like, let's start there.

00:12:49.000 If we just reduce the number of riots, then that also reduces the number of people who are randomly walking through, makes police's job a lot easier, means they can focus on combating crime in their cities, and not have to send these huge forces of people just to, you know, deal with unruly rioters.

00:13:05.000 So, you know, when I asked about why make new laws if it's already illegal, you said something to the effect of, the punishment must not have been severe enough.

00:13:11.000 Like, if it's still happening despite being illegal all the time, we are not deterring it sufficiently.

00:13:11.000 Right.

00:13:16.000 Because the district attorneys aren't prosecuting it.

00:13:18.000 That might be true, but this is a solution to that as well, right?

00:13:21.000 If you create new state laws with severe punishments and, you know, essentially you create an environment also where the state attorney general is going to want to enforce those laws if local district attorneys are not.

00:13:31.000 And that authority, I'm pretty sure, is always there.

00:13:33.000 So long as at the state level.

00:13:35.000 I guess my bigger concern then is one of the statements made by Democrats is that this is going to be disproportionately used.

00:13:41.000 It's going to be biased.

00:13:42.000 It's going to be used against them.

00:13:44.000 They're half right.

00:13:45.000 I think if you look at the evidence, they've consistently, the Black Lives Matter, the Antifa, have consistently gotten away with serious violent extremism. 0.68

00:13:54.000 I mean, how many people died in the riots or peripheral to the riots of last year?

00:13:57.000 It was like 30 something.

00:13:58.000 Yeah.

00:13:59.000 There were 19, I think, deaths directly related and then peripheral deaths like people in ambulances that couldn't get to the hospital and stuff like that.

00:14:07.000 These people have gotten away with it.

00:14:08.000 I mean, Kamala Harris solicited donations to get these people out of jail. 0.85

00:14:11.000 Joe Biden's staff donated to these funds to get these people out of jail.

00:14:15.000 And then people voted for them.

00:14:17.000 Then you look at the people at the Capitol.

00:14:19.000 There's one lady, apparently, the door was open and she had no idea what was going on until she walked in, you know, dumbfounded and bewildered like everybody else, and now she's in solitary confinement facing like 40 years in prison.

00:14:29.000 Yeah, I mean, that's the status quo.

00:14:32.000 The left gets off a lot easier.

00:14:33.000 And that's not all about, like, selective prosecution.

00:14:36.000 That's also about, you know, 50 to 60 years of leftist organizing infrastructure and protest infrastructure still existing.

00:14:42.000 I mean, the National Lawyers Guild, they're still around.

00:14:45.000 And in the 70s, they were hiding terrorists, right?

00:14:48.000 Weather underground terrorists.

00:14:49.000 And we, I mean, it's amazing when you actually read about what the 70s weather underground did.

00:14:53.000 They were bombing all over the place.

00:14:55.000 Who was Weather Underground?

00:14:58.000 I've heard of them a lot.

00:14:59.000 They got like probation.

00:15:00.000 Who was it?

00:15:00.000 They were fugitives for 10 years and they finally turned themselves in and got probation.

00:15:04.000 Who was Weather Underground?

00:15:05.000 I've heard of them a lot.

00:15:06.000 Bill Ayers.

00:15:07.000 Bill Ayers.

00:15:08.000 So Weather Underground came out of Students for Democrats, Students for Democratic Society,

00:15:12.000 a radical left-wing student group.

00:15:14.000 After, I think in the very early 70s, they made the decision that we actually are,

00:15:23.000 the revolution is coming.

00:15:24.000 And so after they went to a big protest in Chicago and a bunch of them got indicted

00:15:30.000 on various like rioting assault charges, a bunch of them instead of returning to face those charges,

00:15:34.000 they went underground.

00:15:36.000 Um, which at the time just meant, well, okay, I'm not going to show up for my court date.

00:15:39.000 I'm not going to be a fugitive.

00:15:40.000 And I'm going to go get, you know, new identity documents and, and just live under the radar and not be pub, you know, not be employed.

00:15:47.000 It was much easier to do then because it was just easy to fake make, get a fake ID.

00:15:51.000 No internet.

00:15:53.000 So, um, that was, you know, and so there was a big, there was a group, it ended up being about like 150 left-wing people and they started out, they, I mean, apparently there was a plan to actually go after and set off bombs in an army base while people were there.

00:15:53.000 Right.

00:16:05.000 That failed and ultimately a bunch of them killed themselves in a bomb accident in their own townhouse.

00:16:09.000 Wow.

00:16:10.000 Uh, and then after that they decided we're only going to bomb things symbolically, but they were, you know, there was just, there was a bombing campaign all over the place where they would just set off bombs and, you know, energy stations and random places to make a political point.

00:16:21.000 So we have decades of that infrastructure and the remnants of that still exist today.

00:16:25.000 Yeah.

00:16:25.000 So when it comes to this new law, how long until a Democrat wins Florida?

00:16:30.000 Assuming they do.

00:16:31.000 Maybe it swings back hardly the direction in the next few years.

00:16:34.000 Maybe not.

00:16:34.000 Maybe.

00:16:35.000 I mean, it was fairly close this time around.

00:16:37.000 Democrat takes over and then all of a sudden the Republicans find themselves with a boot on their face.

00:16:42.000 Well, I mean, it's possible, but, you know, I think Republicans... Republicans generally don't riot, and, you know, one of the things I said about January 6th is the reason they weren't even able to get into the Capitol is because Republicans generally don't do that.

00:16:53.000 So they weren't prepared for it?

00:16:55.000 The Capitol Police weren't prepared for it at all.

00:16:56.000 They were really understaffed.

00:16:57.000 What if a right-wing group decides to march around, and they got flags, and they find themselves marching in the street?

00:17:02.000 Then all of a sudden they're all committing felonies, and they all get locked up.

00:17:04.000 I mean, don't do that.

00:17:06.000 The law says don't do it.

00:17:07.000 Obey the law.

00:17:08.000 But if you're a regular person and you're coming out waving your flag, you're on a street corner and everyone's cheering.

00:17:13.000 And then you start marching and then you're in the street not realizing what's going on.

00:17:16.000 You don't know the law.

00:17:17.000 And then all of a sudden they're like, thank you so much for this law.

00:17:21.000 That's 50 year old grandmother is now a felon. 1.00

00:17:25.000 And they lock her up and they put her in solitary. 0.97

00:17:27.000 I mean, one, they've already done that in federal law.

00:17:31.000 Right, right.

00:17:31.000 That's what I'm saying.

00:17:32.000 So it's like, I expect more.

00:17:33.000 It's quite possible that Democrats will use this stuff against us.

00:17:36.000 But I mean, I think the net tradeoff, given how few sort of riots there are from the right, like January 6th was such a bizarre aberration.

00:17:45.000 I remember just being surprised.

00:17:46.000 It's like, our side never does this.

00:17:48.000 Left did this all summer and all the time.

00:17:51.000 The right never does this.

00:17:52.000 I literally published a video at 1 p.m.

00:17:53.000 that day where I was like, nothing's happening.

00:17:55.000 Trump's speaking.

00:17:56.000 Everyone's waving little flags.

00:17:58.000 This is boring.

00:17:59.000 And then 10 minutes later, they pushed past the barricade.

00:18:02.000 And then 40 minutes later, you know. 1.00

00:18:04.000 Oh, so stupid. 1.00

00:18:05.000 So stupid. 1.00

00:18:06.000 So anyway, I'm not pro-rioting. 1.00

00:18:09.000 I just don't care.

00:18:10.000 I'm concerned how they redefine riot in the coming.

00:18:10.000 Don't riot.

00:18:13.000 That's in it.

00:18:14.000 It changes it to three or more people engaging in tumultuous activity.

00:18:16.000 then all of a sudden they're going to make a law about what the word riot means.

00:18:19.000 That's in it. It changes it to three or more people engaging in tumultuous activities.

00:18:23.000 So if I go on the corner and start playing music and I have four people around me yelling

00:18:27.000 and they're excited, they could say I'm rioting.

00:18:30.000 Maybe, but then there's always this First Amendment constraint in the background, right?

00:18:33.000 Yeah.

00:18:34.000 So, like, I mean, I think, and I'm confident in the ability of federal courts to enforce the First Amendment and strike down laws, even just as applied, right, if they try to use one of these riot laws to something that is clearly First Amendment-protected activity.

00:18:47.000 I'm confident a court would strike it down.

00:18:49.000 They'll arrest them.

00:18:49.000 Lock them up.

00:18:49.000 Yeah.

00:18:50.000 Journalists who are there covering it one. There's one.

00:18:54.000 There's the problem with people there who are actual journalists who have you know

00:18:57.000 Their cameras and stuff and then there's people who fake it You know, there have been a lot of people at these riots

00:19:03.000 who have fake press credentials So are they gonna arrest everybody including people who are

00:19:09.000 there as reporters or are they gonna let reporters go and then have people? 0.87

00:19:13.000 Fake it. They'll arrest them. They you know, so of our two of our reporters got arrested. Yeah

00:19:19.000 Yeah, yeah, yeah.

00:19:20.000 I remember, I'll tell you this, the simple thing is if you're a journalist and you're working the protest beat, be nice to the cops.

00:19:27.000 Like, be calm, very calm, and have your press credentials readily available.

00:19:33.000 Ask for a supervisor very calmly and politely.

00:19:35.000 If it doesn't happen, keep your mouth shut.

00:19:37.000 So I've been in so many of these circumstances, and I remember in D.C.

00:19:40.000 on Trump's inauguration, several journalists got pulled out of the mass arrest.

00:19:45.000 I was one of them.

00:19:46.000 Why?

00:19:47.000 I had my card.

00:19:48.000 I asked for a supervisor.

00:19:49.000 The guy came over and said, you're under arrest.

00:19:51.000 I was like, just want to let you know I'm press.

00:19:52.000 He goes, no, it doesn't matter.

00:19:53.000 I was like, you got it.

00:19:54.000 Just letting you know.

00:19:55.000 He came back later and he looked at some journalists and he was like, you come with me, you come with me.

00:19:58.000 And I was like, yo, come with me.

00:20:01.000 He pulled us out.

00:20:02.000 He said, all right, you guys are good to go.

00:20:02.000 Show me your card.

00:20:04.000 You know, sorry about that.

00:20:06.000 Some other journalists were in the crowd screaming at the top of their lungs. 0.85

00:20:08.000 You mother effer, you can't arrest me, I'm a journalist!

00:20:11.000 And they went to jail and then they had all of the activists cheer them on they came out and these people are 0.97

00:20:17.000 hardcore activists That's why they're screaming at cops and they're angry. So

00:20:21.000 as part of the job, but you're not supposed to get arrested, but you get arrested a

00:20:24.000 Real a real professional journalist in my opinion gets arrested and they grumble about it

00:20:29.000 And they keep their mouth shut and they let their boss know the moment it's happening if they can

00:20:34.000 They say, you know, they'll yell to someone, tell, you know, Channel 5 I'm being arrested, and then they'll peacefully put their hands behind their back, and then go through the motions.

00:20:41.000 And then when the, you know, the station will call them, the police usually say, okay, you're free to go.

00:20:45.000 But when you scream in their faces and start a fight, then you get locked up.

00:20:48.000 If you're screaming at the cops and starting a fight with them, you're probably not a real journalist or a real reporter.

00:20:55.000 I think it's fair to say.

00:20:55.000 Yep.

00:20:57.000 We defend the act of journalism.

00:20:59.000 Someone becomes a journalist the moment they're engaging in journalism.

00:21:02.000 But if you combine, at any point, the act of journalism with the act of rioting or screaming at cops, now you're an active participant.

00:21:08.000 You may be an act of journalism, but you're also— I'll put it this way.

00:21:12.000 The First Amendment says peaceably assemble, meaning if you violently assemble or illegally assemble, then you're not peaceably assembling.

00:21:19.000 Illegal is where it gets interesting, and there are probably case law challenges, but the general idea is If you're not breaking the law or putting people at risk, you're probably fine.

00:21:29.000 The same thing is true for if you're engaging in an act of the press.

00:21:32.000 If you start acting violently, you know, the press has implied that you're being peaceful.

00:21:36.000 If you're now throwing bricks at people and filming it, that's not journalism, you know?

00:21:41.000 I think it's fair to say.

00:21:43.000 Filming yourself throw bricks is not journalism.

00:21:45.000 This is in Florida?

00:21:46.000 Is this where this is?

00:21:47.000 But there's like I think 13 states that have the same bill.

00:21:50.000 So if it went through then would a journalist who steps onto the street be committing a felony?

00:21:56.000 Doubtful.

00:21:57.000 Well, they could charge it, but I don't think it would fly.

00:21:59.000 They could charge it because they'll say, you know, let's say you're there, and you're filming, and you're in a group of three or more engaging in tumultuous activity.

00:22:07.000 They'll say, ah, you're in the street, felony, you're under arrest.

00:22:10.000 Then you'll go, you'll probably have to go before a judge, you'll tell the judge, I'm a reporter, here's where I work.

00:22:14.000 The judge will be like, okay, you're free to go.

00:22:17.000 If you can't prove you work somewhere, he'll probably say, I don't believe you.

00:22:21.000 You know, your coordinate is this.

00:22:24.000 It's tough.

00:22:24.000 It's not easy.

00:22:25.000 The first amendment is interesting.

00:22:26.000 It defends the press, but now everybody's the press.

00:22:29.000 So I guess the, the, the, the problem now is like the question you ask.

00:22:33.000 If you're a journalist and you enter the street and you're obstructing it now, got a problem.

00:22:39.000 I mean, I don't know, like, I'm looking at the statute, it changes the definition to someone who participates in a violent public disturbance involving an assembly of three or more persons.

00:22:46.000 That'd be violent. 0.99

00:22:46.000 Oh, okay. 0.99

00:22:47.000 Acting with a common intent to assist each other in a violent and disorderly conduct.

00:22:50.000 So yeah, violence is part of writing.

00:22:52.000 That wouldn't include journalists, right?

00:22:54.000 No.

00:22:54.000 Journalists are free then.

00:22:55.000 Unless you're filming yourself throwing bricks at people and calling them journalists.

00:22:55.000 Yeah.

00:22:58.000 I mean, if you're filming and throwing a water bottle, then the more important part is you're throwing a water bottle.

00:23:03.000 Right, exactly.

00:23:04.000 Well, let's jump over to the next story, because the next one is whether or not we're going to see massive riots across the country.

00:23:10.000 And yes or no answer will.

00:23:12.000 Will we see substantially worse riots this year?

00:23:16.000 Oh man.

00:23:18.000 Substantially worse?

00:23:20.000 No, I won't say substantially worse because they were real bad last year.

00:23:22.000 You don't think it'll be worse this time?

00:23:24.000 No, I think the police will be better prepared.

00:23:25.000 Seems like they've been better prepared in Brooklyn Center.

00:23:27.000 Do you think there'll be riots?

00:23:28.000 Yes.

00:23:29.000 Alright, we got this story from Fox News which I found... I'm sorry, I laughed when I saw it.

00:23:34.000 Greg Jarrett says, Derek Chauvin prosecutors meet the burden of proof in trial.

00:23:40.000 And he opens by saying defending the indefensible can be futile and fatuous endeavor.

00:23:45.000 And then he talks a lot about stuff, blah blah blah.

00:23:47.000 At the end he says, it is never easy to reach a decision unanimously when presented with conflicting testimony as noted herein.

00:23:53.000 Jurors tend to resort to common sense and wisdom grounded in their own life experiences.

00:23:57.000 In this case, the great weight of the evidence favors the prosecution.

00:24:02.000 It has sustained the burden of proof, be it a reasonable doubt, that what Derek Chauvin did was not only wrong but criminal.

00:24:09.000 I can't believe that's true, based on everything I've seen so far.

00:24:14.000 And I'm curious, Mr. Lawyer, if you agree with Greg Jarrett that the prosecution has met the burden of proof, proving that Derek Chauvin was not only wrong, but criminal.

00:24:28.000 I don't think they've proved causation beyond a reasonable doubt.

00:24:31.000 I thought Dr. Fowler's testimony I thought was very reasonable.

00:24:35.000 There's just a lot of potential alternate causality here.

00:24:38.000 I mean, the guy had a 90% blocked heart artery.

00:24:40.000 He had 11 nanograms per milliliter of fentanyl in his system along with methamphetamine.

00:24:45.000 And I think it was, what, 5.6 of norfentanyl, meaning metabolized?

00:24:48.000 Yeah, metabolized fentanyl.

00:24:49.000 I mean, you had the testimony about him sleeping in the car.

00:24:52.000 He had to be roused.

00:24:53.000 He decided to fight with the officers and have this huge adrenaline spike.

00:24:57.000 That could have been a heart attack.

00:24:59.000 Well, so here's my issue, right?

00:25:01.000 So let's go through the charges.

00:25:02.000 This guy's saying they met the burden of proof.

00:25:03.000 I don't see that.

00:25:04.000 We've got murder two, murder three.

00:25:06.000 We've got manslaughter in second degree and assault in the third degree, which is... The murder two they're going for is the felony murder rule, correct?

00:25:15.000 So that means they're arguing that Chauvin did not want to kill George Floyd.

00:25:19.000 Yeah, there's no... none of the charges require intent to kill.

00:25:23.000 That's the key thing to understand, right?

00:25:25.000 They're going for unintentional murder two, depraved heart murder three, which is also unintentional, and then involuntary manslaughter.

00:25:32.000 So that's all... none of that requires intent to kill, so that's why they didn't spend any time proving it.

00:25:36.000 There was a point in the trial that I've brought up several times where the defense cross-examined the state's use of force expert from LA.

00:25:44.000 And based on the continuum chart, it's a continuum where it shows like passive resistance, which is, you know, going limp or, you know, not standing up.

00:25:52.000 Active resistance, which is fighting and then active aggression where you're like shooting at somebody.

00:25:57.000 In the category, this guy said, in the continuum, the defense expert witness, I'm sorry, sorry, the prosecution's expert witness said George Floyd was actively resisting.

00:26:07.000 Right next to it, it says, it said like electro whatever, you know, force compliance or whatever, which is a taser.

00:26:15.000 And Nelson, the defense attorney said, So, Chauvin could have used a taser immediately upon encountering George Floyd actively resisting the other officers.

00:26:26.000 And the prosecution's witness said, yes.

00:26:28.000 And he goes, and then Chauvin chose a lesser force option of restraint instead.

00:26:34.000 And the expert witness for the prosecution said, yes.

00:26:36.000 That, to me, right away, threw everything out the window.

00:26:40.000 It seems like, based on that argument alone, Chauvin was trying not to hurt the man.

00:26:45.000 Or to minimize.

00:26:45.000 Right.

00:26:46.000 Right, you could see, I mean, that could in and of itself be reasonable doubt. 0.95

00:26:49.000 I think the defense is gonna have problems because the defense use of force expert was a clown. 0.93

00:26:54.000 Yeah. 0.99

00:26:55.000 A complete clown. 0.94

00:26:56.000 I mean, the attempt to say that it wasn't a use of force to hold the guy on the ground because, well, it's a constraint position, so... 0.95

00:27:02.000 There's not even an inquiry as to whether or not the force was excessive.

00:27:05.000 I mean, I thought that was in... It was indefensible.

00:27:07.000 It was revealed on cross to be indefensible.

00:27:08.000 He basically, like, retracted his entire opinion within five minutes of cross-examination.

00:27:13.000 So that was really bad.

00:27:14.000 And I think it was a huge misopportunity for the defense because I think you're right.

00:27:18.000 You know, there were... The defense use of force experts, plural, had conflicting testimony.

00:27:23.000 I mean, you had the LAPD guy saying that holding somebody in the prone position under the circumstances was justified use of force.

00:27:31.000 And then you had the academic saying it wasn't.

00:27:33.000 Right.

00:27:33.000 And all you need is a guy to get up there and say... Which is it?

00:27:37.000 You know, which is it?

00:27:38.000 But just you have your own defense expert who says, look, under the totality of these circumstances, this was a justified use of force.

00:27:44.000 Rather than trying to say it wasn't a use of force at all.

00:27:46.000 Like, you just say, like, given the resistance and given the fact that they thought he was going through excited delirium, it was reasonable for them to hold him on the ground and try and just restrain him and prevent him from moving.

00:27:56.000 And that's what they were doing.

00:27:57.000 The crazy thing to me is that they're trying to claim that Chauvin murdered Floyd, that he was the cause of death, but they can't even tell us definitively what the cause of death was.

00:28:08.000 Right.

00:28:09.000 I mean, they say that it's 100% positional asphyxia.

00:28:13.000 Well, they changed their position.

00:28:16.000 Initially it was that it was pressure to the neck cutting off oxygen to the brain.

00:28:21.000 And then, apparently because of one of their own experts testifying about how the knee had moved, they switched it up to saying it was pressure resulting in low respiratory function.

00:28:30.000 Yeah, I mean, the weakest part of... So Tobin says it was both the knee on the back and holding him in the prone position, and then also the knee on the side of the neck at times.

00:28:39.000 Which to me, honestly, doesn't make that much sense, because, I mean, I don't know if you've, like, done this, but, like, this isn't near your airway, right?

00:28:45.000 Like, the idea that knee on the back of the neck would close your airway just doesn't make sense.

00:28:48.000 Is that what he said?

00:28:48.000 Close your airway?

00:28:49.000 Right, like, it would lead to your airway closing.

00:28:51.000 He's a breathing expert, I guess, right?

00:28:52.000 Right, he's a breathing expert.

00:28:53.000 And the defense expert said, there's no literature on this.

00:28:57.000 Like, And to me, that was a moment of like, yeah, I mean, you're saying he choked via that.

00:29:01.000 And then the positional asphyxia thing, the Fowler was able to suggest pretty strongly that the guy who came up with the idea and wrote about it said, it really only applies to people who are obese because you're pressing their gut up into their lungs.

00:29:15.000 It doesn't apply to people like Floyd, who was quite, you know, 6'6", 230, but very lean.

00:29:22.000 What is the closing argument from the prosecution going to be?

00:29:24.000 Could you even predict it?

00:29:25.000 I mean the closing argument is going to be unjustified use of force means it's assault, so that's murder 2.

00:29:31.000 The knee on the neck is so egregious and appalling that that means it's murder 3 too.

00:29:35.000 And then he died of positional asphyxia, Dr. Tobin said he did, listen to him.

00:29:40.000 And the other guy is not credible, he was paid.

00:29:42.000 Well, I mean, they had one of their defense experts.

00:29:45.000 I think a couple of their experts were paid as well, but sure.

00:29:48.000 Yeah, and I don't think being paid in the circumstances is... I mean, I don't think it makes you more or less credible.

00:29:52.000 I mean, the fact that you're volunteering and wanting to try and put a guy in jail is weird.

00:29:56.000 I agree.

00:29:56.000 Yeah.

00:29:57.000 Having this guy be like, I want to fly out here and then come and speak so that I can, you know, make my.

00:30:01.000 I mean, the prosecution team, they had the most, they had Neil Katyal.

00:30:05.000 Do you know?

00:30:05.000 I don't know if you guys know Neil Katyal.

00:30:06.000 He was my former criminal law professor.

00:30:08.000 He was former acting solicitor general of the United States.

00:30:11.000 He was, he was serving on the prosecution.

00:30:12.000 He was like, they brought him in for motions practice, right?

00:30:16.000 To argue some of the legal points.

00:30:17.000 He would zoom in and, like, argue them.

00:30:19.000 And so you've got Eric Nelson, the random criminal defense attorney, arguing against Neil Katyal, who argues more Supreme Court cases every year than any other private attorney.

00:30:27.000 Wow!

00:30:28.000 Like, just... Why?

00:30:29.000 Oh, and the prosecution team is also mostly private attorneys.

00:30:32.000 What?

00:30:33.000 So Blackwell, the bald black guy, and then Schleicher, who handled a lot of the other cross-examination, both of them are like private litigators that Keith Ellison brought in to handle the case.

00:30:45.000 There's only like one state prosecutor, the woman with brown hair.

00:30:50.000 She was the only prosecutor who's actually a prosecutor in her day job. 0.99

00:30:53.000 They overcharged Chauvin.

00:30:55.000 Yeah.

00:30:55.000 They should have gone with, what, manslaughter?

00:30:57.000 I mean, I think Mantu is the correct charge here.

00:30:59.000 But you don't even think he'll get that?

00:31:01.000 I don't think he'll get that because I think at the end of the day there's going to be a juror who says to himself, I don't know how he died.

00:31:08.000 Yup.

00:31:09.000 That's reasonable doubt.

00:31:10.000 But even if the juror's like, I think he most likely died because of the knee on the neck, that's still doubt, right?

00:31:18.000 Right.

00:31:18.000 He still gets off in that case.

00:31:22.000 And that's going to come up.

00:31:23.000 The closing's going to focus on that.

00:31:24.000 I guarantee you the defense attorney's a smart guy.

00:31:27.000 I guarantee you that defense attorney knows he's in a lot, I guess, deeper water on use of force than he is on causation.

00:31:34.000 And he's going to drill down and be like, unless you are 100% certain That Chauvin died of positional asphyxia?

00:31:41.000 Not guilty.

00:31:42.000 Yeah.

00:31:42.000 Right?

00:31:43.000 Floyd, yeah.

00:31:43.000 Floyd died of positional asphyxia.

00:31:46.000 Didn't Cahill mention in September it looked like Floyd swallowed pills?

00:31:50.000 There was a tweet I pulled up from a local journalist.

00:31:53.000 Yeah, I mean, there were pills in the back of the squad car with his saliva on them.

00:31:56.000 The speedball.

00:31:57.000 A half-chewed speedball found in the squad car.

00:31:59.000 Yeah.

00:32:00.000 So I pulled this up.

00:32:01.000 There was a tweet from back in September when they were setting up the trial, setting up the case, where the judge said that it looked like in the photos Floyd had swallowed pills.

00:32:11.000 Do you think the defense is going to bring it to the jury?

00:32:13.000 George Floyd was seen on camera ingesting what appeared to be drugs.

00:32:17.000 He was with a man that was testified by his own girlfriend to be their drug dealer.

00:32:21.000 They found drugs in the vehicle and he had the drugs in his system, which as you've heard already, Fentanyl depresses your respiratory system, and methamphetamine causes heart arrhythmia.

00:32:31.000 We can't be sure how George Floyd died.

00:32:34.000 Yeah.

00:32:36.000 I mean, there's a very powerful closing, and it's a lot harder to rule it out.

00:32:40.000 I mean, they basically have to rely on these pieces of Dr. Tobin's testimony that said, well, if he had a heart attack, you would have seen this and this and this.

00:32:47.000 Who gets the last word, though?

00:32:48.000 Prosecution does, right?

00:32:48.000 Yeah, but, I mean, the prosecution already had its... I think, yeah, the prosecution gets the last word in opening or... In the closing arguments.

00:32:54.000 Yeah.

00:32:55.000 Yeah.

00:32:56.000 That's powerful.

00:32:57.000 It is, but it's still beyond a reasonable doubt.

00:32:59.000 And I think at the end of the day, the defense has it.

00:33:02.000 I've seen, you know, I think about the Robert Durst case where the guy literally, what's the word for, not decapitated, but dismembered.

00:33:11.000 Dismembered his neighbor.

00:33:13.000 The dismembered body was, you know, pieces of the dismembered body were found in the lake or in the river.

00:33:19.000 The axe used to do the dismembering was found in Durst's car.

00:33:25.000 What?

00:33:25.000 When was this?

00:33:26.000 This is a great HBO show called The Jinx, which you have to watch if you haven't seen it.

00:33:30.000 Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah, The Jinx.

00:33:31.000 The Jinx, it's incredible.

00:33:33.000 And he claimed self-defense, you know, said that the guy was his friend.

00:33:39.000 And, you know, when do you dismember someone in self-defense?

00:33:41.000 So how did he get acquitted?

00:33:44.000 He managed to give for his acquit, reasonable doubt, that the thing that led to his... He's like, I didn't murder him, I did dismember him.

00:33:52.000 I think it was, wasn't it the New York Post that the headline was, Durst, who cut off body, claims self-defense.

00:33:59.000 That was the New York Times that said that.

00:34:01.000 Wow.

00:34:02.000 Holy cow. 0.89

00:34:04.000 That was a headline.

00:34:04.000 Well, hold on, there's something we got to consider though.

00:34:08.000 If tonight we see rioting, and I think one of these jurors lives in Brooklyn Center, and the rest of the jurors still have to commute through riots to get to court, do you think they're going to show up on Monday sweating bullets knowing that if they say not guilty, that it's going to be a brick through their window and their house on fire?

00:34:24.000 Maybe.

00:34:24.000 I mean, I could see somebody hanging in the jury because of that.

00:34:27.000 They're just like not willing to go with a not guilty verdict.

00:34:29.000 So I think, you know, I think hung jury is a real possibility here.

00:34:33.000 And that means they redo the trial again later, right?

00:34:34.000 Right.

00:34:35.000 It would just be a mistrial.

00:34:37.000 Um, what's the difference between murder three and manslaughter?

00:34:41.000 Uh, murder three is what's called depraved heart, uh, murder.

00:34:45.000 So like that's supposed to be really, really, you know, involuntary manslaughter is, is, you know, killing someone without intent, right?

00:34:51.000 Generally it's, that's the usual crime.

00:34:53.000 Like for example, uh, the Daunte Wright case where the woman mistake, mistook her taser for a, mistook her gun for a taser and shot the guy.

00:35:01.000 That's an involuntary manslaughter charge.

00:35:03.000 So the, so the one cop says she, I don't think she's actually made her statement yet.

00:35:06.000 Right, right.

00:35:07.000 Fair enough.

00:35:07.000 But, like, that's what they charged.

00:35:08.000 That's the first thing they charged.

00:35:10.000 But depraved heart murder is things that are, like, really beyond the pale that indicate a depraved heart.

00:35:15.000 So, you know... Juggling chainsaws?

00:35:17.000 Juggling chainsaws.

00:35:18.000 And then you throw someone at somebody or something?

00:35:21.000 I think I read that the classic case in blackletter law is two people are playing a modified Russian roulette where they're shooting, you know, there's one bullet and a revolver and they're shooting each other.

00:35:30.000 Right, I see, I see.

00:35:31.000 So weird.

00:35:31.000 And they're like okay, that's not involuntary manslaughter even if you didn't have intent to kill rice

00:35:35.000 That's so beyond the pale weird there, but it's not it's not supposed to be that common third-degree murder is not

00:35:41.000 supposed to be that common So what they're claiming that that what that he was he like

00:35:47.000 it In his mind, he was like, I don't want to kill him, but man, I hope he dies?

00:35:51.000 Is that kind of it? 0.99

00:35:52.000 I don't care that I'm putting my knee on his neck and suffocating him. 0.93

00:35:57.000 Even if I'm not trying to kill him, I don't care that I'm inflicting this much pain. 0.92

00:35:59.000 Weird distinction.

00:36:01.000 It doesn't even matter.

00:36:02.000 Yeah, I mean, it's there so that sometimes things that are really beyond the pale can get more years.

00:36:07.000 The prosecution's own witness, I think more than one, testified that the position Chauvin was in was a ground control technique that they actually train.

00:36:15.000 The Brazilian jiu-jitsu guy said, yes, that's a ground control technique.

00:36:18.000 So it's like, what?

00:36:21.000 I'm sorry, man.

00:36:22.000 Look, nobody wants, well, I should say most people don't want anyone dying, right?

00:36:27.000 There's a faction of murderers, I suppose they exist, and depraved individuals.

00:36:31.000 That's why we have murder charges.

00:36:32.000 But, I mean, nobody wanted to see anybody die in the Dante Wright case, in the Adam Toledo case, in George Floyd.

00:36:37.000 But, the cop shows up.

00:36:39.000 De Chauvin was told it was a priority one, right?

00:36:42.000 That means sirens, rush in, guys actively resisting.

00:36:45.000 He shows up and he sees Floyd resisting.

00:36:47.000 And he chooses not to tase him.

00:36:49.000 I'm gonna restrain him anyway.

00:36:50.000 I'm gonna use a ground control technique.

00:36:52.000 Everyone's screaming in his face.

00:36:53.000 One guy's an MMA fighter, and he's being held back by someone else.

00:36:57.000 That was one of the most amazing things to me about the case.

00:37:00.000 This guy who's an MMA fighter testified.

00:37:01.000 He put him in a blood choke.

00:37:03.000 And then when Nelson shows the video, it's like, there's the MMA fighter in front of Chauvin, who's, what, 5'9", 140 pounds, and someone was holding this guy back.

00:37:11.000 Stands to reason that Chauvin felt he was in a very serious, threatening situation.

00:37:15.000 He was a little distracted.

00:37:16.000 Like, I would be distracted under circumstances, too.

00:37:18.000 How do they not have reasonable doubt?

00:37:20.000 It's like, I'm sorry, but at this point, I have like, it's not reasonable doubt, it's like, what's overt disbelief?

00:37:31.000 You know what I mean?

00:37:32.000 Right.

00:37:33.000 Like, you just think he's innocent.

00:37:34.000 Period.

00:37:35.000 No!

00:37:35.000 Right?

00:37:36.000 Like, that's simple.

00:37:37.000 I love how the left, their attitude is, but we saw it on video!

00:37:41.000 It's like, all the context, the training, policing, none of it matters!

00:37:46.000 And I can't stand how the left is covering this.

00:37:48.000 They are not preparing their audience at all for an acquittal.

00:37:52.000 They're saying that this trial is going swimmingly for the prosecution.

00:37:55.000 And it's like, there was a day that went really well for the prosecution when they cross-examined the use of force expert.

00:38:02.000 But every other day, I would say, for the prosecution has not been that great.

00:38:07.000 They had tons and tons of witnesses.

00:38:11.000 So I'm not a lawyer.

00:38:15.000 I don't typically follow criminal trials.

00:38:18.000 And I thought when the prosecution's use-of-force experts were testifying, I thought it was a defense witness.

00:38:28.000 Yeah.

00:38:28.000 Yikes.

00:38:28.000 I was like, wow, this is great.

00:38:30.000 The defense is really laying it out.

00:38:31.000 And then I was like, wait, that's the prosecution's witness?

00:38:34.000 He brought in a guy to claim that Chauvin was doing what he was supposed to do and could have done worse?

00:38:39.000 Wow.

00:38:40.000 I was like, are they trying to lose?

00:38:42.000 Or, I can't remember who it was that we were talking to, they said, there's just no case.

00:38:47.000 I mean, on the one hand, it's really hard because there's a lot of what Chauvin is doing.

00:38:51.000 I mean, and there's this mismatch too, right?

00:38:53.000 Like, the thing that really seems like excessive force is, in particular, the knee on the neck or in the neck area.

00:38:59.000 And also, like, holding on to him well after he's lost his pulse.

00:39:01.000 That seems like excessive force.

00:39:03.000 But so much of everything that led up to that was policy.

00:39:07.000 Like, I think they conceded, you know, holding somebody in the prone position.

00:39:11.000 For Excited Delirium.

00:39:12.000 I'm pretty sure that was Minneapolis Policy.

00:39:14.000 Right.

00:39:15.000 But also, they were like, yeah, but why nine minutes?

00:39:17.000 Because the MMA guy was screaming in his face and being held back and Chauvin was very distracted and didn't know what was going on.

00:39:24.000 And because they thought EMS was coming and would be right there and they were just trying to hold on to him.

00:39:28.000 Did you see the prosecution's expert use of force witness who said, when he was asked on cross, have you ever held someone in a restraint until EMS arrived?

00:39:39.000 Yes, I did.

00:39:40.000 Yeah.

00:39:40.000 Wow!

00:39:44.000 I mean, it's just true.

00:39:46.000 Their own witnesses over and over and over again.

00:39:49.000 That was crazy to me.

00:39:51.000 And then I was reading.

00:39:52.000 The crazy thing about it is I'm watching the trial.

00:39:55.000 And like I said, the first time I tuned into the cross-examination, I thought it was the defense's own witness.

00:40:00.000 And I was like, oh wow, we're in the defense.

00:40:01.000 I was like, wait a minute.

00:40:03.000 The defense hasn't started their case yet?

00:40:05.000 Wow.

00:40:06.000 And then I start watching the mainstream media.

00:40:08.000 And what do they do?

00:40:10.000 They show only the highlight reel of one fighter landing punches.

00:40:14.000 They omit the defense.

00:40:16.000 The craziest thing about that, I think it was Slate.com, right?

00:40:19.000 Lefty publication.

00:40:20.000 Where they say, is the defense floundering?

00:40:23.000 And then I see these articles where they're like, the defense is helpless.

00:40:28.000 And I'm like, When your commentary is derivative of biased news sources and you don't double check, you write opinions that are based in just not reality.

00:40:38.000 Yeah, nobody was watching Cross.

00:40:40.000 We were watching, I think, CNN a couple days ago during the defense witnesses.

00:40:47.000 And finally, their analysts were talking about cross-examination and how they were able to ask questions and things like that.

00:40:53.000 And I'm like, I realize you guys haven't even talked about cross-examination yet.

00:40:56.000 You've only broadcast highlights of Direct.

00:41:00.000 Yep.

00:41:00.000 And that gives you no clue about what's actually happening.

00:41:03.000 You know why?

00:41:04.000 In the case.

00:41:05.000 These people have invested everything in the resistance.

00:41:08.000 In Donald Trump.

00:41:08.000 That's why there are still these YouTubers and there are still these news outlets that are writing about Donald Trump today.

00:41:13.000 It's amazing!

00:41:14.000 They talk about January 6th almost every single night.

00:41:17.000 I watch CNN and MSNBC every night.

00:41:19.000 They talk about it literally... I don't know, Will watches it with me.

00:41:22.000 Would you say almost every single night?

00:41:24.000 Almost every night?

00:41:25.000 I mean, Rachel Maddow did like 40 minutes on Russia. 0.99

00:41:27.000 Trump-Russia last night.

00:41:29.000 No!

00:41:30.000 What?

00:41:30.000 40 minutes.

00:41:30.000 She talked about Russia, Trump-Russia, and then she talked about... I think it was Duvante Wright she talked about for a little bit?

00:41:38.000 Or it was a shooting?

00:41:39.000 Yeah, there was like 20 minutes of the riots.

00:41:40.000 And then she went back to Russia.

00:41:42.000 So these people have an audience of cultists that they've whipped into a cult over the past several years, and they know if they give them real information that offends them, their minds will explode.

00:41:57.000 So they're like, OK, let's see, we have this trial and the prosecution, expert witness says Chauvin should not have done that.

00:42:02.000 That's great.

00:42:03.000 We'll put that for 10 p.m.

00:42:05.000 or for 10 a.m.

00:42:06.000 Then we have the defense. They said, actually, he should not have done it, but it was part of his

00:42:10.000 training. Let's just throw that in the garbage. And let's this next one says Chauvin was using it 0.97

00:42:15.000 because of force. We'll put that right there. And then, but that's my opinion and not the facts

00:42:20.000 because he was trained to do that and other officers do it as well. Let's throw that one

00:42:22.000 in the garbage. Just the highlights. This is a major part of what's stirring up riots. 0.99

00:42:27.000 You have all of these viewers watching what they think is the facts of the trial.

00:42:32.000 They turn on CNN, MSNBC every single night and then what if he gets off?

00:42:37.000 Well what they've been watching is showing them To them, obviously, he should have been convicted.

00:42:43.000 So, you know, once he gets off, it's like they have more of a reason to go out and riot.

00:42:50.000 Imagine watching a boxing match where they only show you, you know, fighter in the blue shorts, punching the fighter in the red shorts over and over again.

00:42:59.000 You're like, oh, this is brutal.

00:43:00.000 It's over, man.

00:43:01.000 This is, oh, geez.

00:43:03.000 And then all of a sudden they go to call it and they raise the arm of the guy in the red shorts.

00:43:07.000 You're like, He didn't land a single punch!

00:43:09.000 They'll even be like, why does that other guy's face look so busted up?

00:43:13.000 It doesn't matter, he won!

00:43:16.000 And then they riot.

00:43:17.000 They won't even question why it looks like that.

00:43:19.000 Literally, that's how the human mind is built.

00:43:21.000 Or actually, maybe a better way to put it is, like, it's a World Series match.

00:43:24.000 It's, you know, baseball, and it's the, uh, I don't know, I don't know any teams.

00:43:27.000 Give me a team.

00:43:27.000 We've got the White Sox.

00:43:28.000 Cleveland Indians!

00:43:29.000 Do they play against the Sox?

00:43:30.000 They play against the White Sox.

00:43:31.000 No, no, they play against the Cubs.

00:43:32.000 They wouldn't, not in the World Series.

00:43:33.000 The World Series is gonna be National and American League, so.

00:43:35.000 Let's say Cubs.

00:43:36.000 So the Cubs vs. White Sox.

00:43:38.000 What?

00:43:38.000 I guess.

00:43:39.000 They both think it's Chicago.

00:43:40.000 So there's going to be a riot no matter what happens.

00:43:42.000 I mean, it is Chicago.

00:43:43.000 And basically, people are watching.

00:43:46.000 And then they only see the home run scored by the Sox.

00:43:49.000 And they're like, wow.

00:43:51.000 They got eight runs in.

00:43:53.000 They must have won.

00:43:54.000 And then when it turns out the Cubs had nine, they just don't believe it.

00:43:56.000 Like, you're lying.

00:43:57.000 We watched the game.

00:43:58.000 We didn't see any of that.

00:43:58.000 And they go around and destroy everything.

00:44:00.000 Riots, smashing things, and just anger.

00:44:01.000 They're doing it again.

00:44:02.000 So the Dante Wright thing, we were watching it on CNN and MSNBC.

00:44:05.000 They always play the clip and you know what they omit?

00:44:08.000 The part where he's being placed under arrest and then evades and gets back into his car.

00:44:12.000 They cut to begin the thing right after that happens and while he's already back in the car.

00:44:16.000 In, I think it was, it was either 2015 or 16, there was a Trump rally in Janesville, Wisconsin.

00:44:23.000 There was an old man arguing with a young woman.

00:44:27.000 She started screaming, he touched my breast, he touched my breast, he put his hands up and said, I didn't even touch you.

00:44:31.000 Then, she punches him in the face, and someone pepper sprays her. 0.76

00:44:36.000 Mike.com added the most insane edit I've ever seen, because it was within, like, one second where he puts his hands up, then she punches him and gets pepper sprayed. 0.96

00:44:48.000 So they added, like, a flare.

00:44:50.000 A white flash.

00:44:52.000 And all it did was cover up her punching the old man.

00:44:55.000 So all you see her doing is going, he touched my breast.

00:44:57.000 He puts his hands up and then the screen flashes and she's going, ah, getting pepper sprayed. 1.00

00:45:01.000 They literally cut out her punching a guy in the face.

00:45:04.000 She was pepper sprayed in self-defense of others.

00:45:07.000 Yeah.

00:45:07.000 Amazing.

00:45:08.000 What goes through your mind when you're like, I'm going to edit this video and make this woman not punch him. 0.99

00:45:14.000 Why?

00:45:15.000 Because they're like, I'm going to make so much money from this.

00:45:19.000 That's true.

00:45:20.000 Yup.

00:45:21.000 Yeah, I don't know.

00:45:22.000 It's so dangerous.

00:45:23.000 That's the public perception.

00:45:25.000 That's the media landscape.

00:45:26.000 I'll tell you what this results in.

00:45:27.000 Let's jump to this next story because this is where this is what we can we can expect right now.

00:45:30.000 So we so we have this anti-riot law come up.

00:45:32.000 We got this Chauvin trial and we think there's going to be riots.

00:45:35.000 Check out this story from Scriber News.

00:45:37.000 Scriber correspondent attacked while covering protest.

00:45:40.000 This is Kaelin de Almeida.

00:45:43.000 We know him.

00:45:43.000 Yes, a night covering Black Lives Matter Los Angeles protests had peaceful moments, but parts turned to mayhem in the evening hours.

00:45:50.000 Scuffles broke out as a Scriber Field correspondent was attacked.

00:45:54.000 Scriber Field reporter Kaylin D'Almeida was attacked at approximately 10.30 p.m.

00:45:58.000 on Highland Avenue between Hawthorne and Selma in Hollywood.

00:46:01.000 I mean, this video is particularly brutal.

00:46:03.000 I can't play for you the video, but this is a guy who's just doing journalism, and they chase him down.

00:46:09.000 They stalk him.

00:46:10.000 They follow him.

00:46:11.000 They repeatedly, like, shove him, hit him, knock him to the ground.

00:46:14.000 It's particularly bad.

00:46:15.000 My understanding, and I could be wrong, is I believe he got knocked unconscious and, like, left on the ground.

00:46:20.000 Particularly brutal attack.

00:46:22.000 So we have these roving bands of, I guess, terrorists?

00:46:27.000 Vigilantes?

00:46:29.000 No, they're not vigilantes.

00:46:30.000 That's how they see themselves.

00:46:31.000 Criminals who should be in jail. 0.99

00:46:33.000 They view themselves as like righteous superheroes.

00:46:38.000 Criminals who should be in jail. 0.99

00:46:39.000 I don't even know if they see themselves as a resistance.

00:46:42.000 Honestly, I don't even know if they see themselves.

00:46:43.000 You know what I mean?

00:46:44.000 No self-awareness.

00:46:46.000 But I do mean that like how many of these people just don't know.

00:46:50.000 They're just outside bored and then they see a group punching someone so they run up and punch them and they're not thinking anything.

00:46:56.000 Who knows?

00:46:57.000 I don't know.

00:46:57.000 I mean, Antifa would do that stuff.

00:46:59.000 They would love to get up in people's faces.

00:47:03.000 I remember something as simple as when Jack went to that protest at the Lincoln, I think it was the Lincoln statue in D.C., and just had, clearly was just being assaulted by this random Antifa kid, Jason Charter or whatever, who ended up being arrested.

00:47:14.000 Oh yeah, Jack Posobiec.

00:47:15.000 Right.

00:47:15.000 That was a great photo.

00:47:16.000 It was a great photo.

00:47:18.000 But you're just watching it, and it's like, this guy's committing crimes on camera.

00:47:22.000 That's assault.

00:47:23.000 You can't just push people and prevent them from going places.

00:47:26.000 You can't get in people's faces.

00:47:28.000 You're committing crimes on camera, dude.

00:47:30.000 You're gonna get arrested for them.

00:47:31.000 A friend of mine actually texted me about Kalen earlier today and was like, I guess people don't like being recorded while they're committing crimes.

00:47:38.000 That's probably correct.

00:47:43.000 I went to Black Lives Matter Plaza one night and there's a lot of people there and it to me seemed like they were just randomly picking people to kick out.

00:47:54.000 I couldn't really see a pattern of who they were picking, but it kind of seemed like, and it was a very specific group of people, it wasn't everybody there, but it was, you know, a group of people and they would just find someone who was recording and make them leave.

00:48:08.000 I would be fine with, like, a very serious, like, ramping up the penalties for assaulting a journalist.

00:48:13.000 Right?

00:48:14.000 Like, five years.

00:48:15.000 Well, like, how do you define a journalist in that capacity?

00:48:17.000 I mean, well, somebody who's, like, maybe if... I mean, you could probably figure out a way to do it that somebody... if you beat up somebody who's filming you, right?

00:48:25.000 Like, in the middle of a riot or a protest or whatever.

00:48:28.000 Like, that's a five-year count.

00:48:30.000 They chased out CNN.

00:48:32.000 They did, yeah, you're right.

00:48:33.000 And CNN didn't even mention it.

00:48:34.000 Not once.

00:48:36.000 Really?

00:48:36.000 Wow.

00:48:37.000 Not once.

00:48:38.000 Wow. 0.97

00:48:39.000 They're awful.

00:48:41.000 I checked the website.

00:48:43.000 I checked the shows.

00:48:45.000 Not one mentioned.

00:48:46.000 Look, Jeff Zucker is the reality TV guy.

00:48:50.000 Isn't he the Apprentice guy?

00:48:51.000 Yeah, he wanted Trump.

00:48:53.000 Wasn't that him?

00:48:53.000 Yeah, he was the Apprentice guy, wasn't he?

00:48:58.000 I don't know.

00:48:58.000 I don't know. I think so.

00:48:59.000 CNN brought on...

00:49:00.000 Yeah, yeah.

00:49:01.000 Double check me.

00:49:02.000 Double check on that one.

00:49:03.000 I'm pretty sure Zucker was the apprentice guy.

00:49:05.000 He was reality TV for NBC.

00:49:08.000 And CNN brought him on because they were like, listen, you know, here's how I imagine it.

00:49:14.000 You've got the executives, you know, Time Warner, whatever, AT&T, whoever bought CNN.

00:49:19.000 And they're like, we don't want to do news.

00:49:21.000 We just want to be bad people.

00:49:23.000 What's the worst possible thing we can do for humanity?

00:49:26.000 Got it.

00:49:27.000 Let's hire Brian Stelter, Oliver Garcia, and Jeff Zucker to run everything.

00:49:32.000 Did you see the Project Veritas thing with Brian Stelter?

00:49:35.000 Yeah, that was funny.

00:49:36.000 So for those that haven't followed the story, Project Veritas got an amazing exposé.

00:49:42.000 It's a CNN technical director basically saying they're a propaganda network gloating about COVID death, celebrating the numbers.

00:49:48.000 I'm like, that's insane, man.

00:49:50.000 You know what I would love?

00:49:51.000 Talk about Sonic the Hedgehog again.

00:49:53.000 We've done segments about the Falcon and the Winter Soldier because we really want to talk about fun things and argue about inanities instead of this CNN guy gloating about all the dead people means ratings.

00:50:05.000 Well, so James O'Keefe gets suspended from Twitter.

00:50:09.000 They send a journalist to confront Brian Stelter.

00:50:12.000 And Brian Stelter, in the most... What's the right word?

00:50:17.000 It's hard to say. 0.99

00:50:18.000 I want to say a combination of pathetic, And unwillingness to do your job and dishonesty. 0.99

00:50:25.000 Is there a word for that? 0.99

00:50:26.000 Can we make a word for that?

00:50:27.000 Probably a German word, honestly.

00:50:28.000 We'll call it stelter.

00:50:30.000 Steltering?

00:50:30.000 Steltering.

00:50:31.000 Yeah, it's like Rupar.

00:50:32.000 Yeah, yeah, steltering.

00:50:34.000 So this journalist says, do you have a comment?

00:50:37.000 You know, your employee said you're a propaganda network.

00:50:39.000 And he goes, I feel really bad for you.

00:50:42.000 And I'm like, dude, listen, first of all, who explains PR to these people?

00:50:49.000 If I was confronted by somebody, don't you realize that insulting them and yelling at them makes everything worse for you?

00:50:57.000 He could've just been like, I'm not the PR person, I'm not familiar with this guy, I don't really have much to say, and I'm sorry, I wish I did.

00:51:03.000 And then it's like, can you answer this question?

00:51:05.000 Honestly, I really can't.

00:51:07.000 I respect that you're doing journalism, I'm sorry, I- Talk to the networks.

00:51:11.000 The network has a PR arm, you can talk to them if you want, comment on the record.

00:51:15.000 I'd be like, look, you know, I don't really know this guy.

00:51:18.000 He doesn't work on my show.

00:51:20.000 I'm not familiar with his opinions.

00:51:21.000 I disagree with them.

00:51:23.000 I appreciate you guys are trying to get to the bottom of something you think is malfeasance.

00:51:26.000 You're gonna have to talk to CNN's network and get a statement.

00:51:29.000 That's all I can really say.

00:51:29.000 Is that all he said?

00:51:31.000 He didn't say that at all!

00:51:32.000 I'm saying he should have said that! 0.60

00:51:33.000 No, I'm saying is all he said, I feel bad for you.

00:51:35.000 Yes.

00:51:36.000 Wow.

00:51:37.000 Twice he said it.

00:51:38.000 And then he's like looking at security and going like...

00:51:41.000 Get this parole away from me.

00:51:46.000 So I look at this guy, um, you know, uh, Caitlin, he gets brutally beaten in the quest to film and give the public a view into what these people are doing in the, in the process of being beaten.

00:52:01.000 He's still done that.

00:52:02.000 He's shown, you know, the country and the world who these people really are.

00:52:06.000 I love how the activists like to say the whole world is watching.

00:52:08.000 They just chanted a whole lot.

00:52:09.000 They don't really chant it all that much, but.

00:52:11.000 The world is watching.

00:52:13.000 And they can see these people for who they are.

00:52:15.000 But you won't see that.

00:52:16.000 You won't learn these things on CNN.

00:52:18.000 Because Brian Stalter is too busy complaining about Tucker Carlson's opinions.

00:52:23.000 Opinions he's allowed to have.

00:52:24.000 Opinions that are decently influential.

00:52:26.000 Opinions that only passively affect policy.

00:52:30.000 And that's his show.

00:52:31.000 That's CNN. 0.97

00:52:33.000 You have these people at CNN who brag about being liars, manipulators, fearmongers. 0.97

00:52:39.000 And they're millionaires for it. 0.96

00:52:40.000 I can't stand that guy, Brian Stelter.

00:52:42.000 And there are not a lot of people I can't stand.

00:52:44.000 I'm pretty open, but like Mitch McConnell and Brian Stelter, I can't stand.

00:52:48.000 That's a weird combination of names.

00:52:50.000 How are those guys in any position of power only by name recognition?

00:52:55.000 Did CNN still stelt that guy up?

00:52:59.000 Well, I mean, look, look, for Mitch McConnell, You know, growing up as a young turtle in a sewer who was exposed to the ooze.

00:53:06.000 Oh, he got the mutagen. 0.59

00:53:07.000 After he was, you know, retired, he went to a life of politics, and his notoriety as a ninja turtle really, really helped him.

00:53:16.000 And as for Stelter, little known that when the ninja turtles were doused in the ooze, someone had thrown some potatoes into the gutter, and the ooze hit that as well.

00:53:27.000 I don't really understand that.

00:53:29.000 That's pretty much it, yeah.

00:53:30.000 I don't take him seriously, but that's a problem.

00:53:31.000 Because sometimes if you just ignore people and mock them, they become very dangerous.

00:53:36.000 Well, it's like, in a normal world, he would be like this fringe lunatic who'd be struggling for any airtime.

00:53:42.000 He'd be like Alex Jones. 0.85

00:53:44.000 You'd see him and be like, oh, that's a horrible disinformation.

00:53:46.000 He would be like Alex Jones?

00:53:47.000 Right.

00:53:48.000 Or treated like Alex Jones is currently treated.

00:53:49.000 Exactly.

00:53:50.000 That's a better way to put it.

00:53:50.000 Because he is!

00:53:51.000 Right.

00:53:52.000 No, no, right like I think I mean if you that's a fair Alex Jones exactly

00:53:56.000 I think that's a very unfair comparison. I didn't I mean and I'm sorry Alex

00:53:59.000 I didn't mean to you know, but you dare to be ostracized by society, right?

00:54:03.000 He'd be ostracized by society. He'd be you know struggling to even get work. He'd be struggling to stay on platforms

00:54:08.000 Because people would be like wow, this guy's super dishonest and spreading disinformation constantly

00:54:12.000 And I feel that way constantly like there's so many things that the left does and it's like I just imagine if you were

00:54:18.000 you Know I think about the kind of lot tightrope. I have to

00:54:21.000 walk to keep my platform And I'm like you guys can just do the most absurd fake news

00:54:26.000 all the time I mean, the Russian bounty story.

00:54:28.000 Amazing.

00:54:29.000 Election disinformation, right?

00:54:31.000 If the right had something like that and it was revealed, everybody who promulgated it would have been deplatformed.

00:54:36.000 Yep.

00:54:37.000 Imagine how it works with the fact checkers.

00:54:39.000 I'll tell you a story.

00:54:42.000 There was a guy, uh, the AP published a story.

00:54:45.000 There was some guy who took credit for some action.

00:54:48.000 And I said, based on my investigation, and, and, you know, I did preliminary, preliminary investigation.

00:54:52.000 This is fake news.

00:54:53.000 The AP is publishing, you know, bunk information.

00:54:56.000 YouTube deleted my video saying it was like a guidelines, like community violation.

00:55:01.000 I don't know the exact reason because I wasn't given a legitimate one.

00:55:04.000 It was, you know, community guidelines violation.

00:55:05.000 And then two days later, I think it was, or a day later, the AP issued a retraction saying,

00:55:09.000 we were wrong, here's what really happened, and it backed up my story, and then YouTube

00:55:12.000 reinstated my video.

00:55:14.000 The assumption is that the AP must be correct, and Tim Pool, random YouTuber, must be wrong.

00:55:18.000 Meanwhile, we're the ones fact-checking the establishment.

00:55:20.000 They call those gatekeepers.

00:55:21.000 And they're very dangerous for a free and open society.

00:55:26.000 I'm down with this backflip thing.

00:55:27.000 an intern who writes an article that says Ian Crosland did a backflip.

00:55:32.000 We're back on the Ian Crosland does things.

00:55:34.000 I'm down with this backflip thing.

00:55:35.000 And then I come out as someone who knows Ian and say, this is just not true.

00:55:42.000 Don't defame me, Tim.

00:55:44.000 The fact checkers will say, Tim Poole lied and published false information.

00:55:48.000 ABC News reported this happened.

00:55:50.000 And if I would say, no, Tim is right, ABC lied, they'd be like, Ian Crosland is not a credible source.

00:55:55.000 That's right.

00:55:55.000 They'd say he's lying to defend himself.

00:55:57.000 So the point is, when CNN, NBC or ABC or MSNBC or any of these outlets make a claim, it is assumed to be true no matter what.

00:56:06.000 With or without sources.

00:56:07.000 Here's what I love about Veritas.

00:56:08.000 James O'Keefe literally posts a video where it's a guy saying that CNN is propaganda.

00:56:15.000 And they're like, that's deceptively edited.

00:56:17.000 Meanwhile, the New York Times is like, a source familiar with how Trump thinks believes that Trump wants to kick a puppy.

00:56:24.000 And that's like a headline story.

00:56:25.000 Because what, some guy in an alley was ranting about he can read Trump's mind?

00:56:29.000 That's fact news, though.

00:56:30.000 Remember that video I took of the Trump worker being kicked out of the polling place?

00:56:35.000 The poll watcher.

00:56:36.000 That got fact-checked into oblivion.

00:56:37.000 Nobody ever called me.

00:56:38.000 And the fact-checks were wrong.

00:56:40.000 They were all like, he was let in later.

00:56:41.000 False.

00:56:42.000 He was not.

00:56:42.000 He never went back.

00:56:43.000 I was with him all day.

00:56:43.000 So, some context.

00:56:45.000 During Election Day, you were there, and you filmed a poll watcher being removed.

00:56:51.000 Or being barred entry.

00:56:52.000 Yeah, being refused entry into a polling place.

00:56:54.000 We need a certificate that guaranteed him, that gave him the right to enter any polling place in the city of Philadelphia.

00:56:59.000 They wouldn't let him in.

00:57:00.000 They wouldn't let him in.

00:57:01.000 Fact checkers claimed you were lying.

00:57:03.000 Fact-checkers claimed... First, there was one fact-checker who claimed I was just lying, that the guy didn't have the right to be there.

00:57:08.000 False.

00:57:09.000 Then, fact-checkers later claimed, based on a report, they called the city, and the city said, oh, this guy was let back in.

00:57:16.000 They didn't call us.

00:57:17.000 I have a Twitter account.

00:57:18.000 You could reach out and say, was he ever let back in?

00:57:21.000 Because the answer was, no, he never was let back in.

00:57:24.000 Oh, sorry to interrupt.

00:57:26.000 I was going to say it's funny to think how much people actually lie, but it's not funny.

00:57:31.000 I'm not laughing about it, but it's so prevalent.

00:57:35.000 I don't think about it because I don't lie during the day.

00:57:37.000 For the most part, I'm honest, but It's just so common.

00:57:42.000 You know why people are scared of James O'Keefe?

00:57:44.000 Because they're gonna get caught lying.

00:57:46.000 Yeah, and you know who's not scared of James O'Keefe?

00:57:48.000 Me!

00:57:49.000 Anybody, everybody here, we've hung out with him because the things we say in the show are the things we say in real life.

00:57:54.000 There's no secret words like, okay James, here's what we really think.

00:57:57.000 No, it's like, I invite him on to tell him what I really think.

00:58:00.000 Yeah, we all say our opinions.

00:58:03.000 I do recognize there's a problem in that, in the digital space, certain opinions are banned, and we're lucky enough to have opinions that fall into the right area.

00:58:12.000 But when I'm talking with anybody, from the left or the right, I say the same things I say on here as I say off the show.

00:58:19.000 The only difference is I won't say people, like I'll avoid saying someone's name if they're like a, you know, certain individuals to avoid causing, you know, like a brigade or something.

00:58:28.000 I'll say people's names privately because it's not going to, you know, go out into the ether and then cause someone to get a bunch of emails or something.

00:58:35.000 That's about it.

00:58:36.000 You know, a lot of people are scared of it.

00:58:39.000 This deception world is crazy that like the city would tell, say that he came back just Yeah, and they didn't check up with us.

00:58:46.000 I mean, I think some other poll watcher eventually went back to that polling place, but it wasn't the one that was in the video, because I was with them all day.

00:58:52.000 And they just reported that as true without reaching out to us.

00:58:55.000 And I mean, the fact that the original fact checks were wrong, I mean, it was really embarrassing for them.

00:59:00.000 Even like when you call the bank and you're like, I have an overdraft fee.

00:59:03.000 Can you help me?

00:59:03.000 They're like, I can't.

00:59:05.000 They're lying to you.

00:59:06.000 Of course they can.

00:59:07.000 And then if you push them a little bit and say, can I talk to your manager?

00:59:09.000 They'll go, OK, hold one second.

00:59:11.000 Oh, hello, Mr. Croson.

00:59:12.000 I was able to take that charge off.

00:59:14.000 I want to talk about Project Veritas, because I mentioned this a bit yesterday, a bit earlier today, but I really do think that what they're doing is probably the most consequential and important, whatever you want to call it, fighting battles that anyone in the culture war is doing.

00:59:33.000 Because James is not only doing the investigations, publishing videos of people saying these things, he's fighting the legal battles.

00:59:40.000 Suing CNN, now he's going to be suing Twitter.

00:59:50.000 He's not backing down.

00:59:51.000 He is going nuclear and he's doing so much more than anyone else is willing to do.

00:59:55.000 He's willing to just refuse to bend the knee in any capacity and there are so many people that I get mad at these cops in the Minneapolis area who can see what's happening with Show and his other cops, and they're like, well, I'm gonna stay here.

01:00:07.000 It's fine.

01:00:08.000 I'm not gonna stand up.

01:00:09.000 I'm not gonna speak out.

01:00:10.000 Because a lot of cops did.

01:00:11.000 They quit.

01:00:11.000 They refused.

01:00:12.000 We had this story people mentioned.

01:00:13.000 I think it was in Denver, I guess.

01:00:15.000 Like 20 cops were like, nope, we out.

01:00:17.000 But some of these cops were like, I'll keep my head down and say nothing.

01:00:20.000 James is the opposite of that.

01:00:21.000 That's why I respect him.

01:00:22.000 Because he's like, I'm gonna stand up and scream twice as loud now.

01:00:25.000 So let's talk about this.

01:00:26.000 I have a question for you, Will.

01:00:30.000 In the New York Times lawsuit with Veritas, the judge said, so the New York Times filed a motion to dismiss, saying that their reporters were making opinions which are unactionable, and the judge said, if you have a fact-based news story and your reporters interject their opinions, it stands to reason you should inform your readers of that.

01:00:52.000 For one, I'm curious of your opinions on his ruling and what that might mean, but does this in any way set precedent that we could use moving forward?

01:00:58.000 I mean, a New York state court opinion is weak precedent, generally, because it's a New York judge applying New York defamation law in a New York court.

01:01:09.000 But it works for New York?

01:01:11.000 I mean, it probably works in federal district court.

01:01:12.000 It's also not an appellate court ruling, which really, if you actually want precedent that binds future courts and really influences courts far and wide, a single state district judge is not going to do it, generally.

01:01:25.000 That said, I think this could go up on appeal and you could get an appellate opinion from the New York, because I assume the New York Times is going to appeal this if they don't settle it.

01:01:35.000 And I think it could be valuable there.

01:01:36.000 I think it's just generally, I mean, it's a great opinion though, and it provides a sort of template for how to approach these things when the New York Times does this in the future, or any other outlet does it.

01:01:45.000 I mean, that's a very persuasive point.

01:01:47.000 Like, you don't get to suddenly claim you're an opinion outlet when you're writing a news article and then saying somebody is deceptive and misinforming people.

01:01:54.000 I've had a lot of lawyers tell me this, that when a news article smears me, it's an opinion.

01:01:58.000 And I'm like, how does someone claim to be fact-based, real news, publish opinion pieces and get away with it without any accountability?

01:02:08.000 Even then, remember, he just got passed a motion to dismiss.

01:02:10.000 He's still got to prove actual malice.

01:02:12.000 I mean, he's alleged it.

01:02:14.000 And I think there was a circumstance where, you know, for some reason, the timing of—in particular, I think it was the timing of this article and how quickly it went up.

01:02:23.000 Right, it was like within 63 minutes.

01:02:25.000 Within 63 minutes or something, that was what the judge used to infer actual malice, and infer that they didn't even have time to try, and yet they still published it anyway.

01:02:32.000 The New York Times, I think they claimed that if you read James' Wikipedia, that shows that he has no ability to sue anyone at any point because he is so defamed.

01:02:43.000 It's an interesting argument because I get it, right?

01:02:46.000 The average person sees this and assumes all of these things are true and correct.

01:02:50.000 So that brings me to the Wikipedia argument where if Wikipedia is claiming that sex— like, we got very serious problems right now.

01:02:57.000 I guess the issue is James is, like, one of the few people going to war.

01:03:02.000 Like, where's everybody else?

01:03:03.000 I don't know how else you, you, you, you, you know, rally the troops.

01:03:06.000 Well, for just a little help, pull up Bill Ayers' Wikipedia.

01:03:08.000 I don't know if you guys can do that.

01:03:10.000 Oh, yeah.

01:03:10.000 This is the guy from the Weather Underground.

01:03:11.000 This is the Weather Underground Terrorist, right?

01:03:13.000 Weather Underground Terrorist.

01:03:14.000 Weather Underground Terrorist.

01:03:16.000 Excuse me, Will.

01:03:18.000 Excuse me.

01:03:19.000 William Charles Ayers is an American elementary education theorist.

01:03:24.000 Oh.

01:03:24.000 Oh, yeah.

01:03:25.000 And he was a leader of a militant group described by the FBI as a terrorist group that opposed to his involvement in the Vietnam War.

01:03:33.000 He is known for his 1960s radical activism and his later work in education reform curriculum and instruction.

01:03:39.000 Oh he is?

01:03:41.000 That's what he's known for?

01:03:43.000 Not setting off bombs all over the country?

01:03:45.000 And they say Project Veritas is a far-right activist group that engages in disinformation.

01:03:51.000 You're talking about Enrique Atario, the chairman of the Proud Boys, a far-right neo-fascist and male-only white nationalist that promotes and engages in political violence?

01:03:59.000 That sounds right, yeah.

01:04:01.000 Not setting off bombs, by the way.

01:04:03.000 How many bombs has Enrique Atario set off?

01:04:05.000 Zero.

01:04:06.000 It does say in the next paragraph he engaged in a campaign of bombing public buildings, including police stations, the US Capitol, and the Pentagon.

01:04:13.000 Secondary.

01:04:14.000 Wow!

01:04:14.000 Thanks for bringing that to my attention in the second paragraph.

01:04:18.000 Why doesn't it say, William Charles Ayers is a far-left terrorist and conspiracy theorist who is most known for engaging in terroristic plots and insurrection against the United States?

01:04:29.000 That would be pretty accurate.

01:04:30.000 Yeah.

01:04:31.000 Or at least, like, you gotta have the same sort of neutralizing, like, I mean, I've seen so many people on our side who have Wikipedia profiles that begin just like the one about Enrique Tarrio.

01:04:39.000 Far-right's an opinion!

01:04:40.000 It's, yeah, it's an immediately it's an opinion.

01:04:42.000 Listen, saying William Charles Ayer is an American elementary educational theorist is a fact.

01:04:50.000 You can argue some of it's an opinion, like, what does it mean to be a theorist?

01:04:52.000 But no, like, he does that.

01:04:53.000 Yes.

01:04:53.000 You could also say he's a terrorist.

01:04:55.000 That's also a fact.

01:04:56.000 Also true.

01:04:56.000 But if you said he was far left, far right, you know, or whatever, they say self-described communist.

01:05:03.000 You know why?

01:05:04.000 Because calling him a communist could be an opinion.

01:05:07.000 As they say, he was a co-founder of the Weather Underground, a self-described communist revolutionary group.

01:05:14.000 They're very careful when it comes to Bill Ayers.

01:05:16.000 With everyone else, from people like Mike Cernovich, Jack Posobiec, or Project Veritas, James O'Keefe, they assert a bunch of opinions.

01:05:22.000 They're deceptive, they're misleading, they're conspiracy theorists, they're far-right, none of which are statements of fact.

01:05:27.000 Why is Wikipedia engaging in opinion articles about people?

01:05:32.000 It's 2.30.

01:05:32.000 2.30 is so broad.

01:05:34.000 And I mean, this is actually one area where I think I really think we could do without 2.30.

01:05:38.000 I mean, I think, you know, or very much narrow it so that like, you know, Wikipedia, OK, it has its little it has its pages and people can access them if they want.

01:05:47.000 But if they show up on Google searches, which they do, then that's Wikipedia publishing them.

01:05:51.000 So they're they're now liable for whatever.

01:05:53.000 I made this argument the other day.

01:05:56.000 This bill, this let me let me pull up James O'Keefe.

01:06:00.000 This is going to be good.

01:06:01.000 Well, we showed this the other day.

01:06:02.000 We'll pull up James.

01:06:04.000 He's an American conservative political activist and provocateur.

01:06:07.000 What's a provocateur?

01:06:07.000 That's an opinion.

01:06:09.000 What has he done that can be definitively stated as being a provocateur?

01:06:13.000 He's a journalist.

01:06:15.000 American journalist.

01:06:15.000 The investigative journalist.

01:06:17.000 Has James ever called himself a conservative activist?

01:06:20.000 I don't think so.

01:06:21.000 I don't think he's ever referred to himself that way.

01:06:23.000 Not to me.

01:06:23.000 I don't think he's ever referred to himself as an activist.

01:06:25.000 I mean, again, Bill Ayers bombed federal buildings.

01:06:29.000 James O'Keefe filmed people saying some things they wish they didn't.

01:06:34.000 One's a far-right activist.

01:06:35.000 Or they're both activists in this respect.

01:06:37.000 But one is first off defined as being an education theorist.

01:06:41.000 So here's the point I brought up the other day.

01:06:43.000 Wikipedia right here.

01:06:46.000 Whose name is next to this statement?

01:06:48.000 Wikipedia.

01:06:50.000 In a comment section, for which Section 230 is designed, the username appears.

01:06:55.000 On Twitter, your picture and your username appears.

01:06:57.000 On Facebook, your profile picture, your name appears.

01:07:00.000 On Wikipedia, it says, Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

01:07:03.000 James O'Keefe, from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

01:07:06.000 Let me stop right there.

01:07:08.000 The article says, from Wikipedia.

01:07:13.000 I rest my case, your honor.

01:07:15.000 I mean, I think, you know, as I was saying before, I think 230 has been interpreted broadly enough by the courts that

01:07:21.000 it would probably be a defense to any lawsuit based on this stuff.

01:07:25.000 But if so, you're saying if I write an article, if I publish an article, if, okay, let's slow down.

01:07:30.000 On TimCast.com, I take the comments from people under a video.

01:07:34.000 I then take the text, right, put it all as an article and then put TimCast.com. This article is from TimCast.com and

01:07:41.000 it says all of these insane things. They can't sue me?

01:07:45.000 I mean, it depends.

01:07:47.000 I mean, they could sue me, but I could argue section 230.

01:07:49.000 This is user-generated content.

01:07:51.000 Yeah, I mean, I think you probably, I mean, the way that it's been interpreted, I think you'd probably be safe.

01:07:56.000 I mean, it's been, it's a very, very broad grant of immunity.

01:07:59.000 I don't think we need it.

01:08:00.000 I'm sorry.

01:08:01.000 Like, I know it would very much disrupt Wikipedia's current model where, you know, and I'm like, good.

01:08:05.000 It's, it's a defamation engine.

01:08:07.000 That's what it is.

01:08:07.000 Okay.

01:08:07.000 I have a question for anybody.

01:08:10.000 So 230 means that social media companies are not liable for what people say on their site, correct?

01:08:17.000 So if you take that away, wouldn't that lead to more censorship?

01:08:21.000 Because if they're liable for what people say, then take more of it off.

01:08:26.000 Theoretically, yes.

01:08:27.000 It could mean that Twitter can't exist unless Twitter vets the people who are posting, and it might revert back to everyone having their own website, which might be something better.

01:08:36.000 I mean, the thing that Ian and I have been talking about for the past, I guess, what, three or four weeks?

01:08:41.000 Yeah.

01:08:42.000 Is people having their own websites with open source networking technology built in.

01:08:47.000 So that if you have, you know, humanevents.com, you can install this plugin, which creates a networking function where you can choose what to exclude from, you know, people who are redirected.

01:08:57.000 But it basically creates this recommendation system so that I'll say, I definitely want to have human events recommended in the networking tab of TimCast.com.

01:09:05.000 And it creates a social media function on my website.

01:09:09.000 I mean, I'd be okay with just a narrowed 230 that essentially allows Twitter and Facebook to continue their current business model, assuming they don't, they knock off the censorship.

01:09:18.000 And then also, but also like really puts the screws to Wikipedia, right?

01:09:21.000 You know, cause I think, I think there's something particularly damaging about Wikipedia posturing as an encyclopedia that is authoritative and yet it is just an engine of defamation.

01:09:29.000 It's an opinion aggregator.

01:09:32.000 But my main point is the other day I was saying that if, you know, I mentioned like your username appears next to what you say, we say that's definitively from you.

01:09:41.000 What Wikipedia does is it takes the opinions, opinions, literally opinions, framing and opinions of random people, But then it publishes them to a front facing page that says Wikipedia on top.

01:09:54.000 And some of these articles, notably the James O'Keefe article, is protected.

01:09:58.000 That means Wikipedia has decided the general public is not allowed to edit this.

01:10:01.000 Only their select group of individuals.

01:10:04.000 So what's defining this as user generated?

01:10:06.000 That they're not paying these people?

01:10:08.000 That's it?

01:10:09.000 Yeah, I mean, what do you think?

01:10:11.000 Who's got plenty of time?

01:10:13.000 So I can have users, three of them, come over to the studio, and I'll say, anyone is allowed to write on this website, so long as you're a pre-approved user who's not getting paid, and they can write whatever they want, and I can't be sued over it.

01:10:29.000 That's an amazing standard.

01:10:31.000 The main issue, though, is, sure, maybe someone argues, yeah, but everything on the page is a user in the back end.

01:10:39.000 It says, from Wikipedia.

01:10:41.000 It doesn't say, from user JohnSmith123.

01:10:44.000 It doesn't say, from Ian Crossland.

01:10:46.000 It literally says, James O'Keefe, from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

01:10:50.000 They are asserting, they are the people speaking these statements.

01:10:53.000 Yeah.

01:10:54.000 James, sue them!

01:10:56.000 I mean, well, we need to rewrite 230 so that it doesn't cover this.

01:11:01.000 How could it cover you saying, I wrote this?

01:11:04.000 It shouldn't.

01:11:05.000 You're saying it does?

01:11:07.000 I'm pretty sure that under current case law, it does.

01:11:11.000 So what if I said, oh, won't someone write me this article claiming that Ian did a backflip?

01:11:21.000 It's just user-generated content!

01:11:24.000 I mean, you know, maybe that's a little bit closer to the edge because you could be construed to be actively soliciting a defamatory content.

01:11:32.000 I don't know.

01:11:33.000 I hope no one writes that Ian did a backflip.

01:11:36.000 Still, same thing.

01:11:37.000 So what if I say we allow everyone to submit through the website's forms, like Wikipedia, whatever they want, and then we arbitrarily just publish some of them.

01:11:46.000 Boop boop boop. 1.00

01:11:48.000 I don't know.

01:11:48.000 Good question.

01:11:49.000 I need to be deeper on current 230.

01:11:53.000 230 does not draw a distinction.

01:11:55.000 No, it doesn't.

01:11:55.000 If you're a platform, you have specific protections.

01:11:59.000 But if you're a publisher... No.

01:12:02.000 Those words don't appear anywhere in Section 230.

01:12:04.000 Well, it's that you're not the speaker of the content, that's what it says.

01:12:08.000 Right, and Wikipedia's acting as the speaker of the content in this case.

01:12:12.000 I'm paraphrasing, but online digital platforms cannot be held liable for content provided by users of that platform.

01:12:19.000 And then it also adds another provision saying, You cannot hold a website responsible for the speech of its users if they're acting in good faith to remove, lewd, lascivious, or otherwise objectionable content.

01:12:31.000 It's a slight tweak on that.

01:12:33.000 It's that they're not liable for that removal, right?

01:12:36.000 Good faith removal is they're also shielded from liability for that.

01:12:40.000 So they're allowed to moderate.

01:12:42.000 They're allowed to remove things they don't like.

01:12:45.000 And they're allowed to literally publish things, but it's not their opinion, so it's fine.

01:12:53.000 Is it for any website?

01:12:55.000 Or is this just any social network?

01:12:57.000 Any.

01:12:57.000 Every.

01:12:57.000 All of them.

01:12:57.000 I don't think that these contributors or users... This should protect the New York Times.

01:13:01.000 It protects the New York Times from their comments section.

01:13:03.000 No, no, no.

01:13:03.000 Why wouldn't it protect an article?

01:13:06.000 An article is like, that's actually the New York Times speaking, right?

01:13:10.000 Well, what's the difference between the New York Times publishing an article on Wikipedia saying, from Wikipedia?

01:13:15.000 It's an employee of the New York Times who's actually writing the content.

01:13:18.000 This is great.

01:13:19.000 This means I can start a newspaper and just not pay people?

01:13:22.000 People would love to write for me, and then I can't ever be sued?

01:13:24.000 Well, I mean, you can just put the pages on the website and let people write, you know, and not... Well, well, look, the goal is, like, with Wikipedia, they put protection on these articles, so only their select people can make changes.

01:13:35.000 Yeah, I mean, I think that's an interesting argument.

01:13:37.000 I wonder if that's been tried.

01:13:38.000 It's like, we're deep into 230 law now, and I'm not a...

01:13:42.000 I know a decent amount about 230, but I'm not deep enough about the finer points of when something is protected and when it's not.

01:13:49.000 All right.

01:13:49.000 How about we just start a fund, raise a couple million dollars, and then just launch a volley of lawsuits based on Wikipedia claiming the articles are from Wikipedia?

01:13:57.000 Let's just write some new state laws.

01:14:00.000 Texas has got a great law that's on the books right now.

01:14:03.000 It basically says if you wrongfully censor someone for their political beliefs, you're liable.

01:14:06.000 They can walk into court, get an injunction.

01:14:08.000 That's great.

01:14:08.000 And get an attorney's fees.

01:14:10.000 But how do you deal with the defamation machine?

01:14:13.000 The defamation machine, I think... Smear merchants. 1.00

01:14:16.000 I think you just need to amend the law that basically says if you amplify or redirect the comments, basically what... I think a world where Wikipedia was just a webpage where people could post and that's all that happened, right?

01:14:28.000 I would be able to say, okay, you're protected from liability for what people post since you're just opening it up to the world.

01:14:33.000 But the moment Wikipedia is redirecting information about Wikipedia entries to Google, okay, now you're speaking.

01:14:38.000 Right. You're adopting these views now.

01:14:40.000 And so I don't know how to you know I think you could probably write a law.

01:14:44.000 It would be tricky to do it.

01:14:45.000 But in general you're not going to get it at the federal level.

01:14:47.000 Yeah. I mean not not anytime soon.

01:14:51.000 And the state law can't conflict with federal law, too, so that particular law couldn't be done at the state level, right?

01:14:57.000 If it conflicts with existing federal law revolving around Section 230, there's the Supremacy Clause, right?

01:15:05.000 The federal government can't legislate everywhere, but when it does, state law can't conflict with it.

01:15:09.000 So I guess we need, uh, we, we can't wait for these laws to get passed.

01:15:14.000 I mean, look, taxes might be doing that, but.

01:15:17.000 I mean, we can, we can try suits, but I don't think the suits will work.

01:15:20.000 Right.

01:15:20.000 I really think this is one of those cases.

01:15:22.000 Sometimes the federal government writes a law that, you know, insulates people from liability.

01:15:26.000 And the only way to be able to sue them in the future is to get that law repealed.

01:15:29.000 All right, so someone needs to call Ron DeSantis and be like, can you guys do this please?

01:15:34.000 They're doing that censorship bill.

01:15:36.000 They're doing a good censorship bill.

01:15:37.000 I think the Texas one's a little better.

01:15:39.000 Texas one's a little more focused on protecting just average citizens.

01:15:43.000 The Florida one was focused on political candidates, if I remember correctly, and didn't provide a broad private right of action for citizens who were censored.

01:15:50.000 Texas has got it nailed down.

01:15:51.000 Texas is doing it exactly right.

01:15:53.000 When can we expect that, do you know?

01:15:55.000 I think it's working its way through the... I don't know.

01:15:57.000 I'm not exactly sure.

01:15:58.000 It might have passed already.

01:15:59.000 I don't know.

01:16:00.000 I mean, I know that it was... Governor of Texas announced his support for it.

01:16:04.000 And I think it was... If... I gotta be honest.

01:16:07.000 If Texas passes that law, some soon, I think we might relocate there.

01:16:11.000 I think it's a strong possibility we would relocate there.

01:16:14.000 Oh, yeah.

01:16:15.000 I mean, that would be the state where you'd actually have protections.

01:16:17.000 Now, again, there's another interesting problem, which is, does 230 preempt that too?

01:16:22.000 Because 230 says you have this liability shield for good-faith removal, and Texas is saying, no you don't, effectively.

01:16:28.000 Like, private citizens can sue you if you censor their political beliefs.

01:16:32.000 Now, you know, maybe there's no tension there because good faith might not be political censorship.

01:16:36.000 That's one avenue.

01:16:37.000 Yeah.

01:16:37.000 But there's also Justice Thomas had that opinion a few, like a week ago.

01:16:41.000 I don't remember exactly what day it came out.

01:16:43.000 Oh, yeah.

01:16:43.000 But he made an interesting argument that he says, actually, if a federal law preempts a state law that is granting people free speech rights, the federal law has a First Amendment problem.

01:16:56.000 So are 230.

01:16:58.000 Interesting.

01:16:59.000 So 230 as applied to try and Overturn a state law that protects people's right to speak online, as applied, that might fall apart on a First Amendment challenge.

01:17:10.000 That hasn't been tested at all, but literally that whole opinion was just Clarence Thomas being like, hey states, here's how you can protect people if you want to try, and here's some ways that this will survive legally.

01:17:21.000 Interesting.

01:17:23.000 Yeah.

01:17:23.000 So I need to find out more about this because I got to be honest, you know, a lot of people are moving to Texas.

01:17:28.000 I've got, you know, I just did a quick Google search.

01:17:31.000 Texas Senate Committee heard legislation on Monday aiming to prohibit social media platforms from censoring users based on their viewpoints.

01:17:37.000 Senate Bill SB 12, filed by Senator Brian Hughes of Mineola.

01:17:42.000 Let's pop this open and see what we got here.

01:17:44.000 Introduced Senate Committee report engrossed.

01:17:48.000 Uh, I don't know what any of that means.

01:17:49.000 I'll have to look into this.

01:17:50.000 But, uh, I gotta be honest.

01:17:53.000 Like, we got a big operation going on here.

01:17:55.000 Here's the thing, though.

01:17:57.000 If Texas offers up these protections, we have no choice but to move there.

01:18:01.000 You know why?

01:18:03.000 My business could be shut down overnight.

01:18:04.000 Yeah.

01:18:05.000 These platforms could just nuke us. 0.90

01:18:07.000 Overnight.

01:18:08.000 Everybody loses their jobs.

01:18:10.000 Go to Texas, we have recourse.

01:18:13.000 I would have no choice, if this bill passes, to do that.

01:18:16.000 Well, I guess I'll need to move too.

01:18:17.000 I guess we'll all need to move.

01:18:19.000 I think most people would go to Texas.

01:18:21.000 I mean, you know, there is interesting things about D.C.

01:18:24.000 with, you know, political viewpoint, political party or affiliation is a protected class.

01:18:29.000 But that doesn't do anything about big tech.

01:18:31.000 No, I don't think so.

01:18:32.000 I mean, and this is what, you know, the funny thing is, I remember two years ago, I've been advocating for exactly this type of law.

01:18:36.000 I was hoping we'd get it done at the federal level.

01:18:38.000 But, man, if we can get it at the state level, and, you know, we get some friendly judges who look at it the same way Thomas does, right?

01:18:44.000 Federal preemption of a state-created speech right.

01:18:48.000 That's fascinating.

01:18:51.000 I think Twitter and Facebook and YouTube would probably at that point stop censoring everybody because they wouldn't want to risk somebody being in Texas and having a cause of action.

01:19:02.000 So let's say you're in Texas.

01:19:04.000 They pass this bill.

01:19:05.000 It becomes law.

01:19:06.000 The governor signs it.

01:19:07.000 You get censored.

01:19:09.000 And so you immediately go into a court, file the paperwork or whatever.

01:19:12.000 What would you say?

01:19:12.000 You'd file an injunction?

01:19:13.000 So you file a complaint, right?

01:19:16.000 Any lawsuit begins with a complaint, and then you also file a motion for a preliminary injunction.

01:19:20.000 Which gives you your accounts back.

01:19:22.000 Right, like if you win that motion, you get your account back.

01:19:25.000 That could be really quickly, couldn't it?

01:19:26.000 Yeah, I mean, injunctions can get heard very fast.

01:19:28.000 Sometimes there's temporary restraining orders that are super fast, but then a preliminary injunction can happen.

01:19:33.000 You can get a decision on that within weeks if you want.

01:19:35.000 So let me ask.

01:19:36.000 Let's say I'm in Texas, and we're doing the show, and then one day, boom, YouTube's gone.

01:19:42.000 So, I file a complaint and I request an emergency injunction because my business is now at risk and all of my employees could be out of work unless this is reversed.

01:19:52.000 You think it's likely a judge would say, reverse this until we can hear the case?

01:19:57.000 Probably.

01:19:58.000 They would probably issue, you know, you'd probably win your injunction given the nature of the law.

01:20:01.000 And then, right, once you win your injunction they have to let you keep your account until, I would assume, until it's adjudicated.

01:20:08.000 Now, then they say, but section 230 grants us this immunity, right?

01:20:14.000 Let's say that the, so who would hear that case?

01:20:17.000 Would it go to a federal court then?

01:20:18.000 So, I mean, they could, so it depends.

01:20:20.000 I mean, if they could probably remove it to federal court, right?

01:20:23.000 Like it's a, there's enough money at issue.

01:20:24.000 That would be what's called diversity jurisdiction.

01:20:26.000 So two bases of federal court jurisdiction.

01:20:29.000 This is one, one else learned their first day of civil procedure.

01:20:32.000 Okay.

01:20:33.000 Two bases of federal court jurisdiction.

01:20:35.000 Either there has to be a federal question, meaning it's a federal, you're suing under a federal law, or there's diversity jurisdiction, which means the parties are from different states and there's at least $75,000 at issue.

01:20:45.000 So this would be a state law, so it wouldn't be a, probably wouldn't be a federal question, although they might make a First Amendment claim.

01:20:51.000 I'm not exactly, I'd have to reread my work to think about how that would work.

01:20:54.000 But it's certainly diversity, so they could remove it into federal court in Texas.

01:20:57.000 So let's say, in the federal court, the judge hears it and says, I understand Section 230, but we have a free speech issue where the First Amendment is supposed to protect the rights of the individual, and if Texas is protecting the speech rights, the First Amendment can't supersede that, so I rule in favor of the complainant, right?

01:21:15.000 Right.

01:21:16.000 They sue, it goes to the Supreme Court, I'd imagine.

01:21:19.000 If it goes, it could potentially.

01:21:22.000 I'd actually have to think about whether or not they'd have the right to appeal at that point, if you have an injunction granted.

01:21:28.000 I think you probably would have the right to appeal that right away.

01:21:31.000 So let's say YouTube then appeals.

01:21:33.000 You'd appeal that to the Federal Appeals Court, so that would be the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.

01:21:38.000 Then they would have a fairly quick hearing on the injunction.

01:21:43.000 And then if they lose there, they can appeal So let's say they agree with you, and then YouTube appeals again, then it goes to Supreme Court?

01:21:51.000 Yeah, Supreme Court.

01:21:52.000 They would be applying for a stay of the injunction.

01:21:54.000 Now here's my final question.

01:21:55.000 If the Supreme Court agrees with me in that case, would it impact the rest of the country?

01:22:00.000 Depends on how they wrote the opinion, right?

01:22:02.000 So if they write it in unpublished or non-precedential, it wouldn't, but they could just as easily write a precedential opinion on the injunction if they wanted to, and then that would be binding law.

01:22:12.000 Why would they do one or the other?

01:22:15.000 Sometimes they don't like putting out precedential opinions if it's a very new issue.

01:22:20.000 They kind of want to let lower courts handle it and get more reasoned opinions. 0.98

01:22:24.000 Also, in a rush, they don't like putting out, because part of the thing is, whenever they make a rule, it affects everyone, everything, a variety of different body of law.

01:22:33.000 So oftentimes, like, when they're forced to issue a ruling or an opinion on kind of short notice, because it's an injunction, they are reluctant to make it, like, precedential.

01:22:42.000 So there are reasons, you know, they want, so whenever something's precedential, they want to be careful and give it full review.

01:22:47.000 So there's some reason, you know, in a very, very emergency circumstance, they might issue, like, a non-precedential opinion.

01:22:53.000 It seems tough though. It seems like the likelihood throughout the Texas...

01:22:58.000 First, the Texas judge is probably going to side with you because the Texas law says you can't do this.

01:23:01.000 But then they're going to kick it to a federal court and then you have what? The first federal

01:23:07.000 judge, the appellate, and then the Supreme Court? Yeah, I mean probably wouldn't even...

01:23:12.000 The state judge might grant you that immediate temporary restraining order before the case is removed to federal court.

01:23:16.000 Could the federal judge say, I don't want to hear it?

01:23:18.000 State law stands?

01:23:19.000 Federal judge could... I mean, the federal judge could maybe say there's not even a federal court... I mean, it's possible there's not jurisdiction?

01:23:25.000 Probably not.

01:23:26.000 The federal judge would have to rule on the injunction.

01:23:27.000 They could say... They could disagree, right?

01:23:30.000 They could say, First Amendment doesn't apply. 0.67

01:23:32.000 We're denying your injunction.

01:23:33.000 Then you could appeal.

01:23:36.000 Or vice versa.

01:23:37.000 They could go either way.

01:23:38.000 It's interesting.

01:23:38.000 So basically, Texas is granting you the right to this platform to speak, and the federal government would have to deny you that right.

01:23:45.000 Right, exactly, which is sort of... And there's precedent in different contexts where... Not in the tech context, but it's like in the union stuff.

01:23:54.000 There was some Supreme Court case where the Supreme Court said something like, if a federal law preempts a state right that grants the right to speak, that's a First Amendment issue.

01:24:04.000 And there's a first amendment prohibition against that.

01:24:06.000 I wonder if you were suing YouTube, for instance, in Texas, but if YouTube's like a Delaware corporation, and you were in Texas, would that didn't automatically be across state lines and immediately become a federal issue?

01:24:17.000 Depends.

01:24:17.000 So this is another classic 1L civil procedure issue, which is a corporation is located in its principal place of business and its place of incorporation for diversity purposes.

01:24:26.000 So Google's a primary place of business in California, Delaware corporation.

01:24:30.000 So if you are a resident of either Delaware or California, diversity jurisdiction wouldn't be available.

01:24:36.000 But if you were a resident of Texas, it would.

01:24:39.000 Man, I think there's an easier solution to this.

01:24:42.000 I think, Ian, you were saying in three months we can have this thing up and running?

01:24:44.000 That was one person mentioned that if we had 10 dedicated full-time developers that it could be ready in three months.

01:24:50.000 So it's like optimal pie in the sky, I think, three months.

01:24:54.000 But yeah, something, I mean, within the year for sure, I would imagine.

01:24:56.000 But what if we got like a hundred, you know, open source community, active communication in a discord server?

01:25:02.000 It would be good.

01:25:03.000 And we're getting close to that, but there are diminishing returns when people code over each other and forking.

01:25:07.000 Yeah.

01:25:08.000 Too many cooks in the kitchen. 1.00

01:25:09.000 So you want to, you want to crack team of like experts and specialists.

01:25:13.000 So what I want to do.

01:25:16.000 There's one big thing that makes YouTube dominant, and that's you make money on YouTube.

01:25:21.000 There's a reason why people don't use these other platforms.

01:25:24.000 People get banned from YouTube, and they'll say, okay, fine, now I'll go to Mines.com.

01:25:28.000 But you make money on YouTube.

01:25:29.000 Now, Mines was smart about this, and they implemented a way to make money on Mines as well, and the token's actually worth like three bucks now, so all my videos automatically post on Mines and everything.

01:25:40.000 But for most people, they need to make money.

01:25:43.000 We want to make a way that you get an open source piece of software free for everyone that makes it very easy to install a website.

01:25:50.000 You buy server space.

01:25:52.000 Boom! 0.99

01:25:52.000 You install it. 0.99

01:25:53.000 It's a functioning website where you can easily post things.

01:25:56.000 WordPress already makes it particularly easy.

01:25:59.000 So we're also going to provide instructions for people because there's some, you know, learning curve.

01:26:03.000 But it includes subscription functionality.

01:26:06.000 So that somebody can, you can easily plug in if you're using PayPal, Stripe, or some other, you know, e-commerce platform.

01:26:13.000 Then you have a members only.

01:26:14.000 So you can.

01:26:15.000 Isn't Ghost doing something like this?

01:26:16.000 Cause it's, this sounds similar to Substack, but Ghost, I think.

01:26:20.000 Except this is going to be you on your server with your domain.

01:26:24.000 However you do it, you own it and no one can ban you but yourself.

01:26:27.000 That's Ghost.

01:26:28.000 I'm pretty sure.

01:26:28.000 I don't know if you guys are familiar with Ghost.

01:26:29.000 I'm going to look him up though.

01:26:31.000 Yeah.

01:26:31.000 It exists?

01:26:31.000 Yeah.

01:26:32.000 I think it might exist already.

01:26:33.000 So you like drop it onto your server and boom, and then you got it.

01:26:37.000 Right, right.

01:26:37.000 I don't know if you know Balaji Srinivasan.

01:26:40.000 He wrote about this, right?

01:26:41.000 He was like writing about like how, you know, after Twitter censorship, how do you do this?

01:26:44.000 And he was like, there's a, Substack is still centralized, right?

01:26:47.000 Substack's its own platform.

01:26:48.000 Right, they can ban you. 1.00

01:26:49.000 But Ghost is like something you implement on your own website.

01:26:51.000 Do you know what the website is?

01:26:52.000 I think, let me see.

01:26:53.000 If I Google search Ghost, I'm not gonna find it.

01:26:54.000 Yeah, right.

01:26:55.000 Got that on the hard way.

01:26:57.000 Ghost, Substack.

01:26:57.000 It's not that hard.

01:26:59.000 But listen, listen, there's one other thing.

01:27:01.000 Maybe they've edited this.

01:27:02.000 Ghost.org if you want to find it.

01:27:03.000 We want to add a networking functionality because the next big thing about YouTube is that it markets you for you.

01:27:12.000 Instead of buying marketing like a traditional show, if YouTube likes you and thinks they'll make money off of you, they'll start promoting your work.

01:27:19.000 So what we want to add to these websites is a networking section that's part of the package.

01:27:23.000 Now you'll have on your site the ability to remove certain people so they won't appear on your site, certain words, phrases, or things.

01:27:30.000 It's your choice.

01:27:31.000 But it's your website.

01:27:32.000 So then if someone goes to TimCast.com, Then this software allows people to comment, be users.

01:27:38.000 It's connected to the Fediverse, so the networking section functions like chat rooms or Twitter, but then they can also see recommended shows that are very similar based on keywords.

01:27:46.000 So it'll be like Human Events and, you know, Carl Benjamin, Lotus Eaters Podcast, and then they'll be like, oh cool, and they can get that recommendation feed like they would on any other platform, but it's a decentralized network of people just running these sites.

01:27:57.000 I was just thinking a cool feature would be if you opted in for your site to be found on other sites, then Tim could put my site on his site.

01:28:05.000 And if someone found me through Tim's site, Tim would get 5% of the revenue.

01:28:10.000 So you would be able to opt into that.

01:28:12.000 It's not Ghost.

01:28:13.000 Ghost is a free trial service.

01:28:15.000 Sign up.

01:28:16.000 It's like you get 14 days free trial.

01:28:17.000 I'm talking about, we would give you, there's like a plugin.

01:28:21.000 Oh, it's like free.

01:28:22.000 It's just totally free.

01:28:23.000 Absolutely free for everybody.

01:28:24.000 And you own it 100.

01:28:25.000 It's open source code.

01:28:26.000 It's just free to use.

01:28:28.000 When you open it, boom, all of a sudden your website has like a post section for you.

01:28:32.000 You log in and you just like click a post like you would be on Twitter or whatever.

01:28:35.000 You upload a video and then you can click a lock button and lock it and say $5 members only.

01:28:40.000 And then people can click become a member.

01:28:42.000 You'll need your own accounts.

01:28:43.000 Maybe PayPal bans you.

01:28:44.000 Maybe Stripe bans you.

01:28:45.000 Maybe your domain bans you.

01:28:46.000 Well, those are other services you can't get around.

01:28:48.000 But there won't be a Patreon CEO who bans you.

01:28:51.000 There won't be a Jack Conte who bans you.

01:28:53.000 And then in order to, he's the CEO of Patreon, in order to then network with other people, it's in the Fediverse.

01:29:00.000 And the Fediverse, for people who don't know, is basically like a Twitter protocol where different servers can communicate with each other.

01:29:05.000 So you could follow someone on Gab, but also see them on a different server, a different website altogether.

01:29:12.000 So then we basically create probably the way it should be.

01:29:16.000 If we do that, we don't need Section 230.

01:29:17.000 That's true.

01:29:18.000 I mean, I really would like to create a world where we just, that these people are irrelevant.

01:29:22.000 Right?

01:29:22.000 Like, I think that's the end goal.

01:29:24.000 And I mean, I'm all for it.

01:29:25.000 I'm not a tech guy.

01:29:26.000 I don't know tech.

01:29:26.000 I know law.

01:29:27.000 And so I'm just like, okay, how do I use, how do we change the law to solve the problem?

01:29:30.000 That's my, you know, that's my world.

01:29:31.000 I hope you guys can solve it via tech.

01:29:33.000 I think you can't legislate away every problem.

01:29:36.000 That's for sure.

01:29:36.000 That's true.

01:29:37.000 But I mean, you know, some people, I still have a problem, like people underestimate how effective law can be solving at particular types of problems.

01:29:44.000 You know, I mean, we've we've got a lot of there's a lot of background for how to solve common carrier type problems and discrimination type problems.

01:29:51.000 I mean, that's that's the whole thing Clarence Thomas wrote about.

01:29:53.000 You know, he wrote, you know, went through, you can make big tech a combat carrier, you can make them

01:29:58.000 have public accommodation laws, and then you create private rights of action. Like, you don't need a

01:30:04.000 bureaucracy to solve civil rights. Like, you literally can just do it through people litigating.

01:30:08.000 Very briefly, how do you feel about legislating gun rights?

01:30:11.000 Like, saying, limiting people's gun rights when there are 3D printers

01:30:14.000 that can print those weapons in secret?

01:30:16.000 I mean, I basically think I'm a constitutionalist on that.

01:30:21.000 I think, you know, Peller is right.

01:30:23.000 We shouldn't, you know, guns that are in common use shouldn't be regulated.

01:30:27.000 I think, you know, I mean, I'm not, I guess I wouldn't say I'm an absolutist in the sense that I think all current gun laws are unlawful or something via the Second Amendment because I think even at the time of the founding there were some restrictions out there.

01:30:40.000 And I think, I mean, I remember there was some stuff you were saying about, like, for example, I think it's okay to prohibit, like, violent felons from owning guns, right?

01:30:47.000 Like, I'm okay with that law.

01:30:49.000 I disagree with it.

01:30:50.000 What gets me is when they try and say it's illegal to have this kind of gun, but then it can be 3D printed in someone's basement.

01:30:57.000 Like, you can't enforce that law.

01:31:01.000 Yeah, it's bad to have laws that are unenforceable in general.

01:31:05.000 I don't like unenforceable laws.

01:31:07.000 But, you know, I mean, I saw you were going through the Dante Wright case and be like, that person shouldn't have been arrested or whatever for the gun.

01:31:13.000 Well, but there's also the aggravated robbery, which is a different story.

01:31:16.000 Right.

01:31:16.000 Well, I mean, but yeah, like my view is, okay, so the guy gets out, you know, he's, he's arrested for aggravated robbery and indicted and trial dates in two years.

01:31:23.000 Well, we want to give him bail.

01:31:25.000 Okay.

01:31:25.000 But he's been indicted for aggravated robbery.

01:31:27.000 Like, I think it's a reasonable condition of bail that you not possess a firearm at that point.

01:31:31.000 Yeah, I agree.

01:31:31.000 Right.

01:31:32.000 Right.

01:31:32.000 My, my, my position is after they get out of prison and we're like, you've paid your debt to society, they get their rights back.

01:31:39.000 I think that's more defensible, but I'm still okay with laws that say certain violent felonies.

01:31:45.000 If you committed a violent felony, you forfeit that right in the same way that you forfeit a voting right.

01:31:50.000 I think you should have the right to vote.

01:31:52.000 If you're in prison, maybe not.

01:31:54.000 If you're in prison, you obviously don't get a gun.

01:31:56.000 But if you're out, I just don't like the idea of second-class citizens for any reason. 0.65

01:32:02.000 I agree.

01:32:04.000 People have to be brought back in, and we have to give people the opportunity.

01:32:08.000 Because the problem with these felony laws... I'll tell you a story.

01:32:12.000 I worked at a smoothie shop once.

01:32:16.000 And this woman who worked there apparently was like... I overheard this, so I could be wrong. 0.97

01:32:22.000 It's been like 15 years.

01:32:23.000 A woman applied for a job. 1.00

01:32:26.000 And on the application, she said that she was a felon.

01:32:29.000 And her felony, as she explained it, was that she was arrested for sleeping in an airport. 0.63

01:32:34.000 She was there, she overstayed her ticket, and she remained in the airport, so they eventually arrested her with a felony for being in an airport without a ticket.

01:32:40.000 Something like that.

01:32:41.000 And then they gloated about how they would not hire her, and they were like, as if we would hire that person.

01:32:46.000 And I'm like, she's trying to work a minimum wage job selling smoothies, dude. 1.00

01:32:49.000 Yeah, no, I mean, that's a different, actually a different issue where I'm, like, totally okay with certain government programs to, like, subsidize the hiring of people.

01:32:56.000 It's not necessarily what I, you know, just what I mean.

01:32:59.000 I'm just saying, if someone knows, no matter what I do, I am going to be a second-class citizen, why would, yeah, why would they bother reforming themselves or trying to come back into society and doing better?

01:33:10.000 They can't travel.

01:33:11.000 They can't, you know, have a weapon.

01:33:13.000 They can't defend themselves.

01:33:14.000 They can't vote.

01:33:15.000 They're not, they're not, No taxation without representation.

01:33:17.000 I don't care if you're out of jail.

01:33:20.000 If the judge says your punishment for doing this will be 10 years, then after the 10 years, then we're like, welcome back.

01:33:26.000 Now don't do it again.

01:33:27.000 And you'll enjoy the fruits of American citizenship.

01:33:30.000 But if you're a second class citizen, you're much more likely, in my opinion, to do it again. 0.99

01:33:34.000 I agree.

01:33:35.000 So then you have more people in jail.

01:33:38.000 Because you view yourself as an outsider at that point.

01:33:40.000 You're like, I'm not a part of your system.

01:33:41.000 I'll do what I want.

01:33:42.000 And if you can't get a job, then it's, you know.

01:33:44.000 I mean, that seems, I mean, I would focus on the job part.

01:33:47.000 I just don't think you're entitled to vote at that point.

01:33:50.000 I don't think that, I mean, I'm also more of a utilitarian when it comes to voting.

01:33:54.000 I don't like, you know.

01:33:56.000 Then I'll say this, shall not be infringed.

01:33:59.000 Yeah, but shall not kill.

01:34:01.000 Should 13-year-olds be allowed to buy guns?

01:34:04.000 No.

01:34:05.000 Shall not be infringed.

01:34:08.000 In 1789, were there 15-year-olds who owned their own property and were, you know, running their own businesses?

01:34:13.000 Like, there are still those possession laws, right?

01:34:15.000 For example, Rittenhouse, I mean, he, like, I'm pretty sure, I know they're trying to prosecute him for unlawful possession of that firearm, but my reading of the law says it was lawful.

01:34:23.000 Yeah, yeah, yeah.

01:34:24.000 I've heard some other experts talk about this.

01:34:26.000 Now, let me clarify, too.

01:34:27.000 I'm actually just giving a very harsh interpretation of 2A.

01:34:31.000 I don't think 13-year-olds should be allowed to buy guns or have guns.

01:34:34.000 I think there should be... It is difficult, though, and the reason I say this is back then, you know, way back when, The age limits were much lower for a lot of things. We've

01:34:43.000 moved them up repeatedly. 18.

01:34:45.000 So we set it at 16, then it's 18, now it's 21. They're trying to make it 21 in some places.

01:34:51.000 Eventually it'll be 30. Eventually it'll be 35.

01:34:53.000 I non-ironically think we should raise the voting age to 30.

01:34:57.000 Is there a constitutional amendment that says the right to voting shall not be

01:35:02.000 infringed for any persons in the United States? I don't think so. There was a...

01:35:06.000 There was a late constitutional amendment that reduced, I think, the voting age to 18 for everybody.

01:35:11.000 There are, I think, three amendments.

01:35:13.000 It's the voting age, women, and race, I believe.

01:35:17.000 Yeah, we just need to revise that one that's made at 18.

01:35:21.000 We're not going to get that constitutional amendment anytime soon, I don't think.

01:35:25.000 I was so excited.

01:35:28.000 Anyway, let's read Super Chats, my friends.

01:35:31.000 Thanks for hanging out on this Friday night.

01:35:32.000 I know many of you probably want to be out drinking and partying, but you're here listening to the very important conversations over at TeamCastIRL.

01:35:40.000 Greatly appreciate it.

01:35:41.000 If you haven't already, smash that like button, and comment, because it really does help.

01:35:46.000 You're basically, you know, the engagement is a great thing, and we appreciate it.

01:35:50.000 And if you're listening on iTunes or Spotify, leave us a good review, give us five stars.

01:35:54.000 Go to TimCast.com, become a member, and, excuse me, we're gonna have a bunch of really awesome content coming up in the future.

01:36:00.000 New shows were in the process of reviewing new hires. So we've got I shot at the top yesterday a paranormal and mysteries

01:36:06.000 writer Which will be a part of the podcast show and a news editor

01:36:09.000 and a fact-checker We're gonna have an in-house fact-checker who will be despised

01:36:13.000 by everybody because they're not they're not gonna hang out.

01:36:15.000 They're gonna be isolated They're gonna be like internal affairs. Yeah, but we're in

01:36:19.000 the process of going through these new hires It's not so easy to just, like, grab a random person and be like, you're hired.

01:36:23.000 We gotta check for skill, do interviews, make sure people are cool and, you know, able to do the job.

01:36:28.000 So, yeah, go to TimCats.com.

01:36:29.000 Let's read some super chats!

01:36:31.000 And smash that like button if you haven't.

01:36:33.000 Christian!

01:36:34.000 Jim Gochian says, I work at a small business and I just found out that one of my co-workers watches your content as much as I do.

01:36:40.000 So I'm finally able to talk politics with someone who respects free thought.

01:36:43.000 Awesome.

01:36:43.000 Hey, glad to hear it.

01:36:45.000 Good stuff.

01:36:46.000 John Lee says, Hey Tim, when is the chicken stream starting and is it 24 hours?

01:36:50.000 Yes, and soon.

01:36:52.000 You see the chickens we have outside?

01:36:54.000 They're getting so big so fast!

01:36:56.000 Spring chickens! 0.64

01:36:57.000 We had eight, unfortunately two didn't make it.

01:37:00.000 They succumbed to the worm.

01:37:04.000 I was listening to some podcast by Ryan Holiday and he was talking about if you own a farm you get much more familiar with death broadly because you own chickens and they die.

01:37:12.000 They had parasites, and we immediately went to a vet, was provided with medicine, and the medicine wasn't enough.

01:37:21.000 We called the chicken farmer guy who we bought it from, and he's like, look, sometimes there's weak chickens, they don't make it, and you try everything.

01:37:31.000 And so we were sad, you know, two of them didn't make it, but these ones we have that are six are... Six are awesome.

01:37:35.000 One of them almost died, so they were getting sick, and when we started giving medicine, two didn't make it, so we immediately, one of them that looked like it may be a little sick, we immediately just started giving it the medicine, and it's smaller than the rest, because I think it would have died if we did not give it that medicine.

01:37:50.000 But we're going to be setting up a series of cameras.

01:37:53.000 It's going to be 24-7, live, chicken cam.

01:37:56.000 Tim Pool's chickens.

01:37:58.000 That's right.

01:37:58.000 Absolutely, it's called the Chicken City.

01:37:59.000 Well, according to this article from PETA, chickens are arguably the most abused animals on the planet.

01:38:05.000 Not ours.

01:38:05.000 Not yours.

01:38:06.000 No way.

01:38:06.000 Ours are the most pampered.

01:38:07.000 I'm glad you're taking care of these.

01:38:08.000 Yeah, we're gonna have them.

01:38:10.000 Lovely ladies. 0.92

01:38:10.000 We're gonna get the eggs from them. 0.92

01:38:12.000 It's gonna be fantastic.

01:38:13.000 We're gonna have a camera on the chicken city 24-7.

01:38:18.000 And they're hilarious little things.

01:38:20.000 Uh, they're smart enough to know not to drink their water, water that's full of feces, but they're not smart enough to not take a dump in their water.

01:38:29.000 So it's like, yeah. 0.92

01:38:30.000 So, so Andy, who does the construction stuff around here, he was like, they're right in that sweet spot where they won't drink the water with the crap in it, but they're not smart enough to not crap in their water. 0.94

01:38:41.000 So it creates problems.

01:38:42.000 Do you build like a drinking thing, like at neck level?

01:38:45.000 A little higher.

01:38:46.000 Yeah, maybe.

01:38:46.000 Well, what we're going to do is we're going to create... We have some ideas for a water system that will automatically funnel.

01:38:53.000 Flush through?

01:38:54.000 Yeah, it'll be at an angle.

01:38:55.000 Oh, yeah.

01:38:55.000 So if they dump in it, it'll float down and the water coming at the top will always be cleaner.

01:39:01.000 But you've got to just change their water and give them food.

01:39:04.000 For the most part, they take care of themselves.

01:39:05.000 They walk around eating bugs and they eat grass a lot.

01:39:07.000 And they destroy everything around them.

01:39:09.000 Yes, they do.

01:39:10.000 It's gonna be great, but we also have the Chicken City connected to our garden. 0.66

01:39:13.000 Cool.

01:39:13.000 So what you do is, in the springtime, you let them into the garden, and they till the ground for you.

01:39:19.000 They scratch it looking for bugs, and then you get all this loose dirt, and then you go and you plant your new plants.

01:39:24.000 Alright, let's see what we got in Superchats.

01:39:27.000 Gouda says, when Doge crashes and lots of people loose their money, crypto will be heavily regulated and will hurt the industry.

01:39:36.000 I don't think so.

01:39:37.000 There's a funny comic, it's Cyanide and Happiness, and it was on AgedLikeMilk on Reddit.

01:39:43.000 And it was someone getting, it's like a guy's robbing someone.

01:39:45.000 He's like, Hey, you give me all your money.

01:39:46.000 And the next panel, next panel is, he goes, I don't have any, I only use Bitcoin.

01:39:50.000 And then the robber goes, you need this more than I do.

01:39:52.000 And handed a bunch of money to him.

01:39:54.000 Cause in 2014, Bitcoin went like 20, 20 grand and then dropped down to like some really, people lost their houses.

01:40:00.000 People were taking out like loans to buy Bitcoin.

01:40:03.000 And then.

01:40:03.000 Yikes, that's just a bad idea.

01:40:05.000 And here's the best part.

01:40:06.000 The people who panicked and sold are probably crying right now.

01:40:09.000 Who could have held it?

01:40:11.000 It's at $63,000.

01:40:12.000 I mean... The smart investors knew.

01:40:13.000 I know it dropped.

01:40:15.000 I'm gonna hold it until it's back.

01:40:16.000 The worst is that people... Diamond hands!

01:40:17.000 I don't know anything about Bitcoin or cryptocurrency, but there's apparently like the keys where you can get into your...

01:40:24.000 Money, but there's people who lost them and there's no way to get them back.

01:40:29.000 And so I was reading this article and it's guys in there who have, this one guy was like, yeah, I have $2 million in Bitcoin, just a normal guy.

01:40:36.000 He's like, I can never get it.

01:40:37.000 It's like a special kind of hell.

01:40:39.000 You get like 10 tries and then it self-destructs.

01:40:43.000 And he was on like try number eight and had no idea. 0.96

01:40:47.000 I'm like, that sucks.

01:40:49.000 And then the entropy makes the value of those coins are basically out of circulation. 0.73

01:40:54.000 They're going to be used.

01:40:54.000 So there's less Bitcoin than it looks like.

01:40:56.000 So which means they're actually more valuable than the numbers say.

01:40:59.000 Interesting.

01:41:00.000 It affects trade value.

01:41:01.000 All right.

01:41:02.000 PowderPZ says, Tim, just want to let you know that Scarlet Witch is a bad guy. 1.00

01:41:06.000 She's going to be the villain in the upcoming Doctor Strange and the Multiverse of Madness. 0.99

01:41:09.000 Is that confirmed?

01:41:10.000 Because that sounds really awesome.

01:41:12.000 Yeah, yeah.

01:41:13.000 There was a post by Bruce Campbell, where it was on April 1st, so nobody thinks it's real, probably an April Fool's joke, where it's a script from Doctor Strange, where Doctor Strange goes to Evil Dead, and he sees Ash, who's got the chainsaw arm or whatever, and then he's like, I'm looking for the Darkhold, and then he's like, what's that?

01:41:31.000 He's like, it's a book, and he goes, does it have a face on it?

01:41:33.000 And then Doctor Strange is like, what?

01:41:35.000 Because, you know, you've seen Evil Dead, right?

01:41:37.000 The Necronomicon's got a face on it or whatever.

01:41:38.000 Something like that.

01:41:39.000 I don't know.

01:41:39.000 Whatever.

01:41:39.000 I have no idea what you're talking about at all.

01:41:43.000 You are not a man of culture, Will.

01:41:45.000 You look so offended.

01:41:48.000 I'm sorry.

01:41:49.000 Very offended.

01:41:50.000 I appreciate this look.

01:41:50.000 I think the best thing Disney could do is start crossing Doctor Strange to every Disney story that they can.

01:41:57.000 I don't know if they own Dark Tower or not.

01:41:59.000 But Benedict Cumberbatch is such a good actor.

01:42:02.000 Possibly one of the best actors on Earth.

01:42:04.000 He's good, yeah.

01:42:04.000 He's quite good.

01:42:05.000 top three actor in my opinion that that he could cross over in any genre and it

01:42:10.000 would be the doctor strange care he's amazing as dr.

01:42:13.000 strange she's fantastic it's it's it's bright I thought he was awful as Julian Assange

01:42:17.000 it was the weirdest trash I never see that yeah I was just like it's a

01:42:22.000 big role very weird and like I saw I've met a son jenna Mike I don't I don't

01:42:26.000 know I don't think it's cover badges fault probably cast first thing no no no the

01:42:30.000 writing of like what they view Assange to be just so seems like makes no sense

01:42:35.000 did you see a Star Trek when he played Khan

01:42:38.000 I liked it, yeah.

01:42:39.000 He was incredible.

01:42:39.000 I didn't know who he was when I saw that.

01:42:41.000 I just was like, God, that guy's awesome.

01:42:41.000 But people were mad because it was, who was it, Ricardo Montalban?

01:42:45.000 Is that his name?

01:42:46.000 Montalban? 0.93

01:42:47.000 Montalban or something.

01:42:47.000 I don't know.

01:42:48.000 He played Khan in the original movie.

01:42:50.000 Oh, okay.

01:42:50.000 So then they like, you know, now they have this tall, white dude.

01:42:54.000 Everyone got mad.

01:42:55.000 He talked like this the whole time.

01:42:58.000 Khan!

01:42:58.000 He was very intense.

01:42:59.000 I was like, oh my God.

01:43:01.000 All right, Wayne Smith says, quote, the FBI has made an average of more than four arrests a day, seven days a week since January 6th, says acting Deputy Attorney General John Carlin.

01:43:10.000 They can do it for the Capitol, but can't do it for looters and rioters.

01:43:13.000 That's right.

01:43:14.000 Yeah, well, we're, I mean, embrace the fact that you're second-class citizens already, you know. 0.96

01:43:19.000 Geez, yeah, kind of.

01:43:20.000 Yep.

01:43:22.000 All right, VoltageVolt says, hello everyone of the Beanie Compound.

01:43:26.000 I finally subscribed to the website right before the show started.

01:43:29.000 Been watching for about two years now.

01:43:30.000 Haven't missed a show.

01:43:31.000 Love you guys.

01:43:32.000 Awesome.

01:43:32.000 Nice.

01:43:33.000 We have a massive library of content.

01:43:35.000 So if you go to TimGast.com, we have this new streamlined members area.

01:43:39.000 When you click it, you actually can see Just scroll down very easily.

01:43:43.000 All of these different subjects that you can, you can watch.

01:43:46.000 Some of these are like an hour long.

01:43:47.000 We've got, we've got one with, um, James O'Keefe.

01:43:49.000 It's an hour where it's like a, it's like a full podcast episode.

01:43:52.000 So that's just part of the members only stuff.

01:43:54.000 So go, go become members.

01:43:55.000 Check that out.

01:43:58.000 All right.

01:43:59.000 Turk Longwell says, Tim, I mentioned in a lefty Chauvin YouTube live stream about giving 16 year old guns with their driver's licenses.

01:44:05.000 They hated the idea and called me sick.

01:44:07.000 2A, right?

01:44:08.000 You know, it's interesting.

01:44:10.000 Hardcore leftists are very pro-2A. 0.93

01:44:13.000 And, uh, I think it was Vosh who was tweeting that in the event things fall apart, it stands to reason you don't only want the right-wing militias to be armed.

01:44:22.000 Yep.

01:44:22.000 So you probably, leftists should probably want to have guns.

01:44:25.000 Like a really good point.

01:44:26.000 Yep.

01:44:26.000 Well, I mean, that's, that's Weather Underground too.

01:44:28.000 Like, again, I've read this, I read this whole book about, uh, days of rage, which I can recommend by, uh, uh, Bill Burroughs, I think.

01:44:35.000 And something that, you know, Bill Ayers, like, was famous for being in front of, like, a Weather Underground conference, and he's like, do you guys own a gun?

01:44:41.000 Do you not understand what's coming?

01:44:43.000 Like, the whole idea is they're revolutionary communists.

01:44:45.000 They wanted to do Cuba here, and so they're like, of course we want guns. 0.90

01:44:48.000 Yeah.

01:44:49.000 That's important.

01:44:49.000 The problem is they're allied with the establishment left.

01:44:53.000 And the establishment left thinks guns are, like, nuclear bombs.

01:44:58.000 It's the craziest thing.

01:44:59.000 You know, I really, I genuinely believe If you've got somebody who's like, I'm a gun owner and guns should be banned.

01:45:07.000 That's a grifter.

01:45:08.000 That's absolutely a grifter. 0.65

01:45:09.000 Because if they've actually held a weapon and they know anything about it, they know the Democrats are wrong or lying.

01:45:13.000 And they have no idea what they're talking about.

01:45:15.000 When someone says, Oh, you know, I, I was in the, I was in the Marines and I had a gun and we shouldn't give weapons of war to people.

01:45:20.000 It's like, okay, I know you're grifting because that means, you know, an AR-15 is not an M16.

01:45:24.000 You have no idea what you're talking about.

01:45:26.000 Those people are almost always like some back office types in the, you know, they were like jags.

01:45:31.000 Yeah.

01:45:32.000 And so then you have the rest of these people.

01:45:34.000 I'm confident they've never held a weapon in their life.

01:45:38.000 Just not, not even, I wonder if you've even held like a super soaker. 1.00

01:45:41.000 It's not part of the culture.

01:45:42.000 Like, it's just, there's a big cultural difference.

01:45:45.000 I mean, and I think that's something that liberals really struggle with.

01:45:49.000 The idea that it's completely alien to them that guns would be something like you, you go with your kids, you hunt, you target shoot.

01:45:55.000 It's like part of... The way, the way I described it is when I cross a busy street, I'm not worried about getting hit by a car.

01:46:03.000 You know, there's cars driving all crazy and you're walking and there's a stop sign.

01:46:08.000 You really think that that sign, which is just a representation of an idea, will stop someone from slamming into you in that car?

01:46:14.000 Yes!

01:46:15.000 Because people don't want to kill you.

01:46:17.000 So when I see someone walk around with a gun, I'm not worried about them trying to kill me.

01:46:20.000 Yeah, but you gotta look both ways, because those stop signs won't stop a car.

01:46:24.000 That's right.

01:46:24.000 So, when you're walking near people you don't know or trust, you have to be aware of your surroundings at all times.

01:46:29.000 It doesn't matter if it's a car or a guy with a gun.

01:46:31.000 And if you're gonna use a gun, you better know- Or a lady with a gun. 1.00

01:46:33.000 You better know how to use it.

01:46:34.000 Yes.

01:46:34.000 And you better be trained with that thing.

01:46:35.000 Be responsible.

01:46:37.000 All right, David Norman says blocking traffic during a protest is a violation of the non-aggression principle.

01:46:42.000 Interesting.

01:46:43.000 Agreed.

01:46:44.000 The Libertarians found something they're right about.

01:46:48.000 Congratulations.

01:46:50.000 But they are quite correct and that's why they should go to jail for doing that.

01:46:55.000 All right, VBDC says, Bill Ayers also wrote rules for radicals.

01:47:01.000 Well, that was Olinsky, wasn't it? 0.56

01:47:02.000 I'm pretty sure that was Olinsky.

01:47:04.000 I know, I mean, Ayers wrote some things, but I don't... He didn't write rules for radicals.

01:47:08.000 He might have written some, like... It's possible he wrote something for radicals, but...

01:47:13.000 That's not, that was Alinsky, which I think most people should read.

01:47:16.000 I think, you know, Alinsky dedicated it to Satan, I think, as the first radical.

01:47:21.000 And I just see that as, maybe, I mean, my Harry Potter, I'm a little rusty, but it's like a horcrux, it's something designed to prevent, it's something designed to prevent, like, conservatives from reading it.

01:47:29.000 Like, they see them like, oh gosh, terrible.

01:47:31.000 Horcrux preserves the soul of the person so they can't die.

01:47:35.000 Okay, well then I have no idea what I'm talking about.

01:47:38.000 Alright.

01:47:39.000 But yeah.

01:47:39.000 Interesting.

01:47:40.000 It repels them, yeah.

01:47:41.000 Imran says, Tim, stop spreading disinformation.

01:47:43.000 Firearms Policy Coalition is going after NYC and Chicago's de facto gun bans.

01:47:49.000 They're already going to court for NYC and they're building their Chicago case.

01:47:52.000 Well, there you go.

01:47:53.000 Very neat.

01:47:54.000 Glad someone is doing it.

01:47:57.000 Ted2 says, Tim, check out the channel RangerUpVideo.

01:48:01.000 They make a weekly news segment that's legit and more people should see it.

01:48:04.000 Veteran company that started out making t-shirts.

01:48:06.000 You should have Nick and Matt on the show.

01:48:08.000 Would be great conversation.

01:48:10.000 I will look into their channel.

01:48:14.000 All right, let's see.

01:48:17.000 We will find some.

01:48:18.000 Stephen A says, I made a bunch on the Holy Doge, so here's a tie to the High Priest of the Beanie.

01:48:23.000 I love my gorilla shirt.

01:48:24.000 It's super soft.

01:48:25.000 Awesome.

01:48:26.000 Legit, yeah.

01:48:27.000 Teespring has really great shirt quality.

01:48:29.000 Yeah, I noticed it was soft.

01:48:30.000 I love it.

01:48:30.000 Yeah, I was impressed.

01:48:32.000 Remember, if you're making money on Doge, that you need to declare all that stuff as capital gains.

01:48:37.000 Oh, yeah.

01:48:37.000 For tax purposes.

01:48:38.000 If you sell it.

01:48:39.000 If you sell it.

01:48:40.000 Right.

01:48:41.000 If you receive Doge from someone, you've already gained.

01:48:45.000 So that's where it gets interesting.

01:48:46.000 I wonder how that would work.

01:48:47.000 Let's say you give me a doge, right?

01:48:50.000 And it's worth 5 cents.

01:48:51.000 At the end of the year, it's now worth 50 cents.

01:48:53.000 Do I owe on 50 cents or 5 cents?

01:48:55.000 You owe on 5 cents.

01:48:57.000 It's the value of the gift when it was given.

01:48:58.000 sure you can value the gift when it was given.

01:49:00.000 Ah, okay.

01:49:01.000 Right.

01:49:01.000 Like, but then if you sell it, your value, you have to pay taxes on the gain.

01:49:05.000 Ah.

01:49:05.000 Rad number two says, I don't care how peaceful you are blocking traffic, you're still halting

01:49:09.000 everyone's right to travel without being unreasonably stopped.

01:49:12.000 That's a civil rights violation, so a felony charge is perfectly suited to that. 0.88

01:49:15.000 I just love how the commenters are totally supporting my side of the debate.

01:49:20.000 This is fantastic.

01:49:21.000 See, we're open to differences of opinion.

01:49:23.000 I got mixed feelings because I agree with you, but I also acknowledge the United States is an act of civil disobedience.

01:49:30.000 Right, you know, this is sort of the dilemma.

01:49:31.000 I mean, this is the Hamilton dilemma, right?

01:49:33.000 Hamilton really quickly realized, like, hey, you know, we can't just be revolting all the time.

01:49:37.000 People actually do need to respect lawful authority.

01:49:40.000 And, you know, that's, I mean, part of... Now that we've removed the king, everybody must stop revolting because I'm in charge now and must respect me.

01:49:48.000 No, he's not a tyrant.

01:49:49.000 Yeah, but I mean, he was second in command.

01:49:53.000 Hamilton basically built the federal government.

01:49:55.000 We sort of underestimate that, but the primary author of the Constitution, responsible for many of the early departments and the plan for manufacturers and economics.

01:50:04.000 I mean, brilliant guy.

01:50:06.000 But yeah, I mean he was you know, he was sort of a half monarchist in his own way and anyway So I'm a big believer in law and order.

01:50:13.000 So yes, we were founded on revolution.

01:50:14.000 That's great Like we don't want to have revolutions every week Steven Sherman with a massive super tip says you are a Republican You just know don't know how our freedom works together now Do you mean like little are Republican as in like the Republic or the political party because I'm not a fan of the Republican Party Well, I remember still, I always chuckle because I remember we had like a conversation before we did one of our shows, like a YouTube show a couple years ago.

01:50:37.000 We had a conversation where you're like, Will, you know, it seems like we agree on everything and yet you're a Trump guy.

01:50:45.000 And then you became a Trump guy, so.

01:50:48.000 Yeah, but the issue was Trump released a comprehensive list of things he was going for.

01:50:53.000 And I was like, eh, I can get behind that.

01:50:56.000 That's good.

01:50:56.000 I mean, that's all true.

01:50:57.000 I don't know, like, I was always, you know, my view of, you know, I can be annoyed at the Republican Party, but at the end of the day, like, I don't think it's responsible to let Democrats have power if it can be avoided.

01:51:09.000 That's true, I get that.

01:51:10.000 But I think my bigger point was that on the issues that are relevant today in politics, we mostly agree.

01:51:16.000 That's true.

01:51:17.000 But even though there's probably a wide range of things we completely disagree on.

01:51:20.000 Like, we disagreed today on, you know, the protest stuff.

01:51:22.000 That's true, on the protest stuff.

01:51:23.000 Like, I have a fairly lefty view on the protest stuff.

01:51:27.000 That's true.

01:51:27.000 And it's interesting how when you're honest and you understand the truth and you're like, we actually know when the news is lying.

01:51:34.000 So there's no issue when we're like, Oh, I disagree.

01:51:36.000 Oh, okay.

01:51:37.000 The issue is when the left believes things that aren't true and you confront them with the truth and they lose their minds because of it, or they don't want you to say things that can conflict their worldview.

01:51:44.000 Or they're just bigoted.

01:51:45.000 I mean, that's a big problem that I see.

01:51:48.000 I mean, just people losing friendships, people disowning their family.

01:51:51.000 I mean, that's cult stuff.

01:51:52.000 We were watching a lot of the Scientology and the Aftermath, the Leah Remini show, and Scientology gets all this flack for disconnection, which is the policy where somebody leaves the church, their whole family needs to disconnect from them.

01:52:05.000 And I'm like, this is what woke liberals do.

01:52:07.000 Woke liberals watch the show and are like, oh, that's crazy.

01:52:09.000 I would never do that. 0.97

01:52:10.000 Also, I disown my racist uncle for being a racist. 0.51

01:52:13.000 This is the problem.

01:52:14.000 There are a lot of people who are like, I'm a big fan of the show.

01:52:17.000 And I'm like, the problem with people is like, why don't you come on?

01:52:19.000 Well, I mean, look, I work with a lot of people and I'm like, dude, do you really want to live that way?

01:52:26.000 I'm sorry.

01:52:26.000 Hold on.

01:52:27.000 I'm not entirely sure how you really could be a fan of the show.

01:52:32.000 If you're also unwilling to actually just stand up for yourself and say, I just happen to like the show.

01:52:38.000 There's nothing more freeing than being in this space, honestly.

01:52:40.000 Like, at least, you know, I don't have to worry about Twitter, I don't have to worry about somebody else, but at the end of the day, like, I don't have to worry that I'm gonna say something that leads to me being fired, and I don't have to worry about saying something that, you know, I just can say what I think.

01:52:54.000 The thing is, for most conservatives that come on this show, this show is leftward for them.

01:52:58.000 No conservative's gonna be like, Will, why are you talking to Tim Pool?

01:53:01.000 Don't you know he was yelling about taxing the rich?

01:53:03.000 What are you doing, man?

01:53:05.000 No conservative will do that.

01:53:07.000 Conservatives will come here and be like, I think you're wrong.

01:53:08.000 And I'll be like, I think you're wrong.

01:53:09.000 They'll be like, well, that was fun.

01:53:12.000 But if we cross that line to the tribal left, Or I should say, I'm sorry, if the tribal left crosses a line in this direction toward rightward, then they get harassed and berated and attacked.

01:53:23.000 And they're scared.

01:53:24.000 I mean, the funny thing is they'd probably tell us, sorry, I'll let you go.

01:53:26.000 Just one last point.

01:53:28.000 They would probably say like, how dare you give Tin Pool a platform?

01:53:31.000 Yeah.

01:53:31.000 Which is like the most hilarious thing.

01:53:32.000 Yeah.

01:53:33.000 Well, because for them, they say things like, oh, speech is, this speech is violence.

01:53:36.000 Exactly.

01:53:37.000 It is literally not.

01:53:39.000 Like that is quite literally untrue.

01:53:41.000 Yes.

01:53:41.000 But like quotes and sayings like that.

01:53:45.000 When you actually believe stuff like that, then it does become unacceptable behavior to go on Tim Pool's show.

01:53:52.000 There is one way that speech can be violence.

01:53:55.000 If it's really loud.

01:53:56.000 If you scream really loud.

01:53:59.000 I hate loud bars.

01:54:00.000 If anybody else hates loud bars, it's silence, I can tell you that.

01:54:03.000 I hate loud bars.

01:54:04.000 No, but if you, like, got close to someone and screamed the Second Amendment over and over again into their ears, as loud as possible.

01:54:11.000 We're not the ones screaming, okay?

01:54:12.000 Your speech is hurting somebody.

01:54:15.000 Literal violence.

01:54:16.000 All right, Corey.

01:54:18.000 Corey Hill.

01:54:19.000 Ooh, this is important.

01:54:19.000 Says, Tim, we have been trying to reach you about your car's extended warranty.

01:54:23.000 Have you guys been getting those calls?

01:54:26.000 You should answer that.

01:54:27.000 Yes.

01:54:27.000 Why?

01:54:27.000 I was just kidding.

01:54:29.000 No.

01:54:30.000 When they call me, I go, which one?

01:54:33.000 I've been getting some call.

01:54:34.000 I usually delete it after the first three seconds.

01:54:36.000 Scam likely.

01:54:39.000 Ruslan says, hey Tim, Ian, SB-519 in California is going to legalize DMT.

01:54:45.000 This is weird because I am on the fence with this bill. 0.99

01:54:48.000 That's so weird that California's like, we will lock you up for the stupidest things, but you can smoke drugs! 0.99

01:54:54.000 SB-519? 1.00

01:54:54.000 Yeah. 1.00

01:54:56.000 Controlled substance decriminalization.

01:54:58.000 So it's not legalizing it, but it looks like it's decriminalizing it.

01:55:01.000 Right, which means you can have it and you won't go to jail.

01:55:03.000 So we're gonna learn like tomorrow Joe Rogan announces he's moving back to California.

01:55:07.000 California is just going straight to Mad Max, right?

01:55:10.000 Like just endless homeless encampments, they're not gonna do a thing about them, and then you can do whatever drugs you want.

01:55:15.000 Yeah, sounds great!

01:55:17.000 It is psychedelics are way different than amphetamines though.

01:55:20.000 So yeah, I'm kind of down I don't have a strong view on whether DMV DMT should be have you ever smoked it?

01:55:27.000 Nope.

01:55:27.000 It's amazing But apparently when you talk to people that go deep It's the one spiritual.

01:55:36.000 Yeah Ayahuasca is DMT. I was good. I was good causes your body

01:55:41.000 to produce large amounts of DMT Okay

01:55:46.000 VBDC says by the way Kalin from from scriber was on your show

01:55:50.000 Lydia said we know him. That's why we wanted to talk about him getting brutally beaten. Yes, that was the context of

01:55:56.000 the segment Here's a guy who's willing to go on the ground and actually risk his safety to get his information versus CNN, who surround themselves with security guards while complaining about guns and lying to people.

01:56:06.000 So it's like inverted.

01:56:08.000 Yes.

01:56:08.000 Sorry.

01:56:09.000 Having him on with a bruised, beat up face.

01:56:11.000 I don't want to objectify you, Kalen.

01:56:13.000 I'm not doing that.

01:56:14.000 But I mean, having someone on that has experienced physical trauma, so you can see the effects, would have more of an impact.

01:56:21.000 YouTube might Might take that down.

01:56:22.000 Yeah, that's what I'm wondering.

01:56:23.000 Yeah, YouTube says you can't show, like, violence.

01:56:26.000 What's it called?

01:56:27.000 Yeah.

01:56:27.000 But I think they wouldn't take that one down.

01:56:29.000 Real hurt.

01:56:30.000 Actually, this is really interesting.

01:56:31.000 YouTube just relaxed their rules.

01:56:32.000 There was a big announcement that as of the 15th, you're allowed to have some swearing, moderate profanity, at a certain point to the other.

01:56:40.000 It's weird.

01:56:41.000 But you're actually allowed now to show violent interactions with police officers.

01:56:46.000 Oh, wow.

01:56:47.000 Like, straight up, you can show it and you can monetize it now.

01:56:49.000 That, to me, was crazy.

01:56:49.000 I was like, but you know- So they're letting it cost again.

01:56:51.000 Yeah, they love the show.

01:56:54.000 No, no, no, no, no.

01:56:54.000 But listen, listen.

01:56:56.000 The issue, I think, was that a lot of leftist activists were getting demonetized for showing Dante Wright or Adam Toledo.

01:57:05.000 And so YouTube was like, OK, OK, fine, fine, fine.

01:57:07.000 You can do these now.

01:57:08.000 Cool.

01:57:09.000 Interesting.

01:57:10.000 Yep.

01:57:11.000 FineCastleIE says, congrats on the 1 million, Tim and cast.

01:57:14.000 Since OurPillow was a success, would you ever sell a t-shirt called Our Gorilla with the gorilla wearing a beanie holding a hammer and sickle?

01:57:21.000 Maybe!

01:57:23.000 We're trying to figure out I am a chimpanzee full of snakes.

01:57:25.000 Yes.

01:57:26.000 But I think... That's a Jordan Peterson... Well, hold on.

01:57:30.000 Seamus of Freedom Tunes made a joke about it.

01:57:34.000 Jordan Peterson apparently said something to this effect where, uh, I guess Seamus pointed out that in a lecture, Peterson said, like, what are you even anyway? 0.64

01:57:42.000 You're a chimpanzee full of snakes or some approximation of that. 0.96

01:57:46.000 Yep. 0.93

01:57:46.000 So then he did a, Jordan Peterson is the Red Skull joke where the Avengers are watching Red Skull Lecture and he says, what are you? 0.93

01:57:53.000 You're a chimpanzee full of snakes.

01:57:56.000 So then we said on the show, everyone laughed and they were like, make a t-shirt. 0.87

01:57:59.000 But maybe Seamus should make the t-shirt because it's his joke.

01:58:04.000 That'd be fun.

01:58:04.000 I'd hawk his merch.

01:58:05.000 Heck yeah.

01:58:06.000 It's probably a shirt he should be selling.

01:58:08.000 Chimpanzee full of snakes.

01:58:12.000 Look man, I think Jordan Peterson's great, but...

01:58:15.000 A lot of people who are passive viewers of him don't realize he says a lot of things that you would absolutely be baffled by unless you- Without context.

01:58:23.000 Yeah, without the full context of his lectures.

01:58:26.000 Like the snakes and the- It never struck me.

01:58:29.000 Seamus really gets it.

01:58:30.000 Yeah, I heard it.

01:58:31.000 It never struck me.

01:58:34.000 All right.

01:58:35.000 Brown Bear says, if I'm stuck in traffic because of a bunch of protesters decided to protest in the middle of the street, I immediately hope whatever their cause is fails, no matter what it is.

01:58:43.000 I agree with that.

01:58:44.000 Yeah.

01:58:44.000 Absolutely.

01:58:45.000 Yep.

01:58:45.000 Yeah.

01:58:45.000 It's selfish.

01:58:46.000 I mean, it's fundamentally a very selfish way to protest.

01:58:49.000 It's just indifferent to other people inflicting pain on third parties who have nothing to do with your protest.

01:58:54.000 PR suicide.

01:58:56.000 Yeah.

01:58:57.000 Jail.

01:58:59.000 All right.

01:59:00.000 Christopher Cavey says, Tim, are the chickens getting a YouTube channel?

01:59:03.000 We did mention this.

01:59:04.000 The answer is yes.

01:59:05.000 It is going to be called the Chicken City, or something to that effect.

01:59:08.000 We don't know the full name, so... But we have the... We double-fortified the Chicken City, so...

01:59:15.000 We used to just have one layer of, like, chicken wire, and then we doubled over it with a stronger metal.

01:59:21.000 And we want to make sure... So we added another latch, too, because we had someone try... something try to break in.

01:59:26.000 I think it was, like, maybe a raccoon.

01:59:28.000 So we set a trap, and, you know, we'll have to... Put some lights up.

01:59:31.000 Motion sensor lights to scare it off.

01:59:33.000 Doesn't work.

01:59:34.000 Yeah, it doesn't work.

01:59:37.000 I'm looking through my mentions and I tweeted about the video and somebody said to tell Tim to fire Ian.

01:59:44.000 Hashtag fire Ian.

01:59:45.000 No!

01:59:46.000 Not happening.

01:59:47.000 No, they're saying Ian's fire.

01:59:48.000 That's right, there you go.

01:59:50.000 Alright, alright, let's see what we got here.

01:59:52.000 Fire Ian.

01:59:53.000 Nick Nast says, Hey all, I was listening a few days ago and heard Ian mention he was looking for a PHP developer for the open source project.

02:00:00.000 I emailed Info and Jobs at TimCast but got no reply.

02:00:03.000 Should I contact Ian directly?

02:00:04.000 If so, what's a good contact email?

02:00:06.000 Um, you message me on Twitter.

02:00:08.000 That seems to work.

02:00:09.000 Do I follow you on Twitter?

02:00:10.000 I should.

02:00:11.000 You sure should.

02:00:12.000 Definitely.

02:00:12.000 Uplifting.

02:00:13.000 Air Traffic Controller says the Texas House passed a law making open carry legal even without a permit.

02:00:18.000 Come on down to Texas.

02:00:19.000 That's a pretty good reason.

02:00:22.000 I follow you, Ian, but you don't follow me.

02:00:23.000 I'm about to, Will.

02:00:24.000 How rude! 0.85

02:00:24.000 I know, aren't you? 0.85

02:00:26.000 Owned.

02:00:26.000 You too.

02:00:28.000 Alright, let's see.

02:00:29.000 You got me live!

02:00:33.000 Chris Rose, 1986, says, We need to change the 13th Amendment.

02:00:36.000 There should be no slavery at all.

02:00:38.000 All felons that have done their time should have all their rights back.

02:00:41.000 The pink gorilla t-shirt is great.

02:00:43.000 Don't tell that to Joe Biden, who said that no amendment is absolute.

02:00:46.000 Yeah, right?

02:00:48.000 Like, you know, all those exceptions to the 13th Amendment that need to be made.

02:00:52.000 All right.

02:00:55.000 WhiteMetalBaby says, Tim, it's time.

02:00:56.000 Announce your intention to form a new independent media center dedicated to true and valuable context opinion.

02:01:02.000 Dibs on first name chicken media.

02:01:04.000 Or is that a rooster or a turkey?

02:01:06.000 I can't tell.

02:01:06.000 It's a chicken.

02:01:07.000 Oh, it's a rooster.

02:01:08.000 Oh, rooster media.

02:01:09.000 Rooster media.

02:01:09.000 I like it.

02:01:10.000 Well, now you can't use the name because it was his idea, which means he'll come and sue you for copyright. 0.98

02:01:15.000 Darn it, man. 0.97

02:01:16.000 Good idea, though. 0.99

02:01:17.000 I like it.

02:01:18.000 All right, Waffle Sensei says, Will is correct about not voting while having a felony.

02:01:22.000 The felony will come off your record eventually, and if we expect immigrants to follow the law to get in, we should expect citizens to follow higher classified laws to vote on those laws. 0.96

02:01:32.000 Is there a period after you leave prison as a felon you get your voting rights back?

02:01:36.000 Um, I mean, I think if your felony is expunged... Yeah, but how do you, but not, that's like... Some felonies don't get expunged, I assume.

02:01:43.000 Most don't.

02:01:44.000 I don't know, I don't know the details of that, but that's not, you know, I don't, I don't rely on his rationale for saying why felons shouldn't have voting rights.

02:01:52.000 Hey, look at this.

02:01:53.000 Sterling Morris says, Tim, look up chicken nipple waterer.

02:01:56.000 No joke.

02:01:56.000 They are top-down waterers.

02:01:57.000 They can't crappen.

02:01:59.000 I will, I will, I will get that.

02:02:01.000 I will look that up right after the show and we will get that.

02:02:03.000 They have good waterers.

02:02:03.000 They understand chickens.

02:02:07.000 Robo Cheez-It says, I will watch this later, but I love the show, so thank you.

02:02:11.000 But Tim, I'm curious, would you go around, uh, go around your of video calls if you could have Edward... Oh, okay.

02:02:18.000 Oh, yeah, your rule.

02:02:19.000 Would I have video calls if I could have Edward Snowden on?

02:02:23.000 No.

02:02:24.000 I wouldn't.

02:02:25.000 But RoboCheeseit, your name is sweet.

02:02:27.000 I love it.

02:02:28.000 No exceptions.

02:02:28.000 Demako says, Tim, when are you going back on Joe Rogan?

02:02:31.000 Probably never!

02:02:32.000 Simply because I am dedicated to making this project work.

02:02:36.000 TimCast.com is growing.

02:02:37.000 We've got a ton of work we have to do, and I have no time for anything.

02:02:42.000 So Rogan's podcast is fantastic.

02:02:45.000 Rogan's an awesome dude.

02:02:46.000 Big, big, big, big fan.

02:02:48.000 But I get a lot of requests.

02:02:49.000 There are some shows that I've done where it's like I can turn the camera on when I'm already here and just talk for like 10 minutes.

02:02:54.000 Hiring people is hard work.

02:02:56.000 We have so many resumes, and there's a lot of people who email us who have no experience, and are like, you know, I work in a warehouse, but I can totally do this, I swear.

02:03:06.000 And it's like, look man, I'm glad you guys are interested, I'm glad you're fans, but it's really difficult to quality control everything, and we literally can't hire someone who doesn't know how to do a job to do a job.

02:03:17.000 It's hard enough because we're not Joe Rogan level.

02:03:20.000 We don't have that kind of money.

02:03:22.000 So we're trying to get top-level people at premium rates, essentially, and it's very difficult.

02:03:29.000 If we want to make this work, we're going to need some talented, free-thinking individuals who are the best of the best at what they do, or to the best of our ability, the best based on how much we can afford to spend.

02:03:39.000 So it's tough.

02:03:40.000 It's not easy.

02:03:41.000 I should say I'm not specifically looking to hire a PHP developer.

02:03:45.000 I want to get in touch with people that are doing that and then bring you into our Element chat, our Fediverse chat, and we'll go from there.

02:03:51.000 Yeah, and the open source project too is external.

02:03:54.000 It's not going to be owned.

02:03:55.000 I mean, I don't want to be owned by anybody.

02:03:57.000 Right.

02:03:58.000 We might do a foundation that collects donations that can help fund the project.

02:04:02.000 Yes.

02:04:03.000 Which the foundation would be owned probably by Tim Kast or something.

02:04:05.000 But the product, the things that are made would be free for public use.

02:04:09.000 We'd probably just keep making tools that are free.

02:04:11.000 You know, I'd imagine why would we stop there if we could do it?

02:04:14.000 All right.

02:04:15.000 Dan9S says, Tim, the YouTube channel Nando vs V Movies has a series called One Small Change.

02:04:20.000 You should check out the episode he did for Wanda's last episode.

02:04:23.000 In my honest opinion, it would have been way better to convey the message they were trying to make.

02:04:27.000 You know what I want to do? 0.96

02:04:28.000 I want to do like short sketches of changing movies and it's like just ending movies very easily by getting rid of the deus ex machina or the idiot plots. 0.94

02:04:37.000 Game of Thrones did that. 0.88

02:04:38.000 The day of Sexmachina in Game of Thrones was just so awful. 1.00

02:04:41.000 Yeah.

02:04:42.000 Like, we flew from the south to the north in a few hours.

02:04:44.000 Here we are.

02:04:45.000 Amazing.

02:04:46.000 God, they just destroyed that series.

02:04:47.000 I couldn't finish it.

02:04:49.000 I love how they're, like, trapped, surrounded by the White Walkers in the ice behind the wall. 0.97

02:04:53.000 And then, you know, Khaleesi flies in the dragon. 0.93

02:04:58.000 In a matter of, what, an hour?

02:04:59.000 Like, you just knew that the writers were trying to reverse engineer a way to give the White Walkers a dragon. 0.87

02:05:05.000 Like, that was the problem they were trying to solve. 0.99

02:05:07.000 And they're like, well, we can have all the main characters do something obviously and horribly stupid. 0.96

02:05:12.000 Like, go all the way north to get a live White Walker for some reason. 0.95

02:05:16.000 To prove that the White Walkers are still here. 1.00

02:05:19.000 I could rip on that show for hours.

02:05:21.000 Yeah, seriously.

02:05:22.000 Isn't it amazing how it was like the best show ever until the last two seasons?

02:05:25.000 The first season was so good.

02:05:27.000 And Sean Bean, hands down, probably the reason why.

02:05:30.000 I mean, it was an amazing show because they just, they killed, I mean, I don't want to, actually I shouldn't say anything.

02:05:35.000 Spoiler alert, the show's been over for five years.

02:05:37.000 Yeah, right, they killed the protagonist at the end of season one.

02:05:41.000 That's amazing.

02:05:41.000 I get it.

02:05:43.000 It is.

02:05:43.000 It's amazing.

02:05:44.000 That was bold.

02:05:46.000 All right, let's see.

02:05:47.000 We'll do a couple more here.

02:05:49.000 Sora989 says, Tim, you don't know what you're doing with your chicks. 1.00

02:05:53.000 Roosters offer more than just protection, and there's ways to keep their food and water raised.

02:05:57.000 Yes, this is true, and the problem with roosters is that we record, so we can't have one.

02:06:01.000 Cannot have noise.

02:06:02.000 Yeah, so we have to figure it out.

02:06:04.000 We were thinking of consulting with a chicken whisperer for a one-off to come.

02:06:09.000 John Goodwin says, is it possible to consider anti-gun laws as racist due to an impact on black men carrying in unsafe neighborhoods?

02:06:15.000 Yes.

02:06:16.000 Also, chickens keep ticks and fleas down.

02:06:18.000 And if one chicken gets hurt and bleeds, the other chickens may try to eat the wounded one.

02:06:22.000 Whoa! 0.71

02:06:23.000 Yes, it's horrifying.

02:06:25.000 Little dinosaurs.

02:06:27.000 Christopher says, Tim, you're wrong.

02:06:28.000 I'm a felon.

02:06:29.000 Been to prison.

02:06:30.000 Trust me, you don't want people getting guns back when they're released.

02:06:33.000 Some people make no effort to change and are planning next crimes before the release.

02:06:38.000 No, I'm not wrong.

02:06:40.000 I understand that fully.

02:06:42.000 But the Constitution says shall not be infringed, and so long as we're not incarcerating someone anymore, I don't like the idea of a permanent lingering effect that strips you of your rights.

02:06:49.000 Are we at like 5-zip in the... Will, are you paying these people?

02:06:52.000 I don't know.

02:06:53.000 I'm not.

02:06:54.000 They're paying to comment.

02:06:55.000 No, no, you have to understand, right?

02:06:56.000 These are all of Will's burners.

02:06:58.000 Oh, I see how this works.

02:06:59.000 That's what I've been doing on my phone this whole time.

02:07:01.000 Arguments are great.

02:07:03.000 And a lot of the Super Chats want to have their opinion heard when there's an opinion on the show and they disagree with, and then we read their opinion because it's typically not agreeing with me, and that's the point.

02:07:11.000 Interesting.

02:07:12.000 You really think that violent felons should get a gun the day they get out of prison?

02:07:18.000 I didn't say that.

02:07:18.000 Oh.

02:07:19.000 What do you think exactly?

02:07:20.000 If they've paid their debt to society, perhaps we say it's five years in prison plus five years probationary period.

02:07:27.000 Which is not necessarily probation, but like a probationary period where you don't get to vote, you don't get your guns back.

02:07:31.000 I'm talking about when all is said and done and what we deem to be the end of their punishment, they get their rights back.

02:07:37.000 In some way that has to happen.

02:07:39.000 I think we need to have prison reform.

02:07:41.000 I think the bigger problems aren't so much Whether or not a felon should have a gun, it's more so what's resulting in crime, poverty, felonies anyway.

02:07:49.000 I don't think people are inherently evil.

02:07:52.000 I think we have problems that need to be solved that could root out a lot of the issues.

02:07:56.000 The problem is you have a political class hellbent on manipulating people into making these problems worse so they can sustain their power.

02:08:04.000 Ah, yeah.

02:08:05.000 And it's true for the left and the right, unfortunately. 0.66

02:08:08.000 More so, I would say, on the left, to be completely honest, hence why we find ourselves in this position with the establishment left lying and manipulating and cheating, and sometimes conservatives saying dumb things, but... It's the rule of the left and the exception on the right.

02:08:22.000 All right, Joseph Walcott says motion sensor sprinklers for night defense outside your coop works like a charm.

02:08:27.000 Yeah, we were thinking about that.

02:08:29.000 All right, my friends, if you haven't already, you must, you must smash that like button because it really does help.

02:08:34.000 And thanks for hanging out.

02:08:35.000 Go to TimGuest.com, become a member because the members area will show you a Huge list of all of these guests and all these bonus segments, I assure you.

02:08:43.000 If you're not a member and you sign up today, there is too much content for you to be able to watch.

02:08:48.000 It's just too much!

02:08:49.000 Because I think we've been doing this now for like three months and there's going to be probably days worth of content.

02:08:55.000 You will be permanently... And it's not all new stuff.

02:08:58.000 Like we had Jim Hansen on, he talked about His war stories in the Philippines, we're eating rotten eggs, and we try to do a lot of that for the bonus stuff that's always evergreen and always entertaining.

02:09:08.000 Fun.

02:09:08.000 I love that guy.

02:09:09.000 Yeah, it was fun.

02:09:10.000 Check out TimCast.com, become a member, but don't forget to like, share, subscribe to this show.

02:09:14.000 We broke a million subs with all your guys' help, so we're really, really grateful for all of that.

02:09:18.000 We're live Monday through Friday at 8 p.m.

02:09:19.000 You can follow me on all social media platforms at TimCast, and you can check out my other YouTube channels, YouTube.com slash TimCast and YouTube.com slash TimCast News.

02:09:28.000 Will, you do stuff.

02:09:29.000 Yeah, I know.

02:09:31.000 So you can follow me on Twitter at Will Chamberlain, but I also do human events and that's a bigger thing.

02:09:35.000 So we are available at humanevents.com and publish news and opinion regularly.

02:09:39.000 We also, you can go to youtube.com slash human events, which will give you access to my live streams that I'm not as regular as Tim, but I'm, you know, getting a little more consistent with them.

02:09:48.000 And also facebook.com slash human events media will also get you access to those as well.

02:09:55.000 Read the Daily Caller.

02:09:57.000 I write a ton of stuff every day.

02:09:59.000 And you can follow me on Twitter, I'm jordielancaster.

02:10:02.000 Or Instagram, I'm jordannlancaster.

02:10:06.000 Yeah, I'm at Ian Crossland.

02:10:08.000 IanCrossland.net.

02:10:09.000 And one of the things I like about TeamCast.com I was just thinking about today is as the days go on, the subscription becomes more valuable because the library keeps getting bigger.

02:10:19.000 So it's like you get more.

02:10:21.000 Great point.

02:10:21.000 Well, once we start the new shows, It's gonna be like HBO Plus!

02:10:29.000 Yes, I'll put it this way right so when everybody's becoming a member we're using that money to make the site

02:10:34.000 better and There's there's bump roads. There's bumps in the road, but

02:10:38.000 the money we're making is we're hiring more people. I am NOT going to be

02:10:42.000 Let me let me say put it this way. I see a lot of these people they get they get a bunch of subscribers

02:10:47.000 What do they do they buy you know Ferrari Ferraris infinity pools?

02:10:51.000 It takes selfies You know, private jets, private jets.

02:10:54.000 Oh man, they fly $20,000 flights first class.

02:10:56.000 They're all rich.

02:10:57.000 And I'm like, that's money you could use to hire someone for like, you know, to write

02:11:02.000 stuff, to make content, to produce videos.

02:11:04.000 But would you be down to get an infinity pool?

02:11:06.000 No, come on. 0.85

02:11:08.000 I would like an infinity pool, but I'm not going to spend money on a pool when I can spend money on someone who's going to do awesome stuff.

02:11:12.000 I would like an infinity pool too.

02:11:13.000 I'll put it this way.

02:11:14.000 If I had my choice between an infinity pool and giving someone a job where they're funded to create awesome content and culture, I'd choose the content and culture.

02:11:22.000 Yes!

02:11:22.000 Invest in the people.

02:11:23.000 I am more interested in creating awesome things that inspire people than I am in being able to sit in a pool.

02:11:31.000 I get inspiration from sitting in a pool.

02:11:33.000 That's fair.

02:11:34.000 I mean, we have a sauna.

02:11:36.000 Synchronious.

02:11:37.000 We have a skate park.

02:11:39.000 But I'll tell you this, everything we do is with the intention of making something of it.

02:11:44.000 So when we built the skate park in the garage, it's because it's actually a venue where we're going to have events and we're going to do live streams.

02:11:50.000 So the goal is in the future for everyone listening, Friday nights are going to become big events where we do the show.

02:11:55.000 And then we segue into the outdoor cameras where we have a comedian or musician or I don't know maybe a skateboarder and we just have a hangout with like beers and barbecue and we make it a free like probably hour long maybe two hour long thing where it's like a Friday night hangout.

02:12:08.000 Now we're gonna do one night where members actually have the ability to buy tickets to come out.

02:12:14.000 It'll be limited probably like 20 tickets because we want an audience watching and you know the cameras rolling But it's not a big venue.

02:12:21.000 Yes, we can't literally have everybody but that's the plan man It's gonna be it's gonna be amazing cool stuff like um we could stream live Tim cast IRL like one camera angle of the venue and then if you go to Tim cast calm as a Subscriber you get like five more angles.

02:12:34.000 No, no, no, we're gonna we're gonna have it produce a multicam and everything nice Because we're going to have panning cameras mounted and then all we have to do is just, you know, have one person on controls.

02:12:44.000 And so I want to do events like Friday night.

02:12:47.000 There are probably a lot of people who are like, you know, I don't care to watch a talk show, but I'd love to see a standup comedy thing from somebody with multiple comedians.

02:12:55.000 The other thing we're going to do too is periodic, very, very special events that would be effectively pay-per-view where it's like, I would like to get prominent comedians to do a show as if it were any other venue.

02:13:08.000 But that means they'll want standard venue procedures where it's like people pay tickets, they get a percentage of the ticket sales.

02:13:14.000 So we would just do a digital venue where it's like, okay, we're going to do a special event, you know, Sunday night with like these four comedians.

02:13:20.000 It's a $5 ticket for entry.

02:13:22.000 And then it's online.

02:13:23.000 And then they get a portion of the of the sales as you know, as they do.

02:13:26.000 So yeah, man, a lot of big plans in that direction.

02:13:28.000 Love you, Tim.

02:13:29.000 Awesome.

02:13:29.000 It's going to be fun.

02:13:30.000 It's going to be a whole lot of fun.

02:13:31.000 Did you shout out?

02:13:32.000 I did not.

02:13:33.000 So I will say my two cents on this is that I think the issue that the guys are talking about is entirely cultural, which is not something that you can fix from the top down.

02:13:40.000 You fix it from the bottom up.

02:13:41.000 And that's one of the things we're doing at TimCast.com.

02:13:44.000 But you can follow me at Sarah Patchlitz on Twitter and Mines.

02:13:48.000 Everybody!

02:13:49.000 It's Friday night.

02:13:49.000 Thanks for hanging out.

02:13:50.000 We are going to be back Monday at 8pm, and we're going to be doing some fun stuff this weekend.

02:13:55.000 So we did film a vlog last Sunday, and we had this Pro BMX guy, Mike Fede, he did a grind on the grind bar, and we're building out the new vlog section.

02:14:06.000 You can see it at TimCast.com, it's just nothing there yet.

Timcast IRL - Tim Pool - April 16, 2021

Timcast IRL - Florida Bill Grants Immunity If You Drive Through Protesters w-Will Chamberlain

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript