Timcast IRL - Tim Pool - Timcast IRL - New Evidence Points To Waukesha Attack Being Terror w-Branca & Posobiec

00:00:00.000 There's a lot of new information in the Waukesha attack.

00:00:12.000 First of all, as I've been covering, as Andy Ngo covered, and now many other outlets have covered, the New York Post and the Daily Mail, among many others, the perpetrator had threatened white people on social media.

00:00:25.000 He had posted black nationalist memes.

00:00:28.000 He had expressed support for Black Lives Matter.

00:00:31.000 And there's a lot of other information from the police reports about how he was slowly driving up towards the parade, slow enough that a cop was able to bang on the hood, and then walk around and bang on the door and tell him to stop.

00:00:43.000 So this was not a pursuit.

00:00:45.000 This was an intentional act.

00:00:47.000 And that's exactly what this man was charged with.

00:00:49.000 But now there's new information.

00:00:51.000 The man in question, Brooks, apparently had threatened to blow up a casino in the past.

00:00:56.000 Now, why is it that the media has come out and said it was an accident?

00:00:59.000 NBC, many activists, on MSNBC, a man said it was an accident.

00:01:04.000 What are they calling it across the internet?

00:01:06.000 A crash.

00:01:08.000 A crash.

00:01:09.000 Strangely, I am shocked to say this, Debra Messing, of all people, had a tweet where she said it was not an accident, it was intentional, it was the Waukesha massacre.

00:01:18.000 So we're going to get into all this, and we're going to break down the media lies and what's going on.

00:01:21.000 And we also have big news in the Ahmed Arbery case.

00:01:24.000 All three men were convicted of murder in the death of Ahmed Arbery.

00:01:29.000 Now, on the law, seems like it was correct.

00:01:32.000 But there are some serious problems that I think we need to talk about as it pertains to citizens' arrest and self-defense.

00:01:39.000 And I just want to stress, man, The neighbor who was filming it, they charged him with murder, too?

00:01:44.000 Yikes, man.

00:01:44.000 He was just following behind, filming what was going on.

00:01:47.000 But hey, you are party to a group that surrounds a guy, and the death occurs.

00:01:53.000 If the citizen's arrest was not justified, you're all gonna get charged.

00:01:56.000 Now, I'm not the expert on self-defense, so we brought in the expert on self-defense, Andrew Branca.

00:02:02.000 Branca, is it?

00:02:03.000 Which one is it?

00:02:03.000 Branca.

00:02:04.000 Branca.

00:02:05.000 I've been saying it wrong the entire time.

00:02:06.000 Either way is fine.

00:02:08.000 So tell us what you do.

00:02:09.000 You've been on the show before.

00:02:10.000 Yes, I'm an attorney.

00:02:11.000 I do use of force law, self-defense law.

00:02:14.000 That's all I do.

00:02:15.000 I don't have a generalized criminal defense practice.

00:02:18.000 I've been doing that this year is 30 years now, doing nothing but use of force law in all 50 states.

00:02:24.000 To my knowledge, I'm the only attorney in the country with that explicit focus strictly on use of force law, certainly for that duration of time.

00:02:31.000 So getting into the Ahmaud Arbery stuff as well as the Rittenhouse stuff is going to be really interesting.

00:02:36.000 I watched every minute of the Rittenhouse trial and much of the Arbery trial as well, so I have definitely strongly held opinions on both those cases.

00:02:44.000 And it's crazy to me, not to take up too much time, but the Arbery case, people really don't seem to know anything about this.

00:02:51.000 Even conservatives right now see they're getting it wrong, but we'll get into all that too.

00:02:54.000 And we also have another individual who is an expert on many subjects.

00:02:58.000 You worked in intelligence as well as just, you're on the beat, you know the news.

00:03:01.000 We got Jack Posobiec.

00:03:03.000 You see, I'm confused, Tim.

00:03:05.000 You're talking about, you know, you're telling me that there's some driver of this SUV and yet I've been reading the media and it tells, you know, the New York Times says the SUV just drove through the parade by itself.

00:03:19.000 It doesn't say anything about a driver.

00:03:20.000 I'm looking on the Wikipedia page.

00:03:22.000 Just says an SUV drove through it.

00:03:24.000 Doesn't say anything about it.

00:03:25.000 You're talking about all this other stuff.

00:03:27.000 Which Transformer is the red SUV?

00:03:29.000 The Ford Escape Transformer.

00:03:31.000 It's not Optimus Prime, is it?

00:03:32.000 No.

00:03:33.000 No, he's a tractor-trailer or something.

00:03:34.000 Yeah, oh, a tractor-trailer.

00:03:35.000 So it couldn't be Optimus Prime.

00:03:36.000 We'll just say it was Megatron.

00:03:38.000 Megatron did it!

00:03:40.000 Obviously a Decepticon.

00:03:41.000 Yeah, the media is saying an SUV did it.

00:03:44.000 Oh! 0.60

00:03:44.000 Isn't it amazing how they do that? 0.60

00:03:46.000 Nothing like it.

00:03:46.000 Passive voice.

00:03:47.000 Well, they're trying to cover all this up, so...

00:03:51.000 I think what's going on is very clear.

00:03:53.000 This is a disinformation campaign.

00:03:55.000 This was something that had been started very early and that's the way all good disinformation campaigns start.

00:04:01.000 You get the lie out as fast as possible.

00:04:03.000 Who was the source?

00:04:05.000 Who was the source from the local police that went to the national media and said that he was fleeing from a knife fight?

00:04:15.000 Ask that question.

00:04:17.000 And you'll get your answer.

00:04:18.000 He was sealed in his car.

00:04:19.000 I don't know.

00:04:20.000 It was if the guy with the knife wasn't in his car with him attacking him.

00:04:23.000 Well, we'll talk about this because there's there's now been investigations that have gone through real time investigations.

00:04:29.000 People anons are actually going and driving the route right by themselves and then timing it up with the police scanner video with police scanner audio and the videos that came out from on the scene to determine the speed of this thing.

00:04:42.000 So we'll get in all this stuff, too.

00:04:44.000 I think we know the truth now.

00:04:46.000 Yeah, we got Ian.

00:04:46.000 Well, what's up, everybody?

00:04:47.000 Good to see you.

00:04:48.000 Ian Crossland, happy to be here.

00:04:49.000 iancrossland.net.

00:04:51.000 Get some!

00:04:51.000 I am also here in the corner pushing buttons as I always do.

00:04:54.000 I'm delighted to be back with Andrew Branca.

00:04:56.000 He's a very smart guy.

00:04:57.000 And Jack, of course, good pal.

00:04:58.000 So we're gonna have a great talk tonight.

00:04:59.000 I'm stoked.

00:05:00.000 Before we get started my friends, head over to StrongerBonesAndLife.com and you can get your Ageless Multicollagen from Biotrust 51% off.

00:05:09.000 This stuff is great.

00:05:10.000 Unflavored, you mix it in your drinks and it provides you with collagen.

00:05:13.000 You need it for your skin, your nails, your joints, all that really important stuff and for me, Now, truth be told, I haven't actually skated in a little bit because we got sick and then we had the week in Austin, but I try to make sure I'm keeping up with my protein and my collagen because I have old man, 35-year-old knees.

00:05:29.000 And as much as a lot of the older people are like, you're not old!

00:05:32.000 I'm like, try jumping down a six-foot half pipe with 35-year-old knees and you'll know what I'm talking about.

00:05:37.000 So go to strongerbonesinlife.com You get a 60-day money-back guarantee, the healthy aging support of collagen in its ideal forms, the 5 key types of collagen you need from 4 different sources, hydrolyzed collagen peptides meaning better and faster digestibility to support maximum benefits.

00:05:52.000 For every order today, BioTrust will donate a nutritious meal to a hungry child in your honor through their partnership with NoKidHungry.org.

00:05:59.000 To date, BioTrust has provided over 5 million meals to hungry kids.

00:06:02.000 Please help them hit their goal of 6 million meals this year.

00:06:06.000 The collagen.

00:06:07.000 It's non-GMO.

00:06:08.000 It's free of artificial colors, flavors, and preservatives.

00:06:10.000 There's nearly no odor or taste, unlike bone broth and other supplements.

00:06:14.000 There's no clumping.

00:06:15.000 And you will get free shipping with every order.

00:06:17.000 Free VIP live health and fitness coaching from BioTrust's team of expert nutrition and health coaches for Life With Every Order.

00:06:24.000 And their free e-report, The 14 Foods for Amazing Skin With Every Order.

00:06:28.000 Seriously, shout out.

00:06:29.000 You guys know BioTrust.

00:06:30.000 They sponsor a few shows every month.

00:06:33.000 And I have just tremendous respect.

00:06:36.000 And gratitude to the companies willing to get behind the show directly and have us shout them out.

00:06:40.000 That means a lot.

00:06:41.000 But don't forget, go to TimCast.com, become a member.

00:06:43.000 We're gonna have a members-only segment coming up around 11 or so p.m., but we are taking the rest of the weekend off for Thanksgiving so that we can have Thanksgiving with friends, Thanksgiving with family, and you should all do the same.

00:06:55.000 But at TimCast.com, you'll get access to all of our members-only segments, as well as supporting our journalists who are doing a lot of really great work.

00:07:02.000 So don't forget to like this video, subscribe to this channel, share this show with your friends.

00:07:05.000 And over at the TimCast store, TimCast.com, click the store, you can get your official Step On Snack and Find Out shirt.

00:07:11.000 Yes!

00:07:12.000 I guess YouTube doesn't like it.

00:07:13.000 They won't let us put it up on the channel.

00:07:16.000 It's an amazing shirt, so you guys should get it if you want it.

00:07:18.000 Let's jump into this first story, which I imagine YouTube will also get mad at us about.

00:07:23.000 Check this out from Daily Mail.

00:07:24.000 Waukesha massacre suspect, Daryl Brooks, was convicted for threatening to bomb

00:07:29.000 Nugget Casino in Nevada, and is still wanted after failing to appear in court.

00:07:34.000 They charged this guy in 2007 for calling in a bomb threat to the Nugget Casino.

00:07:40.000 He was put on probation after being convicted of conspiring to disturb the peace of Grosbeesteminer

00:07:46.000 and was banned from the casino.

00:07:47.000 His rap sheet also includes a conviction for, let's just say he was trafficking minors,

00:07:52.000 and I believe he had a child with the minor.

00:07:54.000 I mean, this guy is, you know, we'll try to keep it family friendly here.

00:07:57.000 Not a good guy, not good at all.

00:08:00.000 But based on this, as well as other information that's come out,

00:08:03.000 What Andy Ngo reported and then I used in my reporting, which really triggered the media.

00:08:08.000 They were so angry.

00:08:09.000 Oh no, don't tell everybody this guy supports Black Lives Matter and that he's promoted black nationalism and that he's threatened to harm white people, because that's the truth. 0.75

00:08:18.000 And so if you look at this and you look at, uh, Jack Posobiec, you put out the court, uh, police report.

00:08:23.000 This car was slowly creeping up towards the parade.

00:08:27.000 It was not a pursuit.

00:08:28.000 He was not fleeing anything.

00:08:30.000 And he was going slow enough that one of the officers was able to walk up to the car, bang on the hood, walk over, bang on the door, and then the car speeds through, choosing to go down this path.

00:08:42.000 It was not, it was not pursuit.

00:08:43.000 This was an intentional act.

00:08:45.000 He's been, so let me put it this way.

00:08:47.000 They've charged the guy with intentional homicide.

00:08:50.000 Witnesses said he was swerving into people.

00:08:52.000 The police said he was slowly moving up and they banged the car telling him to stop. 0.99

00:08:56.000 He's posted about how he's wanted to kill white people. 0.90

00:08:58.000 He's supported black nationalism and Black Lives Matter. 0.99

00:09:01.000 But the media says it was an accident.

00:09:03.000 The media is downplaying this.

00:09:05.000 They're criticizing me and Andy Ngo and many others who are pointing these things out.

00:09:08.000 What do you call it if a guy goes online, threatens harm against white people, and then gets in an SUV, drives up to a parade route, runs over a bunch of white people?

00:09:21.000 What answer? 0.79

00:09:22.000 I always got the answers!

00:09:23.000 That's just a traffic accident, buddy.

00:09:25.000 You're connecting too many dots over there.

00:09:28.000 What do you even think you're doing?

00:09:30.000 That's not the narrative.

00:09:32.000 That's not what the police officers told us.

00:09:34.000 It was an SUV.

00:09:36.000 So this is what you get.

00:09:36.000 If you have a guy who goes on social media and says he wants to harm white people and then he runs through a parade route directly through it, swerving into people, What you get is an SUV involved in an accident.

00:09:48.000 Right.

00:09:48.000 Well, so here's what, and you can go see, go to walkershawcounty.gov, you can see the entire thing.

00:09:54.000 I've got it written up as Detective Casey, Officer Berlin, you know, they come up and they talk about this where they say it was driving so slow that they were able to walk up to it, knock on the hood, then he brushes them aside, but he's still going slow.

00:10:10.000 Then they're able to knock on the window, right?

00:10:13.000 And say, stop, you can't go in there.

00:10:15.000 That's a parade route.

00:10:16.000 At that point, he turns and drives.

00:10:19.000 So if you go look at the videos, if you freeze it, you can actually see that his hood is already damaged, right?

00:10:26.000 Before he gets there.

00:10:27.000 That's because he had to drive through barricades to get onto the parade route.

00:10:33.000 So he combined that with this video.

00:10:35.000 That just some anon went and filmed himself driving down that road and then they time it up with the videos and they realize that you would have to be driving slow and then speed up.

00:10:48.000 Here's the key.

00:10:49.000 Here's the key point of that.

00:10:52.000 And I talked to people locally from the MythInform guys.

00:10:54.000 You know those guys.

00:10:55.000 They're in Milwaukee.

00:10:57.000 So they're telling me, they said, Jack, Waukesha, it's not like some town where you can get stuck.

00:11:01.000 There's a million ways in and out.

00:11:03.000 There's plenty of routes.

00:11:04.000 You know, it's ridiculous to even think that you would somehow be, you know, accidentally trapped on a parade route.

00:11:10.000 So as the car is driving, you can see this in the dash cam video that this guy filmed, you have to make a hard right turn into where the parade route was.

00:11:21.000 So it's that hard right turn where he would have to smash through the barricades and then speed up to be able to go through.

00:11:27.000 That is intent.

00:11:29.000 How far away did Brooks live?

00:11:32.000 Oh, he lived in Milwaukee.

00:11:34.000 That's like 25 minutes away.

00:11:35.000 So did he, he came, apparently he came from a domestic, they're saying there, or no, no, no, they said there was an altercation nearby.

00:11:40.000 I think it's totally unrelated.

00:11:41.000 It's weird.

00:11:42.000 So there, they, it was a boat ramp, believe it or not, of all things, right?

00:11:46.000 So there's a boat ramp, that's what you hear on the police scanner, that there's this altercation and there's something about Hey, that's actually why the first police officer went over.

00:11:54.000 Let's see if I can pull this up.

00:11:56.000 That he went over at approximately 4.35 p.m.

00:11:59.000 Detective Casey heard via Waukesha Police Radio that a reserve officer was informed by a citizen that two people were fighting in the area of White Rock School.

00:12:09.000 Squads were sent to that area to further investigate.

00:12:12.000 A few minutes later, Detective Casey hears a horn honking from an area north of his location,

00:12:17.000 and that's where he goes in and sees him, uh, go- essentially going into the parade route.

00:12:21.000 I'm- I'm just wondering, you know, this guy lives so far away, why was he out there?

00:12:25.000 Right.

00:12:25.000 You know, I- I think it's obvious.

00:12:27.000 I think anybody who looks at the story says, in the absence of evidence, the solution with the least amount of assumptions tends to be correct, and that looks like a terror attack, a racial and political terror attack, based on what this guy had said and believed.

00:12:42.000 It's possible it wasn't, to be completely honest.

00:12:44.000 But that's the absence of evidence.

00:12:45.000 What we have here is it was an intentional act, it was deliberate, and we can see his motivations.

00:12:50.000 We can see some of his inclinations on social media.

00:12:53.000 That doesn't mean, I'll correct, doesn't mean motivations.

00:12:56.000 But I think, you know, when we're dealing with crimes and stuff, it is reasonable for a person to try and figure out what motive may have been.

00:13:03.000 At this point, it is reasonable to assume this was a terror attack for racial and political reasons.

00:13:08.000 Before... Real quick, we had just two days before this, the Rittenhouse verdict, we had an activist reported on the 20th.

00:13:15.000 This was one day an activist, it was reported, had said that this country is a tinderbox and one more, you know, one more match or whatever and it's gonna go up.

00:13:26.000 We had tons of people on the left.

00:13:27.000 We had that Democrat in Illinois saying it's karma.

00:13:30.000 We had activists on Twitter saying they wanted revenge, saying go, you know, to do bad things.

00:13:36.000 And then come Sunday, a guy who's made posts about harming white people goes and does a bad thing.

00:13:42.000 It's absurd to me to not start with that hypothesis.

00:13:47.000 It's crazy how like if someone the way the way murder can can happen and how people will respond differently like if that guy had been face to face with each of those individuals looking in their eyes and using a knife to kill them each one after the other if this would be another realm then being behind the the icy cold steel of a car where they can't see your face it's like a drone dropping a drone bomb as opposed to being the one there doing the killing I mean, but he's... I understand the drone argument, but... They'd be stringing him up if he was like a knife killer and had blood all over his body and stuff.

00:14:19.000 There are two lines here that I was just about to read, and one of them speaks to exactly what you're talking about, because it says, Officer Buterin observed the driver looking straight ahead, directly at him, and it appeared he had no emotion on his face.

00:14:34.000 As the vehicle passed his location, he continually yelled for the vehicle to stop.

00:14:38.000 Skip ahead a little bit.

00:14:40.000 They shot at him, right?

00:14:41.000 He- they did shoot at him.

00:14:42.000 He hurt- the vehicle then appeared.

00:14:44.000 So, okay.

00:14:45.000 So they knew he was- he was- he was preparing to attack these people and they tried to use deadly force to stop it.

00:14:52.000 At that point, obviously, they perceived him as an imminent deadly force threat.

00:14:52.000 Yes.

00:14:56.000 That's why they fired the shot.

00:14:57.000 Officer Buterin heard tires squeal as the vehicle appeared to rapidly accelerate.

00:15:02.000 The vehicle took an abrupt left turn into the crowd of parade participants.

00:15:07.000 At this point, it was clear that this was an intentional act to strike and hurt as many people as possible.

00:15:13.000 And so, I love this.

00:15:15.000 If we operate on what the police said, they said they've ruled out terror, then I can only say Impulse?

00:15:22.000 I mean, it's not passion.

00:15:24.000 Passion, you know, you maybe argue passion, but what was he mad about?

00:15:27.000 Was he like, he was driving up and he saw some Karen yelling and he was like, oh now I'm really angry, and in this passionate moment, there was no great passion, so it was just... Legally it would only matter anyway if the passion was aroused by the people he used to force against him.

00:15:40.000 So that's clearly not the case.

00:15:41.000 So maybe drugs?

00:15:44.000 I would love to see a toxicology report here.

00:15:47.000 Oh, it would be off the charts, would be my expectation.

00:15:49.000 You would see that ring video and the mugshot that's come out.

00:15:53.000 I mean, this does not seem like a guy who's operating his rights.

00:15:56.000 You'll have every peek on that graph.

00:15:57.000 And that may be why the police said it's not terror.

00:16:00.000 Because it turns out the guy's just, you know, whacked out of his mind and was just slamming the gas thinking he was running over gummy bears or something.

00:16:06.000 You know, he's just like, you know, tripping and crazy.

00:16:09.000 So my issue is, I would love to believe this guy was just on drugs.

00:16:13.000 I don't want to live in a world where we have this- But it certainly wouldn't be the first terrorist attack that was committed by someone on drugs.

00:16:17.000 No, for sure.

00:16:18.000 For sure.

00:16:18.000 I'm just saying, if someone was on drugs, we can then argue, oh, okay.

00:16:23.000 So there's evidence to suggest maybe it wasn't terror, just a drug addict doing something crazy.

00:16:28.000 There's still, I think it's still a fair assumption that this guy was politically motivated in what he did.

00:16:32.000 I'm just saying, right now, there is no evidence of drugs.

00:16:35.000 The only thing we have is this guy's political statements about wanting to hurt white people, which, you know, something about banging heads or something.

00:16:42.000 And then getting a car and doing this, plus the timing, plus the political nature of what's been going on.

00:16:47.000 And so, I lean towards, not definitively, but I think it's a fair assumption, it was terror.

00:16:52.000 If they come out with a toxicology report and say he was on drugs, it would shift more towards the middle again.

00:16:56.000 And I'd say it's still, you know, likely it could be terror, but it could also be the guy was whacked out of his mind.

00:17:01.000 So here's my thing too.

00:17:02.000 And, you know, I had kind of already been thinking this with some of those social media posts that you and Andy were highlighting.

00:17:09.000 I went through a ton of them myself before the thing got taken down.

00:17:12.000 Andy, Andy was highlighting.

00:17:13.000 Yeah.

00:17:14.000 I was just citing reporting.

00:17:15.000 Right, right, right.

00:17:16.000 And so, and now I think New York Post has put it up.

00:17:18.000 Daily Mail's put it up.

00:17:19.000 But specifically, now, of course, you know, the anti-white posts, the FBI is not tracking that.

00:17:25.000 They're just not.

00:17:25.000 But the anti-police posts that he had up, the posts about killing police officers, that's something that definitely would... He had a post about killing cops?

00:17:33.000 Right. 0.95

00:17:34.000 Wow.

00:17:34.000 Talked about, you know, called them pigs and this type of thing back in 2020.

00:17:39.000 And that's definitely something that would have put him on the radar.

00:17:41.000 So one of the things that I was thinking about reading this was, and of course in all of these cases, we, you know, it seems that we always come up to an extent where they were known to the FBI.

00:17:52.000 Subject was known to FBI, right?

00:17:53.000 Don't we always, don't we always hear about this?

00:17:56.000 And so I was wondering based on those posts, I'm like, yeah, he's probably in a file somewhere because that would have pinged the algorithm.

00:18:02.000 But then we hear this thing about the casino, and that he threatened to bomb a casino.

00:18:08.000 That's like, okay, FBI's definitely got a file on this.

00:18:11.000 They know him.

00:18:12.000 100%.

00:18:12.000 Well, in fairness, I'm also known to the FBI.

00:18:14.000 I teach at the academy there.

00:18:15.000 Yeah, but I mean...

00:18:19.000 I've been through some FBI training myself.

00:18:21.000 Something I find interesting about this whole thing is we have the story itself, right?

00:18:25.000 Why did he do this?

00:18:26.000 Was it intentional?

00:18:26.000 Were there drugs?

00:18:27.000 Kind of the core story.

00:18:28.000 But then there's also the meta story.

00:18:30.000 Like, why are all these people instantly coming to his defense trying to explain away what happened?

00:18:36.000 Or just cover up.

00:18:37.000 He was chased by someone with a knife or there was a gunfighter.

00:18:40.000 There was some innocent explanation for this It wasn't actually a an act of malice that that did this and I think there's a reason for it I think because this guy is a real problem for the bail reform movement now we've all heard about bail reform and I believe bail can use reform if someone's charged with a Non-violent crime and they're being they can't make $500 bail and that means they won't be able to work and pay the rent That's a real problem that needs to be fixed But that's not where bail reform in the real world stops.

00:19:07.000 It releases violent people too.

00:19:09.000 And those violent people go back to their community and create havoc.

00:19:13.000 The same havoc they got arrested for the first time.

00:19:16.000 And you might think, well why would anybody want that?

00:19:18.000 Why would anybody want havoc in their neighborhood?

00:19:20.000 But havoc, chaos, is not bad for business for everybody.

00:19:25.000 It's bad if it's your neighborhood and you live there.

00:19:28.000 But if you're a Benjamin Crump, for example, you make $10 million every time there's some kind of Zimmerman case, a Rittenhouse case, a Ahmaud Arbery case.

00:19:37.000 These are money-making opportunities in the tens of millions of dollars for you.

00:19:42.000 So chaos is good for some people.

00:19:44.000 Not just money, but political capital.

00:19:45.000 You're saying that There is a motivation to bring about bail reform because it results in an opportunity where a criminal can get hurt and they can monetize it.

00:19:59.000 Chaos is good for some people.

00:20:02.000 I should be clear.

00:20:02.000 When I say people are leveraging bail reform for political reasons, I would say bail reform overreach.

00:20:09.000 Not all bail reform, but bail reform that releases violent charged suspects.

00:20:13.000 But you think that many people advocating for it, I'm not saying every, but some have that in mind.

00:20:18.000 They're like, this will create more crime and more opportunity.

00:20:21.000 Especially people with considerable political power, like a Benjamin Crump.

00:20:24.000 I don't mean the individual social worker who's in favor.

00:20:27.000 Right, right.

00:20:27.000 They don't have any influence over everything.

00:20:29.000 He's a lawyer who monetizes.

00:20:30.000 Right.

00:20:30.000 So, right, the pendulum has been swinging in favor of loosening bail requirements more and more and more until the point they include people charged with violent crimes.

00:20:40.000 And eventually the pendulum's going to swing back, but when it swings back, that's going to be bad for some people.

00:20:45.000 This case is a perfect example, a perfect warning to the normals in society that, holy cow, we all thought that bail reform was a good thing, but it's possible it goes too far.

00:20:55.000 It lets people like this out on bail.

00:20:57.000 Well, hold on.

00:20:57.000 I think bail reform is a good thing.

00:20:59.000 I don't like the bail system.

00:21:01.000 I don't like the idea that we would say, you're presumed innocent, but we're not going to let you out unless you give us 500 bucks.

00:21:07.000 for violent criminals with a preponderance of evidence, then I'm in favor of remand.

00:21:12.000 As far as I'm concerned, either it's remand or you're free to go until you're convicted.

00:21:17.000 But that means substantially more people should be remanded and substantially more people should

00:21:22.000 be released. There's also got to be some limitations, like if someone's a repeat

00:21:26.000 offender and you've got past convictions, okay, well, now you're going to be...

00:21:29.000 That's almost everybody.

00:21:30.000 Well, if that's the case.

00:21:31.000 Sorry, but as a practical matter, you see very few people go through the criminal just...

00:21:36.000 Of the people going through the criminal justice system on any given day,

00:21:39.000 almost none of them is it their first time.

00:21:41.000 But that... Sure.

00:21:43.000 But if someone goes in, and they've had a past conviction, and they say, okay, well, it's, you know, $2,000 if you want to get out.

00:21:51.000 I mean, you're going to destroy that person's life.

00:21:53.000 Outright, before you've proven them guilty simply on their past.

00:21:55.000 Well, they could sit in jail for a long time.

00:21:57.000 And there's too many, I mean, look at Kyle.

00:22:00.000 Kyle Rittenhouse, when he was like, he had to sit there for 87 days.

00:22:03.000 And he didn't have, what'd he say?

00:22:04.000 He had no running water.

00:22:05.000 He was not getting good food.

00:22:07.000 He was losing all this weight.

00:22:08.000 And he was not guilty.

00:22:10.000 So, and then he, $2 million to get him out.

00:22:13.000 And we can, you know, we can talk about the lawyers and all that stuff, but just on the system alone.

00:22:18.000 One aspect that I would, so bail obviously has been around a long time.

00:22:22.000 This isn't something, some new system that, you know, just was under like the Trump era or something like that.

00:22:27.000 You know, and Trump actually was for, you know, criminal justice reform, although he was focused more on back end than front end.

00:22:33.000 And not that I'm a supporter of the First Step movement, but just, you know, to clarify that.

00:22:39.000 But when it comes to these types of situations, you know, you know, you were talking before about how the criminal citizens arrest law in the Arbery case was something that had been written during the Civil War in Georgia.

00:22:52.000 It was still on the books at the time.

00:22:54.000 It has been updated since.

00:22:55.000 Well, with these cases as well, one thing that I think really ties all of these together is video, right?

00:23:02.000 We have video of Waukesha.

00:23:03.000 We have tons of video of it.

00:23:05.000 We have video of Kenosha.

00:23:06.000 We had video of Ahmaud Arbery, right?

00:23:08.000 And I think that in those two cases, it was the video that went to the jury and eventually swung them in one way or the other.

00:23:13.000 So you're thinking they should look at video as part of setting bail?

00:23:16.000 So look at video.

00:23:17.000 That would never happen.

00:23:17.000 Never happen.

00:23:19.000 Because you have to understand how this process works.

00:23:22.000 They're trying to make these decisions in three minutes.

00:23:25.000 The magistrate is making a bail decision in three minutes.

00:23:25.000 Right.

00:23:28.000 He's got an algorithm he uses depending on the degree of the offense, risk of flight.

00:23:33.000 There's a set criteria that they use.

00:23:37.000 And the state and the defense are going to go down that checklist of criteria.

00:23:40.000 And it's like a little algorithm that arrives at the bail amount.

00:23:42.000 So you can't make it part of probable cause?

00:23:45.000 Well, a probable cause would be determined someplace else.

00:23:48.000 It's not going to be determined right there.

00:23:49.000 But a judge, a magistrate's not going to take time to look through even five minutes of video to try to come to some determination of what a bail should be.

00:23:57.000 It should be legally required.

00:23:58.000 Maybe, but you'd have to redesign the entire system.

00:24:02.000 I mean, we're talking about redesigning the system.

00:24:04.000 The process is the punishment.

00:24:06.000 What they did to James O'Keefe.

00:24:07.000 They raid him and his journalists because law enforcement knows the process is the punishment.

00:24:12.000 When it came to Occupy Wall Street protests, there was a photographer that I was just filming.

00:24:16.000 I'm filming.

00:24:17.000 And there was a photographer standing on the sidewalk minding his own business when an officer came up and arrested him.

00:24:23.000 They claimed that he was obstructing a roadway.

00:24:26.000 They lied.

00:24:27.000 They made it up.

00:24:28.000 They then had a female officer lie under oath, and it wasn't until the National Lawyers Guild, who I'm not the biggest fan of, used my footage to show that the police lied, he was released.

00:24:38.000 Did any of the officers get in trouble?

00:24:40.000 No.

00:24:40.000 They never do.

00:24:41.000 They lie all the time on these criminal complaints.

00:24:44.000 They're never held accountable.

00:24:46.000 If there's someone who is a regular working-class Joe, and he gets accused of a somewhat serious offense, but not like, not a felony or anything, the judge can be like, look, I think we should keep him in jail until the court, and then what, 87 days or 80 days? 0.98

00:25:00.000 You lose your job, you lose your apartment, your car gets towed, your people are wondering where you went, your dog is going hungry, and then you get out destitute.

00:25:08.000 So I will cite Benjamin Franklin all day and night.

00:25:11.000 It is better that a hundred guilty persons go free than one innocent person suffer.

00:25:15.000 If the court cannot justify reasonably an algorithm in three minutes is not justification for holding someone against their will when they are presumed innocent.

00:25:24.000 That being said, everybody should keep and bear arms, and a free society means a society with risks.

00:25:34.000 And if we're gonna let out people, and I don't think violent offenders, depending on what they've committed, I think that's reasonable for a judge to be like, you're accused of triple murder or something, okay, sorry.

00:25:43.000 Which was Kyle Rittenhouse.

00:25:44.000 Go to Kyle, well, not triple, but yeah.

00:25:46.000 Well, you got double murder plus, you know, a bunch of other charges.

00:25:49.000 I can understand why they would be like, look, I'm sorry, you're being held because these are very serious and we're worried about the safety of others.

00:25:55.000 There should still be some scrutiny there.

00:25:57.000 But if we're going to let people out on bail, then all we need do is look at the constitution and say the fifth and sixth amendment, Benjamin Franklin and Blackstone and the second amendment.

00:26:10.000 Sure.

00:26:11.000 So, I don't want to come across as someone who's defending the way the system is.

00:26:15.000 I think it's broken.

00:26:16.000 I mean, from my perspective, for example, I think probable cause hearings are worthless the way they operate today.

00:26:22.000 What's supposed to happen is a probable cause hearing is supposed to be a filter to keep people from being dragged into a full-blown trial.

00:26:30.000 Unless there's probable cause to believe they committed the crime.

00:26:33.000 So at trial, they're going to have to prove you guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

00:26:37.000 If they can't even show 51% of the evidence going into that process, they shouldn't be able to drag you into the terribly destructive, dangerous risk of a full-blown trial.

00:26:47.000 But probable cause doesn't work that way today.

00:26:50.000 It doesn't work like a 51 degree threshold before you're brought into trial.

00:26:54.000 It's essentially a zero degree threshold.

00:26:56.000 The prosecutor can say whatever he wants.

00:26:58.000 He can get officers to swear whatever they want.

00:27:00.000 Nothing's ever checked.

00:27:01.000 When things are later proven to not be true, it doesn't matter.

00:27:05.000 They don't say, well, the process that got you into trial was inherently defective, so we're going to let you out.

00:27:10.000 What we need is a genuine probable cause hearing.

00:27:14.000 The reason we don't have one... I'm not defending this.

00:27:17.000 This is just the practical way the system works.

00:27:20.000 The reason we don't have that is because we have so many criminals going through the system.

00:27:25.000 We could never give everybody a genuine probable cause hearing the way the system is designed today.

00:27:30.000 And most of the people going through are criminals.

00:27:33.000 So no one cares that they're not actually getting a probable cause hearing.

00:27:37.000 No one notices until an innocent person Gets fed into that system and suffers all the thresher effects of that horribly destructive system.

00:27:48.000 And you see it affecting an innocent person that way.

00:27:51.000 Justice being blind is not always a good thing.

00:27:54.000 Here's the example I'll throw out there.

00:27:56.000 Justice isn't blind, I don't think.

00:27:57.000 Kyle Rittenhouse was charged, what, within 24 hours?

00:28:01.000 Or maybe 36 hours, if you actually go by the dates.

00:28:06.000 Alec Baldwin, it's still under investigation.

00:28:08.000 We're still reviewing the incident.

00:28:10.000 When we know that this took place on a movie set, I'm sure every single minute of that incident is caught on film.

00:28:18.000 There's no relevant facts in dispute.

00:28:20.000 I mean, on the criminal charge of reckless homicide, we know all the facts.

00:28:23.000 They're not in dispute.

00:28:25.000 And we know the law.

00:28:26.000 The law is not ambiguous there.

00:28:28.000 So the only reason they haven't charged him is because they've decided they don't want to charge him.

00:28:33.000 That's all.

00:28:33.000 If it was me or you and they decided they wanted to charge us, we would have been charged that day.

00:28:37.000 All day, every day.

00:28:38.000 And correct me if I'm wrong, I'm not a New Mexico lawyer.

00:28:41.000 I mean, I'm from out West, but... Crisis management system.

00:28:44.000 Is there a special rule for actors?

00:28:47.000 There's a special carve out in the law?

00:28:50.000 Alec Baldwin, in my opinion, and it wasn't my opinion.

00:28:53.000 It was someone on the show who mentioned this.

00:28:54.000 We saw what Gloria Allred said, right?

00:28:56.000 Alec Baldwin had a crisis management firm, most likely.

00:28:58.000 Oh yeah.

00:28:59.000 And he was on the phone immediately.

00:29:00.000 I believe that.

00:29:00.000 And they seeded the fake story about a blank and a misfire and shrapnel because the real story was that Alec Baldwin was handed a gun by someone who wasn't supposed to give it to him, that neither of them had checked the weapon, that it was loaded live, and he chose to, for no reason, seemingly no reason, to pull the hammer back, aim it, and shoot a woman.

00:29:18.000 The scene did not call for that in any way.

00:29:20.000 And it wouldn't matter if it did.

00:29:22.000 And this is what I was saying, I can't remember who was here, we were talking about this.

00:29:26.000 I said, if you walk up to someone, aim a gun, cock the hammer, pull the trigger, what are they going to call that?

00:29:34.000 Intentional homicide.

00:29:35.000 Alec Baldwin, however, got in front of the story.

00:29:38.000 At the very least, it's a reckless homicide.

00:29:40.000 So the intent element is different.

00:29:43.000 For example, he may not have genuinely not have known the gun was loaded.

00:29:46.000 That would take away the intent.

00:29:48.000 But the fact that he didn't check, that's still reckless.

00:29:51.000 If Alec Baldwin walked in the middle of the street, and there was some woman walking down the street, and he pulled a gun and pointed at her and just shot her, intentional homicide.

00:29:57.000 You would infer intent from that conduct.

00:29:59.000 Alec Baldwin wasn't supposed to aim, cock, and fire a gun in that scene.

00:30:04.000 So what's the difference?

00:30:05.000 I know, you know, the pattern, it's a set, so maybe something's going on, but if the script supervisor, and the lead electrician, and other witnesses there said, he wasn't supposed to be given the gun by that person, and then he chose to point it, pull the, you know, with live rounds in it, like, what's the difference?

00:30:20.000 The difference is, if you're just in the middle of the street, you're not involved in a movie set, and you walk up to a woman, point the gun, pull the trigger, blow her brains out, that conduct is conduct, because we never know intent, right?

00:30:30.000 We can't read inside a person's mind.

00:30:31.000 We're inferring their intent from their conduct.

00:30:34.000 And you can infer from that conduct they intended to shoot that woman because there's no alternative hypothesis consistent with the conduct there is in the in the Baldwin case because he was on a movie set so there may be some other reason why he did this without intending to kill her but he did kill her There's no justified reason for her killing her.

00:30:54.000 He could have avoided killing her by taking the simple step of confirming himself that the gun did not have a round in it.

00:31:00.000 And it is a violation of standard protocols to aim a weapon for any reason.

00:31:03.000 Guns are inherently dangerous instruments.

00:31:05.000 The standard of care is strict liability.

00:31:07.000 If it goes off when you pull the trigger and a bullet goes through somebody, that's on you.

00:31:11.000 I think it's murder.

00:31:12.000 You don't get to say, oops.

00:31:14.000 Gloria Allred had the great line of it. 1.00

00:31:16.000 She said, you handed Alec Baldwin that gun and he decided to play Russian Roulette with it.

00:31:22.000 I think people keep giving him the benefit of the doubt every turn.

00:31:27.000 It's insane to me.

00:31:29.000 We now know the stories were all lies.

00:31:32.000 We know that he had no reason to aim that gun at a person because it's a violation of his decades of security training, of firearms training, on movie sets.

00:31:39.000 He's been in movies, action movies.

00:31:41.000 Witnesses have testified, he's got multiple training, that AD wasn't supposed to give him the gun.

00:31:45.000 He had literally no reason, and it was a violation of safety protocol, to aim it at a person It wasn't part of the scene, and there was a dispute with the crew over what was going on.

00:31:55.000 I mean, look, you look at all the stories, all the news that has come out, and it sounds much more like Alec Baldwin has an anger management problem, so he took a gun, angrily pointed at the camera person, and shot and killed her, and then freaked out.

00:32:08.000 That makes substantially more sense than the armorer made a mistake, who accidentally handed it to the AD who made a mistake, who gave it to Baldin who made a mistake, who accidentally aimed it at her, pulled the hammer back, it's a single-action revolver, and then shot her with it, and then a fake story gets seeded.

00:32:22.000 So you're saying he could have been frustrated about something's going wrong on the set, he's stressed out.

00:32:22.000 I'm not playing.

00:32:26.000 The crew was revolting against him, people were walking off.

00:32:28.000 No, but I mean, even in that specific moment.

00:32:30.000 So he's yelling at her, saying something.

00:32:32.000 And notice we still, to this day, have not seen any video of this.

00:32:36.000 We haven't even seen a sanitized video.

00:32:38.000 We haven't seen anything.

00:32:40.000 And there are multiple cameras filming, they say.

00:32:42.000 Obviously.

00:32:43.000 So my gut would say that's an overreach.

00:32:45.000 I don't know for sure, but I will say this.

00:32:47.000 It's no crazier than what the Rittenhouse prosecutor argued.

00:32:51.000 True.

00:32:52.000 I think I'd say it's much more reasonable than what he argued.

00:32:54.000 Let's go back to reasonableness.

00:32:55.000 Let's talk about what's going on with the press in Waukesha.

00:32:58.000 We have the story from The Examiner.

00:33:00.000 NBC labels Waukesha attack an accident.

00:33:03.000 Oh, it's better.

00:33:03.000 It's better.

00:33:04.000 It's not just an accident.

00:33:05.000 It wasn't just a guy on TV saying, well, you know the accident here.

00:33:08.000 We've got CNN.

00:33:09.000 Waukesha parade crash suspect.

00:33:12.000 Crash suspect?

00:33:13.000 Is crash an intentional homicide act?

00:33:16.000 Okay.

00:33:17.000 I'll just jump over to Google.

00:33:19.000 Vehicle plows through parade.

00:33:20.000 There's Times of India, good on them.

00:33:21.000 CNN crash.

00:33:22.000 Fox says media blasted for calling it a crash.

00:33:24.000 CNN, Waukesha crash.

00:33:27.000 Eight-year-old, victim of the crash.

00:33:28.000 Parade incident.

00:33:30.000 Parade incident, BBC says.

00:33:33.000 They are all terrified to say it was an attack, even though the dude's been charged with intentional homicide.

00:33:39.000 It was intentional homicide, I believe, right?

00:33:40.000 Is that what you charged him with?

00:33:42.000 I just read the criminal complaint.

00:33:46.000 It's amazing to me because You have all of the evidence and all of the elements in that criminal complaint.

00:33:54.000 That is a terroristic criminal complaint.

00:33:58.000 The only difference is that the charge isn't there and what the chief of police says at the press conference.

00:34:05.000 If you had added up all of those facts and you add in then one more paragraph of the statements that he had made online, the years and years worth of statements, you know what you have?

00:34:16.000 You have Charlottesville.

00:34:18.000 You have the Charlottesville 2017 James Fields attack.

00:34:22.000 And it is all the same facts.

00:34:24.000 Imagine if they found similar statements on Kylie.

00:34:27.000 Except that that wasn't a Christmas parade.

00:34:29.000 I mean, this is worse.

00:34:31.000 So the thing about Charlottesville is that you have two angry factions.

00:34:34.000 I'm talking about from the complaint side, not the situation.

00:34:37.000 Right, right, right, right.

00:34:38.000 You have two fighting sides.

00:34:40.000 All day, it's nuts, the cops aren't stopping, and people are- Were you- Did you cover that?

00:34:44.000 I was not injured.

00:34:44.000 You were out there, yeah, no, neither was I. But a guy, you know, fired a gun at one dude and another dude- You were at Berkeley, that was it.

00:34:49.000 Yeah, I was at Berkeley.

00:34:49.000 Yeah, that's what I'm thinking of.

00:34:50.000 And then one guy's flamethrowing another guy, and then a dude gets in his car- You had mutual combat.

00:34:55.000 You're a lot of music.

00:34:56.000 Oh, definitely.

00:34:56.000 And then I can't speak to, you know, what's going through people's minds, but I can tell you what the video shows.

00:35:04.000 Fields then starts driving down a road towards a large group.

00:35:07.000 They run up and start bashing his car and he just slams the gas and rams into people.

00:35:12.000 So there's a lot of heat of the moment elements in that.

00:35:15.000 Combat all day, driving down the road, the dude slams the gas.

00:35:18.000 He claimed I believe he was trying to escape.

00:35:20.000 I don't think I believe him when you have mutual combat and then a guy engages in very serious attacks on another group.

00:35:26.000 Sorry, you don't get that benefit of the doubt.

00:35:28.000 But in Waukesha, he like, he drove to a parade.

00:35:33.000 He sought this out.

00:35:34.000 There was no combat here.

00:35:35.000 It was little kids marching down the street, twirling batons, and he plows through them.

00:35:39.000 This is worse.

00:35:41.000 Well, so let me go read, and this is what I was getting at.

00:35:44.000 I have the Wikipedia articles, and I screenshotted these earlier today.

00:35:49.000 Here is the one for Waukesha.

00:35:52.000 2021 Waukesha Christmas Parade car crash.

00:35:56.000 On November 21st, 2021, an SUV was driven through, SUV was driven through, no name of the driver, driven through the annual Christmas Parade in Waukesha, Wisconsin.

00:36:04.000 Almost makes it sound like it's part of the parade.

00:36:06.000 It's so passive, right?

00:36:07.000 Driven through the parade.

00:36:09.000 Killing six people and injuring 62 others.

00:36:11.000 Then we get the alleged driver of the vehicle, 39 year old Daryl Lee Brooks is in custody.

00:36:16.000 Brooks has been charged with five degrees of first degree intentional homicides.

00:36:18.000 Actually hasn't been updated because he's been charged with six now.

00:36:21.000 Yeah.

00:36:22.000 Once again, Wikipedia's fake news.

00:36:24.000 Now I have, I'll read this one.

00:36:26.000 And the next one is Charlottesville.

00:36:32.000 And, of course, I can't find it right now.

00:36:33.000 So, in Charlottesville, though, you get the driver, you get the fact that he had made a series of... It starts by saying a white supremacist guy's car.

00:36:41.000 Oh, here it is.

00:36:41.000 The Charlottesville car attack.

00:36:43.000 The Charlottesville car attack was a white supremacist terrorist attack. 0.98

00:36:46.000 Terrorist attack. 0.97

00:36:47.000 Terrorist attack, right there.

00:36:49.000 Perpetuated on August 12, 2017, when James Alex Fields Jr.

00:36:52.000 deliberately drove his car into a crowd of people, peacefully protesting the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, killing one person and injuring 35.

00:37:00.000 20-year-old Fields had previously espoused neo-Nazi and white supremacist beliefs and drove from Ohio to attend the rally.

00:37:07.000 So I think it's very important to point out that this comparison intends, the intention is to show the Waukesha attacker is comparable to what happened in Charlottesville.

00:37:18.000 Someone who committed a violent act against a group of people and their horrifying attacks.

00:37:25.000 But the media Over like just, just absolutely slams Charlottesville every moment they get and walk a shot.

00:37:31.000 I think yesterday, CNN put a candidate in Virginia that just less what a week ago, a month ago ran his entire campaign was based around Charlottesville.

00:37:40.000 Joe Biden launched the current president of the United States launched his campaign based on Charlottesville.

00:37:46.000 This has been a seminal moment in American politics.

00:37:50.000 Well, I think it's fairly obvious.

00:37:52.000 For that side.

00:37:52.000 There are a bunch of people posting about how they can assume the race of the individual based on the fact that the media won't report it.

00:38:00.000 And it's actually not fair.

00:38:01.000 It's actually, it could be... It's the Coulter rule.

00:38:04.000 Is that what it is?

00:38:05.000 Yeah, or Coulter's Law.

00:38:06.000 But I think it's fair to say, if they don't report the race, you can just assume the person is not white.

00:38:10.000 Yes.

00:38:11.000 Because it's not about any one particular minority group, it's just about the media has no problem, you know, actually they enjoy saying, like, a white person did this.

00:38:20.000 So, you know, a lot of people are pointing out, what do you think would happen?

00:38:24.000 In Arbery, every moment of it.

00:38:26.000 White jury. 0.84

00:38:26.000 What do you think would happen if, in the press, We had a story about a white man with years of posts about how he doesn't like black people, gets in a car, drives to a black suburb, and then rams a black Christmas parade. 0.84

00:38:38.000 What would the media say?

00:38:38.000 Imagine if Kyle Rittenhouse had had messages like that on his phone.

00:38:42.000 Kyle Rittenhouse didn't have anti-black anything.

00:38:45.000 No, no, no, but I'm saying if he did.

00:38:47.000 We would never have heard anything but that for the entire trial.

00:38:49.000 That's it.

00:38:50.000 I mean the Proud Boys photo.

00:38:52.000 You get the one hand gesture, which, you know, he even claims now was something that was a setup.

00:38:57.000 He actually did claim that in his last interview with Ashley Banfield on NewsNation.

00:39:03.000 And I really like NewsNation, by the way, a lot of the stuff, a lot of the work they're doing.

00:39:06.000 I think they're trying to kind of be what CNN was at one point, you know, just kind of show both sides and not really try to take a side.

00:39:13.000 In 1991?

00:39:13.000 Yes.

00:39:16.000 I mean, like, the original, original iteration.

00:39:18.000 Watching those old Keith Olbermann videos, kind of sad to see how psychotic he's become.

00:39:21.000 I know, right?

00:39:22.000 And then you also, of course, had Binger trying to make use of Kyle Rittenhouse's social media in the trial.

00:39:31.000 He fought for that supposed Proud Boys meeting photos.

00:39:34.000 He fought desperately to get that into evidence.

00:39:37.000 No, but he did use his TikTok.

00:39:38.000 Remember that?

00:39:39.000 That's the video.

00:39:40.000 Was your TikTok account four doors, you know?

00:39:44.000 Yes.

00:39:45.000 By the way, the only reason he was able to use that was because Kyle's profile picture in there had him holding the rifle.

00:39:53.000 That's what made it admissible.

00:39:54.000 I gotta give a shout out to Debra Messing. 1.00

00:39:56.000 Debra Messing is usually on the wrong side of a lot of things, we're usually criticizing her for, but today she tweeted Dear mainstream media, a man intentionally drove a car through a parade, killing six and injuring 50-plus.

00:40:07.000 It was not an accident.

00:40:08.000 Fire emoji.

00:40:09.000 Call it by its name, Waukesha Massacre.

00:40:12.000 And it was a domestic terror attack.

00:40:14.000 Don't minimize, please.

00:40:15.000 Bravo!

00:40:16.000 Uh, yeah?

00:40:17.000 When celebrities and media are lying and omitting and covering up, and then Debra Messing, I mean look, she's had a lot of tweets I've been like, oh jeez, you know, what a crazy tweet. 0.55

00:40:26.000 I'm pretty sure she's been on Siraj's list a couple times.

00:40:28.000 I'm sure she has.

00:40:29.000 Probably.

00:40:30.000 Maybe not, I don't know.

00:40:31.000 But she came out, she got it right, and I completely agree.

00:40:34.000 She's right and then it trended after that as well Walker Shaw massacre started that I believe she was the one who

00:40:39.000 started that trend And I think everybody was just shocked that here's somebody

00:40:43.000 who's you know, not not just known as you know Do your typical prototypical Hollywood, you know kind of

00:40:48.000 lefty. I mean she's like like Blue and on like George take a level kind of just occupy

00:40:55.000 Democrats I'm pretty sure George doesn't actually run his own Twitter

00:40:58.000 account Oh, I'm sure he doesn't. 0.64

00:40:59.000 He has a company do it, and that's why he sounds insane all the time.

00:41:02.000 And you're like, he's probably just sitting in a room with like a warm blanket on his lap, like in the sun, half asleep, being old, and someone's tweeting away on his thing, you know, like Gravel Institute, you know, Mike Gravel, you know, he passed.

00:41:13.000 Yeah, he's not even alive anymore.

00:41:15.000 Yeah, right, right, right.

00:41:16.000 By the way, so much for red flag laws then, right? 0.92

00:41:20.000 Someone complains about you, your ex-girlfriend complains about you, the police come and take all your guns away because you could be dangerous.

00:41:25.000 Turns out you don't need a gun to kill a bunch of people. 0.55

00:41:27.000 You can just get a Ford Escape and run it through a parade.

00:41:30.000 There was someone who actually tweeted that, by the way.

00:41:32.000 I mean, this has been a talking point for some time.

00:41:35.000 But the point I bring up is that every day you live in a city, you cross a street with these gigantic multi-ton vehicles flying at you and you're not scared of getting hit.

00:41:45.000 Why?

00:41:46.000 Any one of those people could decide to just hurt and kill dozens in New York City of all places, and they don't do it.

00:41:53.000 It did happen a couple years ago.

00:41:54.000 It does happen.

00:41:56.000 Okay, so it happened a lot in the summer of 2015 or 16 in Europe, and this is interesting to me because I remember how the BBC and some of these overseas organizations characterized these mysterious car attacks exactly like the US media is characterizing this.

00:42:12.000 They were literally terror attacks perpetrated by foreigners who'd come into like, for example, the UK and France, and they would not cover Where these people are coming from, what their ideologies might have been, they only covered that it was a car attack.

00:42:24.000 The motive may never be known.

00:42:26.000 This is why when you go to a Christmas market, and Tanya and I, a couple years ago, we were going through and visiting Christmas markets in Europe that, before we had kids obviously, and there are barricades up before you can go in to in every country in Europe, with the exception of Poland.

00:42:42.000 Not Estonia.

00:42:43.000 Well, in Europe right now, I don't even know who'd want to be there considering the extremity of the lockdowns that's been happening.

00:42:50.000 Not in Poland. 0.74

00:42:50.000 And not in Poland, in Australia. 0.74

00:42:53.000 Australia's getting real dark.

00:42:55.000 But we can talk about that in a little bit.

00:42:58.000 We'll keep it in line with this because we have more news.

00:43:00.000 This is actually fairly big.

00:43:02.000 We got the story from TimCast.com.

00:43:03.000 All three men found guilty of murder in Ahmed Arbery case.

00:43:07.000 This is the story about A man who had gone to this neighborhood several times, he

00:43:12.000 had entered a building on multiple occasions.

00:43:15.000 I believe he was actually a felony suspect.

00:43:19.000 That was in the trial.

00:43:20.000 I think even the prosecution said yes.

00:43:22.000 A felony suspect.

00:43:23.000 A burglary suspect.

00:43:24.000 In this instance.

00:43:24.000 in this instance.

00:43:26.000 Yeah, yeah.

00:43:27.000 So this is from actual Justice Warrior.

00:43:29.000 He had tweeted that in the case, the issue was they all agreed that he was actually suspected of committing burglaries.

00:43:36.000 Oh, the police were going door to door.

00:43:38.000 But not that day.

00:43:39.000 They were handing a photo of the guy, right?

00:43:40.000 Yeah, but not that day.

00:43:42.000 And so the issue was they did not have actual knowledge of anything he had done at that day.

00:43:47.000 But let's give you the context real quick.

00:43:49.000 All three men were found guilty.

00:43:51.000 And the craziest thing about it is the third guy He was just following in his car and filming what was happening.

00:43:58.000 And then he gave the footage like, hey, look.

00:44:00.000 And they prosecuted him.

00:44:01.000 This guy's going to prison for the rest of his life for filming this.

00:44:05.000 So we're getting a lot of conservatives.

00:44:07.000 First of all, the entirety of the left is cheering.

00:44:10.000 When they announced the verdict, a guy in the courtroom was like, woo!

00:44:12.000 And then the judge was like, get him out of my courtroom.

00:44:14.000 No outbursts.

00:44:15.000 I think y'all are wrong on this one in a certain sense.

00:44:16.000 and celebrating, which is funny considering they just said the justice system was broken

00:44:19.000 because of Renton House, but they're cheering for it. And then I see a bunch of conservatives

00:44:23.000 cheering for it. And I'm like, I think y'all are wrong on this one in a certain sense.

00:44:29.000 Legally speaking on the law, yep, the jury got it right. 0.71

00:44:33.000 The judge gave him instructions.

00:44:35.000 These guys did not have a right to get in their trucks, grab a shotgun and go chase down some

00:44:39.000 dudes around him. But there's a lot of context here that says to me, I think the two guys,

00:44:47.000 the McMichaels, these are the two guys who are directly involved with getting their vehicle

00:44:50.000 and the gun and then confronting him. It's the father and the son.

00:44:53.000 Father and son.

00:44:53.000 I believe they deserved charges.

00:44:55.000 I don't know if, you know, sending them for decades in prison makes sense, but they should have been charged for a lot of, you know, on something.

00:45:01.000 The third guy who was just filming, I mean, this is, I just... So was the ruling then that he was part of the pursuit?

00:45:07.000 Is that the idea?

00:45:08.000 Part of that, but they had also charged him with aggravated assault.

00:45:12.000 Yeah.

00:45:13.000 Using his pickup truck.

00:45:14.000 Which doesn't mean you have to cause injury.

00:45:15.000 It means you put someone else in fear of injury.

00:45:18.000 Right.

00:45:19.000 So, it wasn't just that he was filming.

00:45:21.000 Right, right, right.

00:45:22.000 It was the aggravated assault, which is a felony, and that's, then he died, so it's felony murder.

00:45:27.000 I think on the law, this is the right ruling, and I think that's what most people are saying.

00:45:32.000 So I'll just put it this way.

00:45:33.000 The dude was a burglary suspect.

00:45:35.000 That was not up for, he was not contested.

00:45:39.000 But you have in the video, that came out, I think it's two vehicles, or maybe just a truck.

00:45:44.000 And Aubrey is seen running towards that truck.

00:45:48.000 But you got a guy following behind him, so he's not gonna turn around.

00:45:51.000 He's gotta run towards the guy with the shotgun.

00:45:53.000 And I'll tell you this, he's between two trucks.

00:45:55.000 In fairness, he's not limited to the street.

00:45:57.000 He could run to the right.

00:45:58.000 He could have run to the brush.

00:46:00.000 He had 350 degrees of other directions he could run in.

00:46:02.000 And it's not like the trucks went up on the lawns of properties chasing him.

00:46:05.000 But, if they had been following him for several minutes, he knew they were following him, in his mind he may have been like, I can't get away from these guys, this guy's holding a shotgun, my only way out of this is to fight back.

00:46:17.000 Well, maybe, but that's not an element of the crimes against them.

00:46:21.000 Right.

00:46:21.000 If he had gotten the gun and shot them and been charged with shooting them, and he raised the legal defense of self-defense, then the reasonableness of his perception would be relevant.

00:46:30.000 But it's not relevant with respect to these criminal charges.

00:46:33.000 What would your analysis be, given that were the case?

00:46:36.000 Well it's difficult.

00:46:37.000 I know we're playing hypotheticals.

00:46:40.000 What complicates it is he wasn't just someone recreationally jogging.

00:46:43.000 I mean we know this.

00:46:45.000 You'd have to erase your mind of everything else around him.

00:46:48.000 But they're still pushing the line.

00:46:49.000 I know they are.

00:46:50.000 And that just makes proper legal analysis more complicated because there's a lot of misinformation, disinformation, and if you believe that stuff you come to a different outcome.

00:47:00.000 But this guy was in that home repeatedly in the middle of the night.

00:47:03.000 This is not somebody recreationally visiting a construction site.

00:47:07.000 And there had been burglaries, there had been robberies, a gun had been stolen.

00:47:10.000 Including a gun, yeah.

00:47:11.000 Not even a month prior.

00:47:12.000 And when we say that the McMichaels didn't know exactly what he was doing that day, they knew the other stuff.

00:47:20.000 And the other stuff can play a role in your assessment of probable cause.

00:47:24.000 If a police officer had seen those videos of him there those other times and then saw him apparently leaving the building again that day, the police officer is not required to pretend he doesn't know that past experience, those past events.

00:47:37.000 He's allowed to consider that in coming to a determination of probable cause on that day.

00:47:42.000 Even if he didn't see explicitly burglar-like activity that day, he's seen burglar-like activity from this guy on this property on previous occasions.

00:47:50.000 So let me ask you.

00:47:51.000 And I think the answer is obvious, but you being the attorney on self-defense, if Travis McMichael, who has not been convicted on all counts, if he actually was a police officer who did the exact same thing, what would have happened?

00:48:06.000 He would never have been charged.

00:48:07.000 Never.

00:48:08.000 They wouldn't even bring charges.

00:48:09.000 No.

00:48:09.000 And so here's the crazy thing.

00:48:13.000 There's a vehicle behind Ahmed Arbery, so I can certainly understand why he's like, you know, these guys are after me.

00:48:18.000 Now, I don't think he was a good dude.

00:48:19.000 I think he had, you know, mal intent.

00:48:21.000 But, you know, don't surround people.

00:48:25.000 I can certainly understand why.

00:48:28.000 But of course the defense was that they weren't.

00:48:29.000 The defense was there was no coordination between those two vehicles.

00:48:33.000 So they weren't like a pack of wolves surrounding somebody.

00:48:37.000 Look, I get it, but I also feel like, you know, I think about what I would be doing if I was running down the street and then a car comes up behind me and a car's in front of me.

00:48:46.000 So, we can listen.

00:48:47.000 Right, but again, we're confusing it because you have to think, what would I be doing if that happened to me and I was engaged in felony burglary behavior?

00:48:55.000 Right.

00:48:55.000 You know why they're following you.

00:48:57.000 You're not a recreational jogger who's suddenly being approached by men with shotguns.

00:49:00.000 That's not what's happening.

00:49:02.000 No, no, no, right, right, right, right.

00:49:02.000 So you're saying there's a reason the hands don't go up, and it's, hey guys, wait, wait, wait.

00:49:05.000 But I'm saying, in the context of these guys not being law enforcement, like, this guy's gonna fight.

00:49:10.000 But here's what I'm getting to.

00:49:11.000 Ahmaud Arbery runs around- I think he would have fought if they were law enforcement.

00:49:15.000 Oh, I agree, I agree.

00:49:16.000 Yeah, I think what he's getting at is that this guy didn't want to be stopped.

00:49:20.000 Right.

00:49:21.000 Ahmaud Arbery- Because of what he got.

00:49:21.000 For any reason.

00:49:23.000 Ran to the right, around the right side of the truck, got around it, and then flanked left.

00:49:28.000 Grabbed the shotgun from Travis McMichael.

00:49:30.000 They fought over it.

00:49:32.000 A shot was fired, hitting Ahmaud Arbery, and he died.

00:49:35.000 Now, I want to stop, and I want to give you the real context in a more... in the spirit of what I think is a fair assessment.

00:49:43.000 The media, the left will tell you, and this is what they did say, that a bunch of racists got in a pickup truck and chased down a jogger and lynched him, which is a psychotic lie.

00:49:53.000 What actually happened?

00:49:55.000 A couple local guys who had been hearing reports about burglaries from the police heard this guy was spotted in their neighborhood again.

00:50:03.000 A gun had been stolen about a month earlier.

00:50:03.000 Again?

00:50:03.000 Again.

00:50:07.000 They say, hey, we gotta figure out who this guy is.

00:50:10.000 We gotta check him out.

00:50:11.000 They probably didn't think anything other than, we gotta stop this guy.

00:50:15.000 What does that mean?

00:50:15.000 It could mean nothing.

00:50:16.000 It could be like, let's just get in our car and go after him.

00:50:19.000 Hold on, hold on, hold on.

00:50:21.000 So they knew a gun was stolen.

00:50:24.000 That's why Travis McMichael had a shotgun.

00:50:27.000 Hey, someone stole a gun.

00:50:28.000 If he's got a gun, we could be in trouble.

00:50:29.000 And if we try and say, hey, what are you doing here?

00:50:31.000 And even try and talk to him, he could have a gun.

00:50:34.000 When they stop their truck, and as you argued, the defense argued, there was no coordination, he gets out with a shotgun.

00:50:38.000 He is legally allowed to keep and bear arms.

00:50:41.000 When Ahmed Arbery ran around the truck and then grabbed the gun and fought with him, there was now dual possession of that weapon.

00:50:48.000 In the fight, a shotgun blast killed Ahmed Arbery.

00:50:51.000 So I look at that and I'm like, man, I understand the letter of the law, they got the conviction, but doesn't it feel like something doesn't make sense or doesn't add up properly?

00:50:59.000 The narrative from the mainstream media is a lie.

00:51:01.000 Does this get to the provocation argument that we were talking about in Kyle Rittenhouse?

00:51:07.000 Well, the prosecution did raise the issue of provocation in her closing statement.

00:51:10.000 It wasn't a major part of the trial.

00:51:12.000 Oh, I see.

00:51:14.000 I think... Suddenly I lost my train of thought.

00:51:20.000 Go ahead, Tim.

00:51:23.000 Did the guy with the shotgun brandish the shotgun?

00:51:26.000 He was holding it.

00:51:27.000 I think he was just holding it.

00:51:28.000 And then Ahmed Arbery, look.

00:51:30.000 Oh, I remember what I was going to say.

00:51:31.000 He's in front of the truck to the left.

00:51:32.000 Sorry.

00:51:33.000 And then Ahmed Arbery goes around it and can't actually see Travis McMichael and then comes around the front and attacks him.

00:51:39.000 It's unknown whether McMichael ever brandished.

00:51:39.000 Charges him.

00:51:42.000 Well, it's disputed.

00:51:43.000 The video's very fuzzy at that point, and there's parts where they're obscured by the truck in front, so you can't really see what's happening.

00:51:50.000 But of course, the state has to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

00:51:53.000 But I don't think it matters, because if he's pointing at that point, he's being charged by someone.

00:51:59.000 Arbery is on camera, going around the car, and at this point, there is no gun pointed at him.

00:52:05.000 And he chooses then to turn left and engage Travis McMichael.

00:52:09.000 So it's much more complicated than malice murder and felony murder, but they just said, you know, across the board.

00:52:16.000 I want to make clear because there's obviously a lot of emotions around this.

00:52:16.000 So here's the thing.

00:52:19.000 It's a racially energized case.

00:52:21.000 I don't care about these guys getting convicted and going to prison on any kind of personal level.

00:52:25.000 I don't know these people.

00:52:26.000 They're not friends of mine.

00:52:27.000 They weren't my client.

00:52:29.000 What happened to them is of very little consequence to me on any kind of personal level.

00:52:33.000 But professionally, I care a lot about the legal process and I care a lot about due process.

00:52:37.000 And if they're going to get convicted, it ought to be done the right way.

00:52:41.000 And that didn't happen here.

00:52:43.000 Because the whole case rested on this citizen's arrest statute and your interpretation of it.

00:52:48.000 There were two possible interpretations.

00:52:50.000 Lawyers in that courtroom and me, myself, outside the courtroom with lots of other lawyers.

00:52:55.000 We, in good faith, argued different positions on that citizen's arrest law.

00:53:00.000 The judge wasn't sure exactly what it meant.

00:53:02.000 When all the legal experts can't decide on what it means, someone has to make the call.

00:53:07.000 You can't have an A version and a B version, one of which favors the prosecution, one of which favors the defense, and whichever one is chosen decides the whole case.

00:53:15.000 And both parties know that.

00:53:16.000 The prosecution knows, oh my gosh, if I don't get my version, I lose this trial.

00:53:20.000 These guys walk.

00:53:21.000 And the defense knows, if we don't get our version, our clients are going to get convicted.

00:53:25.000 There's no other possible outcome.

00:53:26.000 So, somebody has to decide which version is the jury going to get.

00:53:30.000 And that's the responsibility of the judge in this case.

00:53:33.000 Real quick, what are these versions?

00:53:33.000 Can you summarize?

00:53:35.000 Yeah, I was going to ask the same thing.

00:53:37.000 One of the versions, one of the versions.

00:53:39.000 Ah!

00:53:40.000 I guess there should be 72 of those, right?

00:53:42.000 Ave Maria, gratia plena, dominus tecum.

00:53:44.000 Essentially, one of the versions is that the citizens arrest

00:53:47.000 could only be lawful if everything was contemporaneous and they had essentially perfect knowledge

00:53:52.000 that a felony burglary had occurred.

00:53:55.000 And of course the defense never claimed either of those things because that didn't exist, right?

00:54:00.000 They didn't know for a fact that he'd committed felony burglary and the felony burglary-like conduct they were aware of was not contemporaneous with their efforts to arrest him.

00:54:11.000 What does that mean, contemporaneous?

00:54:13.000 Happening at the same time.

00:54:14.000 So they had evidence of felony-like behavior, but it was from a week earlier, two weeks earlier.

00:54:14.000 Right.

00:54:19.000 So it's like they didn't see him walk up, smash the window, go in, grab a bunch of stuff, and take off down the street.

00:54:25.000 That is the state position.

00:54:26.000 That's what they would have had to have seen in that moment to make the citizen's arrest lawful.

00:54:31.000 That's the state position.

00:54:33.000 And if that position is accepted, well then they're convicted, because they don't have any of that.

00:54:38.000 The defense position is, well no, the knowledge is, first of all, doesn't have to be absolute, doesn't have to be in his presence, because he was an apparent felon in flight.

00:54:46.000 The standard should be probable cause.

00:54:48.000 That's what the statute says.

00:54:49.000 Probable cause.

00:54:50.000 Not certainty.

00:54:52.000 And probable cause can be based on knowledge not gained only in that moment, but prior knowledge that you're aware of.

00:54:58.000 Surveillance video of the guy in the house that you've seen that's part of your knowledge base.

00:55:02.000 It's part of why you believe it's probable that he's now also committing a felony burglary.

00:55:08.000 If you have that definition that favors the defense, it's probably an acquittal.

00:55:12.000 So these two competing versions, one wins for the state, one wins for the defense.

00:55:16.000 The judge, his duty was to make a call.

00:55:19.000 Look, we don't know which one of these really should apply, but I'm the judge, I decide what the law is going to be as presented to the jury.

00:55:26.000 Now, when he makes a decision, later on he might be reversed.

00:55:30.000 Appellate court might say, no, you chose A, it should have been B. Or the reverse.

00:55:33.000 But it's also true that there's only one way to actually make that decision, because there's a legal doctrine called the Doctrine of Lenity, and it says if a statute is ambiguous in criminal law, the benefit of the doubt is always given to the defense, not to the state.

00:55:52.000 So because the state drafted the law, the state passed the law, the state was in control of how unambiguously that statute was written.

00:55:59.000 You can't hold that against the defendant.

00:56:01.000 So if the judge was going to pick one of those versions, under the doctrine of lenity, he would be obliged to pick the version that favored the defense, and then we're looking at acquittals for these guys.

00:56:10.000 And the city would have burned to the ground, right?

00:56:13.000 Maybe many cities.

00:56:14.000 So he decided, well I'm not going to make that decision.

00:56:16.000 So he puns.

00:56:17.000 I'm not going to do my job.

00:56:19.000 I'm going to take the ambiguous version, both options, give them to the jury, and let them decide.

00:56:24.000 And that's not the job of the jury.

00:56:26.000 The crazy thing to me is, you know, I tweeted basically about, I read your article, I did a video on it, and I tweeted like, this could result in an appeal.

00:56:35.000 Is that fair to say?

00:56:35.000 Oh yeah, there's fertile ground for appeal here.

00:56:38.000 People need to keep in mind, appeals, I like to say, appeals are for losers.

00:56:42.000 And that's technically true, right?

00:56:43.000 You're only appealing if you got a deal.

00:56:46.000 Here's the interesting thing here, for one, I mean, there could be an appeal.

00:56:49.000 But things do get overturned.

00:56:51.000 Looking at this, you have Kyle Rittenhouse, who was fleeing.

00:56:56.000 And you have Ahmaud Arbery who is engaging.

00:56:59.000 You can argue that by putting the pickup truck there and then having behind him that, you know, it was a fight-or-flight reflex, but he didn't have to attack them and go for the gun.

00:57:07.000 So I was thinking about that in regards to your previous statements on Kyle Rittenhouse about how the mentality of Anthony Hooper, for instance, has no bearing on the self-defense right of Kyle Rittenhouse.

00:57:18.000 Anthony Huber could believe he stopped being a mass shooter, but he's still threatening Kyle, who has a right to self-defense.

00:57:24.000 Right.

00:57:25.000 In this instance, I'm curious about the different potentialities here.

00:57:28.000 I mean, just what's your assessment on was Travis McMichael defending himself?

00:57:32.000 It all comes back to that citizen's arrest law.

00:57:35.000 If you believe the citizen's arrest was unlawful, Well, then it makes sense that Arbery would defend himself and he would have a right to defend himself against an unlawful arrest.

00:57:44.000 But let me ask you something.

00:57:46.000 I mean, is this whole case seems to be an issue of the context provided by the McMichaels?

00:57:51.000 What if they just said, we just happened to be standing there legally bearing arms and you attacked me?

00:57:57.000 Well, of course, we know that's not true because they gave statements to the police at the scene.

00:58:01.000 That's what I'm saying.

00:58:02.000 So these guys... Oh, if these guys had just kept their mouths shut, you couldn't have had a prosecutor in the video.

00:58:07.000 And if that guy released the video thinking it would exonerate them and it convicted all three.

00:58:11.000 They gave the statements and months went by.

00:58:14.000 I mean, the prosecutors... Remember, the original prosecutor passed on charges.

00:58:18.000 I mean, he actually wrote a memo saying, no, this was lawful citizen's arrest and therefore everything is, you know, was within the bounds of the law.

00:58:18.000 Yeah.

00:58:25.000 It was political.

00:58:26.000 The charges came back because there was political outrage.

00:58:29.000 Well again, after the video came out.

00:58:31.000 This is a money-making opportunity for some people.

00:58:34.000 This is the point that I keep bringing it back to.

00:58:37.000 And we now live in a society that is governed by viral videos.

00:58:43.000 Whatever the last viral video that came out is now the new discussion, and if it comes out... Remember, George Floyd started with a viral video.

00:58:52.000 The Central Park Karen, which actually turned out to be false, that started with a video, a very selectively edited video, which the guy who posted it actually later debunked on his own Facebook, because he said he did provoke her.

00:59:04.000 He said he was going to take her dog.

00:59:06.000 And then she freaked out, thinking that the stranger was about to take my dog.

00:59:09.000 So the problem, though, that we have in society is that we now live in a mass surveillance society.

00:59:14.000 But George Orwell, who got a lot right, got this wrong.

00:59:17.000 It's not Big Brother that's the only one that's in on the game of mass surveillance.

00:59:21.000 It's everyone.

00:59:22.000 We're all surveilling each other.

00:59:24.000 Lots of little brothers, lots of little sisters.

00:59:26.000 And so the question then becomes, what do we do with all this?

00:59:30.000 Kyle Rittenhouse, if there were no video, he would be in jail for the rest of his life.

00:59:35.000 Because it would be his word against the word of the other people in that mob.

00:59:39.000 And it would be very, very hard for him to get off without that video.

00:59:43.000 With these guys, the McMichaels, they're going to jail because of video.

00:59:47.000 My understanding is that, I could be wrong, it's been a while, it's been almost two years now,

00:59:51.000 but the guy, what was his name, Brady or something? Brian or something, I don't know.

00:59:55.000 The third guy?

00:59:56.000 Yeah, the third guy. He released the video because I think people in the community were

00:59:59.000 calling him murderers and he was like, no, look, it was self-defense, I'll show you the video.

01:00:04.000 And then everyone was like, whoa.

01:00:07.000 And that's one of those videos where people will see what they want to see in that video and you will never change anybody's mind.

01:00:07.000 Hey!

01:00:14.000 Some people see that video and they see a felony suspect charging a man who has a shotgun in his hands, fighting that man for a shotgun, and dying in the effort.

01:00:23.000 And by the way, when they show those gruesome wound scenes on Arbery, those are the same wounds that the McMichaels would have feared.

01:00:31.000 They would have suffered if he had gotten control of that shotgun, right?

01:00:33.000 It's exactly the same thing.

01:00:35.000 But other people look at that video, and what they see is, they see a black man who was chased by a bunch of rednecks and is desperately fighting for his life. 0.91

01:00:42.000 Because it fits a narrative.

01:00:44.000 And what if, there's no point asking what Aubrey would have done with the gun, but considering he went for the shotgun and is visibly fighting for it, what would have happened if Aubrey got the gun and shot them?

01:00:57.000 He would be charged, and it wouldn't be pressed.

01:00:59.000 If I was his attorney, I'd be arguing self-defense.

01:01:01.000 Yeah.

01:01:02.000 But I don't think it would be in the press.

01:01:04.000 Nobody would know about it.

01:01:05.000 It's a small Georgian community.

01:01:05.000 It would not be news.

01:01:07.000 You don't know.

01:01:08.000 I mean, if George Zimmerman had been killed by Trayvon Martin, we never would have heard about the case.

01:01:11.000 Right.

01:01:12.000 It would be a non-event.

01:01:12.000 That's what I'm saying.

01:01:13.000 It would just be another...

01:01:15.000 But I also think it's fair to say that if they didn't go out there with the shotgun, we also wouldn't be hearing about this case, because a fight would have broken out and that would have been the end of it.

01:01:22.000 But you can say that for any case.

01:01:24.000 It's true, and I want to stress, people have a right to keep and bear arms.

01:01:27.000 It's not every case.

01:01:28.000 I disagree with that.

01:01:29.000 I think there's a lot of debate to be had around the nature of the Citizens Law Statute, whether this judge did his job, and I believe he did not.

01:01:36.000 I just mean that if they weren't there, there'd be no case.

01:01:40.000 That doesn't mean these guys didn't exercise poor judgment.

01:01:43.000 That was poor judgment.

01:01:44.000 By the way, Rittenhouse also exercised poor judgment.

01:01:46.000 If I had a 17-year-old son, I would not say, hey, good idea, let's take the AR and go down to the riot.

01:01:53.000 But poor judgment's not a crime.

01:01:55.000 I mean, as a guy who's got an ex-wife, thank God, poor judgment is not a crime.

01:01:58.000 So they're not charged with that.

01:02:00.000 They're charged with specific offenses, with specific elements, and specific defenses with specific elements.

01:02:06.000 And one of those is citizen's arrest and how that law is supposed to be applied.

01:02:11.000 And when you just give the jury the job of deciding how the law works, the only non-experts in the courtroom, by the way, the courtroom is full of lawyers.

01:02:20.000 There's three prosecutors, there's six defense attorneys, and a judge, and none of them can figure out what the statute's actually supposed to mean.

01:02:27.000 But we're going to let 12 jurors, untrained in the law, do that job.

01:02:31.000 Let me ask you, in your opinion, based on the facts of the case, do you think these men should have been convicted?

01:02:41.000 My view of justice is different.

01:02:42.000 I don't think about the outcomes per se.

01:02:44.000 I don't really care about the outcomes per se.

01:02:47.000 In my view, justice is about the process, not about the outcome.

01:02:51.000 Well, I'm asking because I was going to ask you then on the judge's ruling.

01:02:55.000 So the first thing I want to understand is, you know, based on your understanding of the case and the law as you've read it, do you think it should have been an acquittal or... I think there was reasonable doubt that they had probable cause to try to make a citizen's... And by the way... You lean towards an acquittal is what you're saying?

01:03:11.000 Yes, but I don't want people to misunderstand.

01:03:14.000 By that I don't mean like I think it's more likely than not that they had probable cause, but that's not the legal standard.

01:03:19.000 The standard isn't whether they were probably right.

01:03:21.000 The standard is, is there a reasonable doubt that they could have been right?

01:03:26.000 The math gets complicated, but could they have had a 51% belief that he was a felony burglary suspect?

01:03:35.000 By a reasonable doubt.

01:03:35.000 Is that enough?

01:03:37.000 So a very tiny belief that they might have had probable cause should be sufficient for an acquittal.

01:03:42.000 The reason I ask is, do you have, like, so you've mentioned the judge didn't do his job in defining and instructing properly.

01:03:49.000 Do you have a view of how it should have been instructed?

01:03:53.000 Yes, so my reading of the statute favors the defense.

01:03:57.000 Because there's basically, it's amazing how ambiguous it is because it's only two sentences.

01:04:01.000 So it's not like in the Kyle Rittenhouse case they had that gun statute where you had to refer to this other statute and then you had to refer to two other statutes beyond that.

01:04:09.000 And it got very, kind of, well, in some senses complicated.

01:04:13.000 This is only a two-sentence statute.

01:04:15.000 But the first sentence talks about, kind of, citizen's arrest generally.

01:04:19.000 And it says you have to have immediate knowledge or presence.

01:04:22.000 And the second sentence speaks specifically to a felon in flight.

01:04:26.000 And there it says probable cause.

01:04:28.000 And some people believe you've got to read those two together.

01:04:31.000 And others, my position is you have to read them separately because it doesn't make any sense to read them together.

01:04:36.000 So, the way I read it, it says, look, for citizens arrest generally, and that means for like misdemeanors, like shoplifting, for, you know, the smallest arrestable offense, you have to have presence or immediate knowledge.

01:04:49.000 That's 100% certainty.

01:04:50.000 You saw it happen, right?

01:04:52.000 That's not probable cause.

01:04:53.000 That's not you think it's likely it happened.

01:04:55.000 You saw it happen.

01:04:56.000 It happened in your presence.

01:04:57.000 You have immediate knowledge.

01:04:59.000 To believe that you start with 100%, that's the requirement.

01:05:05.000 But then if it's a felony in pursuit, you also have to have 51%?

01:05:08.000 I mean, you're already at 100.

01:05:09.000 I want to read it.

01:05:11.000 This is from your article from Legal Insurrection.

01:05:13.000 It says, the two sentences are, a private person may arrest an offender if the offense is committed in his presence or within his immediate knowledge.

01:05:22.000 If the offense is a felony and the offender is escaping or attempting to escape, a private person may arrest him upon reasonable and probable grounds of suspicion.

01:05:30.000 So how I read that is generally, like even for a misdemeanor, if you want to arrest somebody for a misdemeanor, you have to have absolute knowledge, presence or immediate knowledge.

01:05:39.000 You saw them shoplift that item.

01:05:43.000 But, for the special circumstance of a felon in flight, in that case it's then probable cause, 51% is certain.

01:05:51.000 And that makes sense to me because we're treating them differently.

01:05:54.000 Look, an arrest is a profound constraint of your liberty, right?

01:05:57.000 Yours doesn't make total sense.

01:06:00.000 And by the way, that applies to cops.

01:06:02.000 The standard for cops is if they want to arrest somebody for a misdemeanor, they have to have seen it.

01:06:06.000 They don't have to have seen it for a felony.

01:06:08.000 Right.

01:06:08.000 So this actually, if we put these two requirements together, what we're actually saying is it's, it's, it's harder to arrest somebody who's a felon in pursuit than it is to arrest someone who's a criminal.

01:06:21.000 Wait, wait, wait, but Tim, just put it back in a common sense, right?

01:06:24.000 Couldn't this, isn't this also just the situation of, hey, stop that guy.

01:06:28.000 Right.

01:06:28.000 Yeah.

01:06:29.000 Hey, stop that guy.

01:06:29.000 He stole a purse.

01:06:30.000 Hey, stop that guy.

01:06:31.000 He stole my phone.

01:06:32.000 That's what I was saying.

01:06:33.000 Right, so I didn't see him steal the phone, but I'm hearing someone say, hey, this guy stole my phone, stop that guy.

01:06:33.000 That's 51.

01:06:40.000 And you want to make that legal.

01:06:43.000 You made a good point about, you know, this guy is a burglary suspect who is entering this home repeatedly.

01:06:49.000 When you operate from the leftist's false narrative that this guy was just jogging, the story is very different.

01:06:53.000 A couple of rednecks accused a jogger of a crime he didn't commit and then confronted him with a shotgun.

01:06:57.000 He defended himself.

01:06:58.000 When you know all the facts, you know that these guys were scared because, you know, as I mentioned, a gun had been stolen, there had been burglaries.

01:07:04.000 You guys mentioned that the police had actually handed out his photo?

01:07:06.000 Is that what they did?

01:07:08.000 I forget if they were showing, I think they were showing photos around from the video.

01:07:11.000 They've done a screen capture.

01:07:13.000 The video from when he was inside the home in the middle of the night.

01:07:16.000 So maybe not like a mug shot.

01:07:18.000 If you see this guy in the neighborhood, call us because we have video.

01:07:21.000 There was reporting though that one of the, I believe it was the older McMichael, had known of Arbery from a previous investigation.

01:07:27.000 But he didn't connect the dots.

01:07:30.000 So Arbery had been, he had brought a gun to school.

01:07:34.000 I believe it was a felony conviction.

01:07:36.000 So he was an adult who went to some school event, like a football game.

01:07:38.000 So he was a felon.

01:07:39.000 It was like a football game, yeah, yeah, yeah, I remember this.

01:07:41.000 So he was a felon.

01:07:42.000 I forget the status, if he was convicted of the felony, or if it was expunged, or... I don't remember the details, so I don't want to overstate it, but it was a felony charge for sure.

01:07:50.000 Because he brought the gun, and then he fought the cops when they tried to arrest him for having the gun at the school.

01:07:54.000 It was a big mess.

01:07:55.000 And the prosecutor's office investigated that event, and the investigator was Greg McMichaels.

01:07:59.000 So they'd had some exposure to each other.

01:08:02.000 But there's no evidence that at the time of this day, when Arbery was shot, that Greg McMichaels recognized him as that person.

01:08:09.000 Does that make sense?

01:08:10.000 I want to break down this... Which would have made a huge difference, by the way, because that would have been a huge contributor to probable cause and reason to feel... No, I always remember that, because that's huge.

01:08:20.000 I want to get at these two sentences real quick, just very simply.

01:08:23.000 A private person may arrest an offender if the offense is committed in his presence or within his immediate knowledge.

01:08:28.000 If the offense is a felony and the offender is escaping or attempting to escape, a private person may arrest him upon reasonable and probable grounds of suspicion.

01:08:35.000 I think your assessment is very reasonable.

01:08:37.000 To put it simply, if someone commits a misdemeanor, you have to know they did it.

01:08:41.000 If someone you believe, your probable cause, has committed a felony and is fleeing... You're probable cause to believe they just killed somebody, they just murdered someone, that person, and they're in flight, right?

01:08:50.000 So they're not waiting for the cops to show up, right?

01:08:52.000 They're in flight, they're a reasonably perceived felon, you only need probable cause to stop them.

01:08:58.000 Which seems to be a situation where you want to empower the citizenry... For the more serious crime.

01:09:03.000 So burglary is a felony.

01:09:05.000 Yes.

01:09:06.000 So they believed that at some point, this was a person who committed a burglary, and under the statute, he was trying to escape, they had grounds to stop him.

01:09:13.000 That's the defense, right.

01:09:14.000 But the prosecution said, all of these things have to be true.

01:09:17.000 Right.

01:09:18.000 Which makes no sense.

01:09:19.000 Which makes no sense.

01:09:20.000 No.

01:09:20.000 To apply both standards, to apply, say, alright, every citizen's arrest no matter what has to have 100% certainty.

01:09:27.000 But a felony, a felon in flight, that also requires 51%.

01:09:31.000 Once you have 100% to make them decide who isn't going through to the level we are here, and they don't have you.

01:09:38.000 Or to put it another way, if the first sentence applies to everything, including felons in pursuit, why do you need the second sentence?

01:09:44.000 Right, exactly.

01:09:45.000 And a normal statutory interpretation does not allow you to presume that a substantive part of a statute is there for no purpose.

01:09:51.000 But I think one of the big questions was whether or not Right, well she didn't say it that explicitly, but she would only say what they knew that day.

01:09:58.000 what you're saying, I think what the prosecution argued was their knowledge from previous incidents

01:10:03.000 has no bearing on their right to commit a citizen's arrest today.

01:10:06.000 Right, well she didn't say it that explicitly, but she would only say what they knew that day.

01:10:10.000 They didn't see anything that looked like felony burglary that day.

01:10:13.000 Yep, right.

01:10:14.000 Right, because remember, she couldn't, they couldn't, they, the judge prevented her from

01:10:18.000 using, the prosecutor, from using the jogger narrative.

01:10:22.000 And yet for, what, a year, that had already been seeded throughout the community.

01:10:26.000 Jogger, jogger, jogger, jogger, jogger. 0.70

01:10:27.000 I mean, this notion that he was just a recreational jogger going through the neighborhood is ridiculous.

01:10:31.000 I mean, because a recreational jogger going through a neighborhood is not in someone's home at night repeatedly on video camera.

01:10:38.000 Even if he was just loitering, there was no evidence of burglary that day.

01:10:41.000 If you're in someone's home in the middle of the night without any explanation, it's reasonable to infer it's a burglary.

01:10:47.000 Was he in a house that night?

01:10:48.000 It's a house.

01:10:49.000 It's a house under construction, but it's a house.

01:10:51.000 They saw him exit the house under construction.

01:10:52.000 He's on camera.

01:10:53.000 That night?

01:10:54.000 I thought that was from an earlier night.

01:10:56.000 No, earlier nights.

01:10:56.000 The camera's from earlier nights.

01:10:58.000 Okay, so not that night.

01:10:59.000 Because this event took place during the day.

01:11:01.000 Yeah, yeah.

01:11:02.000 They just saw him, right?

01:11:03.000 Right.

01:11:03.000 He was right by the house, I guess.

01:11:05.000 It sounds like it was ruled properly.

01:11:08.000 In this instance.

01:11:08.000 I mean, I don't have all the data.

01:11:10.000 Well, it's like Colbert said.

01:11:11.000 They just saw him and chased him.

01:11:13.000 It sounds like, first of all, this definitely shouldn't have happened.

01:11:17.000 Take pictures, call the police, and say, you know, Hey, we just saw the guy.

01:11:21.000 We just saw the guy.

01:11:21.000 He's here.

01:11:22.000 I mean, that's what I think most reasonable people would do.

01:11:25.000 But there's a question here about, man, something doesn't sit right with the idea that someone can come into a community, be a burglary suspect, keep going into these homes, people are worried, guns go missing, and then you just sit back and say, that's the current state of our country.

01:11:39.000 We just sit back and let this guy do it, because the cops can't stop him.

01:11:42.000 And by the way, this happens repeatedly, right?

01:11:44.000 This is a common theme in these events.

01:11:45.000 So in the George Zimmerman event, he was living in an apartment complex that was being ravaged by burglaries and home invasions.

01:11:53.000 They would call the police.

01:11:54.000 The police would show up.

01:11:55.000 The bad guy was already gone.

01:11:57.000 The neighborhood couldn't take it anymore.

01:11:58.000 They said, we have to do something ourselves.

01:12:00.000 They started a neighborhood watch group.

01:12:02.000 Zimmerman joins the neighborhood watch group, sees Trayvon Martin that night, and we have everything that happens.

01:12:07.000 He was trying to do a good thing for his community.

01:12:09.000 To fight this wave of crime that was coming through it.

01:12:12.000 Rittenhouse, we have a city engulfed in rioting, looting, and arson.

01:12:17.000 The police are doing nothing.

01:12:19.000 The citizenry says, we got to step up and do something to protect ourselves, to protect our city.

01:12:24.000 Kyle goes there as one of that group, offering medical services, gets attacked, kills, charged with murder, and the risk is because the state failed.

01:12:33.000 With Arbery, we have a community that again is being ravaged by crime.

01:12:36.000 This was once a little dream community, sleepy dream community.

01:12:40.000 The house under construction was that guy's dream house that he'd always wanted to build there.

01:12:46.000 And now the community literally was calling 9-1-1 for property crimes every day for three months.

01:12:52.000 There were neighbors in that community, single mothers with children, who would not let their children play outside.

01:12:59.000 Because of their fear of the crime in their community.

01:13:01.000 And they'd call the cops, the cops would show up, the bad guys were always gone.

01:13:05.000 So, the community says, yeah, everybody in that community was buying guns, installing security cameras, doing neighborhood watch, sharing Facebook messages and next-door messages with each other about the crime.

01:13:17.000 This is right next to FLETC, by the way.

01:13:18.000 Right, okay.

01:13:19.000 So, the citizenry said, listen, no one's helping us, and we're living in fear.

01:13:23.000 So we have to help ourselves and then we have this encounter with Arbery, he dies and they're going to jail for the rest of their lives now.

01:13:29.000 So the chaos that's created in these communities by crimes and the failure of the state to provide security, is there any more fundamental responsibility of the state than that?

01:13:39.000 And the idea that you cannot protect your community because the state has taken responsibility but failed to provide the security.

01:13:45.000 You can do it if you want, but if push comes to shove, they will prosecute you and put you in jail for the rest of your life.

01:13:50.000 Abolish the police!

01:13:51.000 This is my issue when people go and say, well, you know, Rittenhouse should never have been there.

01:13:57.000 Rittenhouse should never have been there.

01:13:58.000 So when people say that to me, and I've said this before but I haven't said it here, I say, you know what, you're right.

01:14:03.000 But at the same time, none of them should have been there.

01:14:07.000 The rioters shouldn't have been there.

01:14:08.000 The mobs shouldn't have been there.

01:14:10.000 The police should have.

01:14:10.000 The police should have been there, or in this case, the National Guard.

01:14:13.000 When I remember in jury selection, I know you covered this as well, That there were people who came up and said things like, keep in mind, this was night three.

01:14:24.000 The car source had already been burned once, right?

01:14:27.000 This was night three.

01:14:27.000 And by the way, he was asked to be there.

01:14:29.000 Those car source guys obviously asked for them to be there.

01:14:32.000 There's video of them there.

01:14:34.000 It's not even worth talking about.

01:14:35.000 It's not even worth talking about.

01:14:37.000 Just look at their testimony.

01:14:38.000 They're obviously lying.

01:14:39.000 They clearly asked him to be there.

01:14:40.000 We have all the evidence, right?

01:14:44.000 There were people saying during jury selection, I was so scared that I took my kids and we got out of town for the week.

01:14:52.000 You had other people saying, I couldn't afford to get my kids out of town.

01:14:56.000 So we went to the local church and I was there sleeping with my children inside the church because I thought that that wouldn't get hit, that it wouldn't get burned.

01:15:04.000 I was in Kenosha two weeks after this happened.

01:15:07.000 A lot of Kenosha, by the way, still to this day boarded up.

01:15:11.000 And were these jurors rejected?

01:15:15.000 I'd have to go back and actually look at the transcripts.

01:15:16.000 Yeah, there were so many.

01:15:17.000 A lot were rejected, some got on, but I remember seeing on the plywood that they'd put up, they'd say, live animals inside, do not burn.

01:15:28.000 I mean, imagine having to write that up on your town.

01:15:31.000 This is a primal kind of situation, right?

01:15:36.000 You have marauders that are coming out from Chicago, Milwaukee, crossing state lines.

01:15:42.000 I mean, this is like the Middle Ages where ravaging hordes would come out of the plains and burn your city down.

01:15:47.000 It's anarcho-tyranny.

01:15:49.000 It's anarcho-tyranny.

01:15:50.000 The village is under attack.

01:15:53.000 They're getting burned.

01:15:54.000 People are freaking out.

01:15:56.000 They don't know what's going to happen.

01:15:58.000 And I'll say something else.

01:15:59.000 For all the people who say, well, he shouldn't have been there.

01:16:00.000 They shouldn't have been there.

01:16:01.000 They shouldn't have done this.

01:16:03.000 All right.

01:16:03.000 I get it.

01:16:04.000 That's one position to take.

01:16:05.000 And frankly, it's a position I would advocate because I don't claim to have any particular degree of bravery.

01:16:09.000 If I had an adult son or a teenage son, I wouldn't tell him to get engaged in these events.

01:16:13.000 But people need to keep in mind the unexpected consequences of making that your personal policy decision.

01:16:19.000 And one of those consequences is what?

01:16:21.000 Not a month ago, we had a woman raped on a subway car in front of a bunch of people.

01:16:25.000 And then everyone says, nobody did anything.

01:16:27.000 Why didn't anybody do anything?

01:16:29.000 Because George Zimmerman, Kyle Rittenhouse, if they had done something and found themselves in a fight and killed that guy, They get charged for murder.

01:16:29.000 You know why?

01:16:36.000 This is what happens in China.

01:16:38.000 This is exactly what I, when I was in China, there was a situation where I was in KFC of all places.

01:16:44.000 And, um, I'll tell the short version of the story.

01:16:47.000 Guy starts beating his girlfriend on the other side of the room.

01:16:49.000 Starts just, just smacking her, slams her head into the table, um, throws a soda in her face and just starts just walloping her right there. 0.99

01:16:57.000 And, you know, a couple of teenagers.

01:16:58.000 And he's sitting with this friend.

01:16:59.000 There's people around.

01:17:00.000 There's employees around.

01:17:01.000 I'm back.

01:17:01.000 I was actually meeting my Chinese tutor.

01:17:03.000 We were studying practicing Mandarin.

01:17:06.000 And I'm thinking, well, surely the employees will get involved and break this up.

01:17:09.000 Doesn't happen.

01:17:11.000 He keeps hitting her.

01:17:12.000 Surely the customers will get involved.

01:17:13.000 The men that are sitting around will do something.

01:17:16.000 No.

01:17:17.000 So I got up and I got him and I removed him from the KFC.

01:17:22.000 And I remember afterwards and my Mandarin, I was still learning Mandarin, but I heard people saying, you know, why are you getting involved?

01:17:30.000 That's not your problem.

01:17:32.000 Not your problem.

01:17:33.000 Right.

01:17:34.000 And I was, I was freaked out afterwards because I'm sitting there thinking, and this is what almost 15 years ago, but at that point, this was prior to, you know, Zimmerman and Rittenhouse and all these things.

01:17:47.000 And it didn't even enter into my mind that something like that could happen in the United States and nobody would do anything.

01:17:54.000 And I'm a guy who's from the Philadelphia area, right near where this happened.

01:17:57.000 Now, fast forward, right?

01:17:59.000 It's the same thing because nobody wants to get on the radar of the state.

01:18:03.000 One of my most viewed videos is actually really old and it periodically pops up in the analytics on my, I think on my TimCast channel.

01:18:11.000 And it's Men Are No Longer Helping Women and Children.

01:18:14.000 It's a story I read where this woman says she was at a shopping center and she saw a little kid crying with no parents.

01:18:23.000 And she saw a man walking towards the kid, stopping his tracks, look around, turn around, and start walking quickly the other way.

01:18:31.000 Someone ran up to the kid and said, what's wrong?

01:18:33.000 Where's your parents?

01:18:34.000 They found the mom.

01:18:35.000 And the journalist, the reporter who was watching it happen, ran up to the guy who turned around and walked away.

01:18:39.000 She said, I needed to understand why he saw a crying child and didn't do anything to help.

01:18:44.000 And he said, are you kidding?

01:18:45.000 They'd call me a predator and they'd accuse me of kidnapping.

01:18:48.000 So there are stories like this.

01:18:49.000 There was a story in New York where a woman was being punched on the subway and no one would help.

01:18:55.000 This woman who was attacked said that there were men all around just watching it happen, and no one would help her.

01:18:59.000 Now, fast forward to today, we have that story of the woman on the subway getting raped while everybody watched.

01:19:07.000 No one did anything, and it's for exactly these reasons.

01:19:10.000 Anarcho-tyranny.

01:19:12.000 If you see a child crying, and you go up and say, let me help you, Good luck!

01:19:19.000 There are stories that I read about there was a dad with his like five-year-old daughter and they're at a Walmart and as they're walking out someone called the cops saying there's a strange man with a child and the cops came and detained him and questioned him and separated the kid put her in the car and started asking her a bunch of questions and he's like that's my daughter and they're like we're asking the questions here and of course a five-year-old has no ID and then finally they determined okay well it seems to be correct I go around with my kid all the time.

01:19:45.000 He doesn't have an AID.

01:19:47.000 You sit him down.

01:19:48.000 He's not gonna be able to answer any questions, but prove that's your kid.

01:19:51.000 He looks like me.

01:19:53.000 What might a five-year-old say in all innocence?

01:19:56.000 That would be misinterpreted by law enforcement.

01:19:58.000 What if you're playing cops and robbers with your kid earlier in the day?

01:20:02.000 And then the kid says, he's the bad man and he was bad bad bad chasing me.

01:20:09.000 What if you're lifting your kid out of his car seat and you accidentally hurt his finger or something and he's crying and then somebody walks up and says, what's going on?

01:20:17.000 And he points at you and says, he hurt me.

01:20:19.000 Yep.

01:20:20.000 Hey, my office is going to kill me if I don't plug my book.

01:20:20.000 Right?

01:20:23.000 Would that be okay?

01:20:25.000 I mean, it's been sitting behind you the whole time.

01:20:27.000 Well, people, people, that book behind me and this one on my hands sells on Amazon for $25.

01:20:32.000 That's the normal price for all you Tim Pool listeners.

01:20:34.000 We're making this book available for free.

01:20:37.000 $0 for the book.

01:20:38.000 Whoa.

01:20:39.000 We do ask that you pay this.

01:20:41.000 It's not a PDF or something.

01:20:41.000 It's a physical book.

01:20:43.000 So it has to be shipped.

01:20:44.000 We do ask you to pay the shipping and handling.

01:20:45.000 But the book itself is free, normally $25.

01:20:48.000 Plain English explanation of self-defense law, how it actually works.

01:20:52.000 And you can get that at lawofselfdefense.com slash timcast.

01:20:57.000 Cool.

01:20:57.000 All right, folks, grab it.

01:20:57.000 Cool.

01:20:59.000 Only good for today, by the way.

01:21:00.000 That discount code.

01:21:01.000 Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait.

01:21:02.000 You didn't say your line.

01:21:03.000 You gotta say it.

01:21:04.000 It's such a good line.

01:21:05.000 It's such a good line.

01:21:06.000 I quote it like every day now.

01:21:07.000 You gotta say the line.

01:21:08.000 Well, if you carry a gun, like I carry a gun, so you're hard to kill, I carry a gun so I'm hard to kill, my family is hard to kill, then you also owe it to your family to make sure you know the law so you're hard to convict.

01:21:19.000 Boom! 0.99

01:21:20.000 I still have the mug.

01:21:21.000 And it does sound a little dark, like hard to convict, as if like, but I think the fair way to put it is know the law so you stay within it.

01:21:27.000 Absolutely.

01:21:27.000 Stay within it.

01:21:28.000 And that's the point, right?

01:21:29.000 Know the law.

01:21:30.000 Know your bounds.

01:21:31.000 Know your law.

01:21:32.000 And because you might be so worried about not knowing the law that you might be up at night and not be able to sleep well.

01:21:38.000 What would you do then?

01:21:39.000 Let me ask you a question.

01:21:40.000 Oh no!

01:21:41.000 No!

01:21:42.000 I think I asked you this before.

01:21:44.000 I'll come back to it, folks.

01:21:44.000 I'll come back to it.

01:21:46.000 I think I asked you this last time you were on the show.

01:21:48.000 Let's say somebody is breaking into my house.

01:21:52.000 Or actually, how about this?

01:21:54.000 I know it might depend on jurisdiction, but let's say someone is entering my property.

01:21:57.000 Well, it makes a difference.

01:21:59.000 You mean your land or your home?

01:22:00.000 My land.

01:22:01.000 Okay.

01:22:01.000 Not a lethal force.

01:22:02.000 No.

01:22:02.000 Never.

01:22:03.000 Nowhere.

01:22:03.000 We have two big no trespassing signs, you know, it's like be warned.

01:22:07.000 And so you have to cross two of them so you know you're trespassing.

01:22:10.000 In some states, I believe West Virginia, you actually have grounds to use force, like lethal

01:22:16.000 force if someone's entering.

01:22:17.000 Not lethal force.

01:22:18.000 In West Virginia?

01:22:19.000 No, never.

01:22:20.000 Really?

01:22:21.000 Nowhere.

01:22:22.000 No.

01:22:24.000 In other words, trespass that's not clearly for other criminal purposes.

01:22:27.000 You know, trespass for purposes of stealing properties becomes burglary, so that would be different.

01:22:32.000 But someone just walks on your land, it's a simple trespass.

01:22:35.000 You can use force to remove a trespasser, but only non-deadly force.

01:22:38.000 The risk you run into, of course, is non-deadly force can quickly escalate into a deadly force situation.

01:22:44.000 Say you grab him by the arm and try to walk him off your property, they come up with a knife. 0.98

01:22:49.000 And you pull your gun, you shoot him. 0.96

01:22:50.000 The question is going to be, well, why'd you really shoot him? 0.90

01:22:52.000 Where's the knife?

01:22:53.000 We don't have the knife in evidence.

01:22:54.000 We think you shot him just because he was trespassing on your land, and that wouldn't be justified.

01:22:58.000 So what I want to get to is, you know, tasers exist, less lethals exist.

01:23:03.000 Is there a circumstance where less lethals can be more legally treacherous than actual lethal force?

01:23:11.000 It would be hard to imagine how that would be.

01:23:13.000 Now there's degrees of less lethal.

01:23:16.000 So, for example, you can push someone off your property, or I guess you could tase them if they're on your property, but tasing is a much higher degree of force than simply shoving somebody.

01:23:26.000 It's still non-deadly.

01:23:27.000 But you have to be careful to maintain proportionality within that non-deadly bucket.

01:23:32.000 Just because you can use some non-deadly force doesn't mean you can taze somebody.

01:23:36.000 The reason I ask is, for the average person, they don't have this training.

01:23:39.000 They don't know the... I mean, that's great.

01:23:43.000 But I remember looking at the continuum of force in the Chauvin trial.

01:23:48.000 A regular person's not going to know.

01:23:50.000 And if somebody is coming on their property and, let me ask you this, if a guy enters your property and he's got his hand in his jacket as he's walking up and he's looking at you, and then he goes to pull his hand out really quick and then you shoot him, what do you think would happen to you?

01:24:04.000 It would depend upon the local jurisdiction.

01:24:06.000 So that's going to be a judgment call by the prosecutor.

01:24:08.000 How do you prove he was actually going to do that?

01:24:10.000 It turns out he had nothing in his hands?

01:24:12.000 In theory, you don't have to prove anything.

01:24:14.000 The state has to prove everything.

01:24:16.000 And they have to disprove your claim beyond a reasonable doubt.

01:24:19.000 But, you know, the challenge is if someone, you know... So here's where people get in trouble.

01:24:24.000 Normal law-abiding people... Most claims of self-defense are nonsense.

01:24:27.000 They're bad guys.

01:24:28.000 They're lawyers just raising a claim of self-defense.

01:24:30.000 I'm not talking about those.

01:24:31.000 I'm talking about good guy cases of self-defense, where people tend to get into trouble.

01:24:35.000 It's not on the extreme ends of the use-of-force continuum, right?

01:24:39.000 When there's no threat, we don't do anything.

01:24:40.000 We just go about our day.

01:24:42.000 If someone's jumping at us with that giant sword you have hanging on the wall over there, well, that's not a complicated legal analysis.

01:24:47.000 Well, that's the Master Sword from Legend of Zelda.

01:24:50.000 Yeah, if someone's jumping at you with that, you're done.

01:24:53.000 If someone had a real Master Sword, you can fire energy blasts with it.

01:24:58.000 So I'd be like, run!

01:24:59.000 You don't have to worry about courting after that.

01:25:01.000 Whatever it can do, it's not a complicated legal analysis.

01:25:04.000 That's clearly a deadly force threat.

01:25:05.000 It's imminent, etc.

01:25:06.000 You pull your pistol, you take care of that problem.

01:25:10.000 That's not where people get in trouble.

01:25:11.000 They get in trouble in between those two extremes, what I call the zone of ambiguity, where it's not clear what's happening.

01:25:18.000 Is it a deadly threat?

01:25:19.000 Are we sure?

01:25:20.000 Is something else happening?

01:25:21.000 Do I have other options?

01:25:23.000 And unless people have thought that through ahead of time and developed, learned techniques to kind of, to strip away the ambiguity, so like in that scenario, It's very common.

01:25:33.000 A common scenario I get from women is, hey, I'm walking in a parking garage late at night. 1.00

01:25:37.000 There's some guy like walking behind me.

01:25:39.000 He hasn't done anything yet, but there's something about him.

01:25:41.000 It's really scaring me.

01:25:43.000 I know I can't just turn around and shoot him because he hasn't done anything yet.

01:25:46.000 I don't know what to do. 0.97

01:25:48.000 Well, what you can do is turn around and challenge that guy.

01:25:50.000 Stay the F away from me because if he's a normal guy just walking to his car too, what's he gonna do? 1.00

01:25:54.000 Oh, shit. 1.00

01:25:55.000 Didn't mean to scare you. 0.99

01:25:55.000 Sorry. 0.99

01:25:57.000 If he keeps coming, Well, you've stripped away ambiguity, right?

01:26:00.000 You've clarified the situation.

01:26:02.000 And now his conduct, in the face of your verbal commands to stay back, is conduct consistent with someone who means you harm.

01:26:08.000 This is like guys who have no, you know, no hand-to-hand combat training or have never done any mixed martial arts or anything, and they say, oh, I'm just going to take that guy in that street fight.

01:26:20.000 I just see white man, and I'm just gonna go.

01:26:22.000 I'm gonna go all in, right?

01:26:24.000 And it's like, you haven't taken any time to actually train yourself to understand what it's like to be in physical combat with somebody to having, you know, or, you know, a guy who has a gun that doesn't go to the range or doesn't, you know, even dry fire practice aiming or any of this stuff. 0.99

01:26:38.000 I'm just gonna shoot to kill, man. 0.97

01:26:41.000 No, you're not. 1.00

01:26:42.000 They have these things.

01:26:43.000 I love those people, though, because... Don't you love those people?

01:26:45.000 I have a very costly German motorcycle habit, and those people pay for it.

01:26:50.000 My friend and I had this idea a decade ago.

01:26:51.000 You ever see those ab crunch belts?

01:26:55.000 Where you put the conductive gel on it, you wrap it around your waist, turn it on, but it doesn't shock you.

01:27:05.000 It's I forgot.

01:27:06.000 I think it's like what is it like high voltage, low amps or something like low voltage.

01:27:10.000 So there's no pain, your muscles just contract.

01:27:13.000 But so we used to play with it and like we put on our faces and our faces just like lock up.

01:27:18.000 And we would put on our arms and your arm would just bend.

01:27:20.000 Wasn't this a Johnny Knoxville thing?

01:27:22.000 I don't know.

01:27:23.000 I don't know.

01:27:23.000 No, they did it with a taser, I'm pretty sure.

01:27:27.000 My friend and I had an idea to make gloves.

01:27:29.000 My friend and I had an idea that you could make gloves that you would turn on, and if you grabbed someone's arm, you'd essentially disable their ability to move their arm, which was, you know.

01:27:39.000 And we actually talked with a very big company who initially got really excited for the idea of a crazy science project.

01:27:46.000 And then when, like, these are the sales and sponsorship guys.

01:27:50.000 Big, big company that makes gloves.

01:27:52.000 And then when their head of legal found out, they were talking about making muscle disabling.

01:27:57.000 And we were like, there's no pain, no pain at all.

01:28:00.000 If you grab them, their arms will just be unable to move and they won't feel any pain.

01:28:04.000 I mean, they'll be scared.

01:28:05.000 And they were like, we will not sponsor this project.

01:28:08.000 But I thought that was an interesting idea.

01:28:10.000 I wonder why it doesn't exist, you know?

01:28:13.000 Probably just because it's unreliable.

01:28:14.000 I mean, self-defense tools are... You're wearing gloves.

01:28:18.000 You're wearing gloves, you know?

01:28:19.000 What are gloves for?

01:28:21.000 You need a power source?

01:28:22.000 No, no, no, not even.

01:28:24.000 Tasers do what, like 9-volt batteries?

01:28:26.000 Yeah, you got a little lithium-ion thing in the back.

01:28:30.000 If it's a self-defense tool, it's like a parachute.

01:28:33.000 It has to work if you're going to rely on it.

01:28:35.000 And it's just an unproven... I mean, listen, tasers suck. 0.98

01:28:39.000 I'm sorry, they suck. 0.99

01:28:40.000 I would not recommend them for civilian use. 0.97

01:28:43.000 When they work right, they work amazingly well.

01:28:45.000 But there are so many circumstances that keep them from working right.

01:28:49.000 And if the suspect knows he's going to get tased, just him holding his shirt out away from his body is a shield against the taser.

01:28:56.000 They're not hard to defeat.

01:28:57.000 When police use them properly, You'll have one cop with a taser and a cop right next to

01:29:02.000 him with a gun in case the taser is ineffective when you're A civilian you don't have that option. You don't have a

01:29:07.000 second person with you with a gun Do you think the glove thing is a good idea because if they

01:29:11.000 don't turn on they're just gloves But then they're not working to defend you. Well having no

01:29:17.000 gloves. You have nothing to offend you At least with gloves, you're not going to hurt your hands, right?

01:29:21.000 I carry pepper spray, for example.

01:29:22.000 I carry a gun every day.

01:29:23.000 I also carry pepper spray.

01:29:24.000 That's what I'm saying.

01:29:25.000 You can carry those too.

01:29:26.000 But I just think the idea of being able to like, you know, someone is going to attack you and you can grab them and they can't move.

01:29:31.000 You can make it the whole sleeve so you give them a bear hug.

01:29:34.000 Or, or...

01:29:35.000 Any at any point if they touch you they get you know their hand gets stuck.

01:29:39.000 Yeah, what if you made like?

01:29:40.000 What if you made like a like a one you could throw kind of almost like but it's like sticky So that you throw it and then I mean, that's a good idea.

01:29:49.000 Because why would I want to be so close that I have to touch somebody that they could, you know, presumably do something to me, the thing doesn't work, but I'm just throwing them.

01:29:59.000 I don't like contact weapons for self-defense.

01:30:01.000 I like to maintain distance.

01:30:04.000 Here's an idea.

01:30:05.000 What if we created some kind of like dense, expanding, sticky foam of some sort, and we could take the cartridges and just put them on your wrists, and you can trigger it with a little trigger.

01:30:18.000 So when you push your fingers, it will blast them with some kind of sticky substance.

01:30:21.000 You know who would love that?

01:30:23.000 Police departments and Marvel.

01:30:26.000 Could you imagine if cops actually had web shooters and they fire a net of web?

01:30:32.000 It would be funny because the whole left is like a Holyoake subsidiary of Disney now.

01:30:39.000 So they wouldn't know how to be against it if the cops were like, yeah, we're going to have these Yeah, we're gonna have these these we're gonna come web packs and they'll go right on your right on the inside your forearm there and you just shoot him at the crook and I mean I'm off fewer riots Here's what you do replace all police uniforms with Hogwarts uniforms So all the police are running around and instead of baton, they're all equipped with one and it's like a wand.

01:31:07.000 Oh But they'll have their guns and everything underneath their robes.

01:31:10.000 The goal is when the riots happen, they show up dressed like Harry Potter characters and accuse the rioters of being Death Eaters.

01:31:16.000 I love it.

01:31:17.000 And then the riots stop because they're like, get the Death Eaters!

01:31:21.000 And then afterwards, you know, you have like, it's like, you don't call it the, um, you know, you don't call it the community.

01:31:26.000 This should be the third hour, by the way.

01:31:28.000 You don't usually have, like, the PR officer comes out, the press relations officer comes out, but that'll just be a professor, right?

01:31:35.000 And the professor comes out and talks about it.

01:31:36.000 It'll be a guy in Dumbledore cosplay, yes.

01:31:38.000 With British accent and everything.

01:31:40.000 The rioters!

01:31:42.000 We're working for Voldemort!

01:31:44.000 And then all of a sudden, we're like, yay!

01:31:48.000 That's, uh, I'm stealing Seamus' joke from Freedom Tunes.

01:31:51.000 He did a bit where it was like, he says, Rosenbaum is kind of like Voldemort, and leftist is like, and there's a picture, he has a picture of Kyle Rittenhouse as Harry Potter, and the guy's like, I can't believe that worked.

01:32:01.000 All right, let's go to, we're gonna go to Super Chats.

01:32:03.000 If you haven't already, smash the like button!

01:32:04.000 Subscribe to the channel.

01:32:05.000 We're gonna have a members-only segment coming up at around 11 or so p.m.

01:32:09.000 So, um, we're gonna read some of those Super Chats starting now.

01:32:13.000 All right, let's see.

01:32:16.000 All right.

01:32:17.000 Darth Crypto says I'm here live for this one.

01:32:20.000 Hey, Darth Crypto!

01:32:21.000 Shout out to Darth Crypto, by the way.

01:32:23.000 He sent me some fantastic videos while I was covering the Rittenhouse trial.

01:32:27.000 It really affected my legal analysis of the case.

01:32:30.000 Guy did absolutely fantastic work.

01:32:32.000 On the fly, could easily do.

01:32:34.000 He even did a great video that was sort of a preview of what Binger's, you know, closing was going to be.

01:32:40.000 Very, very good.

01:32:41.000 Yes.

01:32:41.000 You know, right.

01:32:42.000 And it was all about provocation and he nailed it.

01:32:44.000 He says, my boys represent and let's talk Rittenhouse, baby.

01:32:48.000 I'm still going for Binger and co and I'm just getting warmed up.

01:32:51.000 Nice.

01:32:52.000 Yeah, we did have some... I don't know if it's public information.

01:32:56.000 Binger and Lunchbox.

01:32:57.000 Gotta throw that out.

01:32:58.000 Lunchbox, by the way.

01:32:59.000 There's some information about Dominic Black's case.

01:33:00.000 I don't know if we're allowed to publicly release it.

01:33:02.000 I don't know if it was mentioned.

01:33:03.000 Was it?

01:33:04.000 I don't think so.

01:33:04.000 I think it was behind the scenes.

01:33:06.000 But suffice it to say, Binger, I don't believe, is done with Rittenhouse or... He's going for Dominic Black on the gun charges, but I think he's desperately trying to get back at Rittenhouse.

01:33:16.000 Because I think the gun charge was dismissed, right?

01:33:21.000 Yes.

01:33:21.000 The other charges were dismissed with prejudice.

01:33:23.000 On Kyle, not on Dominic.

01:33:25.000 That case is still up.

01:33:27.000 Count 6 is dismissed.

01:33:29.000 On the other charges he was acquitted on, so I guess the argument... The gun charge is not coming back against Kyle.

01:33:34.000 That's not going to happen.

01:33:35.000 You don't think it's possible?

01:33:36.000 No.

01:33:37.000 I don't trust Binger.

01:33:38.000 It's not realistic.

01:33:39.000 Basically, the judge ruled, as a matter of law, it doesn't apply.

01:33:42.000 So you don't get to just go shopping for a different judge.

01:33:45.000 Here's my question, though.

01:33:47.000 In Dominic Black's case, they actually get another judge to say, oh yeah, that's a misreading of the law.

01:33:53.000 It's two different statutes.

01:33:55.000 They're not charged under the same statute.

01:33:57.000 But here's my question about that statute.

01:33:59.000 There are two different things.

01:33:59.000 So the statute they charged Kyle with simply is inapplicable to his circumstances.

01:34:04.000 I've done a lot of analysis on this.

01:34:05.000 It's too lengthy to get into.

01:34:07.000 But that statute is a completely different statute than Dominic Black is charged under.

01:34:11.000 So the fact that Kyle's was dismissed has nothing to do with Black's and Black's has nothing to do with Kyle's. 0.80

01:34:17.000 That being said, the killings do apply.

01:34:21.000 You know, it might.

01:34:22.000 I mean, if our Blacks Defense lawyer, I would start arguing that look the statute gun that was used in a death, right? 0.98

01:34:28.000 So giving a gun to a minor and a death results Yes, and it's intended of course to prevent giving guns to young gang members who then go kill people or get killed themselves and we obviously nobody wants that but in those cases what the what the old statutes intended to prevent is unlawful deaths and that didn't happen here this gun was used to in a justified manner. These deaths were lawful, determined

01:34:51.000 in a court of law.

01:34:52.000 So I would argue that this statute does not apply to the specific circumstances of Dominic

01:34:59.000 Black because the gun he provided was not used to commit an unlawful killing.

01:35:04.000 Dominic Black already testified he didn't provide a gun.

01:35:06.000 Maybe he should have told the truth.

01:35:12.000 We'll see.

01:35:12.000 Stood up for his friend and not tried to weasel his way out of charges.

01:35:16.000 All the testimony around the whole gun thing was very shaky because Binger was trying to make different points at different times and therefore represented the evidence in different ways.

01:35:23.000 It was like Binger was testifying.

01:35:24.000 Well, he did a lot of that.

01:35:25.000 It felt like Binger was testifying and then just kind of pushing someone into a corner and be like, that's what happened, right?

01:35:31.000 That was a very funny part of the case.

01:35:32.000 Is that fair?

01:35:33.000 He was talking about the ammo.

01:35:34.000 Is that fair?

01:35:35.000 Yeah, the ammo.

01:35:35.000 He was asking Kyle about the ammo.

01:35:37.000 So, you know, Are you aware that full metal jacket is different than hollow point?

01:35:41.000 Kyle's like, I don't really know that much about ammo.

01:35:44.000 Well, let me explain it to you.

01:35:46.000 And he was wrong.

01:35:47.000 And the judge comes down.

01:35:48.000 What the hell are you doing?

01:35:49.000 He said hollow point explodes. 1.00

01:35:51.000 Enter and then explode in Kyle's face.

01:35:54.000 He goes, I don't think that's correct.

01:35:57.000 He's like, what would you use it for deer hunting?

01:35:59.000 And Kyle's like...

01:36:01.000 I don't think anyone would use hollow point for deer hunting.

01:36:04.000 No, but that's not true.

01:36:05.000 No, it's not true.

01:36:07.000 I mean, I don't have I have I have a polymer tip 450 Bushmaster.

01:36:11.000 So it's effectively hollow points, right?

01:36:14.000 It's for deer hunting.

01:36:14.000 Right.

01:36:15.000 Yep.

01:36:15.000 You know, well, if it's polymer, sure, but that's But it's effectively a hollow point, you know, it's a soft, it's a, it's a poly tip so that it functions the same way.

01:36:22.000 You use a hollow point for deer hunting because you want, you want the bullet to expand and dump as much energy into the prey animals as possible.

01:36:29.000 Right.

01:36:30.000 Uh, you wouldn't use full metal.

01:36:31.000 Full metal jacket literally punches a pencil size hole right through.

01:36:34.000 And maybe it's a, it's an injury that will prove mortal some days later.

01:36:39.000 I mean, who knows?

01:36:39.000 Uh, but that's not what you want when you're hunting.

01:36:42.000 You want the animal to be stopped humanely right there.

01:36:45.000 I think the defense mentioned this.

01:36:46.000 They said, in some cases, you know, the prosecution will say, you used hollow points.

01:36:50.000 You were trying to kill.

01:36:51.000 And now he's saying, you used full metal jacket.

01:36:52.000 See, that proves it.

01:36:53.000 It's never the right bullet for the prosecutor.

01:36:56.000 Ever.

01:36:57.000 Whichever one he used, it was the other one that was the right one.

01:37:00.000 All right, let's read some more.

01:37:01.000 We got Cristiano.

01:37:02.000 It says, for Luke, and it's a puking emoji.

01:37:05.000 Archangel says, no, Luke, we puke.

01:37:07.000 Ladies and gentlemen.

01:37:07.000 Give him a break.

01:37:08.000 Luke has a family.

01:37:10.000 And it's Thanksgiving tomorrow, so he needs to drive.

01:37:13.000 It's tomorrow, right?

01:37:14.000 Thanksgiving is tomorrow?

01:37:15.000 Yeah.

01:37:15.000 All day.

01:37:16.000 We're doing our family Thanksgiving over the weekend, but we're going to have like a company Thanksgiving for those that aren't, you know.

01:37:21.000 So we're not going to be here tomorrow or Friday.

01:37:24.000 And then, I'm a holidays man.

01:37:26.000 Forced days off.

01:37:27.000 You can't really... Dare you.

01:37:29.000 I've tried to work through them.

01:37:30.000 It doesn't work.

01:37:31.000 I worked through them.

01:37:32.000 You got to accept.

01:37:33.000 Yeah.

01:37:33.000 But for like the work we do, people are eating dinner.

01:37:36.000 They're not watching the show.

01:37:37.000 No one's reporting anything.

01:37:39.000 Everyone, even criminals are spending time with grandma.

01:37:42.000 So crimes aren't being committed.

01:37:44.000 And we just... This was the wire.

01:37:46.000 It was a, you know, the Sunday morning truce.

01:37:49.000 Yeah.

01:37:49.000 You know about the Christmas truce?

01:37:51.000 What's the Christmas truce?

01:37:52.000 World War II.

01:37:54.000 World War I. World War I, yeah.

01:37:56.000 Amazing.

01:37:56.000 It was in the trenches.

01:37:57.000 Soccer game.

01:37:58.000 They all came out and said, it's Christmas, we're not going to fight. 0.86

01:38:01.000 And then they were like, alright, Christmas is over, I'll be over there shooting at you. 0.98

01:38:04.000 They still didn't want to fight, but then the French commanders were like, you have to fight, or we'll kill you. 0.71

01:38:09.000 And so the troops were like, well, rather than get shot by our commanding officers, we'll charge the Germans. 0.86

01:38:14.000 And then the mustard gas came back on.

01:38:15.000 That was nasty.

01:38:17.000 Martin Edgar says I see your 35 year old skating and raise you 54 year old seven-year army with daily runs four times per year 12 mile road marches 23 years as a city carrier walking route and My response is have you gotten your ageless?

01:38:31.000 Yeah, I was gonna say, he's teeing you up right there.

01:38:34.000 Right, right, right.

01:38:35.000 You really need some collagen there.

01:38:35.000 StrongerBonesInLife.com.

01:38:36.000 That's right.

01:38:37.000 Medic Knight.

01:38:41.000 Tim, ask Jack if he believes Biden will get the U.S.

01:38:43.000 into a war with Iran.

01:38:44.000 Remember, Biden is a war hawk.

01:38:46.000 Ask him if he thinks Ron Paul was right on everything.

01:38:48.000 Dems are the party of war.

01:38:51.000 I'm still trying to find the issue where Ron Paul was wrong.

01:38:57.000 And so, yeah, I'd say pretty much everything, pretty much everything Ron Paul was right.

01:39:01.000 There's there's some things I could I could, you know, think of where I'm more conservative than a libertarian on.

01:39:06.000 But, Yeah.

01:39:07.000 As far as war with Iran, I certainly think he has people around him that want to go to war. 0.73

01:39:11.000 He's sending right now, Iran doesn't seem to be the main target.

01:39:16.000 It seems to be that because you remember the Obama people that were around him were the ones that were trying to pay

01:39:20.000 off Iran.

01:39:21.000 Right. They didn't want to go to war.

01:39:22.000 These were trying. These weren't the war hawks.

01:39:23.000 Yes. All right. Right. Right.

01:39:25.000 Right. They were, you know, continually paying off.

01:39:27.000 This was the pallets of cash people.

01:39:29.000 That being said, Russia, I would say, is probably more the one that they want to provoke a war with. 0.93

01:39:34.000 They're sending special forces, I'm sorry, advisers to Ukraine right now.

01:39:38.000 And then China, they're, of course, just going to capitulate to.

01:39:41.000 Right. Or perhaps already have.

01:39:43.000 Hmm.

01:39:44.000 All right.

01:39:45.000 Seth Booz says, here's one for Poso.

01:39:47.000 The last member segment you did, you talked about Sabaton.

01:39:50.000 Top three albums, please.

01:39:51.000 Go.

01:39:51.000 Oh, yeah.

01:39:53.000 So with Sabaton, I love the latest Great War, World War I. I burned a hole in that.

01:39:59.000 I mean, I don't listen to CDs anymore, but I still like that phrase, burned a hole in it.

01:40:03.000 I love the one on Last Stands.

01:40:04.000 And I also have this mix that I basically got that it was sort of like an online playlist that people made of the greatest hits that I really like.

01:40:13.000 Oh, and the last live album, too.

01:40:15.000 But, real quick on Sabaton.

01:40:17.000 I am trying very hard, and I'd like to enlist everyone out there.

01:40:20.000 If you don't know who Sabaton is, they're like a Swedish hard rock band that does historical references in all of their music to actual warfare and specific real-life battles.

01:40:33.000 Of course, they sing a lot about Poland.

01:40:36.000 In Poland, they're extremely, extremely well-respected.

01:40:40.000 And I want to troll them into making an album about the American Revolutionary War.

01:40:45.000 I mean, think about a metal song to Paul Revere.

01:40:48.000 It writes itself!

01:40:49.000 It does.

01:40:49.000 Come on, Sabaton!

01:40:51.000 You can do this!

01:40:51.000 Question for Andrew.

01:40:52.000 What's worse for self-defense, a gun or using a knife?

01:40:57.000 I'm not sure what worst means, but when we talk about the degree of force, I mean, use of force law doesn't really care about the means of force.

01:41:05.000 So there's non-deadly force and there's deadly force.

01:41:08.000 Once you're in the deadly force bucket, it's all the same.

01:41:10.000 So a gun is not more deadly force than a knife or more deadly force than a baseball bat to the head.

01:41:16.000 If it's likely to kill or cause serious bodily injury, it's deadly force.

01:41:20.000 It's all the same.

01:41:21.000 It's a homogenous bucket.

01:41:22.000 You're within 10, 20 feet, you know, I might, I might take the knife.

01:41:27.000 Well, knives are horrible. 0.99

01:41:28.000 I would much rather get shot than get cut up by a knife.

01:41:32.000 I've watched the police training videos. 0.55

01:41:33.000 I watched the Mythbusters episode.

01:41:35.000 I've been in those trainings.

01:41:38.000 And I've done the heat training too, and they always say like, you know, somebody's coming at you with a knife, run, run, run.

01:41:45.000 Run, get out. 0.71

01:41:45.000 Just don't be there. 0.71

01:41:47.000 I mean, the only advantage of a gun really is the gun you can use at a distance before the enemy's on you.

01:41:52.000 But if he's got a knife and he can grab you, it's gonna be a real bad day.

01:41:56.000 Let's be honest.

01:41:57.000 A gun can use at a distance?

01:41:59.000 How likely is the average person to hit their target if they're beyond 21 feet?

01:42:03.000 Well, not very likely, no.

01:42:05.000 And especially with a handgun.

01:42:07.000 And the dude from Mythbusters, they're both out of shape and overweight.

01:42:15.000 And one of the guys was able to close 21 feet in like a second and a half.

01:42:21.000 That's the normal standard.

01:42:22.000 And so I think Jamie, I don't know the guy's name, he couldn't even get the gun out of the holster.

01:42:28.000 It was a laser.

01:42:28.000 He would get it out and point it and click and see if he could get him.

01:42:31.000 He couldn't.

01:42:32.000 Each time the knife, it was a foam knife that tapped his chest.

01:42:35.000 You're not going to get the gun out and get center mass hits unless you train and practice and practice and practice and practice to do that.

01:42:42.000 I mean, I shot competitively most of my adult life.

01:42:44.000 I can clear the gun from my holster, center mass targets in under a second.

01:42:48.000 Wow.

01:42:48.000 But I worked damn hard, 20 years to develop that skill level.

01:42:51.000 This was important for the defense of the Rittenhouse case.

01:42:53.000 Plus, you have to have your right holster, you have to have your gun.

01:42:56.000 You can point out that Gage Grosskreutz was closing the gap because he would not have made the hit running and from at least seven feet.

01:43:06.000 He wouldn't have been able to do it.

01:43:07.000 And where was that defense expert?

01:43:10.000 By the way, I just want to point out for people who may not know, Kyle Rittenhouse had fired that AR rifle Once before in his life.

01:43:21.000 Dude, he did great!

01:43:21.000 When he was out on that street, and he made... Everybody he shot was someone attacking him, except for Jump Kick Man, which was a very difficult situation, getting knocked on your butt and trying to hit somebody who's jumping on top of you.

01:43:33.000 Those two misses, I'll forgive him.

01:43:35.000 Everything else was a solid hit.

01:43:37.000 And I think it's really a testament to the utility of that AR platform for self-defense.

01:43:42.000 This is the purpose of the design.

01:43:44.000 It is so easy to use effectively, even in novice hands.

01:43:48.000 It's an amazing platform.

01:43:49.000 I mean, think of it.

01:43:50.000 They're designed for 17, 18-year-old E1 privates that are put into, you know, a combat situation.

01:43:58.000 But this was not, we got to be careful here.

01:44:01.000 He has a .223, it was an M&P 15.

01:44:02.000 It's not a weapon of war.

01:44:07.000 No.

01:44:07.000 It's a .223.

01:44:08.000 It's a sporting rifle.

01:44:09.000 Yeah, they don't give .223, do they?

01:44:11.000 Oh, it's the same caliber.

01:44:12.000 It's in the military?

01:44:13.000 Yeah, M4.

01:44:14.000 It's functionally the same.

01:44:15.000 It'd be an M4.

01:44:15.000 It'd be 5.56.

01:44:15.000 Select Fire 5.56 is a different weapon.

01:44:19.000 Well, .223 is the caliber of the round.

01:44:21.000 It's equivalent to the metric 5.56.

01:44:23.000 So the round being fired is effectively the same from from both guns.

01:44:27.000 His is select fire.

01:44:29.000 It's not, sorry, it's not a fully automatic weapon.

01:44:32.000 The military is a select fire.

01:44:34.000 It's extremely similar.

01:44:37.000 Well, my point is, there's a big difference between being able to do full-auto bursts.

01:44:41.000 Sure, but other than that, you don't train to fire on, I mean, if you're firing full-auto, you're having a bad day already.

01:44:48.000 My point is, we have to be very careful when we talk about weapons used for war, because this was not it.

01:44:55.000 No, no, no.

01:44:56.000 It was certainly not designed, but I'm talking about the original design of the AR-15, because it was originally designed for the military, for Department of Defense use.

01:45:06.000 Except that the original design always had selectifier.

01:45:09.000 And that's the one reason that you see the forward assist that's on it, because originally the designer didn't want that, but the military said, no, we have soldiers, and these were people at the time that had served in World War II, and they said, look, we've been in so many situations where the round doesn't chamber, something goes wrong, we want that forward assist.

01:45:28.000 And I believe that when, on that video, where you do see Kyle at one point, and this is what came in with Gage Grosskreutz, Where Gage claims, falsely, that Kyle is, you know, recharging the handle.

01:45:42.000 That's a very deliberate and... It's a big motion.

01:45:46.000 ...definite motion that you would see on camera.

01:45:47.000 And he didn't.

01:45:48.000 But you can tell that he does kind of move his hand down.

01:45:51.000 He tilts the gun towards him a little bit.

01:45:53.000 And I believe what he's doing is he's slamming that forward assist.

01:45:56.000 Interesting.

01:45:57.000 So, uh, The Real Hydro says, a man got life in prison for recording something.

01:46:02.000 If it wasn't for his recording, the DA wouldn't have anything.

01:46:04.000 This country is doomed.

01:46:05.000 Uh, based on the story that I read, that neighbor who was just following and filming, he's getting charged with fel- he got convicted of felony murder for that.

01:46:14.000 Well, they're claiming, in effect, that he attacked Arbery with his truck.

01:46:19.000 He committed assault with the truck, which is a deadly force attack.

01:46:22.000 Aggravated assault, it's a felony, and then Arbery died as a con... Now, I would suggest there's a real causation problem there, because there's no evidence he hit Arbery with the truck, and there's no evidence the truck literally caused Arbery's death, right?

01:46:34.000 He didn't run him over with the truck.

01:46:37.000 Arbery didn't jump off a cliff to avoid the truck.

01:46:40.000 But nevertheless, that's the basis.

01:46:41.000 So once you have the felony of aggravated assault and the later death, well then the death is felony murder.

01:46:49.000 Did they all have the same defense?

01:46:50.000 No, every defendant had two lawyers of their own.

01:46:55.000 Because whose decision was it to try it all together?

01:46:57.000 Did they try to separate that at all?

01:46:59.000 You know, I don't know.

01:47:01.000 Like the last day of the trial, O'Brien tried to sever, is the legal term, sever himself from the other defendants, but the judge didn't allow it.

01:47:08.000 of the judge didn't allow it. So they chose to do a joint trial? I don't know if they had an option

01:47:17.000 and that's a criminal procedure thing that would be so local you'd have to ask an attorney.

01:47:20.000 The prosecutor naturally wants to try everybody together.

01:47:22.000 Because I imagine the prosecutor would want that to be all together.

01:47:24.000 Yeah, because then it blurs.

01:47:27.000 Everyone seems responsible.

01:47:28.000 All the evidence appears to be against every defendant.

01:47:31.000 Right, because of course their theory is, well this was a coordinated act, you guys planned this in advance, or at least you Yeah, anytime a prosecutor can try a bunch of people together, they'll do that every time.

01:47:40.000 Yeah, of course.

01:47:41.000 Because then, you know, if you had three defendants and really a third of the evidence was against each one, what it looks like in court is that a hundred percent of the evidence is against each one.

01:47:49.000 Is against all three.

01:47:51.000 Right.

01:47:53.000 And then you get three convictions out of one.

01:47:54.000 Right.

01:47:56.000 Resta says, do you think the media's light reporting on Waukesha is because they are gun-shy from Rittenhouse lawsuits coming their way?

01:48:02.000 No, I think they're terrified of Waukesha.

01:48:03.000 I think they're terrified.

01:48:04.000 I think it's political.

01:48:05.000 Of that narrative.

01:48:06.000 Yeah, I think it's political.

01:48:07.000 I think that this is a situation, again, the same way that Kyle Rittenhouse walked because of independent media, it's the same situation now where independent media is One of the most important things to the survival of this country and the survival of freedom in this country Because it is the last bastion shows like this shows like, you know, we all have podcasts and everything that we do I'm not trying to do a hard pitch here that you are not going to get the truth anymore from corporate media or regime media as you want to call it and

01:48:41.000 It's all lies, all the way down.

01:48:43.000 Has been ever since the Zimmerman case.

01:48:44.000 Everything they're writing about these cases is disinformation.

01:48:47.000 I will say that people who think Kyle's going to get a lot of money suing people, I think that's a pipe dream.

01:48:52.000 That's not going to happen.

01:48:53.000 I don't think the courts will be favorable to him.

01:48:53.000 Really?

01:48:53.000 Why?

01:48:56.000 Anything that was in the criminal indictment, he's not going to be able to sue over.

01:48:59.000 Because the courts have said if it's in a criminal indictment, then calling him a murderer or stuff like that, people are allowed to make that inference.

01:49:05.000 What about Biden, though?

01:49:07.000 What about Biden?

01:49:07.000 That fat progressive guy just tweeted out, literally the other day, that Kyle Rittenhouse crossed state lines.

01:49:13.000 Robert Reich? 0.96

01:49:13.000 Yeah, with an illegal weapon. 0.96

01:49:15.000 Rush Limbaugh used to say, Robert Reich!

01:49:17.000 A false statement of fact.

01:49:21.000 I suppose the challenge is damages.

01:49:23.000 That's the challenge.

01:49:24.000 So there's three problems.

01:49:24.000 Right.

01:49:25.000 One is the criminal indictment stuff.

01:49:27.000 You can't sue over that.

01:49:27.000 Forget it.

01:49:28.000 People are allowed to refer to that and infer that there's some truth to it or

01:49:32.000 wouldn't have been an indictment and stuff like racism and white supremacist.

01:49:36.000 The courts don't care about.

01:49:37.000 They call that opinions.

01:49:38.000 But even if you could get someone on a deliberate statement of fact, well, there's a couple more problems.

01:49:43.000 One is that Kyle was giving interviews, not just recently, but in the past.

01:49:47.000 And the moment you start giving interviews, the courts say, well, you made yourself a public figure.

01:49:51.000 Maybe you weren't when you got attacked the first time, but now that you're giving media interviews, you're a public figure.

01:49:55.000 People are allowed to talk about you.

01:49:57.000 They have to show malice now if they want to collect money.

01:50:00.000 But even if you can do all of that, What are your damages?

01:50:04.000 Because your damages will be damage to reputation, but all that other stuff, the murder, the white supremacist, the racist, there's just no reputation left.

01:50:13.000 What are the damages for the Alex Jones case?

01:50:18.000 Because he said some conspiracy stuff about Sandy Hook.

01:50:20.000 They claim, I believe they're claiming emotional distress.

01:50:23.000 Oh, okay.

01:50:23.000 Well, it looks like they're going to win.

01:50:25.000 We don't know for sure.

01:50:26.000 The media is lying about everything.

01:50:28.000 They did rule Alex Jones in default because they claimed the things he turned over in the discovery weren't the total of what they were actually asking for.

01:50:35.000 They said, we want X. He says he gave them X. They say, you're still missing key documents.

01:50:40.000 So they ruled in default.

01:50:41.000 Apparently he has some time to respond to not be in default.

01:50:44.000 But they're reporting he lost already and he's been found guilty.

01:50:47.000 None of that is true.

01:50:48.000 But they're looking at millions of dollars.

01:50:50.000 Well, if there's a default judgment, it's a judgment.

01:50:53.000 What I mean is, what damages does that family have?

01:50:55.000 Because Alex Jones said crazy things about them.

01:50:58.000 I don't know anything about the case.

01:50:59.000 Here's what I think.

01:51:00.000 But it's completely different than Nick Sandman, for example, who was not a criminal defendant.

01:51:04.000 So there were no charges against him.

01:51:06.000 There was no indictment.

01:51:07.000 Well, there's two things.

01:51:08.000 giving interviews so he wasn't a public figure.

01:51:10.000 He got a lot of money because he meets the criteria for getting a lot of money and Kyle

01:51:15.000 Rittenhouse really doesn't.

01:51:16.000 Well there's two things.

01:51:18.000 First, even if Kyle Rittenhouse loses after suing the media, it's actually not possible

01:51:23.000 for Kyle Rittenhouse to lose his efforts against the mainstream press when it comes to defamation

01:51:28.000 It's not possible because one of two things will happen.

01:51:30.000 Either the news organizations will have to publicly state that their standards don't include reading the criminal indictments in their investigations, don't include cursory investigations, that they just publish hearsay as fact, or opinion as fact, or scuttlebutt as rumor as fact.

01:51:45.000 You're saying they'll have to argue that in court?

01:51:46.000 They will have to publicly state in documents.

01:51:49.000 It is a standard at CNN that we do not do basic base research in any of our stories because that would be the actual malice standard.

01:51:56.000 But will the people who watch CNN care about that?

01:52:00.000 It's irrelevant.

01:52:00.000 It's still a victory.

01:52:01.000 Rachel Maddow admitted this and she's still getting a pay raise. 0.99

01:52:05.000 Having these organizations have to publicly state this is bad for them, across the board.

01:52:13.000 It's not going to be a million dollar paycheck, but it is a cultural victory.

01:52:16.000 To me, I think it's even bigger than the media.

01:52:18.000 You have Joe Biden, who's our current president.

01:52:22.000 Run and used this kid as a political pawn, lied about him, lied about his family, called him a racist, called another trying to play this game of, Oh, I was referring to this. 0.99

01:52:33.000 Shut up. 0.99

01:52:34.000 That's not what you were talking about. 1.00

01:52:35.000 You used him to gain the highest office in the land.

01:52:39.000 Falsely.

01:52:40.000 He should have his campaign, by the way.

01:52:42.000 They should sue the campaign, not him personally.

01:52:44.000 Sue the campaign and then go after them because they don't have whatever kind of immunity that the president does.

01:52:49.000 Oh, that would hurt reelection, wouldn't it?

01:52:50.000 Sue the campaign because yes, you would have to hurt because Biden, well, the White House is telling people he's going to run again, but privately, that's not what he's telling people.

01:52:58.000 The other important thing is that when it comes to damages, I think Kyle's going to easily be able to argue that security, name changes, he's going to have to move out of the state, he's got to protect his address now.

01:53:09.000 He already is out of the state.

01:53:10.000 Right, he's going to have to do this for the rest of his life.

01:53:11.000 But the other side's going to say, look, he would have had to have done that anyway.

01:53:15.000 We didn't make that happen in any substantial way.

01:53:18.000 That was already damage he was incurring from other The New York Times ruled this in a... I'm sorry, the courts ruled this in a New York Times case.

01:53:27.000 The Supreme Court ruled this with Veritas, a different state, I understand.

01:53:30.000 But they said to the New York Times, because the New York Times argued, their reputation is too damaged already, we couldn't damage it any further.

01:53:36.000 And the judge basically said, just because other people are kicking them doesn't mean you are clear of your responsibilities for kicking them.

01:53:44.000 Well, listen, I hope Kyle gets hundreds of millions of dollars.

01:53:46.000 That would be absolutely awesome.

01:53:48.000 But I'm just cautioning people.

01:53:50.000 I think a lot of people look at this and they just assume that he's obviously got a downhill fight in this.

01:53:55.000 And I think it's more complicated than that.

01:53:58.000 I think a lot of people think Sandman got $250 million from CNN, which is just absolutely not true by any reasonable assessment or legal assessment.

01:54:07.000 he got a settlement, which means they may have paid him 25 grand. Some people said it was probably a

01:54:13.000 nuisance fee. CNN said, how much do you want to go away and stop bothering us? And they said,

01:54:17.000 well, we don't know. Right. I mean, cause I mean, it's a settlement. It wasn't $20 million.

01:54:20.000 Well, one thing, one thing I should say while we're talking about this, that if you do believe

01:54:25.000 that Kyle deserves this stuff.

01:54:27.000 You go to FreeKyleUSA and that's where you can actually contribute and help the fight.

01:54:32.000 So Kyle, who obviously deserves a victory in all this, it's FreeKyleUSA, I believe it's .org, that you go to.

01:54:40.000 That's where you can contribute to help his fight.

01:54:42.000 We have this from one free man, he says, I own a construction company and have had over a hundred, and had over hundreds of thousands stolen, stop emboldening criminals.

01:54:51.000 When it comes to Arbery walking in that home under construction, what people need to understand is that there's copper, there's steel, there's wood.

01:54:58.000 I mean, wood's expensive now.

01:54:59.000 Let me tell you guys- We were building up a new deck, we went and bought lumber.

01:55:03.000 I was shocked.

01:55:04.000 Oh, it's worse.

01:55:04.000 We talk about it, but I was still shocked.

01:55:07.000 We're setting up, so, Yeah, just all you're doing the we're doing construction

01:55:11.000 They said hey, we're having trouble trouble with the HVAC stuff because we need to we need to reposition it

01:55:16.000 And that means we need a lot of HVAC stuff. We can't get because of the supply crunch

01:55:19.000 So if you have a construction site and you're putting up a new building and someone goes in there and takes anything

01:55:24.000 that could completely Destroy the entire project. So having this dude coming in

01:55:28.000 five times sounds like casing At best

01:55:33.000 Or plundering.

01:55:34.000 He's not going to run off with a thousand pounds worth of lumber, but he's looking for power tools.

01:55:39.000 I used to work as a mechanic and we used to have guys walk in the garage all the time just off the street and just grab a power tool and run out with it and just go pawn it.

01:55:47.000 So that's probably what was happening.

01:55:49.000 But in any case, people should be clear, under Georgia law, felony burglary doesn't require you actually take anything.

01:55:56.000 It just requires you entered the property with the intent to take something.

01:56:00.000 How would they know?

01:56:00.000 Well, you know intent.

01:56:02.000 How do you always know intent?

01:56:03.000 We can't read people's minds.

01:56:04.000 We infer intent from the circumstances.

01:56:07.000 So he walks into this building, he's looking around at stuff, and then he does it several times.

01:56:10.000 If you're in someone else's property in the middle of the night, you can reasonably infer you're there for an unlawful purpose.

01:56:16.000 There's no lawful reason to be there.

01:56:17.000 So I actually had a question that came in from my dad and my brother who are watching, and they said, You know, given all this that we're talking about, and it goes to what Tim was asking, you know, what does that mean for a neighborhood watch operating in 2021?

01:56:31.000 You know, I get this question a lot because I have people... What do you do?

01:56:34.000 I have people contacting me saying, hey, what if there's a riot or something?

01:56:37.000 Can we set up like a joint defense group in our community, right?

01:56:41.000 Where we'll all have our ARs, we'll stand at the end of the street... Like if you have a car dealership, for example.

01:56:47.000 Well, this is the example.

01:56:48.000 First of all, if you have a formalized group where you've all agreed to do this and someone ends up getting killed by a member of your group, I guarantee you the prosecutor is going to call that a conspiracy.

01:56:57.000 Everyone is going to be charged as an accessory in that murder.

01:57:02.000 Michigan was a militia, remember?

01:57:03.000 And they're going to go to the group individually.

01:57:06.000 They're going to say, hey, we got eight of you, nine of you, ten of you, right?

01:57:09.000 Part of this group.

01:57:10.000 You're all on Facebook all together, right?

01:57:11.000 We know you're all part of the group.

01:57:13.000 One of you is going to jail for the rest of your lives.

01:57:16.000 What are the other of you willing to say about that one person?

01:57:19.000 And we're not telling you which person it'll be.

01:57:20.000 We'll just see what you say.

01:57:22.000 Maybe it'll be you.

01:57:23.000 The only way for it not to be you is for you to be helpful in our investigation.

01:57:27.000 This is the classic prisoner's dilemma.

01:57:29.000 That would be the worst idea to ever say to me. 0.97

01:57:31.000 So the least liked guy in that group gets screwed. 0.74

01:57:35.000 Every other guy in that group is going to be Dominic Black on the witness stand testifying against him. 0.91

01:57:40.000 Binger kept trying to tie Kyle to the Kenosha Guard Facebook page.

01:57:44.000 He tried it for months and months and they couldn't find any evidence And then there was one point where, and I'm paraphrasing, but he was in on one of those, one of the zoom earlier hearings where he's trying to say, well, he operated with other people who may have been part of it.

01:57:59.000 And, and it was Schrader who was just like, you can't, we're not doing this.

01:58:04.000 We're not going.

01:58:04.000 So you give Kyle another judge, you take away those videos.

01:58:08.000 He's in a very different situation.

01:58:10.000 I don't respond well to manipulation.

01:58:13.000 I have, like, an inverted response, I suppose.

01:58:16.000 You know, people might assume the prosecutor would be like, we're gonna pressure you.

01:58:19.000 If they actually came in with a reasonable... Well, he's the guy we flip on, then.

01:58:22.000 Yeah, that's right.

01:58:23.000 Then you're the guy we're pinning it on.

01:58:24.000 Yeah, easily.

01:58:25.000 Tim was the ringleader.

01:58:27.000 Because all those other guys, they're going to have, you know, their wife and their kids and all this kind of stuff.

01:58:31.000 They're going to say, I can't afford to go to prison.

01:58:34.000 If someone's going to go down, it's not going to be me.

01:58:36.000 Might as well be Tim.

01:58:37.000 But this is why you don't join these groups.

01:58:39.000 Well, that's why I always caution people. 0.99

01:58:41.000 People like Dominic Black, you know, cowards and pathetic, whiny little losers will turn on you in two seconds and then still claim to be friends with you. 0.99

01:58:47.000 And then, you know, Kyle will apparently still be friends with him because, you know, I think people are just weak. 0.99

01:58:53.000 I mean, in this Arbor case, there was literally zero evidence that there was any coordination between the McMichaels and between Brian.

01:58:59.000 But that didn't keep the prosecutor from arguing accessory, from arguing that Brian was a party to everything.

01:59:06.000 So what would you tell people?

01:59:08.000 But what would you also just tell people that really do care about their neighborhood?

01:59:13.000 Maybe not necessarily faced with one of these situations, but just in general.

01:59:17.000 The prudent thing to do would be for each person to be, you know, at the end of their own driveway, maybe sharing a cup of coffee with an AR slung, if they're afraid an angry, looting, arsoning horde is going to come down their street.

01:59:30.000 But the moment they organize, and even in an informal way, like we're a collective group, we're working cooperatively, if something bad happens, they're all parties to the criminal offense.

01:59:41.000 Well, you know what I would say, and honestly even answer to my own dad's question, is You have a cell phone.

01:59:47.000 Everybody's got one of these things.

01:59:49.000 These are so incredibly powerful.

01:59:51.000 Look at how every single one of these stories we talked about from Waukesha to Kenosha to Georgia.

01:59:58.000 We know about it because of the cell phone.

01:59:59.000 Oh, yeah.

02:00:00.000 Listen, there's a reason I have security cameras all over the outside of my house.

02:00:03.000 And it's not just so I see stuff coming in.

02:00:05.000 And so if something happens, I want that camera footage.

02:00:08.000 And it's an interesting anecdote from the George Zimmerman trial.

02:00:11.000 They were investigating him for this killing of Trayvon Martin, and his story sounded like self-defense to everybody, but they try to trap him, right?

02:00:19.000 They want to test his story.

02:00:20.000 They want to test his willingness to stick by that story of self-defense.

02:00:24.000 So they came to him.

02:00:25.000 They called him back into the police station.

02:00:27.000 He went without a lawyer, like he always did.

02:00:29.000 I remember this, yes.

02:00:30.000 And they sat him down.

02:00:31.000 They said, listen, George, we have a real problem with your self-defense story because We found some surveillance video and we know exactly what happened.

02:00:38.000 And you know what George said?

02:00:40.000 Thank God.

02:00:41.000 Because he knew, he knew what happened.

02:00:44.000 He knew that if they had video, it was going to be in his favor.

02:00:48.000 I want that video of something happens outside my house.

02:00:51.000 That being said, if the cops ever come, lawyer, lawyer, lawyer.

02:00:55.000 The guy in the Arbery case thought the video was going to exonerate them from the, again, I think the story was that the community hated them.

02:01:01.000 And so he was like, here's the video.

02:01:03.000 I can only say that that guy was described by his own attorney in court as not the smartest guy in the room.

02:01:10.000 I don't understand how sending that guy to prison serves justice.

02:01:13.000 Which again, show it to a lawyer first.

02:01:15.000 He was nearly in tears when they were reading the verdict. 0.97

02:01:17.000 And I'm like, this dumb guy driving a car, filming something, gives out the footage to be like, here's what happened, and now he's going to prison? 0.94

02:01:23.000 This is why people say, I will not be involved. 0.96

02:01:28.000 By the way, another reason not to be part of a group.

02:01:30.000 One member of that group might be Roddy Bryan.

02:01:33.000 Yeah.

02:01:34.000 Right?

02:01:34.000 Might do something that basically blows everything up.

02:01:36.000 You know, when I was a kid, my dad would always be like, if you ever commit a crime, do it by yourself.

02:01:41.000 But it was not, like, literal. 1.00

02:01:43.000 It was a point about how, you know, make sure when you're teaming up with people, you don't have idiots with you. 0.99

02:01:50.000 So that, like, he didn't literally mean go commit crimes. 0.99

02:01:52.000 Listen, I've got a lot of friends in law enforcement.

02:01:54.000 They'll tell me that the hardest cases they have to solve is where the bad guy did it by himself and didn't say a word to anybody.

02:02:01.000 Because that's how you break those cases, is when they have accessories in the crime, someone who will talk, or they told someone, and that person will talk.

02:02:09.000 Well, it's a lot of self-defense ends up being that way, too.

02:02:11.000 It's right, you know, it's me, and I'm with a guy, and it's late at night.

02:02:16.000 I mean, a lot of it is, but a lot of it's not.

02:02:18.000 I mean, a lot of it is, you know, in people have a beef, and it's in a public environment, and people, these days, everyone's got their camera, as soon as, you know, you hear a ruckus.

02:02:27.000 I mean, prior, yeah, prior to the sort of mass surveillance.

02:02:30.000 What does James O'Keefe say?

02:02:31.000 He always acts as though this is a jury of 12 watching what he's doing?

02:02:35.000 Yeah, I like that.

02:02:35.000 It's good policy.

02:02:37.000 So when you're out at a bar, and someone picks a fight with you, just know the camera's watching, and you need to make sure that you are avoiding active aggression, you are initiating, you back away, you put your hands up, you shake your head, and you try and de-escalate, because a fight you can escape is the fight you've won.

02:02:57.000 What matters is not what you think you're doing.

02:02:59.000 What matters is how your conduct will be perceived by other people.

02:03:03.000 Other people who may not have your best interests at heart.

02:03:06.000 So you almost have to role-play yourself when you're out in public.

02:03:10.000 Assume you're always on camera, people are always watching.

02:03:13.000 And how are they going to perceive your conduct?

02:03:16.000 Don't skate the thin line of self-defense.

02:03:18.000 Make sure you are way, way inside a thin line.

02:03:20.000 By the way, if you want to know where that line is, LawOfSelfDefense.com slash TimCast for a free copy of this $25 book.

02:03:29.000 Now I got to do it, because folks, if you are worried about sleeping soundly in your bed at night, I'm worried if someone's keeping watch for you.

02:03:37.000 Now, you might not be the one who's drawn watch that night.

02:03:40.000 So if you're sleeping, make sure that you're sleeping on a MyPillow from MyPillow.com with promo code POSA up to 65% off.

02:03:47.000 Beat Joe Biden and Pete Buttigieg with the supply chain shipping problems.

02:03:51.000 Beat the fact.

02:03:52.000 And by the way, thank God to the 35, what is it?

02:03:56.000 37% of truckers who are standing up to the vaccine mandate.

02:03:59.000 God bless them.

02:04:00.000 Give them a hand and give them some business at MyPillow.com.

02:04:05.000 Yeah, get your Christmas shipping in.

02:04:07.000 And we're going to go over to the member segment, so don't forget to smash the like button, subscribe to this channel, go to TimCast.com, become a member so we can have that substantially less family-friendly members-only show.

02:04:19.000 It's like, you know, wow, you're 18 and older, man.

02:04:21.000 I don't know, you don't want your kids to hear that stuff.

02:04:23.000 We swear all the time, we talk about really serious issues.

02:04:25.000 But if you want to hear that stuff, TimCast.com, become a member.

02:04:28.000 You can follow the show, TimCast IRL, basically on all platforms.

02:04:31.000 We got banned from TikTok, but hey.

02:04:33.000 And you can follow me personally at Timcast.

02:04:35.000 You guys want to mention your socials?

02:04:37.000 Sure, LawOfSelfDefense.com.

02:04:40.000 We also just started a Locals.

02:04:41.000 I'm new to that, but that would be LawOfSelfDefense.Locals.com.

02:04:45.000 Brand new.

02:04:46.000 There's like, I don't know, 30 supporters right now, but hopefully it'll be thousands in the near future.

02:04:51.000 I don't know, Tim, if you've got much of an audience in the UK, but I'm actually going to be over speaking in London on December 8th with Nigel Farage and a group of European delegates that are coming.

02:05:04.000 We're talking about free speech.

02:05:06.000 That's at the Counter Conference.

02:05:07.000 And then I'm also going to be speaking in Phoenix with Tucker Carlson, Charlie Kirk, Kayleigh McEnany, Candace Owens.

02:05:15.000 Rand Paul, take a ton of, you know, senators, congressmen, few people haven't announced yet.

02:05:19.000 That's the Turning Point USA America Fest, Phoenix, Arizona.

02:05:23.000 Tim, love to have you there if possible.

02:05:24.000 We might try and figure something out, but it's tough.

02:05:27.000 Yeah, third week of December out there in Phoenix.

02:05:28.000 If you've got to be somewhere in winter, it might as well be in Phoenix.

02:05:32.000 True that.

02:05:33.000 Nice night.

02:05:34.000 Good information.

02:05:35.000 Thanks for coming, guys.

02:05:36.000 This was fascinating.

02:05:37.000 Fantastic.

02:05:38.000 And thanks for... I have more questions about deepfakes in the future video as evidence.

02:05:43.000 Let's talk about that.

02:05:44.000 Indeed.

02:05:44.000 Seriously.

02:05:45.000 Seriously.

02:05:46.000 Great questions.

02:05:47.000 We'll deep dive in that.

02:05:48.000 Oh, I want to talk all about that.

02:05:49.000 A lot to say.

02:05:51.000 Oh, Lydia. 0.88

02:05:52.000 What's up?

02:05:53.000 Thank you very much for coming and educating us about the law.

02:05:56.000 That's kind of one of my weak points, so I really appreciate all the conversation about some of these details.

02:06:01.000 Thank you guys, both Jack and Andrew.

02:06:04.000 Happy to be here.

02:06:05.000 You guys can follow me on Twitter at Sarah Patchlitz.

02:06:08.000 We will see you all at TimCast.com in the member segment.

02:06:11.000 Thanks for hanging out.

Timcast IRL - Tim Pool - November 25, 2021

Timcast IRL - New Evidence Points To Waukesha Attack Being Terror w-Branca & Posobiec

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript