20 states have joined the Supreme Court to join the case against Texas and other defendants in the case, and we have a special guest, Matt Brainerd, founder of the Voter Integrity Project, joins us to talk about his work on the case.
00:00:41.000my friends it has been a very very spicy past couple of days
00:00:47.000Last night we got word that the Biden family, Joe Biden's son and his brother, are under federal criminal investigations.
00:00:55.000Now they're trying to pass it off as though it's just, you know, Hunter says it's about his taxes.
00:00:59.000But now we actually have confirmation that it actually involves potential money laundering and illicit business dealings with China.
00:01:06.000Illicit business dealings that were facilitated in part by Joe Biden, who flew his son on Air Force Two to China to negotiate a private equity deal.
00:01:15.000We also had a former family confidant, Tony Bobulinski, who said that he believes the Bidens are compromised.
00:01:24.000Social media banned the story when it came out.
00:01:27.000NPR said it wasn't news, it was a distraction.
00:01:30.000And now, just about a month after the election, we are being told by Politico it's an explosive political story that will rock the Biden administration.
00:01:39.000So why did they block us from hearing about it, from knowing about it?
00:01:44.000I think this is one of the biggest media scandals in U.S.
00:01:46.000history, but we actually have bigger news than this.
00:01:50.00020 states have filed amici briefings joining, or I should say supporting, the defendant states in the Supreme Court request for leave.
00:02:01.000Okay, so this is, I'm not a lawyer, but let me try and break it down.
00:02:03.000Texas filed, asked permission to the Supreme Court to file a lawsuit against four states for violating the Electors Clause of the Constitution.
00:02:10.000Texas wants these four states to appoint their electors, the legislatures to appoint their electors, effectively saying Trump wins, if that's what the legislatures choose.
00:02:18.000So far now, 17 other states have signed a brief supporting this suit, and I believe four or five actually filed intervention asking to be listed as plaintiffs in the case, saying as they have suffered injury as well.
00:02:29.000And now 20 states on the other side, blue states, as well as two territories, are filing a brief on behalf of the defendants.
00:02:37.000What do you call it when half the country lines up against the other half of the country saying that I reject you, uh, your president and this election?
00:02:45.000I don't know where all this goes, but I think things are going to get absolutely insane.
00:02:48.000We actually have at least one guy in Texas saying it's time for Texas, a state representative, Calling for Texas to declare its right to secede from the Union.
00:03:32.000Well, I'm a political consultant, which is a dirty word in this town, but I've worked in campaigns all around the country over the last, I don't know, 20, 25 years, going back to the mid-90s.
00:03:43.000I was the director of data and strategy for Trump's campaign in 2016, at least through the primaries.
00:03:48.000And after the election there were a lot of questions being raised and I decided to create the Voter Integrity Project to try to identify anomalies, potential anomalies.
00:04:00.000I didn't start with any preconceived notions of what I'd find.
00:04:03.000I thought, you know, maybe I'll find nothing and it was a clean election.
00:04:06.000Maybe I'll find a few things that don't make a difference.
00:04:09.000And those findings have resulted in, you know, become the basis of court cases, become the basis of legislative hearings, and also brought a lot of scrutiny to the election system we have in this country and how badly managed it is across so many different states.
00:04:27.000So far, you know, the project's been doing pretty well, but it's about time to, you know, it's in the litigation phase, and I'm just very grateful to all the donors, the folks on my team who helped us put together all this data.
00:04:38.000And what we tried to do is that if we're going to find something, it wasn't going to be speculation or theories or, you know, some kind of complex mathematical formula.
00:04:48.000It was going to be actionable material.
00:04:49.000And now that actionable material is in the hands of lawyers and litigators, and perhaps it will have an impact on the outcome.
00:04:56.000There's ongoing litigation in many states as well as I'm referencing these, you know, 20 states versus 20 states or whatever.
00:05:02.000So I'm, there's a lot of things I'm pretty sure you can't talk about because it could theoretically compromise something.
00:05:08.000So, but is it, is it, can you, can you, can you call it evidence?
00:05:14.000I have submitted evidence of potentially illegal ballots in six states, and actually instantly more states when we look at double voting.
00:05:25.000So yeah, all that's been submitted, but I can't get too deep into it because it is involving ongoing litigation.
00:05:30.000But we can speak about generally how the system works.
00:05:33.000So I can say one thing, and I'll try to be really careful, but there have been some statements made by Matt on Twitter about potentially illegal ballots, evidence, and I've reviewed some of this information and independently corroborated what appears to be Backing up claims.
00:05:53.000I'm trying to be vague because of the ongoing litigation, but I can just say, based on what I've seen and independently verified, I believe Matt is correct in telling the truth, and I guess we'll see how it plays out in court.
00:06:03.000I know there's a lot of people who are listening, and they're just like, get more specific, get juicy.
00:06:10.000You know, we could theoretically just come out and say, like, here's everything and publish everything and then you lose the court case and I'm sure nobody wants it to happen.
00:06:17.000And I think that the judge might be, uh, the litigators in this might be upset because we want to make sure we respect the court process.
00:06:45.000Well, I think it's about respecting the courts.
00:06:48.000Whether it's for or against Trump, I think the judges and the people who are working this process Some of them might not make good decisions, but I respect the courts, and I think, you know, a lot of these judges would appreciate the respect of us not litigating their case in the court of public opinion.
00:07:03.000But, well, we're going to talk about it.
00:07:34.000Kings would trade their entire treasures, their treasuries for things like this in the Middle Ages, and now we make them in a laboratory for 80 bucks.
00:07:46.000I'm here in the corner pushing buttons.
00:07:48.000So if you haven't already, smash that like button, subscribe, hit the notification bell.
00:07:51.000You can find us on iTunes, Spotify, all those great platforms, and give us good reviews to help out the show, and share the show with your friends if you think we're doing a good job.
00:07:57.000I think we're going to have relatively spicy conversations, but the first big story, we're going to get into it after you smash that like button.
00:08:05.000This is the actual document from SupremeCourt.gov.
00:08:09.000They say, State of Texas plaintiff versus the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, State of Georgia, State of Michigan, and State of Wisconsin defendants.
00:08:15.000I don't want to read all of these states.
00:08:17.000I'm going to read all these states, okay?
00:08:19.000Motion for leave to file and brief for the District of Columbia and the states and territories of California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Guam, Hawaii, Nevada, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, U.S.
00:08:58.000States respond to Texas Trumpists Supreme Court lawsuit seeking to throw out the results
00:09:04.000For those that aren't familiar with what Texas is requesting, Texas said that these four states that I listed as the defendants have violated the Electors Clause of the Constitution, which states the state legislatures have the ultimate authority in who decides, you know, the elections and who the electors are.
00:09:20.000But in these states, the courts overruled in certain circumstances, or the governors implemented new rules without permission or confirmation from the legislatures.
00:09:29.000Therefore, and for a variety of other reasons, I'm not going to get into the full breakdown of their lawsuit is, they're basically saying Texas, and all 17 states now either supporting or asking to intervene to join, are saying that the state legislatures should be the ones who choose the electors.
00:09:43.000They're Republican state legislatures.
00:09:45.000They would very likely vote for Trump, or perhaps they would abstain.
00:09:48.000And if they did, Joe Biden would not reach 270 electoral votes.
00:09:52.000We would likely move to a contingent election based on House delegations, in which Donald Trump would win.
00:09:57.000Of course, if they chose their electors, Trump would win.
00:10:00.000So these other states are basically saying no, and now we have half the country lining up against the other half, arguing about who the next president is supposed to be.
00:10:16.000states that President Donald Trump lost in the November 3rd election on Thursday began to file court papers opposing a long-shot Republican-backed lawsuit filed by Trump-supporting Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton in the Lone Star State's name at the Supreme Court seeking to undo President-elect Joe Biden's victory.
00:10:32.000I like how they say it's just in Texas's name.
00:10:34.000It's like not actually Texas doing it.
00:10:36.000Officials from Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin already have called the lawsuit, which aims to throw out the results, a reckless attack on democracy.
00:10:45.000The Supreme Court gave the four states a 3 p.m.
00:10:49.000Pennsylvania was the first to file, with the state's Democratic Attorney General Josh Shapiro saying that the Texas lawsuit was adding a cacophony of bogus false claims about the election.
00:10:59.000Quote, what Texas is doing in this proceeding is to ask this court to reconsider a mass of baseless claims about problems with the election that have already been considered and rejected by this court and other courts.
00:11:12.000The lawsuit is supported by Trump and 17 other states.
00:11:15.000The Republican president has falsely claimed he won re-election and has made baseless allegations of widespread voting fraud.
00:11:21.000State election officials have said they found no evidence of such fraud.
00:11:35.000I'm going to question what did they do to find it?
00:11:38.000What efforts did they make to discover it?
00:11:40.000Because if I close my eyes and you come here and take my drink and I don't see you do it, I don't have any evidence you took it because I closed my eyes, right?
00:11:48.000But if I'm sitting there drinking that Red Bull?
00:12:05.000Our own little independent project, we crowdfunded about $580,000 to fund it on our own using tools that were available to us.
00:12:12.000$10,000 to sort of fund it on our own using very you know tools that were available to us
00:12:17.000Why wasn't the state doing this what what scrutiny did they apply to?
00:12:22.000I'm actually shocked by a lot of these court cases where, you know, I think in Nevada the Trump campaign presented actual evidence and the court just said get out of my courtroom.
00:14:08.000Texas's lawsuit says either the Constitution matters or it's just a parchment sitting in the National Archives.
00:14:14.000That's a powerful statement with 17 states signing on in support of it, some actually asking to intervene to be listed as plaintiffs in the case.
00:14:22.000In which case, if the Supreme Court refuses to hear this, then these 17 states have already asserted that would be a declaration the Constitution is meaningless.
00:14:32.000And these other states could effectively say the same thing.
00:14:35.000If the Supreme Court can say no to this election, you know, Joe Biden isn't going to be president because we've ruled it, they'll argue it's the exact same thing.
00:14:44.000So that's why I just look at this and I'm like, you know, ultimately it doesn't matter what this one judge said.
00:14:49.000People have been lining up and they know they're right on both sides.
00:14:59.000Right, and you know, there are many causes to this, but one, I think, the major contributor to all of this is how badly the states manage elections.
00:15:10.000We've been very lucky because historically many elections are won by somebody by a pretty good-sized margin.
00:15:18.000And what happens is when there's a good enough margin, the mismanagement is covered up, right?
00:17:15.000The left has said, the Democrats, the reason why it took longer to count votes After Election Day was because when people go and vote in person, they walk in, and then someone asks them their name, they're given their ballot, or they go to the machine, and they type in things, and they press enter, all of that's done right away.
00:17:34.000When an absentee vote is being counted, they grab the envelope, they look at it, they open it.
00:17:38.000It takes longer to go through the envelope than it is to have a person walk in, vote, and walk out.
00:17:43.000So the argument is, when a person walks in and votes and walks out, it's already in the tabulation machine.
00:17:47.000When they're going through absentee ballots, doing signature verification, it takes a bit longer to tabulate that vote.
00:17:55.000But what doesn't make sense, in my opinion, is then why they dumped all of these batches, you know, really early in the morning, at once.
00:18:02.000And it still took more than one day to do all of this, and these batches came in.
00:18:07.000So, if you look at, I think like November 4th, at like 1 in the morning, there were massive spikes.
00:18:11.000Well, if they were counting on election day, as people came in, and they didn't start counting the ballots until election day, why do we have, you know, not the ballots being entered in at a certain point?
00:18:23.000I guess the argument is they were barred from doing it.
00:18:25.000I still don't think it makes sense as to how, in some circumstances, Trump received a tiny fraction of these mail-in ballot dumps.
00:18:33.000That's the big question that I think needs to be answered.
00:18:36.000And there was also legal arguments in Pennsylvania before the election asking the government to count the votes that were mailed in early.
00:18:43.000The government of Pennsylvania argued against that.
00:18:47.000And then when we look at Florida, I think Florida is the most interesting case because we saw that They were caught with their pants down in 2000 and then they kind of updated their voting system and they had the votes in right away.
00:18:59.000All these other states, we don't have one universal standard or one kind of voting machine or one kind of system to count the votes and I think that's also something to really think about here.
00:19:08.000I hear you, but each state runs their own election.
00:19:34.000So, New York Times reported in 2012 that the failure rate of mail-in and absentee voting is between 1% and 2%.
00:19:41.000If I told you there was a 1% chance that if you mailed in your vote, it would not count?
00:19:46.000Well, I think a lot of people probably will go, I don't know, whatever, I don't care.
00:19:49.000But that's a pretty bold bet to make to not having your voice heard in your election.
00:19:54.000So when I saw that there was this, and this is a big part of the lawsuit going forward with Mike Kelly and Sean Parnell pertaining to the constitutionality of mail-in voting in Pennsylvania.
00:20:05.000There's a few weird things, but when I saw that all of these changes have been implemented a year in advance before COVID and then during COVID to have mass mail-in voting, I mean, we saw in Paterson, New Jersey, a whole election was thrown out.
00:20:16.000A judge actually ordered a new election in Paterson, New Jersey, because they found bundles of mail-in votes from a town over.
00:21:22.000And the absentee ballot request deadline was coming up and Secretary of State was going out, you know, telling everybody, just go to the website until 5 p.m.
00:21:31.000on the deadline day and go ahead and request your absentee ballot.
00:21:34.000Well, we were identifying our supporters, many of whom didn't know that, and telling them, yeah, go to the website and request.
00:21:43.000Now, rather than owning the problem, right, the Secretary of State fought us in court.
00:21:48.000We had to sue them in federal court to get them to extend that deadline.
00:21:52.000And, you know, something to keep in mind is that this system that we're being critical of, the people who are responsible and have the ability to change it, who are running things, they were elected by this system.
00:22:28.000He's a Republican running in North Jersey.
00:22:31.000And I think Patterson is part of the district he was running in.
00:22:33.000And he was, I don't want to put words in his mouth, I want to make sure I'm being careful here, but my understanding of the conversation was he was not getting any support from the Republican Party.
00:22:42.000Because they were like, it's too expensive to even bother with a deep blue district.
00:22:45.000And I'm like, well, if you have an area that's, you know, D plus 20, and an area that's R plus 20, and you don't even bother trying to talk to people and talk about what is important for this country, then it will never change.
00:22:57.000But I think the real issue is that The Republicans are like, no, no, no, no, we don't mess with their safe spaces and they don't mess with ours.
00:24:22.000Yeah, when you look at the gerrymandering and some of the dirty tricks and politics that they especially played on individuals like Cynthia McKinney, it was just absolutely incredible to see just the maneuvering, the repositioning, the redistricting that happened in order to get a favorable outcome even towards their Democratic allies that didn't play along with their kind of party establishment line.
00:24:44.000And I remember during this cycle seeing what happened in Iowa during the Democratic primaries and thinking, oh boy, We are in trouble because if you remember, we didn't have a result from that as well.
00:25:00.000I can actually give you one good argument for gerrymandering though.
00:25:03.000So often what people will show when they're arguing against gerrymandering is you'll have, you know, like it's like a grid of blocks and there'll be like blue and red.
00:25:11.000And they'll say, you know, it's 40% red and 60% blue, and here's how they gerrymander it to make sure you get more Republican representation than Democrat.
00:25:20.000However, my response to that is, if 40% of your state is Republican, and you do districts just by blocks, then you will get zero representation for 40%.
00:25:54.000But I worked for the nation's premier redistricting firm for about 12 years and I helped with drawing lines in the city of Chicago, Illinois, Rhode Island, Arizona, all these different places, congressional down to city.
00:26:05.000And I'll be honest with you, I don't think there's a fair way to draw a line.
00:26:09.000Let's say you draw the line on party, right?
00:26:12.000Okay, well, that gives you a favorable outcome to party.
00:26:18.000Well, that gives a favorable outcome to certain geographies.
00:26:21.000So there's really no way to draw the lines that somebody can't say, well, that's not fair because this person's at a disadvantage.
00:26:29.000And you can make the case too, is that if you draw a district that gets, you pack all your Democrats in the state into one district, it's 90% Democrat, and all the Republicans around it are winning by 55%, right?
00:26:39.000Here's the thing though, in that Democrat district, the Democrat won by 90% of the vote, 90% of the people there had their choice selected and sent to Congress. Whereas in
00:26:49.000the Republican districts only 40% of the people, 55% of the people, 51%
00:26:53.000had their choice. So you know that 90% Democrat district has, well those people had
00:26:58.000their choice. You know they're happier, the district has a higher level of
00:27:02.000happiness because most of them got their choice for Congress. Yeah the reason I'm
00:27:05.000very familiar with it is because Dennis Kucinich and Cynthia McKinney bring
00:27:09.000this up as an example to how they were kicked out of Congress when they
00:27:13.000had a big popular They were a big kind of populist figures and according to them it was gerrymandering.
00:27:19.000It was this kind of redistricting that got them out of office and it was used by the Democratic establishment so they wouldn't be in power.
00:27:25.000Well, remember, the people who drew those lines were also elected by the citizens of those states.
00:27:31.000They were drawn by state legislators, elected by people.
00:27:33.000And the thing is, gerrymandering, redistricting, whatever you want to call it, it's like the most vicious political fights you will ever see.
00:27:40.000And the reason they get so vicious is because the press doesn't pay any attention to it and the public doesn't care.
00:27:52.000Whereas in the more public battles over policy issues, you know, the press pays attention, the people kind of care, but it's one of the most vicious, dirty, and underhandled battles that you'll ever see, if you see it at all.
00:28:04.000Will they do something like take 10 zones and then pack all 98% of the Republicans into one zone?
00:28:11.000And then so there's nine of the zones win Democrat, and then one zone is Republican?
00:28:22.000You've got the party thing, too, but you've got another thing that kind of interferes with that, which is the race factor, and that the courts think that there should be minority-majority districts.
00:28:31.000And when you have minority-majority districts, that inherently forces you to pack, because of the way they tend to vote, Democrats.
00:28:44.000You basically have to draw a district at least 65% minority.
00:28:47.000So that's basically a 65% Democrat-packed district.
00:28:50.000So what you often have is that, and this has happened before, the Republicans in the state legislature and the Black Democrats get together and cut out the other Democrats because the Republicans are happy to create plenty of Black-majority districts for them to get re-elected and have more colleagues.
00:29:04.000The Republicans get all the other districts.
00:29:59.000And then back in 2000, Republicans were dominant.
00:30:01.000They had control over drawing many lines of their own, yet a few cycles later, despite that, Democrats took control of Congress in 2006.
00:30:08.000So it has an impact, but I think sometimes it's a little bit overstated.
00:30:15.000And I really don't know what the alternative is.
00:30:17.000I mean, people want to do a parliamentary system, but I think that actually will, that would be even worse because then you're not, the representative isn't tied to a geography, which I think is most important.
00:30:25.000Forget party, forget race, you are from this town, you represent this town.
00:30:28.000And I think that's what's most important that we maintain.
00:30:31.000So let's talk about the Voter Integrity Project.
00:30:34.000Do you want to just explain what it is and what you did?
00:30:38.000Sure, so a couple days after the election, I had some ideas about ways to detect potentially illegal ballots.
00:30:46.000I shared the idea with a few people privately, but no one really took me up on it.
00:30:52.000I initially did not plan to have anything to do with it.
00:30:54.000It was just, hey, here's some methods you could use to potentially detect illegal ballots.
00:30:59.000And I tweeted about it, and at the time I had like 200 Twitter followers or something.
00:31:04.000And somebody who followed me, who had a little bit of influence, retweeted it.
00:31:09.000And then somebody else retweeted it, and then it sort of exploded.
00:31:12.000And people were saying, well, you should set up a GoFundMe.
00:31:14.000Because in the initial tweet, I said, well, it's probably going to cost about $100K for just the data to do this.
00:32:25.000Any money that's left over after we're done will be returned to donors if they like it.
00:32:29.000Any money that's left over after that will go to a C3, a non-profit that's basically about voter registration and fighting potential voter fraud.
00:32:39.000And in all those cases, no matter where it goes, I'm not personally going to take a penny of it.
00:32:45.000But despite that, people have continued to contribute.
00:32:47.000We're almost 100,000 beyond where I said, OK, we have the money to cover this.
00:32:50.000So you're looking at doing some tests on whether or not ballots may be illegal.
00:32:58.000And I built a team of a couple of people who have similar backgrounds to my own.
00:33:04.000And we started obtaining raw voter data from states.
00:33:08.000So can you explain that, because that was crazy to me, that you can get people's information on how they voted, or not how they voted, but that they voted.
00:33:14.000Oh, well, you can get indications about how they voted.
00:33:16.000This is, yeah, it's too bad I don't have a screen or something because I can just pop it open.
00:33:21.000I know everything that anybody would want to know about every voter in this country.
00:33:28.000And you know, it's also, it's kind of unique to the United States because I've talked about doing, I've talked to doing political consulting in other countries.
00:33:34.000It's kind of difficult because they have very strong privacy laws in Europe, et cetera, but in the U.S.
00:33:40.000I know everything a campaign would want to know, so in terms of voter contact or voter analysis, it's all there.
00:33:46.000And in this case, we were able to obtain a voter list from the state.
00:33:51.000States often release chase files, and that means that every day for like two months leading up to the election, they release a list of all the people who requested ballots or returned ballots, who showed up to vote early.
00:34:03.000And that's helpful for campaigns, because if you have like these 100,000 people you're trying to reach and turn out to vote, If the state says, okay, this person just voted, you can take them off their list, so you're no longer wasting money on doors, phones, mail, and social, anything else to target them, because you can take them off your list and focus on the remaining ones.
00:34:19.000So all this is very useful for that, but in this case, we obtained that data to use it to try to detect potential problems, and we used other government databases to help validate our methods and to compile our evidence.
00:34:36.000What were you proposing to do during this original GoFundMe and this new kind of fundraiser?
00:34:42.000Well, initially, we were going to do some traditional analysis, looking at double voters, looking at people who no longer had residency, looking for potential dead voters.
00:34:54.000And as we got into it, we started to discover other things, other methods that we had not thought of, but then said, oh, that's something we should look into.
00:35:55.000The thing is, I don't think there's any state that would not be a nightmare if the election came down to a couple thousand votes and it was very pivotal.
00:36:03.000There's not a state, I think, that would escape finding all kinds of flaws.
00:36:07.000It's just that those states tend to be saved by the victor winning by enough of a margin that it's like...
00:36:13.000Yes, you know, the errors and potential, if it existed for all, can't overcome that margin, but here we are.
00:36:20.000In some of the lawsuits Trump presented, the judges have said, the amount of ballots you're questioning would not be enough to change the outcome, therefore dismissed.
00:36:27.000I think that's kind of silly because you add up 10 lawsuits targeting specific different things, maybe, but that's actually been some of the results.
00:36:34.000That's more a question for the lawyers, because I've seen cases where actually the number of questionable ballots did not have to surpass the margin, it just had to demonstrate some kind of pattern, and that was enough to get it thrown out.
00:36:48.000I think that was the case in Miami when a judge ruled there was voter fraud down there and threw out a mayor's election.
00:36:53.000Can you elaborate any more on what the Learn Integrity Project has done so far, or is that off limits?
00:36:58.000You know, I think my Twitter feed's covered extensively, but we found all kinds of indications of illegal ballots and other anomalies.
00:37:47.000I can just interject, because for a lot of people who are just tuning in, I have independently... I guess you could say independently corroborated at least I don't know what you can say.
00:38:01.000No, you sidesat me and I showed you some things and you made an evaluation based on that.
00:38:05.000After I saw it, I went and did some general sleuthing and was able to independently corroborate through different databases and it's very interesting.
00:38:36.000Can we play a middle ground here and say, how excited or surprised were you from some of the findings?
00:38:42.000We don't have to discuss the findings, but maybe your level of excitement or shock?
00:38:47.000Well, I'll tell you, you know, I don't think you get I was surprised by certain things that I found and not surprised by other things.
00:38:59.000I said on video without going into detail that I believe that in enough states there were enough potentially illegal ballots to surpass the margins and thus cast into doubt in my mind whether or not Joe Biden's the deserved winner.
00:39:15.000Now I've said that publicly so I don't have a problem really repeating that.
00:39:19.000But there were some things that excited me.
00:39:20.000And you know, not just about the data, but also the process, this journey of... We'll clarify, too.
00:39:26.000Like, we're not at the point where that's definitive.
00:39:27.000It's just signs and indications, perhaps.
00:40:25.000But it is, you know, it's, it's walking a fine line because I'm like, I would, uh, probably be extremely upset if something happened from this show, you know, in a lawsuit where they're like, we're going to say, you know, the Tim Casserole podcast where Matt Brainerd said this, and then all of a sudden it's like, case dismissed or something.
00:40:42.000I guess for the people who are listening, I have no choice, we have no choice, but to just try and, you know, graze this as best we can without ruining everything.
00:40:51.000I think they support that too, because I'm pretty sure people would be calling for my head on... Well, I gotta be careful about the language I use.
00:40:58.000People would be calling for... Your beanie and a spike.
00:41:53.000We had a really funny discussion before the show about like... So, I don't even know if I can say the actual criteria because it might be an algorithm just listens and then nukes the show because I said something too similar.
00:42:27.000What about changing the outcome in terms of like, you know, 0.1 versus, you know, minus 0.1?
00:42:33.000Like, the winner isn't changed, but the numbers are changed.
00:42:36.000And they said, I think it's basically like, if you claim Trump actually won because of these reasons.
00:42:42.000And I'm like, okay, so if I say there is evidence of widespread fraud, and it needs to be investigated, but it's not yet been, as far as I can tell, proven, beyond a reasonable doubt, that it altered the outcome.
00:42:57.000Now I'm not entirely convinced that's the case.
00:42:59.000They may still nuke us for even discussing it because we don't know who these third party outsourced individuals who are reviewing, you know, transcripts, what they're going to understand.
00:43:08.000I get routinely flagged for like ridiculous things.
00:43:11.000You know, I did a segment talking about, it was about some policy position.
00:43:15.000The video was like, you know, Joe Biden plans policy around X and they said it was hate speech.
00:43:19.000And then what I have to do is I have to actually reach out to Google and they do a secondary review and overturn personally.
00:43:25.000Because I guess they like me, you know, maybe, maybe they won't ban me.
00:43:28.000But these, they have third party fact checkers.
00:43:31.000They're, you know, in a bunch of different countries all over the place because YouTube's massive.
00:43:35.000And they just, here's the rule sheet and they say yes or no.
00:46:21.000So this is what I find is particularly crazy, and I'll use Laura Loomer as an example.
00:46:26.000She ran, she won her primary in Florida.
00:46:29.000She's a very controversial figure, but she's very good at getting press attention.
00:46:33.000She's been banned from every platform, but she is an American citizen who was running for office and won a primary, still banned from all these platforms.
00:46:40.000But on Twitter, you can have 100,000 people from Australia telling us how we should vote, what we should think, influencing our elections.
00:46:47.000I'm not saying illegally influencing, but that is worrying to me that these people who don't live here, who don't understand the Electoral College, who don't understand how our representation works, Don't understand how gerrymandering works.
00:46:59.000Are influencing people's opinions in negative ways without understanding our country.
00:47:36.000Yeah, I'm absolutely just sick of this landmine system where you have to be careful with every little thing you say.
00:47:43.000I mean, on my channel, I have to say the conholial sickness and the jab instead of the coronavirus and vaccine, and I notice the significant difference through my videos and the way that they reach people when I say conholial sickness instead of coronavirus.
00:47:59.000There's people in third world countries that are literally hired that have found to have a bias against the LGBTQ community.
00:48:06.000And there was a big outrage because a whole bunch of like trendy new wave woke creators were getting censored and they're like, what's going on here?
00:48:14.000And it was a guy who was a religious zealot in a third world country who hated them for what they were.
00:48:19.000Well, we need to think about the results of what's currently happening with social media.
00:48:24.000So everything I just said about how an Australian citizen has more rights because typically their opinions are more likely to align with the Democrats, right?
00:48:30.000So the US, relative to Europe and Australia, is actually a bit to the right.
00:48:35.000And a lot of people keep saying in Europe, America is so far right, the Democrats are considered like a centrist party compared to Europe.
00:48:42.000And it's like, I don't, I'm not concerned about the opinions of Europeans because they don't understand our system.
00:48:46.000They don't live here and they don't under like, there's a lot of things they don't get about our history.
00:48:50.000Why we have the certain systems we do.
00:48:52.000It's not like one day we woke up and said, we want to create a broken, weird medical system.
00:48:57.000We had, we all had World War II, but they were most impacted and they were, they were forced essentially to create some kind of system to, to fix this.
00:49:05.000But here, what ends up happening is, Jack Dorsey on the Joe Rogan podcast said, we have to create rules for a global community.
00:49:13.000And that means people in America who are to the right of people in other countries may offend their delicate sensibilities.
00:49:20.000So Twitter says, what's in the best interest of maximizing our profits?
00:49:25.000We don't want just American users, we want European users, so we can't offend European users, so ban those who offend European users.
00:49:31.000Democrats tend to offend them much, much less than conservatives, so ban the conservatives.
00:49:36.000Now we can't have conversations in our own country because they've overtaken what's called the commons, the space where we used to communicate and talk about public discourse and And it's not just us, and it's not just random individuals, but it's also major journalistic institutions in the United States, like the New York Post, that are literally having their accounts taken away for days because they release on a story that now everyone is reporting on, but because the story was before the election, it was about Hunter Biden, it was about the son of the Democratic hopeful at the time,
00:50:10.000New York Post got censored and totally wiped off Twitter.
00:50:13.000No one could even communicate with them.
00:50:14.000Well, most major evolutions that become problems like this are almost always the result of certain government policies creating, for example in this case, a moral hazard.
00:50:25.000Here's the moral hazard and here's how it was created.
00:50:28.000Is that they have the ability to censor anyone they want.
00:50:33.000But they don't have the responsibility for what is published on their site.
00:50:38.000So they have all the power but none of the responsibility that comes with it.
00:50:43.000And the way 230 was designed and all these things, you either have one or the other.
00:50:47.000So let's say, let's say you and I plot some criminal scheme and we talk to each other over T-Mobile, the T-Mobile network, right?
00:50:54.000Well, T-Mobile didn't censor us, they didn't publish us, they're sort of, you know, so they're not, you can't sue T-Mobile for, if somebody's a victim of our crime, they can't sue T-Mobile for being part of it, right?
00:51:04.000So that's a protection that makes sense for T-Mobile.
00:51:06.000Now if T-Mobile started listening on conversations and saying that's not an appropriate conversation for you to have.
00:51:12.000Well, you think, well, now they have to accept responsibility for what they're allowing and not allowing.
00:51:16.000But what these socials have right now is they have all the power and other responsibility.
00:51:20.000And one of those two things has to go away.
00:51:22.000The problem is going to continue to get worse.
00:51:23.000And that's kind of the 230 reform we need is that, look, you are either a publisher and you have responsibility, which is fine.
00:51:31.000But then if somebody plots some scheme through your site, well, you're completely on the hook for it.
00:51:35.000And that's the kind of reform that I think we need to look at.
00:51:38.000So, for those that aren't familiar, just to clarify, Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act says that no platform shall be considered to be the publisher of someone else's speech.
00:51:48.000To simplify, if you go on Twitter and post a comment or a tweet, that's your speech, not Twitter's.
00:51:56.000I completely and 100% agree with that.
00:51:59.000Like, if I make a phone call, and if I group call a hundred people, and then I say some naughty word, that's not on T-Mobile.
00:52:11.000If I call people and start defaming someone, you sue me, right?
00:52:13.000The issue is, as you described it, translating this to Twitter, Or to YouTube, actually.
00:52:19.000YouTube's statements about what we can or can't say pertaining to the election is an editorial guideline, not a community standard.
00:52:27.000Now, they've said it was a community standard, but that makes no sense.
00:52:30.000If 74 million people agree with one idea and 80 million people don't, we clearly don't have a unified societal concept like what is lewd and lascivious.
00:52:39.000Section 230 provides what's called a Good Samaritan provision for moderation.
00:52:43.000These platforms, like YouTube, are allowed to remove things and not be considered a publisher because it's good-faith moderation.
00:52:50.000If someone posts, you know, adult activities onto Twitter, and Twitter doesn't want that, then Section 230 says, we're not going to consider you the publisher because you're choosing to get rid of these things that are otherwise objectionable.
00:53:18.000In fact, probably more than that because there's been a couple polls now showing that even Democrats believe there was fraud and most Republicans do.
00:53:28.000So when YouTube says, we find this objectionable, Perhaps, under Section 230, objectionable could be a personal opinion, in which case, they are granted absolute and total immunity as a publisher to issue editorial guidelines on what may or may not be published and never face liability, which not even the New York Times gets.
00:53:45.000You gotta change the word objectionable to illegal.
00:54:25.000Let's say the example I think we were given by one of the guests was a Christian blog.
00:54:30.000A website where Christians and Catholics or whatever can come and have conversations and then someone starts posting a bunch of adult activities, right?
00:54:38.000Well, they're going to be like, we don't want this on our platform.
00:54:56.000Well, so if you get rid of objectionable with illegal, then they could still remove it because lewd, lascivious, filthy, or otherwise objectionable.
00:55:21.000I think that advertisers threatening to pull their money is a big impetus for why YouTube's proactively removing content.
00:55:28.000That's actually the reason they're doing this.
00:55:30.000And that's why Google... So, when I first saw YouTube's statement about, we can't question the election kind of stuff, The full report is actually about like advertisers and friendly content.
00:55:41.000And so they're like, we're removing things.
00:55:43.000They're worried that advertisers will freak out upon seeing this.
00:55:47.000And it's typically because YouTube is scared of the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal.
00:55:51.000The Wall Street Journal targeted PewDiePie.
00:56:58.000Section 230 has created this... It's almost like...
00:57:04.000The system they've created tends towards what is considered mainstream and acceptable, and so people are chasing each other as cancel culture starts attacking the right and getting them banned, increasingly accusing one side of being offensive or objectionable, then social media gets scared because advertisers get scared, and gets rid of it, moving everything further and further, not necessarily to the left, Towards a broken, fractured, algorithmic, paranoid, delusional state.
00:57:29.000You're going to have to remove shadow banning too.
00:57:33.000Shadow banning would be... Which means you're going to have to free the software code because you can't rely on a company to have good faith without knowing what they're doing.
00:58:40.000The evidence would be that you just set up a couple of other accounts, ask people to follow you, do a statistical analysis of how often you show up in the timeline, etc.
00:58:47.000Because I follow people who I believe are shadow banned.
00:58:52.000It's something you can statistically prove to court and it's pretty much open and shut.
00:58:56.000Not only that, when they shadow banned, I think, Ronald McDaniel from Twitter search, it was Plainly obvious to literally everybody.
00:59:03.000But like on YouTube, if you're getting 10,000 views and then all of a sudden you're getting 9,000 views, how can you prove that they didn't 90% your algorithm?
00:59:11.000Well, I think you're thinking about YouTube backwards.
00:59:14.000YouTube isn't necessarily shadow banning, they're algorithmically promoting some content.
00:59:39.000YouTube promotes the content, and they choose who they promote.
00:59:42.000So I actually think, you know, in that sense, YouTube has no obligation to promote me.
00:59:47.000If people don't watch my content, then, I don't know, it does create a problem because they're actively promoting certain content, which makes them, in my opinion, a publisher.
00:59:55.000If YouTube says, we have identified content that we make sure appears on the front page, think about it this way.
01:00:01.000BuzzFeed has a community section, or they used to, I don't know if they still do, where anybody can write and it gets posted.
01:00:06.000But they're not going to put that on the front page.
01:00:08.000The front page is where their authors and staffers appear.
01:00:11.000Sometimes I think community posts might, but I don't think so.
01:00:14.000BuzzFeed community posts, I don't know if they still do it, were always very much like, you could write a story and then publish it.
01:00:20.000On YouTube, well YouTube's the biggest site, the second biggest search engine in the world, They are choosing, based on certain criteria, to publish your content to the front page, to people who have not subscribed.
01:00:32.000YouTube is a publisher and not a platform.
01:00:35.000And even when all your people that you're subscribed to, if you're subscribed to a thousand accounts, YouTube chooses which of those thousand accounts you're gonna see.
01:00:52.000She didn't run for re-election, so somebody's going to be taking her seat, and she's done.
01:00:56.000But there's other means, because you brought up the advertising angle.
01:00:59.000One thing I've advocated for is that there are a lot of states out there with large constituencies who don't like people with conservative viewpoints being just banned for perfectly legal speech.
01:01:09.000I don't see a reason why a state shouldn't start implementing laws that the state itself and all the municipalities within it are forbidden from buying advertising on platforms that censor legal speech.
01:02:21.000I believe that... I'm working on some projects in the upcoming year.
01:02:24.000I think that that will be on the agenda.
01:02:25.000I believe there are at least several... Look, if you can get a state to sue another four states in the Supreme Court over a presidential election, I think you can get... I think you can get a state to, at the sovereign level, say that, look, we're not spending any more money on any social network that censors legal... And it's a very... It's not... They don't have to even name the places.
01:02:43.000They just have to establish that standard.
01:02:45.000And it's like, well, You know, the only thing is...
01:02:47.000But then how do they determine which falls under the criteria?
01:02:50.000Would someone bring a complaint to the state saying, so you know, you'd go there and say,
01:03:14.000And we've seen this before because you remember the state of California, I think, banned doing any business with the state of Indiana or any state that had a bathroom, right?
01:03:23.000So no, I think it was a bathroom or something like that.
01:03:28.000I don't want tax dollars going to financing some of these companies that clearly do have a bias and do have an agenda.
01:03:38.000Another thing to really kind of think about here, especially when it comes to the advertisers and Supposedly, these companies bowing down to the pressure of the advertisers and the mainstream media is that advertisers have a choice to make when they choose advertising.
01:03:51.000They could choose to advertise on, let's say, the Alex Jones show, or they could exclude them.
01:03:56.000Just like me, as a producer, I could go on my AdSense and I could say, I don't want any McDonald's, Monsanto, U.S.
01:04:02.000military, politician ads on my channel, which I did before when I was still in the partner program.
01:04:08.000Advertisers could still do that themselves, and I don't know why there's not a bigger emphasis by saying, hey, if you don't like them, just put them in your Google AdSense account that you don't want to advertise with them, and then you don't have to ban that person.
01:04:35.000Where it came from is that left-wing activists gathered together rabble-rousers to target companies with just hit them with emails, phone calls, tweet at them.
01:04:45.000The company not realizing in most cases these people are not only not their customers but would never be their customers start to panic and they're like and then they call YouTube and said hey we can't advertise with you anymore because all these people are blowing up our timeline so you got to stop you know having You know, this guy on your YouTube channel, because he said something controversial, and then they, you know, that's how we get to this policy.
01:05:05.000Because honestly, if no advertiser ever threatened to pull ads from a social media network, I don't think Jack Dorsey or those guys would.
01:05:12.000But they could just easily say, okay guys, if you're coming at me, we're just going to make sure we never advertise.
01:05:18.000But hold on, you're missing one extra component.
01:05:20.000After the email campaign, the activists will then send a tip to an ally at a news organization, who will then write, did you agree that the racism you were advertising on was bad?
01:05:33.000And so what happens is, they'll get a bunch of emails, and I've seen these threats.
01:05:38.000We were putting on a speaking event last year, and Antifa called, self-identified anti-fascists threatened to burn the theater down.
01:05:47.000But one of the calls that went to a local business was, we're going to make sure the news finds out you're supporting white supremacists.
01:05:54.000So what happens then is this company goes, I got all these emails.
01:05:57.000They then told me I was doing something wrong.
01:05:59.000They then said they're going to send it to the press.
01:06:01.000One of these activists, I mean, they all work in media, they got jobs there, will then be like, ooh, here's a juicy story.
01:06:07.000And then they'll email this company and say, so I actually broke this story where a reporter for Slate sent what I would describe as a veiled threat to a bank to get the Proud Boys, a principal Proud Boy member, banned by saying, why is it that you support white supremacy?
01:06:27.000And the bank was like, no, no, no, no, we don't, we don't, we don't, we don't, it's gone, it's gone.
01:06:30.000Because the journalist is essentially saying, I'm going to write a story accusing you of supporting white supremacy and then watch people panic and sell your shares.
01:06:38.000The other thing that happens in this is that if conservatives do the same thing, you know what the journalist will write?
01:06:44.000A hoax campaign by fringe far-right extremists targeted this company and they valiantly defied them.
01:06:50.000Because the right doesn't have a foot in these cultural institutions, and because a lot of these ad buyers just read the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal, the right can't counter it the same way the left does.
01:06:59.000And I think that companies like Vanguard, State Street, and Black... I think it's BlackRock is the name of them?
01:07:05.000Those three largest investment firms in the world own 20% of Alphabet or Google.
01:07:10.000So it's not just like Toyota that would pull their ads from, you know, Luke Rutkowski's videos if he mentions the Federal Reserve, but it's BlackRock and State Street will pull their funding from Alphabet, and then that company will fall apart.
01:07:23.000These companies own 8% of Apple, 8% of Microsoft, 8% of Google.
01:07:28.000Yeah, BlackRock is one of the largest asset management firms in the world.
01:07:32.000They have about $7 trillion, and they just recently started investing in the Chinese stock market.
01:07:37.000So literally, people's pensions and retirements and money in their bank account literally is investing into China right now.
01:07:43.000And the Federal Reserve is bailing out BlackRock with any loss they have.
01:07:47.000The Federal Reserve is just making sure that they get covered.
01:07:51.000When they make a profit, they get to keep all their income.
01:07:54.000They lose, Federal Reserve literally steps in and is funneling money into them.
01:07:58.000That's a big institution that we should talk about.
01:07:59.000Let's combine our disdain for the activists and media with our disdain for big tech censorship with probably one of the most consequential stories of our generation.
01:08:10.000Hunter Biden is under criminal investigation for possible money laundering and illicit business deals with China that was partially facilitated by his own father in his role as the vice president.
01:08:20.000This story was suppressed, was censored and blocked across social media.
01:08:25.000NPR said it wasn't really news, it was a distraction.
01:08:28.000Politico said, in fact, 50 intelligence officials, former intelligence officials said it was Russian disinformation.
01:08:33.000CNN said the same thing and so did MSNBC.
01:08:35.000And now Politico has the gall to publish the story that, oops, Hunter Biden.
01:08:41.000Justice Department's interest in Hunter Biden covered more than taxes.
01:08:45.000And I love this when they say it is a powerful, well I guess they updated the story recently, but they say it was an explosive, explosive political revelations.
01:08:56.000Revelations that the American people needed to know about before they cast their ballots.
01:09:01.000And revelations that the media as well as big tech companies suppressed That is probably the most, um, I don't know, dystopian thing I've ever, a story I've ever read.
01:09:22.000The official, uh, you know, YouTube has said that there's enough electors to, you know, determine that he is, and it's whatever.
01:09:28.000On January 6th is when, officially under the Constitution, we get our President-elect.
01:09:33.000We're sitting here being told that's the case.
01:09:35.000And now we're being told, oh and by the way, we knew he was crooked, we knew he was corrupt and compromised, and we didn't tell you.
01:09:42.000And we're telling you now because we want you to sit here and wait.
01:09:45.000Wait for a month knowing that we royally you over.
01:09:51.000And that you are going to have a crooked, corrupt, crony, compromised politician running the show, and there is nothing you can do to stop it.
01:10:00.000I think Twitter censoring the New York Post was the most scandalous thing they've ever done.
01:10:04.000Yeah, and it's important to note here, the New York Post was the one that released the story.
01:10:08.000They're the ones who came out and said, hey- The oldest newspaper in this country.
01:10:36.000It's also, the federal authorities are also looking into other relatives, including Joe Biden's brother, James, who the federal authorities are looking into and asking about a specific bankruptcy when it comes to another business that he had.
01:10:49.000We got the story right here from the New York Post.
01:10:56.000And Tony Bobulinski, a former confidant of the family, said in no uncertain terms that he believes the Biden family is compromised by China.
01:11:07.000And there was a poll that was put out, one by the Media Research Center and another, I can't remember, it was more of a, you know, more bland poll from like ABC or something.
01:11:15.000Where they found that a decent amount of people, a small percentage, maybe four to five, said they would not have voted for Joe Biden had they known what his son and brother had been doing.
01:11:23.000But the media suppressed the news and helped Joe Biden, a corrupt politician, win.
01:11:31.000And now what are Americans supposed to do when they come out with this information?
01:11:34.000I'll tell you, if the news just broke right now and they were like, we just found this out, I mean, that would be shocking.
01:11:41.000But when we know that the media said, well, we suppressed the story, we lied about it, and Big Tech censored it to make sure he won, even though they knew he's a criminal.
01:11:51.000It wasn't even that, like, MSNBC didn't run a story on it.
01:11:55.000Twitter took, they deleted stories about it.
01:11:58.000They suspended the New York Post's Twitter account for weeks.
01:12:03.000So they couldn't report anything because they dare oppose the machine.
01:12:05.000And they told the New York Post, delete the tweet, delete the article, you'll get your account back.
01:12:12.000They luckily stood up to their morals, but for how long were they taken out of business, out of commission, from even people seeing and sharing and understanding this larger news, which was an important context to understand, especially on the backdrop of the Beijing professor that came out and hinted that Chinese authorities were the ones... He didn't hint it, he said it.
01:13:22.000And it's just what happened here I think is part of a reaction to what happened in 2016 where coverage of the FBI investigation was what they think through the election to Hillary.
01:13:34.000And no journalist wanted to be that one journalist who came out and reported this story and potentially threw the election back to Trump.
01:13:40.000The peer pressure among them was so strong.
01:13:42.000I remember communicating with journalists just in a couple weeks leading up to the election.
01:13:47.000I'm often trying to seed stories or pitch stories and get stuff out there, and there was one story that would have made Biden look very bad.
01:13:55.000Not laptop bad, but in that realm, right?
01:14:00.000And ordinarily, a story of this nature would be snapped right up, but there were no takers, and I talked to some very serious— They're supporting the Democrats.
01:14:27.000Where it's like the ref joins in the fight, like two guys are fighting and then someone accidentally hits the ref and the ref gets in and now the ref is fighting and you're like, what's going on?
01:14:47.000If I would have told you two years ago, That if I said in 2018, you know in a couple years half the country 20 states and two territories would be Let me rephrase this if I told you in 2018 that 18 states were suing To effectively change the results of the 2020 election and 20 other states filed briefs Challenging them paying half the country against the other half.
01:15:13.000Would you believe I would have believed you you would have yeah Especially if you told me there were mail-in ballots No, no, just that the states are lining up against each other.
01:15:24.000I mean, there was a lot of street fights between left-wing and right-wing people, so there was indications that there was going to be a larger conflict, but not this big.
01:15:32.000Not somewhere where states are going after each other.
01:15:34.000When I was talking about the potential for conflict, people kept saying the states will never be against each other.
01:16:52.000We had an analysis from several security advisors, excuse me, who I can't remember if it was the New York or the Atlantic, where they said ranging from 30% to 90% possibility of a civil war based on the tensions.
01:17:05.000And the aggregate analysis, like when they averaged out everyone's opinions, it was like a 35% chance.
01:17:11.000And then we saw the street fights, we saw Charlottesville, we saw all of this chaos and conflict.
01:17:15.000And if after all of that, I said in two years, 18 states would be filing a suit against four, and then 20 would join in to counter that because they refused the results of the election, people absolutely would have been like, you're insane!
01:17:29.000You know, I had people telling me that the Proud Boys fighting Antifa would stop there.
01:17:54.000Regular New Yorkers were throwing bricks and rocks at cars flying Trump flags.
01:18:00.000And a woman went up to a vehicle and pepper-sprayed children.
01:18:04.000And they still say to me, yeah, but that's just regular people fighting.
01:18:07.000And then I say, but listen, now it's going to the highest levels.
01:18:09.000They're trying to impeach the president on ridiculous, meritless grounds.
01:18:13.000They have put a former general in the crosshairs of prison, Michael Flynn.
01:18:18.000This is one of the highest ranking military positions in the country, and they were going to lock him up for nothing, for lying to the FBI in a potentially informal meeting.
01:18:26.000And when one side, when the DOJ said, we're going to get rid of this, the judge said, no.
01:18:31.000You see from the highest levels, they're trying to arrest a general, and at the lowest levels, you have people fighting in the streets, and now 20 versus 18 states in a lawsuit saying, that's not my president.
01:18:41.000I don't know where this goes, and maybe it stops right now.
01:18:57.000Yeah, there's gonna be, especially in the United States, where you're allowed to go out and protest and own guns, there's gonna be little bits of, like, explosive anger and violence.
01:19:04.000Only a few months ago, a man stalked two Trump supporters and put two bullets in his chest.
01:19:08.000Like, in some countries, that stuff couldn't happen because the government would crack down, kill and arrest everyone involved, and you'd never see any So perhaps we have that weakness.
01:19:19.000The government decides what protests to crack down on, and they have been selective about that.
01:19:23.000When it comes to a particular protest they like, they let it happen.
01:19:25.000If they don't like the protest, they crack down on it.
01:19:27.000Do you think... So listen, I want to be very clear here.
01:19:32.000At a certain point, when I'm saying I think street violence is going to spread, and it's going to affect people, and the culture war will exacerbate, people say, no, I think you're crazy.
01:19:44.000And they say, well, Tim's still crazy.
01:19:46.000Then I say, I didn't predict 18 states filing a suit to challenge 4 states, which would overturn the election, and 20 states firing back.
01:19:54.000Or, you know, Michael Flynn, they're trying to lock up a general.
01:19:57.000That's like trying to arrest and imprison a general because he essentially ratted on the Obama administration's illicit activities in the Middle East, and then he went to work with Trump.
01:20:07.000I mean, this is some highest level stuff all the way down to the lowest level.
01:20:11.000My point is, When we then get to a point where you have 20 versus 18 states, I don't know if it escalates further from here.
01:20:19.000But I can say for the time being, I was right about the escalation.
01:20:56.000We've built a division into the country that's been festering since 2000 where it wasn't any longer... They used to call the states in the southeast the former confederacy and for a while they were solid democrat states and that sort of changed and it became...
01:21:14.000Now we've got a new phrase to divide ourselves, just like the Mason-Dixon slave states, free states.
01:21:20.000We have a new dividing terminology that was not around like in the 80s or 90s.
01:21:25.000There was South Carolina, Kansas, Georgia.
01:21:27.000Sometimes the Democrat won them, sometimes they didn't, but now we have this firm division.
01:21:30.000We have blue states, we have red states.
01:21:34.000People don't understand what a civil war is because they're tainted by American history.
01:21:39.000In American history we had states which were part of a union and so there was an alignment on some issues and not.
01:21:45.000In many other countries, actually every single country, civil war was like pockets of urban areas versus rural areas and then there were fights over territories and control of one government.
01:21:55.000In the United States, you actually had a secession and then the Union saying, we're not going to let the country break apart.
01:22:01.000The South wasn't necessarily trying to take over the North.
01:22:04.000They were trying to get into DC to effectively end the war, but they wanted their states to be out of the Union.
01:22:08.000Very different from what we've seen in perhaps the Spanish Civil War.
01:22:12.000One of the key components in civil conflict, whether it's a civil war or tribalist feuding and fighting or whatever, is a view that the other is irredeemable and evil and wrong.
01:22:25.000We have, as I mentioned, 18 versus 20 states right now.
01:22:28.000And I'm sure many people on the left and many of these people have repeatedly said, nothing's happening.
01:22:33.000Over and over again, as things have escalated, I'll say it again, maybe it stops here.
01:22:49.000An Esquire magazine has written this article.
01:22:52.000The Republican Party is now a seditious organization.
01:22:55.000These authoritarian yahoos believe the Supreme Court will ride to their rescue and disenfranchise millions of people whom they don't believe should be allowed to vote anyway.
01:23:03.000They are now officially stating that all of these states are seditious.
01:23:07.000That's like some crap news organization.
01:23:36.000But clearly, there is a dividing line between the factions.
01:23:39.000Both are calling each other traitorous and evil.
01:23:42.000And I just gotta stress this, you know, to the utmost degree when people talk about this.
01:23:47.000Has anyone... I think we're in the pot boiling, and so we don't realize how serious it is that they tried to put a former general in prison.
01:23:56.000Like, that right there should be a huge indicator that something is seriously going wrong in this country.
01:24:01.000They said that Donald Trump, when he had the rallies chanting, lock her up.
01:24:09.000Who served this country, and as Luke, you know, pointed out in the other episode, I guess the Obama administration was mad because he exposed that they were arming rebels in Syria.
01:24:21.000He's the one that got fired as the National Security Advisor under Barack Obama that exposed the whole game that was happening there, that solidified everything.
01:24:29.000And we have to really think about the kind of longer, bigger terms, perspectives here, because if you're a force, or if you're an interest, and you want to take over another nation or a country, what's the best way to do it?
01:24:41.000You divide and conquer the population.
01:24:44.000Yeah, and that's why I've been talking about this for 10 years.
01:24:46.000I've been saying, watch out for this hyper-partisan nonsense bullcrap that's leaving truth and any kind of logic out of the door.
01:24:53.000We have to, more than ever, keep an open mind.
01:24:56.000We have to, more than ever, pay attention to the truth that matters.
01:24:59.000But it doesn't matter to the special interests that of course bastardize it to push this larger context war
01:25:04.000against us the point is There is no truth
01:25:07.000Clearly I think one side is more correct than the other and we run the rest of eating band for even having his opinions
01:25:13.000What I'm saying is on the left They're under the impression that Donald Trump is illegitimate
01:25:18.000because he was propped up by Russia and that he's a corrupt criminal
01:25:22.000Enterprise and Bill Barr is his hatchet man Clearly not.
01:25:26.000And they just believe what they're told from the media, who's clearly lying because they've allowed Hunter Biden and Joe Biden to get away with this very, very serious story.
01:25:34.000Be careful not to fall into the trap of left and right.
01:26:35.000And although you can look at the left and see that there are some people who aren't super woke, but still align with them.
01:26:43.000And on the right, you have people who are disaffected liberals or intellectual dark web types who are hanging out with conservatives and agree with them.
01:26:49.000The separation, I think, is built upon Are you a follower of what Michael Malice calls the cathedral?
01:27:25.000On the left, you have people who watch the mainstream media and have no idea what they're talking about.
01:27:29.000On the right, you have regular people who have known about the Hunter Biden scandal the whole time and are angry the media has been lying about it.
01:27:35.000Granted, on the right, you get people who go too far and read crazy, you know, conspiracy theories, and then they kind of lose it.
01:27:41.000But I don't think that's the majority.
01:27:43.000Mainstream news, as you mentioned, is essentially functioning as a PR apparatus for the hard-left Democrats.
01:28:05.000In my opinion, I'm being very careful here, on the data I analyzed in the story I was covering years ago, the New York Times seems to reuse URLs to manipulate and game Facebook's algorithm to make more money.
01:28:19.000What they'll do is, in my opinion, this is why they do it, they'll publish a story that's a hot news story, breaking news, Donald Trump does backflip.
01:28:55.000So that's a big story that I was going to be covering, but the point is, for monetary reasons, they're going to build an audience, they're going to sell a story, and it's going to keep pushing this divide.
01:29:07.000You know, I guess to simplify what I was trying to say to Luke that kicked off this conversation is, when you say we got to find the truth, I agree, but I think there is a reason why they call it red pill and blue pill.
01:29:19.000I think Michael Malice describes it as the red pill is you've awoken to the reality outside of corporate controlled media narratives.
01:29:26.000If you watch mainstream news, you're getting contradictory information every other day that makes no sense.
01:29:32.000So people end up thinking crazy things.
01:29:34.000But for those of us who have been actually investigating and looking and reading the news, we knew Hunter Biden was crooked because we saw the emails.
01:29:40.000But people who watch CNN were told it was Russian disinfo.
01:29:44.000What are they going to think now, when they're now being told by CNN, that CNN was actually the ones investigating the story the whole time?
01:29:51.000I think it was Oliver Darcy who said, we've been really going at this story to try and figure out what's really going on.
01:29:55.000So now those people who are convinced it was Russian disinfo are now being told by the very same people.
01:30:00.000Actually, we were the ones who uncovered it in the first place.
01:30:03.000Either these people are not interested, they're not capable cognitively to understand what's going on, or they're going to snap from cognitive dissonance.
01:30:13.000Tim, don't you know we've always been at war with East Asia?
01:30:26.000No, we have to understand a lot of these people are just being brought into total delusion, into total nonsense, where they can't even understand the process of independently thinking because of the contradictory information that just is being thrown at them.
01:30:41.000I think we could all understand that within the last few years, this larger divide and conquer agenda has been there and it has been ranching up on so many different levels where they, I think there is a force.
01:30:54.000There's a power that wants you fighting and hating each other based on your skin color, based on your orientation, based on your age, based on whatever you choose to do with your own life.
01:31:03.000Those differences have been exemplified and empowered to such a level where you see another person you're taught to see someone that you're going to dislike or be angry about and to be dysfunctional.
01:31:16.000There's a lot of different fingers that we could point to people who benefit from that whether it's the corporate world or another geopolitical threat out there.
01:31:25.000But the most important aspect is to first understand that it's happening before even pointing fingers at who's doing it.
01:31:30.000Well, it's that division that we see being encouraged in so many different places, causing division, breaking national unity.
01:31:42.000I recall in President Trump's first inaugural speech, he had a wonderful line, and it's that, through loyalty to our country, we will rediscover loyalty to each other.
01:31:55.000And that there says everything, because everything that we've seen, whether you have people disrespecting our—what do we have that unifies us, right?
01:32:11.000Taking our national things that unify us and bringing us apart of them.
01:32:15.000Tearing down old monuments or disrespect or rewriting history to cast our founding fathers as villains.
01:32:21.000The things that are uniting us are the things that are most under attack.
01:32:25.000And I'll just go a little bit further, though, in terms of what's really the left-right divide, and maybe you guys see it differently, but this has been in human history for a long time, and the best way to define it in contemporary terminology is that there are those who embrace what we now call post-modernism and those who reject it.
01:32:41.000And I find that's a very clean line among the different ways of seeing things and thinking things.
01:33:10.000And so, the way I think Andrew Breitbart said, I'm probably going to paraphrase this incorrectly, but the general idea was that you have to walk towards the fire.
01:33:20.000You think it's dangerous and it's painful, but when you pass through it, you see there's freedom on the other side.
01:33:25.000So you have people, it's the allegory of the cave, who live in the cave and people who don't.
01:33:30.000I think that's, so there's certainly, um, we've had people on this show who are decently woke, you know, and have advocated for, you know, rather social justice type positions, but are not what would be described as left.
01:33:42.000And a lot of people in the chat will like, not like them, but you know, we've had people here who have supported Trump, but also supported social justice initiatives that you typically would not find on the right.
01:33:51.000So not necessarily postmodernist thinking, but that could be a strong indicator.
01:33:56.000I started to fall into postmodernism really hard when I was like, I'm creating reality with my thoughts.
01:34:02.000We are, you know, controlling our reality.
01:34:04.000In like 2008, 9, I really, but then something I was able to kind of pull out of it.
01:34:08.000I know that it's not a deep, dark pit.
01:34:32.000I think that that's an indicator, but I actually would...
01:34:37.000Putting it aside, when we were... I was doing the analysis for the original,
01:34:42.000for the first Trump campaign on what would make somebody favorable to support Trump and
01:34:46.000A lot of people were trying to do that, too, and a lot of them had sort of these second-rate ideas about, you know, it's basically uneducated poor people, or in other cases they'd say, you know, it's basically racist or something.
01:34:55.000And somebody actually did a pretty good study that found that it really did come down to whether or not you were a—embraced postmodernism, which is We're getting in trouble with some philosophy types here, but I think it basically comes down to if it feels good, do it, and by extension in politics, if it feels good, it must be right.
01:35:14.000Versus those who utterly reject that, those who have, I like to say they possess the wisdom of the Old Testament.
01:35:21.000But there are many people on the right who don't like, like in the culture war right, who aren't fans of Trump necessarily.
01:35:25.000Well, but just think about the reasons why.
01:35:27.000It's because he's had three wives, he's very brash, he has his exhibit, like, what they would consider conspicuous consumption.
01:35:33.000And I'm not saying those are my criticisms, those are the ones that you might find the people who are very uncomfortable with him because he seems so, an uncouth, brash New Yorker, right?
01:36:22.000But while I was at Fusion, it's where one of these guys said, don't report on the fact that the New York Times is essentially doing this extremely unethical behavior.
01:36:33.000What the New York Times did when they would change links like this resulted in two of the all-time top posts on Reddit, number three and number five, getting deleted for a violation of the rules.
01:36:58.000So, I kind of lost my train of thought because I wanted to tell that story.
01:37:01.000Well another aspect that I kind of wanted to intervene here I've been waiting to say and whether this is happening on purpose or an accident we have to understand that a lot of this division is also being fueled by big tech social media algorithms that promote certain behaviors and demote other behaviors.
01:37:16.000So when we look at something that's very hyperbolic, whether it's intentionally or not done intentionally, we are seeing the worst elements of our society being presented to us almost every single day.
01:37:26.000That's going to have an effect on your psyche.
01:37:28.000That's going to have an effect on your brain.
01:37:30.000And when you're at war, if you can get your enemy to fight itself, it weakens them.
01:37:36.000Like, if you have 5,000 troops and 5,000 troops and they fight each other and they kill off 2,500 and 2,500, now you only have to fight 2,500 troops, or 5,000 troops instead of 10,000.
01:37:58.000And if you look at the fertility numbers, and if you look at the reproduction numbers, if you look at the marriage numbers, they're all down in the decline in the toilets.
01:38:04.000I'm not saying it's intentionally being done, I'm just saying.
01:38:09.000Constitution is such a threat to globalization or global Of course, the Great Reset can't happen because of the Constitution.
01:38:27.000The Pope has come out in support of the Great Reset.
01:38:30.000But the problem with the Great Reset is that the United States has a Constitution.
01:38:34.000They can't do anything about the Constitution.
01:38:37.000I mean, I think there's only one thing that would actually get rid of the Constitution, and that's the Civil War.
01:38:41.000I mean, if you were talking about dichotomies here, I think you have another dichotomy that you're really hitting on, and we're all kind of dancing around this word, expecting somebody to say, but I don't.
01:38:50.000But you have, on one hand, nationalism, national identity.
01:38:54.000On the other hand, we have something that can't exist in the same space, but has a tremendous amount of financial vested interest and energy and power behind it, and that is consumerism.
01:39:03.000Those two things can't exist in the same place.
01:39:11.000I like consumerism because capitalism encourages bold thinking, revolutionary change, creative disruption, whereas consumerism basically, they just want you to have an earthworm existence where you consume, excrete, consume, excrete, and die.
01:39:25.000Well, the Great Reset is opposed to that.
01:39:29.000The Great Reset wants people not to own anything.
01:39:32.000Well, if you don't own anything, but you have to pay everyone forever.
01:39:38.000You know, you can buy a cell phone and guess what?
01:39:42.000You don't even own it and it's going to be replaced in five years because you don't stop paying.
01:39:46.000When you go on the World Economic Forum, you see a lot of generalized bland language like fairness, equal outcome, the public good.
01:39:54.000But essentially, when you deep down and you look into more of their text, What are they talking about?
01:39:59.000More taxes, more regulations, more free trade agreements like the TPP, which of course benefits the corporate billionaire Wall Street banking class, which is in cahoots with also other foreign governments that they greatly benefit of when they subvert other people's individual's will and sovereignty and freedom.
01:40:15.000And that weaselly language you cite that is concealing that, that is the biggest tell of how malignant and malevolent it is.
01:40:28.000There's no doubt, there's no weasel words like that.
01:40:30.000It says exactly what it means, and you know what it means.
01:40:33.000Whereas those buzzwords you're throwing out, it's like, oh, it sounds good.
01:40:36.000The equality, sustainability, the fourth industrial revolution.
01:40:38.000Especially equality of outcome, that's the dangerous, because you have equality of opportunity, which is great, but equality of outcome is not great.
01:41:33.000In fact, the Great Reset would be greatly beneficial to you because while everyone else would lose ownership of everything, you'd have free access and free reign to do whatever you want indefinitely.
01:41:42.000Yeah, especially individuals like Bill Gates that promised to donate all of their wealth to charity 10 years ago and now has doubled his wealth.
01:41:50.000He's also literally on CNBC talking about how vaccines have been his greatest ever investment and how it's a 20 to 1 return for him personally.
01:41:59.000So I do believe that... Because when you mandate them.
01:42:03.000And this is, again, Bill Gates, the person pushing for a lot of these policies and also pushing for the global reset, a part of the other big players here that are calling for this and are saying, we got to do this.
01:42:14.000Essentially, they do care because it does essentially work out for them in certain ways, like the Bill Gates incident.
01:42:47.000I mean, you look at the Republican states and they've said, no, you look at Pennsylvania and Michigan and the Supreme courts, I think of even their states have, have struck down their attempts at locking down.
01:42:55.000This is what they want is a world where no one owns anything.
01:42:57.000They don't mean everyone owns nothing.
01:42:59.000They mean that most people own nothing and they're going to own it and we're going to rent it from them.
01:43:03.000And they're all going to do it in the name.
01:43:04.000the name of equality and sustainability by pushing again more controls more
01:43:08.000regulations so independent people can't start their own businesses can't have
01:43:12.000their own businesses all the competition against them and their buddies is
01:43:15.000totally wiped out and they call this redefining capitalism.
01:43:19.000Have you seen the video of the woman in California from the pineapple was
01:43:21.000a pineapple hill where she she's uh she's the Hollywood has set up these
01:43:25.000picnic tables and benches and then she can't have hers
01:44:15.000Specifically, when we look at that article when you say you won't own nothing, it was from an article from the World Economic Forum about their vision of 2030.
01:44:23.000And it specifically said, you will own nothing, you will have no privacy, but you will be happy.
01:44:30.000In other words, human slavery is going to be back.
01:44:43.000If there was a space colony floating in orbit where everyone who lived there was, you know, advanced a thousand years of technology and they were immortal and could fly and could teleport, You would wish and long for that if you knew it existed.
01:44:59.000You don't know it exists, so you can only be as happy as you are in the moment.
01:45:04.000But what they're saying is, if we can take the idea of freedom and liberty away from the individual, then they won't long for what they don't know exists.
01:45:13.000So they want to take away ownership so that you're happy and complacent in the future, not even thinking it can exist.
01:45:19.000I think the human spirit and human will naturally goes towards liberty, towards freedom, towards sovereignty.
01:45:33.000There are instances where you could look at the pessimistic aspect of it, and there are aspects of it that you could look at the aspects that propelled humanity and progressed us forward in positive ways, and that road is always the road of freedom.
01:45:48.000If you look at if you look at civilizations and how they stifled they stifled when there is a lack of freedom there's a lack of communication there's a lack of dialogue and now us getting this dialogue taken away from us is the first warning shot that I think people would really need to pay attention to because once we We can't even talk to each other.
01:46:06.000Once we can't even be able to listen to what's really going on there, we've already lost.
01:47:04.000Is there any punishment to not giving back a forgivable loan?
01:47:07.000So a forgivable loan could be like, hey, Ian, I'll lend you $100, and if you bring in the Amazon boxes when they come, I'll forgive the loan.
01:47:16.000So there's a condition that can be met that makes it so you don't owe me any money anymore.
01:47:20.000Tony Bobulinski said he told them not to take the money, and they got rich behind his back, and he thinks they're compromised.
01:47:26.000The media suppressed this, and just like YouTube is now telling us they're going to suppress information, I'm really interested to what happens at the result of some of these lawsuits pertaining to fraud if something favorable happens for Trump and a judge asserts that what YouTube said you can't say is in fact true.
01:47:43.000And when I asked them about this, they had no answer.
01:47:45.000They were like, you can't make these claims.
01:47:47.000And I said, what happens if a judge agrees and says it's true?
01:47:50.000Well, you know, our policy says... I have a question for you.
01:47:55.000Does your policy prohibit you from questioning Kennedy's victory against Nixon?
01:48:14.000Well, there's a lot of people, like, anything that moves far enough back in time, you start to get experts who re-review things and find, oh, maybe this was the case, or, you know, I don't know, Abraham Lincoln was a homosexual or something.
01:48:24.000They're reviewing it and saying, well, maybe, you know, academic research, right?
01:49:14.000Some of the first debates, but, um, what, what YouTube said is you can't question the outcome of a historical election.
01:49:21.000And, um, specifically if you said that there was widespread fraud that resulted in, you know, and this is the second criteria I'm being trying to avoid the algorithm, just because it's hypothetical, uh, that resulted in Kennedy, you know, winning or Nixon losing, that would also be a ban of bullet funds.
01:50:18.000Wouldn't you have expected them to come up with something a little bit more bulletproof or something you couldn't just pick apart so easily?
01:50:24.000I think the issue is... That's the best they came up with is, oh, these are the rules.
01:50:28.000Yeah, yeah, they're trying to find a way and a right time to stop people from talking.
01:50:33.000What they're doing is, the way I described it is, we're on a large island with sheer cliffs on every side, and over time the cliffs have been eroding, and it's all, you know, from the right for the most part.
01:50:44.000Well, it's also a chilling effect, which is also important here because I remember when the Hunter Biden story came out, I had to make a decision.
01:50:50.000I'm like, you know, big news organizations are getting canceled for this.
01:50:54.000If I mentioned this, I could get canceled.
01:50:58.000And I have to say yes, but I could imagine there's other people in my position who would say, no, I'm not going to talk about it because I want to play it safe.
01:51:48.000You could scream anything at the camera as long as it wasn't, like, explicitly illegal, you know?
01:51:54.000YouTube has become, for all intents and purposes, like, I don't know, Netflix.
01:52:01.000In 2013, I know people who work at Google.
01:52:03.000In 2013, I had a meeting with some Google employees, and they said, Netflix is our biggest competition.
01:52:09.000And I said, what are you talking about?
01:52:11.000I was like, you represent, you know, individuals who can make channels and they talk to their friends and their families, and it creates a decentralized network from the smallest audience to the biggest.
01:52:19.000What makes you think you're competing with Netflix?
01:52:24.000When Vice.com came on the scene, they were getting tens of millions of views on their documentaries.
01:52:29.000When Netflix went digital and started allowing streaming, YouTube lost that viewership, but more importantly, Vice documentaries dropped by like 80% in viewership.
01:52:38.000Millennials were going on YouTube to look for content to watch to stream, so Netflix launched a high-quality, you know, Hollywood production, you know, of streaming content, and then people chose that over YouTube.
01:52:49.000So YouTube's ever since then been prioritizing Disney Channel-esque type content.
01:52:54.000Well, they changed their algorithm to promote long-format videos rather than short-format videos because, if you remember, back in the day it was 2-minute videos, 4-minute videos that were the most popular.
01:53:44.000Do you know, do you want to know why the only reason, uh, well, I don't want to get too specific, but I can get a YouTube channel, uh, monetized rather, rather quickly.
01:53:52.000I have to meet the criteria of like, I think it's like what, 4,000 hours and like a thousand subs.
01:54:09.000But I wonder if Facebook's doing it, right?
01:54:12.000I think we're going to come to a point in a year or two where YouTube disables user uploads without certification.
01:54:19.000So in order to upload, you'll have to submit your ID, and then wait a month, and then they'll approve you, and then you can publish to YouTube.
01:54:25.000And then to get into the partner program, it's gonna be, you know, they're gonna have to wait a year.
01:54:29.000They're probably gonna put like, you have to be a user uploading content for six months so we can review your content, submit your ID and verify your identity, give us your tax forms, six months later.
01:54:42.000You don't want to make the barrier to entry too hard because it'll be too easy for other people to go on their own website and stream live and take like Monthly subscriptions.
01:55:05.000Yeah well they turned their back on what made them great.
01:55:08.000What made YouTube great was individuals coming together and just without the corporate squeegee clean PR corporate approved talking points just were natural just were real it was organic it was something to really watch and to be surprised by and to really kind of progress yourself and to really expand your mind with all these different opinions and different talking points And now it's just like, here's Disney Plus and all this other nonsense and crap that you see everywhere regurgitated in the same format and way.
01:55:36.000I think Steven Crowder is... So, the way I described it is, the cliffs are eroding.
01:55:41.000So, two years ago, there was the far right edge of the cliff, and the far left edge of the cliff, and the far left edge of the cliff actually did face some erosion.
01:55:48.000They were actually suppressing some content, and they did ban a bunch of creators recently.
01:55:51.000There was actually a trend... Well, this happened on Twitter, so in the general free speech conversation.
01:56:04.000So, you know, I think it was their usefulness to the establishment had had had is gone inspired
01:56:09.000So now while they were allowed to stay on the platform and advocate for certain things
01:56:13.000Once the election happened they got rid of them. But uh anyway
01:56:17.000The the the right end of the cliff has been eroding for years
01:56:21.000I was actually interviewed by oliver darcy of cnn about the troubling nature of banning the alt-right from social media
01:56:29.000And my point was, they can have deplorable opinions, so long as they're not breaking the law, calling for violence, inciting violence, or advocating for horrific crimes, then they're allowed to have their opinions.
01:56:39.000And actually, Oliver Darcy, of all people.
01:56:43.000Now we're at the point where if you question the election in a certain way, you'll get banned.
01:56:47.000Well, I think Steven Crowder is the one who's now standing with his tippy toes to the edge of the cliff as it's eroding because, I mean, he's absolutely going after these stories and interviewing people and challenging them.
01:56:57.000And then we're standing right behind him.
01:56:58.000I mean, especially having you on the show, Matt.
01:57:01.000Yeah, well, you know, we're gonna have probably our biggest show don't please don't say anything anybody cuz I'm gonna I think we're gonna have one of our biggest shows tomorrow and I'm really poking the bear So I I have my limits.
01:57:15.000I I've said it over and over again if I get banned, I'm gonna go skateboarding I'm gonna go fishing down by the river and and you know There's only so much you can do as the cliffs are eroding before you before you say I will not retreat I will not You can re-divert lava flow from volcanoes to build more landmass if you need more cliff space.
01:58:48.000We got... Yeah, like 98,000 watch hours.
01:58:49.000Three megabits per second up means YouTube is sending out three megabits out time... Well, they probably compress it, so maybe a megabit times 61,000, 58,000.
01:59:35.000Because, listen, when I first started doing YouTube, this was back in 2011 or whatever, And I was getting like five bucks a week doing a video every day.
01:59:42.000And I said, if I can't survive on this, I'm gonna run out of money, and then I can't do anything ever again.
01:59:47.000But once you get enough money to invest in yourself, to start the business, get the ball rolling, and then make just enough, you're good.
02:00:04.000You know, when you get to a certain point and you've got several gold, you know, YouTube awards and you have a certain level of viewership, you make a lot of money.
02:00:10.000There's no way that I could make anywhere near as much money on any other platform.
02:00:31.000That's why the big move right now is we are working on putting together a proprietary website so that people can become members and get access to premium content.
02:00:39.000The idea is going to be that we'll do a show.
02:00:41.000When we wrap up the live show, we do a bonus 10 minute segment for members only and, you know, give a value proposition to everyone, you know, so people who are already members.
02:00:50.000Well, we'll have to figure it out because I want to make sure everybody gets access to it.
02:01:19.000They're nailing Facebook with a monopoly charge, which I think is maybe foolish because if, I was saying this before the show, if Zuckerberg has access to all that code and then he has to give up WhatsApp and what's his other company?
02:01:38.000So it's, it's, it's, you know, they tried that with Snapchat when they did, I forgot what it was called, Facebook, like disappearing messages and it didn't work.
02:02:29.000You know, YouTube, Twitter, the Democrats would love to absolutely erase the populist right and the general right from existence in terms of public communication.
02:03:30.000I got this feeling like we should put media presence on every site, on Rumble, Library of Minds, Facebook, Instagram, but it's like, I don't want to.
02:03:38.000We should just have our own site, our own thing that we own.
02:03:52.000Look, if you think about it, if everybody had their own social media RSS feed, then nobody would centrally control it.
02:03:57.000It'll be sort of network, and you just subscribe to the RSS feed that you want, and it generates what would have been your feed back in the day, but you know, I guess your timeline, we call it now.
02:04:06.000And it'll all be completely independent, so that's... That's how podcasts work.
02:04:09.000So, for people who aren't familiar, I don't upload to iTunes.
02:04:13.000I upload to a server, which produces an RSS link, and then all the podcast directories just have the link of, you know... Right, but back in the day, this business-to-business RSS feeds for podcasts and other things like that, right, because the services need something wrong, but back in the day, a person would click the link to, yeah, I want to share this, you know, have this RSS feed, and actually Google cancelled Was it Reader?
02:04:36.000They took it away, and it just became so far out of mainstream, but it used to be a great thing.
02:04:42.000You'd have news groups, and it wasn't centrally controlled like it is now.
02:04:46.000Yeah, this idea of a big central power controlling your algorithm, controlling your timeline, Absolutely insane it's one of the reasons I hear some people on the internet say the revolution won't be in your timeline or in your newsfeed but there's also another aspect to this that we have to understand that there have even been psychological studies showing how the algorithms could manipulate people's emotions and feelings and
02:05:09.000And that certain algorithms can make you feel sad.
02:05:12.000Facebook admitted they were doing experiments on people.
02:05:16.000Not people who wanted to participate, but people who they were looking into and data feeding, harvesting so much information about them that it's absolutely scary because as we were talking about, I don't know if we were talking about this on the show, Facebook knows when you go to take a dump.
02:05:33.000To that level of certainty and they know so much about you and they data harvest every little aspect of you and now they're toying and they probably already figured this out how to manipulate people's emotions and feelings and to make you feel scared sad and horrified or happy productive good and then when you look at the mental health crisis in America it really makes you wonder what's going on.
02:05:57.000The only thing that gets rid of the Constitution is a civil war.
02:06:01.000Well, that's one thing that might get rid of the Constitution, but I'm sure there could be other... Or Biden presidency.
02:06:14.000So just getting enough judges who interpret the Constitution, they start inventing rights, they find penumbras, ordering judicially things that aren't remotely in the Constitution, they just invent it.
02:06:28.000But you know, the solution to this whole social media thing, all the centralized control, you know what the answer to this is, right?
02:06:34.000We all just have to get our ham radio operators licenses.
02:08:11.000So this is an important PSA for everybody, just, you know, while we have the vaccine.
02:08:14.000Has the FDA today approved the Pfizer vaccine to be used in the United States in a vote for 17 that said yes, four said no, and one person abstained?
02:08:22.000The UK has said, and this is a legitimate warning, I can't believe people are accusing me of being anti-vax for telling you what the, what the health admini- the NHS is telling people.
02:08:31.000Um, if you have a severe allergic reaction, you should not be getting this vaccine, because several people have developed, I believe it's .685% developed anaphylactic reaction, meaning your eyes swell, your throat could swell, and two nurses in the UK needed a shot of epinephrine, an auto-injector.
02:08:48.000So, the UK has said it can only be administered in a place where resuscitation measures are possible.
02:08:53.000So, this is, like, if you're going to go get it, make sure you're getting it at a proper facility, and if you have allergies, the UK... We're not UK citizens, so take your advice from your doctor and the US, but this is something that's happening.
02:09:03.000And that's 68 people out of 1,000 are having severe anaphylactic shock.
02:09:08.000Yeah, and I think they said you have 1 in 200 chance of severe side effects.
02:09:13.000Not trying to freak anybody out or anything, just trying to make sure people get the proper advice, and this is what the news organizations have issued, so this is not, like, this is the Guardian, you know, saying this stuff.
02:09:53.000There's like 19 proteins in the virus, I think, and it encodes for one of the 18 or 19, the outer layer that makes the virus connect.
02:10:02.000And then your body thinks it has that protein, and then when it sees it, it's ready for it.
02:10:06.000So if you already had that in your system, and then you get it a second, the vaccine, your body thinks you're getting it again, maybe it could go into shock.
02:10:13.000It's common in medications that there could be an anaphylactic reaction.
02:12:18.000It's like the opposite of the broken window theory.
02:12:20.000The Giuliani version, not the economics version.
02:12:23.000Is that if you tolerate a neighborhood with broken windows, you just tolerate, because it's such a minimal infraction to the law, no big deal, or you tolerate jaywalkers, well then you just encourage greater and greater crimes.
02:12:36.000But if you crack down on the smaller crimes, it will abate.
02:12:38.000So in the same way, if you crack down really hard on defamation, regardless of economic damages or instances of people casting illegal ballots, it will counter the more substantial or prevent it from growing.
02:13:26.000And then I went, flipped over, slammed on my hand, and I actually thought I broke it, but it's just sprained.
02:13:31.000So, uh, the moral of the story is, this is something every skateboarder, uh, is supposed to know.
02:13:36.000You don't screw around, and you respect the trick when you're always doing it, because you always get hurt whenever you're, like, just goofing off.
02:13:42.000And so here I am, like, I'm just gonna do this, and I'm, you know, I wasn't thinking, and I slipped, and...
02:13:48.000Also, learn how to take a compliment, Tim.
02:14:33.000We're actually gonna have drinks and you know people are gonna work as a workshop We got a 3d printer and stuff.
02:14:38.000Yeah, it's gonna be really really laser incoming All right, let's see.
02:14:42.000This one just came in, so I'll read this one now.
02:14:44.000Logan Matthew says, Please look up the OBDM podcast on YouTube.
02:14:48.000The host, Midnight Mike, his birthday is tomorrow and he has put in over 15 years building his community.
02:14:53.000As a gift, I thought I could try to get you both in touch.
02:14:57.000The world would be better place with you both had a conversation.
02:15:02.000All right, Midnight Mike and the OBDM podcast.
02:15:05.000Ready to Rumble says, Tim constantly kissing YouTube's arse.
02:15:10.000I mean... Well, I would disagree with that.
02:15:12.000Wait till you see what happens tomorrow.
02:15:15.000Yeah, one of the reasons... I mean, you have me on, which is pretty... I mean, you're taking a principal stand, which is commendable, and you've got to give respect to that.
02:15:44.000There's an old story of, I can't remember it, maybe people in the chat will know the story, but there was like, I think it was like Britain and France or whatever fighting.
02:15:51.000And what one side did was they made it so their arrow notches were really, really thin and small.
02:15:58.000That way their bows, which use a thinner string, could fire back the enemy's arrows at a large notch, but the enemy couldn't fire back their arrows at a small notch.
02:16:52.000So it's like, if you just, you know, if you were like, I absolutely think Joe Biden legitimately won.
02:16:58.000He's the greatest president of all time.
02:16:59.000They'll build facial recognition to tell, but I wonder if in the future when the AI comes and tries and fights us, if sarcasm is going to be how we win.
02:17:07.000Well, I think what would happen is we'll be sitting here talking, and then as soon as you cross the line, the gigantic mech robot will walk up the stairs and go like, DROP THE SARCASM!
02:17:22.000No, I think, uh, there was an Outer Limits episode where they had this thing called the stream, where there were like modems all over the place and it was hooked into their brains.
02:17:29.000And it, it always knew it was like essentially sentient.
02:17:33.000So it'll be more like that, you know, we'll be neural linked in, you know, I'll tell you this.
02:17:36.000A lot of, you're familiar with neural link, right?
02:17:39.000Elon Musk's, you know, everyone's good.
02:17:40.000You know, I think, Luke, you're not going to get it, right?
02:17:46.000I am not intending to surrender any of that.
02:17:49.000I could be remembering this wrong because it's been like 20 years, but my grandpa was talking to me about social security numbers and how he thought it was insane that we got registered with a number with the government and how crazy was that.
02:18:01.000But for me, he was like, you don't care because it's always existed.
02:18:51.000That's what they're going to say to each other.
02:18:53.000You know, the neural link, you can get tracked with a neural link and they'll be like, yeah, I know.
02:18:56.000It's gonna be like, people are gonna get installed via the Home Assistant Neuralink plugin, and they're gonna be sitting there, and they're gonna go, and they're just gonna say like, Neuralink, when was X, Y, and Z, and they're gonna be like, you have one of those, you have the assistant in your brain, you know it's spying on you, right?
02:19:58.000So he went to his neighbor's house and he said that he had seen someone fiddling around under his car and wanted to borrow his neighbor's car.
02:20:04.000And his neighbor said, no, you can't use my car.
02:20:06.000And then, uh, I think it was, what, that night?
02:20:08.000His car was going 70 miles an hour down, was at Wilshire Boulevard in L.A., and hit a tree and exploded.
02:20:12.000Yeah, it was like 2 in the morning, and I think it was after he left the bar, so there was some ideas that maybe he was wasted and, like, depressed, but... That was... Usually, if the CIA's gonna have you killed, they try and make you look depressed and that it was a suicide.
02:20:43.000Um, I could be absolutely wrong about all the Civil War stuff.
02:20:46.000The only thing I can say is, for all I know right now, the lawsuit gets booted, and then all of these Republican states go, oh well, and then it's over, right?
02:21:28.000I don't think anything would happen right away, but what happens in next year when Joe Biden says he's going to order a 100-day mask mandate nationwide or whatever?
02:21:41.000And then that's a really dangerous precedent because it precipitates a loss of confidence in government, and government is nothing but the confidence of the people.
02:21:52.000The commander says Trump should split with the reps and make a Trump party.
02:21:56.000From there, he should take over the Alliance Party, which is centrist, made of 15 smaller popular centrist parties, and appeal to central Democrats and Libs.
02:22:08.000Rita Ho says, CCP has moved forward with their agenda and start to pave the path for Kamala to take over by investigating Hunter Biden.
02:22:16.000Well, what people are saying now about the stories coming out that Hunter Biden is compromised and Joe is that it's, uh, it's not an accident.
02:22:25.000They need a reason to remove Joe Biden and make Kamala Harris the president now.
02:22:28.000So now they're going to be like, oh no, Joe, whatever.
02:22:31.000But I think that's a bit too conspiratorial.
02:22:32.000I think these, I think what really happened is nobody wanted to do the story like you were saying, because they didn't want to be the journalist who hurt Joe Biden.
02:22:38.000And now that the election's over, they don't care.
02:22:39.000And they're going to cover the story because it gets some clicks.
02:22:44.000SoBased says, four Democrat senators sent a letter to YouTube on November 24th, suggesting censorship of election fraud speech on YouTube.
02:22:51.000Government censoring through private business.
02:23:34.000You need a huge investment and there's a big process and you barely get a return on your investment.
02:23:39.000All things said, I haven't responded to anyone about it because I was a little overwhelmed and maybe it's just something we shouldn't focus on right now.
02:23:50.000I said Brocages until I saw the last word and then I understood the reference.
02:23:53.000Says, Tim, you always talk about the Spanish Civil War when the scenario would be more closer to the Russian Civil War where the Bolsheviks owned the cities and the whites were more in the rural areas and past the Urals.
02:25:22.000And what pulled it back together was they had a revolutionary leader, Lee Kuan Yew, who imposed strict nationalism.
02:25:29.000He imposed a national language, which happened to be English, which didn't make anybody happy because it wasn't their native tongue.
02:25:35.000He imposed strict rules, anti-corruption, etc.
02:25:38.000And that was the kind of leadership that built that national unity back up.
02:25:42.000You know, when a country gets so far gone, you eventually get your leak on you or your, perhaps, Napoleon or, you know, any of the other examples of somebody who just sort of has to come back in and restore things as a national unity leader.
02:25:55.000I think with a Trump presidency and a Trump continuation, you get people building a community, a communal identity around the Constitution, around America.
02:26:04.000But if we carry on with the path that was, you know, everything before Trump, you get,
02:26:09.000you know, people are dejected, disconnected. There is constant fighting over, you know,
02:26:15.000identity-based issues. And the interest of the elites is just to enrich themselves as the ship
02:26:20.000crashes, because why bother if the ship's going down? There was someone was referencing Buchanan
02:26:26.000So it may be that we get a four years of a Buchanan like Biden, and then it results in the return of Trump in 2024, and then maybe some kind of civil war, or maybe Trump comes back and fixes it.
02:26:33.000to be a nobody, know nothing president.
02:26:34.000Four years of that's going to drive people just to chaos.
02:26:37.000And what people need to realize too, as I bring this up a lot, is history
02:26:52.000But, uh, when people read about the civil war or any war, any history, they read
02:26:56.000the highlights back to back to back to back to back.
02:26:59.000You know, especially if you read Wikipedia, it's like, this happened, this happened, this happened.
02:27:02.000People gotta realize, man, there was like months and years where nothing happened.
02:27:06.000And I think that's one reason why people don't understand it could happen here and we could be in it right now.
02:27:10.000Because they expect one day to turn the TV on and have a news anchor go, like Anderson Cooper says, ladies and gentlemen, America is in a civil war.
02:27:18.000And that's like, that's it, that's how we know.
02:27:22.000I think what's interesting is, uh, was it seven states seceded from the Union before there was a war?
02:27:27.000And it was actually, I don't know how long it took after the secession, before the fire, you know, the shot at Fort Sumter, before it actually kicked off, and then other states seceded.
02:27:35.000So there was actually a time period where they're like, wow, states have seceded?
02:29:03.000But I was looking at property because I was like, look how, like, not to disrespect Ukrainians, but it's like, if you're a middle-class American, you can get a really fancy pad, man.
02:29:14.000An average reactor says, I am a right-leaning libertarian and I want to be involved in journalism because I developed a moral conviction to fight against the establishment that betrays us in broad daylight.
02:29:37.000I would, I mean, COVID aside, there's an organization called Leadership Institute and they excel at placing prospective journalists into programs and give them a little bit, a little bit of a subsidy to make it worthwhile and put you into different publications.
02:29:49.000So I'd say look into that Leadership Institute.
02:29:51.000Also, we were very lucky because we started before the crackdown.
02:29:54.000Now, imagine starting brand new with all these crackdowns that prevent you from reaching a wider audience.
02:30:02.000Ten years ago, it was still sort of easy.
02:30:10.000Now, you say something wrong about the election, you're done, and no one will ever hear of you.
02:30:16.000Shane says I'm a union worker and my dad is a union representative.
02:30:19.000I try to explain to my dad how Biden is going to hurt us, but he passes me as crazy because he bases his ideology off of mainstream media and what our union overarching authorities say.
02:30:33.000You can say... It depends on the union he's in, but Joe Biden is in favor of free trade agreements, which will likely result in your dad losing his job, so... It's very hard to convince family members, so it's always important not to come at it in a combative way, not to try to force information down his or her throat.
02:30:50.000It's always important to share information that's important, but come at it from a perspective like, hey, I saw this.
02:30:57.000Since you're so much older and wiser, what do you think of this?
02:31:01.000And that worked specifically well on my family as well when it came to a lot of important issues.
02:31:05.000Remember, the way persuasion works is you convince somebody of something that they think they always and already believed.
02:31:12.000In those situations, I would encourage you to get at your dad the same way the Grand Canyon was built.
02:31:17.000You find one little crack, one little thing that he clearly kind of disagrees with Biden on, and you kind of put some water in there, you freeze it and expand it.
02:34:00.000And eventually, once you get good at it, you understand the system and how it works and how you're playing this game.
02:34:04.000The problem is, there are people who are naturally good at doing things like this without realizing it, and that's considered morally acceptable.
02:34:10.000You could just naturally, like, poke someone and be like, well, I think the wars are great and it works for you.
02:34:15.000But people who get really good at it and work at it a long time eventually start to understand what they're doing, and then you're like, man, I'm just pulling people's strings and manipulating, I don't like it.
02:34:25.000So then, I don't want to be involved in that, you know?
02:34:27.000I don't want to work a job where the goal was to find a way to navigate someone's mind to convince them.
02:34:33.000And you can justify it any way you want, but I didn't think it was all that entertaining, you know?
02:34:38.000Anyway, we've gone a little bit over, so I think we'll start to wrap things up.
02:34:41.000Make sure you smash that like button if you haven't already.
02:34:44.000Is there anything you want to mention in your social media, or promote anything, or let people know about what's going on?
02:34:48.000Oh yeah, there's longer-term solutions to the stuff I'm working on, and if you want to stay tuned or get involved, just follow me on... I'm on Twitter at Matt Brainerd.
02:34:56.000I'm on Gab and Parler, so you can find me there.
02:36:15.000I know it's a rare thing for somebody to say, but just follow me on socmed and we'll we have more projects coming up.
02:36:21.000If someone were to donate to your charity, how would they go about doing that?
02:36:24.000I would say go to GiveSendGo.com slash voter integrity and any money that's left over at the end will go to a permanent patriotic voter registration effort and anti-voter fraud effort.