Timcast IRL - Tim Pool - Timcast IRL - TWENTY States File AGAINST Texas, Matt Braynard Joins Discussing Voter Fraud

00:00:00.000 you you

00:00:41.000 my friends it has been a very very spicy past couple of days

00:00:47.000 Last night we got word that the Biden family, Joe Biden's son and his brother, are under federal criminal investigations.

00:00:55.000 Now they're trying to pass it off as though it's just, you know, Hunter says it's about his taxes.

00:00:59.000 But now we actually have confirmation that it actually involves potential money laundering and illicit business dealings with China.

00:01:06.000 Illicit 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.

00:01:15.000 We also had a former family confidant, Tony Bobulinski, who said that he believes the Bidens are compromised.

00:01:22.000 The media covered this story up.

00:01:24.000 Social media banned the story when it came out.

00:01:27.000 NPR said it wasn't news, it was a distraction.

00:01:30.000 And 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.

00:01:39.000 So why did they block us from hearing about it, from knowing about it?

00:01:43.000 Why did they lie?

00:01:44.000 I think this is one of the biggest media scandals in U.S.

00:01:46.000 history, but we actually have bigger news than this.

00:01:50.000 20 states have filed amici briefings joining, or I should say supporting, the defendant states in the Supreme Court request for leave.

00:02:01.000 Okay, so this is, I'm not a lawyer, but let me try and break it down.

00:02:03.000 Texas filed, asked permission to the Supreme Court to file a lawsuit against four states for violating the Electors Clause of the Constitution.

00:02:10.000 Texas 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.

00:02:18.000 So 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.

00:02:29.000 And now 20 states on the other side, blue states, as well as two territories, are filing a brief on behalf of the defendants.

00:02:37.000 What 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?

00:02:45.000 I don't know where all this goes, but I think things are going to get absolutely insane.

00:02:48.000 We 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.

00:02:59.000 We got a bunch more.

00:03:00.000 Tulsi Gabbard proposing a bill effectively supporting Trump's calls to get rid of Section 230.

00:03:07.000 She says that we have to, these companies have to treat people fairly, not censor them.

00:03:13.000 So man, we just got, we got way too much.

00:03:15.000 Facebook is being sued by 48 states.

00:03:17.000 I don't even know how much we'll be able to get to.

00:03:19.000 But, I must say, we have a very, very important guest.

00:03:23.000 We have Matt Brainerd on the show.

00:03:25.000 Matt is, I guess you're the founder of the Voter Integrity Project?

00:03:28.000 That's correct.

00:03:28.000 Do you want to briefly explain just, you know, what it is you do?

00:03:31.000 Sure.

00:03:32.000 Well, 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.

00:03:43.000 I was the director of data and strategy for Trump's campaign in 2016, at least through the primaries.

00:03:48.000 And 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.

00:04:00.000 I didn't start with any preconceived notions of what I'd find.

00:04:03.000 I thought, you know, maybe I'll find nothing and it was a clean election.

00:04:06.000 Maybe I'll find a few things that don't make a difference.

00:04:08.000 Maybe I'll find a lot.

00:04:09.000 And 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.

00:04:27.000 So 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.

00:04:38.000 And 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.

00:04:48.000 It was going to be actionable material.

00:04:49.000 And now that actionable material is in the hands of lawyers and litigators, and perhaps it will have an impact on the outcome.

00:04:56.000 There's ongoing litigation in many states as well as I'm referencing these, you know, 20 states versus 20 states or whatever.

00:05:02.000 So I'm, there's a lot of things I'm pretty sure you can't talk about because it could theoretically compromise something.

00:05:08.000 So, but is it, is it, can you, can you, can you call it evidence?

00:05:14.000 I have submitted evidence of potentially illegal ballots in six states, and actually instantly more states when we look at double voting.

00:05:25.000 So yeah, all that's been submitted, but I can't get too deep into it because it is involving ongoing litigation.

00:05:30.000 But we can speak about generally how the system works.

00:05:33.000 So 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.

00:05:53.000 I'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.

00:06:03.000 I know there's a lot of people who are listening, and they're just like, get more specific, get juicy.

00:06:10.000 You 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.

00:06:17.000 And 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.

00:06:23.000 So that's really important.

00:06:24.000 That being said, we're going to read about what's going on with this, uh, the responses.

00:06:27.000 Oh, I want to, can I jump in?

00:06:28.000 Yeah, of course.

00:06:30.000 I hate to.

00:06:31.000 No problem.

00:06:32.000 All the questions that we can't ask now and answer now, I'm more than happy to answer them.

00:06:37.000 Everything in excruciating detail once the litigation is done.

00:06:41.000 So that's the only, it's not that I don't want to answer, it's just, it's a delay.

00:06:44.000 Right, right, right.

00:06:45.000 Well, I think it's about respecting the courts.

00:06:48.000 Whether 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.

00:07:03.000 But, well, we're going to talk about it.

00:07:04.000 We are.

00:07:05.000 Also joining us again is Luke Rudkowski because he lives in my parking lot.

00:07:08.000 Yes, I corroborated the corroborators as we were finding out all the information.

00:07:13.000 Hi, I am the capo behind wearechange.org, and yes, I live in Tim Pool's parking lot.

00:07:18.000 Thanks for having me on.

00:07:19.000 I have a parking lot.

00:07:20.000 Yes, you do.

00:07:21.000 It's actually a big driveway, but you can fit a trail in it.

00:07:23.000 Ian's hanging out.

00:07:24.000 He's got the crystal ball and the beautiful Aurora Borealis painting.

00:07:27.000 It's gorgeous.

00:07:27.000 It's crushed quartz.

00:07:28.000 Is that what it is?

00:07:29.000 Yeah.

00:07:29.000 Wow.

00:07:30.000 Cool.

00:07:31.000 It's a quartz ball?

00:07:31.000 Yeah, they crush it in a laboratory.

00:07:33.000 That's crazy.

00:07:34.000 Kings 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.

00:07:43.000 Right on.

00:07:44.000 Sour Patch Lids is also producing.

00:07:46.000 I'm here in the corner pushing buttons.

00:07:48.000 So if you haven't already, smash that like button, subscribe, hit the notification bell.

00:07:51.000 You 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.

00:07:57.000 I 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.

00:08:04.000 Check this out.

00:08:05.000 This is the actual document from SupremeCourt.gov.

00:08:09.000 They say, State of Texas plaintiff versus the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, State of Georgia, State of Michigan, and State of Wisconsin defendants.

00:08:15.000 I don't want to read all of these states.

00:08:17.000 I'm going to read all these states, okay?

00:08:19.000 Motion 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.

00:08:33.000 Virgin Islands, Washington.

00:08:34.000 That's about it in terms of the breaking news, but we do have the direct response from these states.

00:08:40.000 And they basically just say that, you know, they have the right to, you know, they're

00:08:45.000 asserting their right to join the defendants, I suppose, and issue a statement on their

00:08:49.000 behalf.

00:08:50.000 So, I mean, that's about it in terms of the breaking news.

00:08:52.000 But we do have the direct response from these states.

00:08:56.000 This is from AMNY.

00:08:58.000 States respond to Texas Trumpists Supreme Court lawsuit seeking to throw out the results

00:09:04.000 For 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.

00:09:20.000 But in these states, the courts overruled in certain circumstances, or the governors implemented new rules without permission or confirmation from the legislatures.

00:09:29.000 Therefore, 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.

00:09:43.000 They're Republican state legislatures.

00:09:45.000 They would very likely vote for Trump, or perhaps they would abstain.

00:09:48.000 And if they did, Joe Biden would not reach 270 electoral votes.

00:09:52.000 We would likely move to a contingent election based on House delegations, in which Donald Trump would win.

00:09:57.000 Of course, if they chose their electors, Trump would win.

00:10:00.000 So 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.

00:10:08.000 I wonder how that will play out.

00:10:10.000 But the four states had to issue their response by today, and they did.

00:10:14.000 And so, AM New York says, four U.S.

00:10:16.000 states 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.

00:10:32.000 I like how they say it's just in Texas's name.

00:10:34.000 It's like not actually Texas doing it.

00:10:36.000 Officials from Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin already have called the lawsuit, which aims to throw out the results, a reckless attack on democracy.

00:10:45.000 The Supreme Court gave the four states a 3 p.m.

00:10:47.000 EST deadline to file court papers.

00:10:49.000 Pennsylvania 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.

00:10:59.000 Quote, 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.

00:11:12.000 The lawsuit is supported by Trump and 17 other states.

00:11:15.000 The Republican president has falsely claimed he won re-election and has made baseless allegations of widespread voting fraud.

00:11:21.000 State election officials have said they found no evidence of such fraud.

00:11:25.000 I want to stop there.

00:11:26.000 Can I ask you about that?

00:11:28.000 About the lawsuit?

00:11:28.000 Well, just about the state election officials saying they've found no evidence of such fraud.

00:11:32.000 Is there anything you can comment in that regard?

00:11:34.000 I'm not going to comment.

00:11:34.000 I'm going to question.

00:11:35.000 I'm going to question what did they do to find it?

00:11:38.000 What efforts did they make to discover it?

00:11:40.000 Because 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?

00:11:48.000 But if I'm sitting there drinking that Red Bull?

00:11:49.000 Yeah.

00:11:51.000 That's my question.

00:11:53.000 What evidence can they provide that they applied scrutiny to what happened?

00:11:58.000 Of course you didn't find anything if you didn't look for it.

00:12:02.000 Rarely is it so blatant.

00:12:03.000 It takes a lot of effort.

00:12:05.000 Our 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

00:12:17.000 Why wasn't the state doing this what what scrutiny did they apply to?

00:12:22.000 I'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.

00:12:32.000 They didn't care.

00:12:34.000 They didn't even want to look at what was given to them.

00:12:36.000 And then what we end up seeing is officials say there was no evidence.

00:12:39.000 There was none.

00:12:40.000 I liken it to, you know, if I said, hey, you guys want to play hide and seek?

00:12:44.000 And then everyone goes and hides.

00:12:45.000 And then I'm like, you guys won just like literally right away.

00:12:48.000 Well, I couldn't find you.

00:12:49.000 It's like, you didn't even get out of your chair.

00:12:51.000 Well, you know, I couldn't find you.

00:12:52.000 To what, to what degree am I obligated?

00:12:54.000 I don't know if you saw, have you been following the lawsuits at all from the Trump campaign?

00:12:59.000 Well, I've been involved with some of them, so.

00:13:01.000 Right, right, right, right.

00:13:01.000 So, of course.

00:13:02.000 But the ones not involving, you know, your project or whatever.

00:13:05.000 One of the things that I just want to say, and feel free to comment on what you can or can't, you know, just ignore.

00:13:10.000 But in Pennsylvania, a judge ruled that the election law in Pennsylvania says there has to be observers.

00:13:17.000 And Trump's campaign said the observers weren't allowed near the ballots.

00:13:21.000 So how are they observing?

00:13:22.000 And the judge goes, well, I don't know.

00:13:23.000 The law doesn't specify distance.

00:13:25.000 So as long as they're in the building, it's good.

00:13:28.000 Which is clearly not good faith or to the spirit of the law is supposed to do.

00:13:33.000 And that's the gist of what we've been seeing across the board.

00:13:35.000 So this whole thing is freaking me out, to be honest.

00:13:38.000 Now that we're seeing all of these states line up, it doesn't matter.

00:13:41.000 Like, you know, I'm gonna put it this way.

00:13:44.000 These 20 states and two territories that are saying, oh, we reject this.

00:13:48.000 It's it's, you know, these four states have said it's an attack on democracy.

00:13:52.000 It doesn't even matter what their opinion on this is, because they're not going to change the minds of 18 other states.

00:13:59.000 We're at a point now where 18 states have said definitively Biden should not be president.

00:14:02.000 I mean, well, I should say effectively said Biden should not be president or the electorate.

00:14:06.000 The Constitution has been violated.

00:14:08.000 Texas's lawsuit says either the Constitution matters or it's just a parchment sitting in the National Archives.

00:14:14.000 That'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.

00:14:22.000 In 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.

00:14:32.000 And these other states could effectively say the same thing.

00:14:35.000 If 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.

00:14:44.000 So that's why I just look at this and I'm like, you know, ultimately it doesn't matter what this one judge said.

00:14:49.000 People have been lining up and they know they're right on both sides.

00:14:52.000 They both say they're right.

00:14:53.000 I happen to think one side is more right than the other.

00:14:55.000 Obviously, we all have our biases.

00:14:57.000 But everyone thinks they're right.

00:14:59.000 Right, 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.

00:15:10.000 We've been very lucky because historically many elections are won by somebody by a pretty good-sized margin.

00:15:18.000 And what happens is when there's a good enough margin, the mismanagement is covered up, right?

00:15:24.000 It's concealed.

00:15:25.000 But when the margins are close, sometimes that mismanagement—and mismanagement comes in other, you know, variety of things.

00:15:31.000 It could be creating clerical errors or preventing potential fraud.

00:15:37.000 So, for example, there's really very little authentication done on mail-in ballots.

00:15:41.000 Essentially zero.

00:15:42.000 And very little authentication done on Election Day ballots.

00:15:44.000 We had James O'Keefe show up in D.C.

00:15:46.000 and take the Attorney General's ballot.

00:15:48.000 They gave it to him.

00:15:49.000 Said, hey, I'm the Attorney General.

00:15:50.000 They used his name.

00:15:51.000 Was that this time around, or?

00:15:52.000 Oh, it was a couple of cycles back, but I don't think it got any better.

00:15:54.000 I can't remember that.

00:15:55.000 Yeah, so the election system has, right or wrong, created a space for suspicion to burn like a wildfire because it's so badly managed.

00:16:06.000 And here's something to think about, right?

00:16:09.000 Potholes on the highway, right?

00:16:11.000 We're kind of used to the government maybe not doing the best job of that.

00:16:14.000 Your mail getting lost.

00:16:16.000 We're all used to that.

00:16:17.000 you know okay yeah postal service this always a joke it's a punchline right or

00:16:20.000 let's say you're Medicare not paying a bill that it should pay and you have to

00:16:25.000 fight with them we're all used to that but one thing that I don't think a

00:16:28.000 democracy can survive is that kind of government those kinds of bad management

00:16:36.000 within the election system or with that kind of incompetence in the election

00:16:40.000 system because that's the thing that allows us to potentially fix all these

00:16:43.000 So we're okay with maybe the potholes don't get fixed, or maybe they mismanage a hurricane, which is horrific, right?

00:16:49.000 But the means we have to fix those problems is the election system.

00:16:53.000 But if that is deemed broken, Well, then you're stuck.

00:16:58.000 Then you can't fix any problem beyond it.

00:17:00.000 I always say, if you want someone to be an anarchist, put him at the DMV for a week.

00:17:04.000 And we saw that with the counting that was going on that showed just, wait, states can't even count?

00:17:11.000 They're taking breaks?

00:17:13.000 What's going on here?

00:17:13.000 So let's address that, right?

00:17:15.000 The 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.

00:17:34.000 When an absentee vote is being counted, they grab the envelope, they look at it, they open it.

00:17:38.000 It takes longer to go through the envelope than it is to have a person walk in, vote, and walk out.

00:17:43.000 So the argument is, when a person walks in and votes and walks out, it's already in the tabulation machine.

00:17:47.000 When they're going through absentee ballots, doing signature verification, it takes a bit longer to tabulate that vote.

00:17:53.000 And thus, it took a lot longer.

00:17:55.000 But 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.

00:18:02.000 And it still took more than one day to do all of this, and these batches came in.

00:18:07.000 So, if you look at, I think like November 4th, at like 1 in the morning, there were massive spikes.

00:18:11.000 Well, 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?

00:18:23.000 I guess the argument is they were barred from doing it.

00:18:25.000 I still don't think it makes sense as to how, in some circumstances, Trump received a tiny fraction of these mail-in ballot dumps.

00:18:33.000 That's the big question that I think needs to be answered.

00:18:36.000 And there was also legal arguments in Pennsylvania before the election asking the government to count the votes that were mailed in early.

00:18:43.000 The government of Pennsylvania argued against that.

00:18:45.000 Well, those Republicans.

00:18:46.000 Yeah.

00:18:47.000 And 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.

00:18:59.000 All 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.

00:19:08.000 I hear you, but each state runs their own election.

00:19:11.000 Exactly.

00:19:11.000 And I can respect that, but what I can't respect is Let me, based off what you just said, let me give people an analogy.

00:19:18.000 Would you be willing to get on an airplane if airlines had a 1% failure rate?

00:19:24.000 1%.

00:19:25.000 I think the answer is a resounding no.

00:19:28.000 Well, there would be no airline industry in that scenario.

00:19:30.000 Because they'd be paying out lawsuits every day.

00:19:32.000 Well, because no one would fly.

00:19:33.000 Right.

00:19:34.000 So, New York Times reported in 2012 that the failure rate of mail-in and absentee voting is between 1% and 2%.

00:19:41.000 If I told you there was a 1% chance that if you mailed in your vote, it would not count?

00:19:46.000 Well, I think a lot of people probably will go, I don't know, whatever, I don't care.

00:19:49.000 But that's a pretty bold bet to make to not having your voice heard in your election.

00:19:54.000 So 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.

00:20:05.000 There'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.

00:20:16.000 A judge actually ordered a new election in Paterson, New Jersey, because they found bundles of mail-in votes from a town over.

00:20:22.000 We now have a whistleblower.

00:20:24.000 Who's come out and said they drove a truckload of ballots from New York to Pennsylvania.

00:20:30.000 I don't know if that's true.

00:20:32.000 You know, witness testimony is often unreliable, but it is still evidence admitted in court.

00:20:37.000 So it needs to be considered.

00:20:39.000 It needs to be investigated.

00:20:40.000 We need to look into these things and not just ignore them.

00:20:43.000 And so I guess I throw it back to what you said earlier.

00:20:45.000 How hard have any of these people actually looked into any of this stuff?

00:20:48.000 Right, right.

00:20:49.000 And, you know, I actually can talk about one court case.

00:20:51.000 I actually won a court case in federal court earlier this year over mismanagement of an election.

00:20:58.000 Because, you know, a lot of these states are doing things they haven't done before.

00:21:00.000 Florida, the mail-in-ballot situation, they have that down.

00:21:05.000 They've got it down.

00:21:06.000 The voters have it down.

00:21:07.000 They know their role.

00:21:08.000 But a lot of these states, because of the pandemic and other reasons, are shifting to things they've never done before.

00:21:14.000 Idaho.

00:21:15.000 Decided they were going to do an all-mail-in ballot primary, right?

00:21:20.000 And I had a candidate there.

00:21:21.000 I was on the ground.

00:21:22.000 And 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.

00:21:31.000 on the deadline day and go ahead and request your absentee ballot.

00:21:34.000 Well, we were identifying our supporters, many of whom didn't know that, and telling them, yeah, go to the website and request.

00:21:39.000 Well, website crashed.

00:21:42.000 Completely went down.

00:21:43.000 Now, rather than owning the problem, right, the Secretary of State fought us in court.

00:21:48.000 We had to sue them in federal court to get them to extend that deadline.

00:21:52.000 And, 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.

00:22:05.000 They're in control of it.

00:22:06.000 And it's what is what put them in power.

00:22:08.000 So getting them to realize that there's serious problems with it.

00:22:11.000 They're like, well, it put me here.

00:22:13.000 I got this job.

00:22:14.000 I've got this power.

00:22:15.000 Why would I want to change it?

00:22:17.000 I think we see that with Republicans and Democrats.

00:22:20.000 Yep.

00:22:20.000 Right.

00:22:21.000 So it's you look at areas that are, you know, deep blue or deep red.

00:22:25.000 And we I had a guy on the show.

00:22:27.000 His name was Billy Prempeh.

00:22:28.000 He's a Republican running in North Jersey.

00:22:31.000 And I think Patterson is part of the district he was running in.

00:22:33.000 And 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.

00:22:42.000 Because they were like, it's too expensive to even bother with a deep blue district.

00:22:45.000 And 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. 0.94

00:22:57.000 But 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.

00:23:04.000 So I get guaranteed reelection.

00:23:05.000 And so do they.

00:23:06.000 And we kind of just chill out on it.

00:23:08.000 It's not a battleground area.

00:23:09.000 Why push it?

00:23:10.000 And that's my opinion on it.

00:23:11.000 There's some evidence that I think it's more of a vicious cycle and that the district looks like no Republican win cause it's D plus 20.

00:23:18.000 So no good Republican run.

00:23:19.000 So the only Republicans that run are bad candidates who ended up losing by 20 points.

00:23:24.000 That's why it's D plus 20.

00:23:25.000 Right.

00:23:26.000 You know, going back in history though, I think, um, you remember a guy named Howard Dean?

00:23:30.000 Vaguely, yes. Well after he lost his presidential race. He took over the DNC. That was a while ago

00:23:35.000 Yeah, well this it but I think the the what I'm getting at is still true is either yee-haw guy. Yes

00:23:41.000 He was a terrible presidential candidate, but a fantastic DNC chair and he did something novel

00:23:47.000 He says look we're gonna have a 50-state plan. We're not letting South Carolina go. We're not letting Alabama go

00:23:52.000 We were gonna invest resources in all 50 states and just a few years after that

00:23:56.000 They retook Congress winning seats in many of these states.

00:23:59.000 So Parties can neglect the area saying, oh, we don't stand a

00:24:02.000 chance there at their own peril.

00:24:04.000 But before you were able to win that district, you had a guy that got a 30% of the vote.

00:24:08.000 And then another guy got 40, and 45, and then 50.

00:24:11.000 And then you built something up there.

00:24:12.000 So I agree with you that mining your own territory, there's certainly something to that.

00:24:17.000 But also, it's just this vicious cycle of ignoring areas that you don't think you can win well.

00:24:21.000 It's self-fulfilling.

00:24:22.000 Yeah, 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.

00:24:44.000 And 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.

00:24:55.000 And that was a Democratic primary.

00:24:57.000 And I'm like, wait, they can't even get this right?

00:24:59.000 New York was jammed up too.

00:25:00.000 Yeah.

00:25:00.000 I can actually give you one good argument for gerrymandering though.

00:25:03.000 So 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.

00:25:11.000 And 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.

00:25:20.000 However, 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%.

00:25:30.000 That's going to breed chaos. 0.99

00:25:33.000 40% of the people feeling like they're not being represented.

00:25:36.000 So there is a good reason for gerrymandering.

00:25:39.000 I just think the actual outcome of gerrymandering is exploitation to manipulate and guarantee seats and jobs and stuff like that.

00:25:45.000 Well, you know, it's funny you bring this up because I actually am a professional gerrymanderer.

00:25:49.000 Oh, there you go.

00:25:50.000 So everyone hates you.

00:25:52.000 For all kinds of reasons.

00:25:54.000 But 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.

00:26:05.000 And I'll be honest with you, I don't think there's a fair way to draw a line.

00:26:09.000 Let's say you draw the line on party, right?

00:26:12.000 Okay, well, that gives you a favorable outcome to party.

00:26:15.000 But what's the alternative?

00:26:16.000 Drawing it based on geography?

00:26:18.000 Well, that gives a favorable outcome to certain geographies.

00:26:21.000 So 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.

00:26:29.000 And 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?

00:26:39.000 Here'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

00:26:49.000 the Republican districts only 40% of the people, 55% of the people, 51%

00:26:53.000 had their choice. So you know that 90% Democrat district has, well those people had

00:26:58.000 their choice. You know they're happier, the district has a higher level of

00:27:02.000 happiness because most of them got their choice for Congress. Yeah the reason I'm

00:27:05.000 very familiar with it is because Dennis Kucinich and Cynthia McKinney bring

00:27:09.000 this up as an example to how they were kicked out of Congress when they

00:27:13.000 had a big popular They were a big kind of populist figures and according to them it was gerrymandering.

00:27:19.000 It 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.

00:27:25.000 Well, remember, the people who drew those lines were also elected by the citizens of those states.

00:27:31.000 They were drawn by state legislators, elected by people.

00:27:33.000 And the thing is, gerrymandering, redistricting, whatever you want to call it, it's like the most vicious political fights you will ever see.

00:27:40.000 And the reason they get so vicious is because the press doesn't pay any attention to it and the public doesn't care.

00:27:44.000 So the long knives come out.

00:27:45.000 No one's afraid to slit somebody's throat.

00:27:48.000 Figuratively.

00:27:49.000 Figuratively, of course.

00:27:52.000 Whereas 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.

00:28:04.000 Will they do something like take 10 zones and then pack all 98% of the Republicans into one zone?

00:28:11.000 And then so there's nine of the zones win Democrat, and then one zone is Republican?

00:28:15.000 Or vice versa.

00:28:15.000 And then so the Democrats have massive power because they stuck all the Republicans into one zone?

00:28:19.000 It happens both ways.

00:28:22.000 You'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.

00:28:31.000 And when you have minority-majority districts, that inherently forces you to pack, because of the way they tend to vote, Democrats.

00:28:39.000 And it can't just be 50%.

00:28:40.000 There's laws, jingles, Supreme Court decision.

00:28:44.000 You basically have to draw a district at least 65% minority.

00:28:47.000 So that's basically a 65% Democrat-packed district.

00:28:50.000 So 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.

00:29:04.000 The Republicans get all the other districts.

00:29:06.000 They work together.

00:29:07.000 So it's a complicated process.

00:29:09.000 Weird system.

00:29:10.000 Yep.

00:29:11.000 But would you consider gerrymandering to be, like, corrupt or bad, like, inherently, or is it just the exploitation of it?

00:29:17.000 Look, I think it's a little bit overstated, the impact it has.

00:29:20.000 I'll give you a simple example.

00:29:22.000 In 1990, when the lines were being drawn after the last census, Republicans had complete control over drawing exactly four districts.

00:29:29.000 Democrats had complete control over drawing, I don't know, two.

00:29:32.000 This is basically you have the both legislatures and the governor.

00:29:34.000 You have complete control.

00:29:35.000 You can draw lines however you want.

00:29:36.000 So Republicans had control of four districts, Democrats had control of like 200 or so, and

00:29:42.000 a couple of others were split.

00:29:43.000 Despite that, two years later, the Republicans captured their first congressional majority

00:29:48.000 in like 50 years or so.

00:29:50.000 Yeah, that was in the 90s, right?

00:29:51.000 But those reliance were only, so what I'm getting at is that it has an impact, but it's

00:29:57.000 not completely dominant.

00:29:59.000 And then back in 2000, Republicans were dominant.

00:30:01.000 They had control over drawing many lines of their own, yet a few cycles later, despite that, Democrats took control of Congress in 2006.

00:30:08.000 So it has an impact, but I think sometimes it's a little bit overstated.

00:30:15.000 And I really don't know what the alternative is.

00:30:17.000 I 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.

00:30:25.000 Forget party, forget race, you are from this town, you represent this town.

00:30:28.000 And I think that's what's most important that we maintain.

00:30:31.000 So let's talk about the Voter Integrity Project.

00:30:34.000 Do you want to just explain what it is and what you did?

00:30:38.000 Sure, so a couple days after the election, I had some ideas about ways to detect potentially illegal ballots.

00:30:46.000 I shared the idea with a few people privately, but no one really took me up on it.

00:30:52.000 I initially did not plan to have anything to do with it.

00:30:54.000 It was just, hey, here's some methods you could use to potentially detect illegal ballots.

00:30:59.000 And I tweeted about it, and at the time I had like 200 Twitter followers or something.

00:31:04.000 And somebody who followed me, who had a little bit of influence, retweeted it.

00:31:09.000 And then somebody else retweeted it, and then it sort of exploded.

00:31:12.000 And people were saying, well, you should set up a GoFundMe.

00:31:14.000 Because in the initial tweet, I said, well, it's probably going to cost about $100K for just the data to do this.

00:31:20.000 And I said, OK, fine.

00:31:21.000 I set up a GoFundMe, and we raised $220,000.

00:31:24.000 Wow.

00:31:26.000 Within 24 hours.

00:31:27.000 And then GoFundMe shut the thing down and refunded everybody their money.

00:31:30.000 Whoa.

00:31:31.000 They lied to a journalist about why they shut us down.

00:31:35.000 And I have the record of this, and we may have more legal matters to discuss in the future.

00:31:38.000 Can you tell us why?

00:31:39.000 Oh, sure.

00:31:39.000 What they said was that we were spreading misinformation.

00:31:44.000 We didn't spread it.

00:31:45.000 All we said was like, here's some tests we want to run.

00:31:48.000 And this is what we're going to do with the money.

00:31:49.000 They told a reporter they shut us down for spreading disinformation.

00:31:53.000 So within a few, you know, I did my homework.

00:31:56.000 We found another crowdfunding site called Give, Send, Go.

00:31:58.000 I can't recommend these guys enough.

00:32:01.000 Their rates are very fair.

00:32:03.000 I knew they weren't going to throw us off.

00:32:06.000 And in fact, they don't make money directly on it.

00:32:07.000 It's just that when you make a contribution to us, they ask you for, hey, do you want

00:32:10.000 to help us out too?

00:32:11.000 And a lot of people do.

00:32:12.000 So we were able to raise much more.

00:32:14.000 When we hit $580,000, I said, look, we've raised enough money to cover what I think

00:32:22.000 are the expenses of this project.

00:32:23.000 We're not asking for any more money.

00:32:25.000 Any money that's left over after we're done will be returned to donors if they like it.

00:32:29.000 Any 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.

00:32:39.000 And in all those cases, no matter where it goes, I'm not personally going to take a penny of it.

00:32:45.000 But despite that, people have continued to contribute.

00:32:47.000 We're almost 100,000 beyond where I said, OK, we have the money to cover this.

00:32:50.000 So you're looking at doing some tests on whether or not ballots may be illegal.

00:32:57.000 Is that correct to say?

00:32:57.000 That's how we started.

00:32:58.000 And I built a team of a couple of people who have similar backgrounds to my own.

00:33:04.000 And we started obtaining raw voter data from states.

00:33:08.000 So 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.

00:33:14.000 Oh, well, you can get indications about how they voted.

00:33:16.000 This is, yeah, it's too bad I don't have a screen or something because I can just pop it open.

00:33:21.000 I know everything that anybody would want to know about every voter in this country.

00:33:25.000 That's at my fingertips.

00:33:26.000 That's kind of creepy.

00:33:27.000 Hey, that's life.

00:33:28.000 And 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.

00:33:34.000 It's kind of difficult because they have very strong privacy laws in Europe, et cetera, but in the U.S.

00:33:40.000 I know everything a campaign would want to know, so in terms of voter contact or voter analysis, it's all there.

00:33:46.000 And in this case, we were able to obtain a voter list from the state.

00:33:51.000 States 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.

00:34:03.000 And 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.

00:34:18.000 It's called strike listing.

00:34:19.000 So 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.

00:34:34.000 Can you tell us some of these tests?

00:34:36.000 What were you proposing to do during this original GoFundMe and this new kind of fundraiser?

00:34:42.000 Well, 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.

00:34:54.000 And 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.

00:35:03.000 Because this is unprecedented.

00:35:05.000 This has not really been done before where you go in-depth after an election.

00:35:09.000 Because usually after an election, the margin is such that there's no doubt.

00:35:12.000 And nobody's got any money left.

00:35:15.000 Honestly, it's Thanksgiving.

00:35:16.000 It's Christmas time.

00:35:17.000 We are unique because we have this long period between the election and when the person takes office.

00:35:23.000 Now, in the UK, day after election, they're in and out of Downing Street.

00:35:27.000 It's like that.

00:35:28.000 Whereas, yeah, it's immediate.

00:35:30.000 That sounds terrible.

00:35:32.000 Well, I think it's already bad enough that we have a couple months.

00:35:35.000 Because if you really wanted to do any kind of hard investigation, we don't have the time to do it.

00:35:39.000 And we have months.

00:35:40.000 Right.

00:35:41.000 Well, rarely have we had the need, I think.

00:35:43.000 And again, it goes back to what I said, the fundamental problem behind a lot of this is that You know, you remember Florida 2000, right?

00:35:53.000 Nightmare.

00:35:53.000 A couple hundred votes, nightmare.

00:35:55.000 The 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.

00:36:03.000 There's not a state, I think, that would escape finding all kinds of flaws.

00:36:07.000 It's just that those states tend to be saved by the victor winning by enough of a margin that it's like...

00:36:13.000 Yes, you know, the errors and potential, if it existed for all, can't overcome that margin, but here we are.

00:36:20.000 In 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.

00:36:27.000 I 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.

00:36:34.000 That'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.

00:36:48.000 I think that was the case in Miami when a judge ruled there was voter fraud down there and threw out a mayor's election.

00:36:53.000 Can you elaborate any more on what the Learn Integrity Project has done so far, or is that off limits?

00:36:58.000 You know, I think my Twitter feed's covered extensively, but we found all kinds of indications of illegal ballots and other anomalies.

00:37:05.000 We presented them on YouTube.

00:37:07.000 It's pretty... I mean, we essentially ran about 38 tests across six different states.

00:37:13.000 And we put our results out there publicly.

00:37:15.000 Just at this point, for the next short period of time, I think I've been encouraged to respect the litigation.

00:37:25.000 With respect to the judges involved in this case, I think they would appreciate it if we weren't litigating in public.

00:37:31.000 Right, but once that's done, we'll crank that laptop up, put a projector up, and start... Start showing stuff?

00:37:38.000 Yeah, within the limits, is that I don't want to dox anybody.

00:37:44.000 But there's ways to get around that.

00:37:47.000 I 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.

00:38:01.000 No, you sidesat me and I showed you some things and you made an evaluation based on that.

00:38:05.000 After I saw it, I went and did some general sleuthing and was able to independently corroborate through different databases and it's very interesting.

00:38:17.000 More than once.

00:38:17.000 So, I think you found something.

00:38:19.000 I mean, I guess we'll see how it plays out in the courts.

00:38:22.000 But I do think it's shocking.

00:38:24.000 I mean, we kicked off this conversation reading through, you know, this response from these other states saying that there's no evidence.

00:38:30.000 And that, to me, is shocking considering I just corroborated something.

00:38:34.000 I'll put it that way.

00:38:34.000 And I corroborated the corroborators.

00:38:36.000 Can we play a middle ground here and say, how excited or surprised were you from some of the findings?

00:38:42.000 We don't have to discuss the findings, but maybe your level of excitement or shock?

00:38:47.000 Well, 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.

00:38:59.000 I 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.

00:39:15.000 Now I've said that publicly so I don't have a problem really repeating that.

00:39:19.000 But there were some things that excited me.

00:39:20.000 And you know, not just about the data, but also the process, this journey of... We'll clarify, too.

00:39:26.000 Like, we're not at the point where that's definitive.

00:39:27.000 It's just signs and indications, perhaps.

00:39:31.000 I'll save that one for later.

00:39:33.000 There you go.

00:39:34.000 Where does this go from here?

00:39:35.000 What's the next process?

00:39:36.000 What are we waiting for?

00:39:37.000 How is this going to play out?

00:39:40.000 Well, right now it's in the hands of the lawyers, the judges, the legislators.

00:39:45.000 I'm just at the point now where I answer questions about my findings and potentially answer other questions as they come up.

00:39:53.000 So, from my perspective, the base research has been done and completed.

00:39:57.000 We're just, you know, giving lawyers affidavits and declarations and potentially testifying here and there.

00:40:04.000 Is this in any way related?

00:40:05.000 I don't know.

00:40:06.000 Feel free to not answer, if you can't.

00:40:08.000 Is this in any way related to the state's filing suits?

00:40:13.000 I'm not going to answer that.

00:40:14.000 I can't answer that right now, but that's a question I'm happy to answer with a brief delay.

00:40:19.000 Right on.

00:40:21.000 Well, it's, it's, it's, uh, I'm happy you're here.

00:40:24.000 Okay.

00:40:25.000 But 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.

00:40:41.000 So, uh.

00:40:42.000 I 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.

00:40:51.000 I 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.

00:40:58.000 People would be calling for... Your beanie and a spike.

00:41:01.000 Yes, my beanie.

00:41:01.000 I take his beanie!

00:41:03.000 He had to do this show!

00:41:05.000 We're observing the Bannon rule here, I see.

00:41:07.000 Oh, definitely, man.

00:41:08.000 Well, listen, listen.

00:41:09.000 YouTube has already... So let's do this.

00:41:11.000 This is actually an excellent opportunity to go into... We have big news with Tulsi Gabbard.

00:41:17.000 It's called the breakup... What is it called?

00:41:19.000 Breakup Big Tech Act.

00:41:21.000 The Bubta. 0.61

00:41:23.000 She's saying these companies should not have 230 protections, liability protections, if they're censoring people.

00:41:29.000 We'll go into this in just a brief second.

00:41:32.000 This is the story from Newsweek.

00:41:34.000 Tulsi Gabbard backs Trump in Section 230 battle, accuses lawmakers of kowtowing to big tech.

00:41:40.000 We've already seen, and this story is from a couple days ago.

00:41:44.000 On YouTube right now, they just announced a new rule about what you can and can't say pertaining to Donald Trump and accusations of fraud.

00:41:52.000 It's really weird.

00:41:53.000 We 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.

00:42:06.000 But I'll try and break it up.

00:42:09.000 I actually spoke with Google on the phone.

00:42:11.000 They said, two criteria must be met for a video to be removed.

00:42:14.000 You must assert that there is widespread voter fraud or error in this election.

00:42:19.000 The next criteria that must be claimed in the same sentence is that it changed the outcome of the election.

00:42:25.000 And that's it.

00:42:26.000 I asked for clarification.

00:42:27.000 What about changing the outcome in terms of like, you know, 0.1 versus, you know, minus 0.1?

00:42:33.000 Like, the winner isn't changed, but the numbers are changed.

00:42:36.000 And they said, I think it's basically like, if you claim Trump actually won because of these reasons.

00:42:42.000 And 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.

00:42:56.000 They said that's okay.

00:42:57.000 Now I'm not entirely convinced that's the case.

00:42:59.000 They 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.

00:43:08.000 I get routinely flagged for like ridiculous things.

00:43:11.000 You know, I did a segment talking about, it was about some policy position.

00:43:15.000 The video was like, you know, Joe Biden plans policy around X and they said it was hate speech.

00:43:19.000 And then what I have to do is I have to actually reach out to Google and they do a secondary review and overturn personally.

00:43:25.000 Because I guess they like me, you know, maybe, maybe they won't ban me.

00:43:28.000 But these, they have third party fact checkers.

00:43:31.000 They're, you know, in a bunch of different countries all over the place because YouTube's massive.

00:43:35.000 And they just, here's the rule sheet and they say yes or no.

00:43:38.000 Isn't that just bizarre though?

00:43:40.000 Totally.

00:43:40.000 That the political discussion in our country is governed by their third world outsourced.

00:43:45.000 That's exactly it.

00:43:46.000 That they found on Fiverr.com.

00:43:48.000 Their Fiverr.com workforce is regulating our political speech. 1.00

00:43:51.000 Or robotic algorithms that take things out of context.

00:43:54.000 Yes.

00:43:55.000 And can't understand sarcasm, so... You know... Well, they also... I don't know if we should even joke about it.

00:44:00.000 We had a really funny joke earlier, and I'm like, I don't know if I could actually say that.

00:44:03.000 They still might... Yeah, I don't even know if I can make the joke.

00:44:06.000 Because the joke might still flag the algorithm.

00:44:08.000 When you get to, like, a point of power, it's just time to stop joking, I think.

00:44:12.000 When you talk about certain things... But there's, like... So...

00:44:16.000 There are certain jokes that are obvious jokes to anybody, but not to an algorithm.

00:44:21.000 Because there's intonation, there's inflection.

00:44:23.000 Oh, we should do a whole show on that.

00:44:25.000 Maybe not on YouTube.

00:44:27.000 So, I'll give half the joke.

00:44:29.000 Of course, Joe Biden!

00:44:31.000 One, he's the greatest president in American history.

00:44:35.000 Already.

00:44:35.000 People are going to hear that and they're going to get I'm being sarcastic.

00:44:38.000 He's not the greatest.

00:44:38.000 So that's the joke I was making in the other episodes with like, Joe Biden doesn't campaign and he gets 8 million votes.

00:44:43.000 And just like, wow, think about the amount of charisma, just exuding an aura.

00:44:47.000 It's almost like, if you're familiar with Dragon Ball Z, how many Dragon Ball Z fans are out there?

00:44:52.000 How are they going to campaign when the neural nets activated?

00:44:53.000 And there's like a blast of energy coming out of his body.

00:44:56.000 Joe Biden stood up on that podium and with one wink to that camera, it was like a

00:45:01.000 nuclear bomb exploded behind him.

00:45:02.000 The charisma was just people sitting in their homes, watching their TV, got knocked

00:45:06.000 back, like stuck against the wall with the amount of charisma.

00:45:08.000 That's how Joe Biden was able to not campaign and win 80 million votes.

00:45:12.000 How are they going to campaign with when the neural nets activated?

00:45:16.000 I have no idea.

00:45:18.000 When we're all linked in, you won't need to because we'll be the Borg, I guess.

00:45:22.000 This is just...

00:45:23.000 You already know who you're going to vote for before they even decide they're going to run.

00:45:26.000 They're going to ban you from the neural net.

00:45:28.000 So you're going to be one of these non-networked individuals, and they're going to frown upon you.

00:45:36.000 You're going to be like outside asking people, just spare a little internet.

00:45:39.000 Can you Google search something for me?

00:45:41.000 Obviously the process will change leading up to technology like that.

00:45:44.000 So maybe we're just in a fluctual process right now.

00:45:48.000 The issue is the unpersoning and the suspension of political discourse and especially by non-American actors. 0.99

00:45:55.000 Check this out.

00:45:57.000 If you go on reddit.com and you go to r slash politics, which is supposed to be, it's basically for American politics.

00:46:06.000 More than half the people who are commenting are probably in Australia, New Zealand, and Europe.

00:46:10.000 Maybe not more than half, but a good portion.

00:46:12.000 So that means Americans are hearing more from foreign opinions on our elections.

00:46:18.000 And American citizens get suspended.

00:46:21.000 So this is what I find is particularly crazy, and I'll use Laura Loomer as an example.

00:46:26.000 She ran, she won her primary in Florida.

00:46:29.000 She's a very controversial figure, but she's very good at getting press attention. 1.00

00:46:33.000 She'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.

00:46:40.000 But on Twitter, you can have 100,000 people from Australia telling us how we should vote, what we should think, influencing our elections.

00:46:47.000 I'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.

00:46:59.000 Are influencing people's opinions in negative ways without understanding our country.

00:47:04.000 That to me is terrifying.

00:47:05.000 Especially when you consider a lot of these big tech platforms.

00:47:09.000 Like the risk we face right now by having this conversation.

00:47:11.000 They've said they'll ban it.

00:47:12.000 Well that's not going to affect any Democrat. 0.99

00:47:14.000 The Democrats are saying Republicans are crazy.

00:47:17.000 But there's evidence and there's discussions to be had. 0.96

00:47:20.000 They could ban us.

00:47:21.000 So that's negatively impacting conversations typically of the right.

00:47:25.000 Yet, if you are Australian and you agree with Democrats, you can say whatever you want, but an American citizen can't. 0.74

00:47:31.000 That's insane.

00:47:36.000 Yeah, I'm absolutely just sick of this landmine system where you have to be careful with every little thing you say.

00:47:43.000 I 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.

00:47:57.000 There's different algorithms.

00:47:58.000 There's different people.

00:47:59.000 There's people in third world countries that are literally hired that have found to have a bias against the LGBTQ community.

00:48:06.000 And 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?

00:48:14.000 And it was a guy who was a religious zealot in a third world country who hated them for what they were.

00:48:19.000 Well, we need to think about the results of what's currently happening with social media.

00:48:24.000 So 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?

00:48:30.000 So the US, relative to Europe and Australia, is actually a bit to the right.

00:48:35.000 And a lot of people keep saying in Europe, America is so far right, the Democrats are considered like a centrist party compared to Europe.

00:48:42.000 And it's like, I don't, I'm not concerned about the opinions of Europeans because they don't understand our system. 0.99

00:48:46.000 They don't live here and they don't under like, there's a lot of things they don't get about our history.

00:48:50.000 Why we have the certain systems we do.

00:48:52.000 It's not like one day we woke up and said, we want to create a broken, weird medical system.

00:48:56.000 They had World War II.

00:48:57.000 We 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.

00:49:03.000 It doesn't apply here.

00:49:05.000 But here, what ends up happening is, Jack Dorsey on the Joe Rogan podcast said, we have to create rules for a global community.

00:49:13.000 And that means people in America who are to the right of people in other countries may offend their delicate sensibilities.

00:49:20.000 So Twitter says, what's in the best interest of maximizing our profits?

00:49:25.000 We don't want just American users, we want European users, so we can't offend European users, so ban those who offend European users.

00:49:31.000 Democrats tend to offend them much, much less than conservatives, so ban the conservatives.

00:49:36.000 Now 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,

00:50:10.000 New York Post got censored and totally wiped off Twitter.

00:50:13.000 No one could even communicate with them.

00:50:14.000 Well, 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.

00:50:25.000 Here's the moral hazard and here's how it was created.

00:50:28.000 Is that they have the ability to censor anyone they want.

00:50:33.000 But they don't have the responsibility for what is published on their site.

00:50:38.000 So they have all the power but none of the responsibility that comes with it.

00:50:43.000 And the way 230 was designed and all these things, you either have one or the other.

00:50:47.000 So 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?

00:50:54.000 Well, 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?

00:51:04.000 So that's a protection that makes sense for T-Mobile.

00:51:06.000 Now if T-Mobile started listening on conversations and saying that's not an appropriate conversation for you to have.

00:51:12.000 Well, you think, well, now they have to accept responsibility for what they're allowing and not allowing.

00:51:16.000 But what these socials have right now is they have all the power and other responsibility.

00:51:20.000 And one of those two things has to go away.

00:51:22.000 The problem is going to continue to get worse.

00:51:23.000 And that's kind of the 230 reform we need is that, look, you are either a publisher and you have responsibility, which is fine.

00:51:30.000 Ban everybody.

00:51:31.000 But then if somebody plots some scheme through your site, well, you're completely on the hook for it.

00:51:35.000 And that's the kind of reform that I think we need to look at.

00:51:38.000 So, 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.

00:51:48.000 To simplify, if you go on Twitter and post a comment or a tweet, that's your speech, not Twitter's.

00:51:56.000 I completely and 100% agree with that.

00:51:59.000 Like, 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.

00:52:08.000 T-Mobile is just a phone company.

00:52:09.000 It's my speech.

00:52:10.000 I said something.

00:52:11.000 If I call people and start defaming someone, you sue me, right?

00:52:13.000 The issue is, as you described it, translating this to Twitter, Or to YouTube, actually.

00:52:19.000 YouTube's statements about what we can or can't say pertaining to the election is an editorial guideline, not a community standard.

00:52:27.000 Now, they've said it was a community standard, but that makes no sense.

00:52:30.000 If 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.

00:52:39.000 Section 230 provides what's called a Good Samaritan provision for moderation.

00:52:43.000 These platforms, like YouTube, are allowed to remove things and not be considered a publisher because it's good-faith moderation.

00:52:50.000 If 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.

00:53:04.000 This is where the problem arises.

00:53:06.000 The language objectionable in Section 230.

00:53:09.000 Define it.

00:53:09.000 That's the problem.

00:53:11.000 Well, Twitter or YouTube would say, we think it's objectionable that anyone would question the election.

00:53:17.000 74 million people would disagree.

00:53:18.000 In 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.

00:53:26.000 So it's more than 74 million.

00:53:28.000 So 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.

00:53:45.000 You gotta change the word objectionable to illegal.

00:53:47.000 Yes.

00:53:48.000 And then you gotta pick what state that's in.

00:53:51.000 Right.

00:53:52.000 And typically the law would say like the state at which the company is registered or whatever.

00:53:57.000 But yes, so that way, There is a challenge there, right?

00:54:02.000 But I think you can define lewd, lascivious, and we're not going to say a challenge in the election is lewd.

00:54:08.000 That makes no sense.

00:54:08.000 We're not going to say it's offensive.

00:54:11.000 You might be able to argue that, but that still kind of doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

00:54:14.000 And a judge might be like, what do you mean it's offensive?

00:54:15.000 No, it's not.

00:54:16.000 Objectionable means anything.

00:54:18.000 And that's the reform we need.

00:54:20.000 We need to get rid of that word. 0.99

00:54:21.000 So lewd, lascivious, like if someone pulls out their genitals? 0.99

00:54:25.000 Well, think about it this way. 0.99

00:54:25.000 Let's say the example I think we were given by one of the guests was a Christian blog. 0.99

00:54:30.000 A website where Christians and Catholics or whatever can come and have conversations and then someone starts posting a bunch of adult activities, right?

00:54:38.000 Well, they're going to be like, we don't want this on our platform.

00:54:40.000 It's not for this.

00:54:40.000 It's so that we can have, you know, our conversations.

00:54:43.000 Then they're a publisher then, right?

00:54:45.000 No.

00:54:45.000 You can remove all that and still be protected because It's clearly not in the spirit.

00:54:49.000 It's a good Samaritan provision.

00:54:50.000 But if you change it to say, if only illegal content, then they couldn't remove that without becoming a publisher.

00:54:55.000 Yes, exactly.

00:54:56.000 Well, so if you get rid of objectionable with illegal, then they could still remove it because lewd, lascivious, filthy, or otherwise objectionable.

00:55:04.000 There's a few other words in there.

00:55:05.000 So the issue, I suppose, is there is absolutely illegal content you could remove.

00:55:11.000 And I think the simple solution that a lot of people have presented is the block function.

00:55:15.000 If you are on Twitter, and someone posts something objectionable, Twitter should just be like, well, you can block them.

00:55:20.000 That's it.

00:55:21.000 I think that advertisers threatening to pull their money is a big impetus for why YouTube's proactively removing content.

00:55:28.000 That's actually the reason they're doing this.

00:55:30.000 And 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.

00:55:41.000 And so they're like, we're removing things.

00:55:43.000 They're worried that advertisers will freak out upon seeing this.

00:55:47.000 And it's typically because YouTube is scared of the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal.

00:55:51.000 The Wall Street Journal targeted PewDiePie.

00:55:53.000 YouTube lost so much money.

00:55:54.000 I would love to see this in court.

00:55:56.000 I would love to see Susan Wojcicki and YouTube sitting there and saying, you can't say the election is a fraud.

00:56:03.000 Unless it's four years ago.

00:56:07.000 So yes, right.

00:56:08.000 You can say, but no, I was told you can't say that.

00:56:11.000 Exactly.

00:56:11.000 I was told that the Hillary Clinton Trump election was considered historic.

00:56:14.000 So long as the election is historic, you cannot question it.

00:56:17.000 You can't say two criteria, the one I explained before.

00:56:20.000 One, if you say there's widespread fraud, and then two, you claim it altered the outcome, that is bannable.

00:56:25.000 But if you said something like an alien invasion caused, you know, change the outcome of the election, that's

00:56:32.000 totally fine.

00:56:33.000 But they'll shadow ban you. 0.98

00:56:34.000 No.

00:56:34.000 Oh, I'm sure they will.

00:56:36.000 I mean, they'll shadow ban you for everything and they'll derank everything, but the point is

00:56:40.000 they will straight remove content if you meet this criteria.

00:56:43.000 But didn't you say there's a bunch of stuff about Hillary getting... 1.00

00:56:47.000 All over.

00:56:48.000 Yeah.

00:56:48.000 I mean, The Atlantic has a video about how the election was stolen.

00:56:51.000 The New York Times, CNN, they have tons of videos about all this stuff.

00:56:55.000 Everywhere all over YouTube.

00:56:56.000 That's the problem.

00:56:58.000 Section 230 has created this... It's almost like...

00:57:04.000 The 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.

00:57:29.000 That's the best way to put it.

00:57:29.000 You're going to have to remove shadow banning too.

00:57:33.000 Shadow 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.

00:57:41.000 The courts could review it.

00:57:43.000 So they could have to submit to an oversight committee.

00:57:45.000 But who's overseeing it, man?

00:57:47.000 That's the problem.

00:57:47.000 You would need the code because the code is meant to affect a result.

00:57:50.000 So the result will be the evidence of the code and the policy of shadow banning.

00:57:54.000 You prove shadow banning exists because shadow banning works.

00:57:58.000 But would it need to be public?

00:57:59.000 Would a company need to publish their proprietary code to prove that they're doing the right thing?

00:58:04.000 Well, no, because if they're doing it, it's evident in the results on what you can see.

00:58:10.000 It won't be the point of the code if it didn't reveal what it was.

00:58:12.000 But the point of shadowbanning is that you can't see it.

00:58:15.000 No, no, but you know shadowbanning is happening.

00:58:17.000 But you don't know.

00:58:17.000 That's the point.

00:58:18.000 No, you do.

00:58:18.000 It becomes banning when you know it's happening.

00:58:20.000 When you don't know it's happening, it's called shadowbanning.

00:58:22.000 There are numerous third-party programs that can verify shadowbanning very, very easily.

00:58:27.000 Like what?

00:58:28.000 So what's the one that everyone uses?

00:58:29.000 The European one. 0.84

00:58:32.000 It's shadowban.eu, I think.

00:58:33.000 And you type in a Twitter name and press enter, and it'll tell you every restriction place in your account.

00:58:37.000 It's that simple.

00:58:38.000 It would be empirically reviewable.

00:58:40.000 The 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.

00:58:47.000 Because I follow people who I believe are shadow banned.

00:58:52.000 It's something you can statistically prove to court and it's pretty much open and shut.

00:58:56.000 Not only that, when they shadow banned, I think, Ronald McDaniel from Twitter search, it was Plainly obvious to literally everybody.

00:59:03.000 But 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?

00:59:11.000 Well, I think you're thinking about YouTube backwards.

00:59:14.000 YouTube isn't necessarily shadow banning, they're algorithmically promoting some content.

00:59:18.000 And de-promoting others.

00:59:20.000 No.

00:59:20.000 Or de-moding.

00:59:21.000 Or not promoting at all, is a better way to put it.

00:59:23.000 On Twitter, it's a reverse chronological feed.

00:59:25.000 Meaning, if I follow you, and you post at 10.59 AM, I should get your tweet in my feed at 10.59 AM.

00:59:31.000 But, sometimes, Twitter shadowbans people and that tweet won't appear.

00:59:34.000 So, on YouTube, if I publish a video, you should get a notification.

00:59:38.000 That's it.

00:59:39.000 YouTube promotes the content, and they choose who they promote.

00:59:42.000 So I actually think, you know, in that sense, YouTube has no obligation to promote me.

00:59:47.000 If 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.

00:59:55.000 If YouTube says, we have identified content that we make sure appears on the front page, think about it this way.

01:00:01.000 BuzzFeed has a community section, or they used to, I don't know if they still do, where anybody can write and it gets posted.

01:00:06.000 But they're not going to put that on the front page.

01:00:08.000 The front page is where their authors and staffers appear.

01:00:11.000 Sometimes I think community posts might, but I don't think so.

01:00:14.000 BuzzFeed 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.

01:00:20.000 On 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.

01:00:32.000 YouTube is a publisher and not a platform.

01:00:35.000 And 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.

01:00:42.000 Yes.

01:00:42.000 And that makes them a publisher.

01:00:44.000 Absolutely.

01:00:44.000 Well, you know, there's a counter.

01:00:46.000 We were talking about Reform Section 230.

01:00:48.000 Unfortunately, Representative Gallup-Gabbard, she's out.

01:00:52.000 She didn't run for re-election, so somebody's going to be taking her seat, and she's done.

01:00:56.000 But there's other means, because you brought up the advertising angle.

01:00:59.000 One 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.

01:01:09.000 I 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.

01:01:20.000 Wow.

01:01:20.000 That's a bold law though.

01:01:25.000 Is it or isn't it?

01:01:26.000 Because it's pretty straightforward, and it's very justifiable.

01:01:30.000 In the state of South Carolina, let's say I was living there, I'm a taxpayer, right?

01:01:34.000 And I'm funding the government.

01:01:35.000 Do I want that government handing money to buy advertising?

01:01:38.000 You're saying the government can't buy advertising?

01:01:40.000 The government cannot buy advertising.

01:01:42.000 And politicians?

01:01:44.000 Well, I don't know about elected officials.

01:01:46.000 That's more of a free speech issue.

01:01:47.000 But any government agency, because they spend a lot of money on these socials.

01:01:51.000 They promote advertising all of a sudden.

01:01:53.000 No government agency within the state is allowed to spend money if they censure the speech of our constituents.

01:01:58.000 I'm paying money to the state government.

01:02:00.000 YouTube or Twitter is banning me because I said, I don't know, there's only two

01:02:04.000 genders or whatever. And they'll ban you from that. Yeah, right. And then they're giving, 1.00

01:02:08.000 my money's going from the state to Twitter. That's unconscionable because they're censoring my legal speech. Okay, upon

01:02:14.000 clarification, you are 100% correct and I think every state should implement that. Of

01:02:18.000 course, will any of I'm not totally convinced.

01:02:21.000 Maybe.

01:02:21.000 I believe that... I'm working on some projects in the upcoming year.

01:02:24.000 I think that that will be on the agenda.

01:02:25.000 I 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.

01:02:43.000 They just have to establish that standard.

01:02:45.000 And it's like, well, You know, the only thing is...

01:02:47.000 But then how do they determine which falls under the criteria?

01:02:50.000 Would someone bring a complaint to the state saying, so you know, you'd go there and say,

01:02:54.000 hi, I was banned by Twitter for this.

01:02:57.000 And they would say, therefore, by this one tweet, all advertising is canceled to Twitter.

01:03:00.000 I think that the legislation could work around that to fundamentally get at the general idea

01:03:07.000 is that they may only have to cite the policy of Twitter saying that that's what they do

01:03:12.000 or a well-publicized case.

01:03:14.000 And 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?

01:03:23.000 So no, I think it was a bathroom or something like that.

01:03:26.000 I think it was gay marriage.

01:03:28.000 I don't want tax dollars going to financing some of these companies that clearly do have a bias and do have an agenda.

01:03:38.000 Another 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.

01:03:51.000 They could choose to advertise on, let's say, the Alex Jones show, or they could exclude them.

01:03:56.000 Just 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.

01:04:02.000 military, politician ads on my channel, which I did before when I was still in the partner program.

01:04:08.000 Advertisers 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.

01:04:19.000 You could just block them.

01:04:21.000 Imagine 10 years ago, someone listening to your phone calls and shutting off your phone service because they didn't like what you said.

01:04:27.000 This is the society that we're going to.

01:04:30.000 It's dangerous, and there's so much power by these individuals that needs to be checked immediately.

01:04:35.000 Well, you know what?

01:04:35.000 Where 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.

01:04:45.000 The 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.

01:05:05.000 Because honestly, if no advertiser ever threatened to pull ads from a social media network, I don't think Jack Dorsey or those guys would.

01:05:12.000 But they could just easily say, okay guys, if you're coming at me, we're just going to make sure we never advertise.

01:05:18.000 But hold on, you're missing one extra component.

01:05:20.000 After 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?

01:05:33.000 And so what happens is, they'll get a bunch of emails, and I've seen these threats.

01:05:38.000 We were putting on a speaking event last year, and Antifa called, self-identified anti-fascists threatened to burn the theater down.

01:05:45.000 So naturally, these people freak out.

01:05:47.000 But 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.

01:05:54.000 So what happens then is this company goes, I got all these emails.

01:05:57.000 They then told me I was doing something wrong.

01:05:59.000 They then said they're going to send it to the press.

01:06:01.000 One of these activists, I mean, they all work in media, they got jobs there, will then be like, ooh, here's a juicy story.

01:06:07.000 And 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?

01:06:25.000 Is this a known thing?

01:06:26.000 Something to that effect?

01:06:27.000 And 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.

01:06:30.000 Because 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.

01:06:38.000 The other thing that happens in this is that if conservatives do the same thing, you know what the journalist will write?

01:06:44.000 A hoax campaign by fringe far-right extremists targeted this company and they valiantly defied them.

01:06:50.000 Because 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.

01:06:59.000 And I think that companies like Vanguard, State Street, and Black... I think it's BlackRock is the name of them?

01:07:05.000 Those three largest investment firms in the world own 20% of Alphabet or Google.

01:07:10.000 So 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.

01:07:23.000 These companies own 8% of Apple, 8% of Microsoft, 8% of Google.

01:07:28.000 Yeah, BlackRock is one of the largest asset management firms in the world.

01:07:32.000 They have about $7 trillion, and they just recently started investing in the Chinese stock market.

01:07:37.000 So literally, people's pensions and retirements and money in their bank account literally is investing into China right now.

01:07:43.000 And the Federal Reserve is bailing out BlackRock with any loss they have.

01:07:47.000 The Federal Reserve is just making sure that they get covered.

01:07:50.000 Socialism for the super rich.

01:07:51.000 When they make a profit, they get to keep all their income.

01:07:54.000 They lose, Federal Reserve literally steps in and is funneling money into them.

01:07:58.000 That's a big institution that we should talk about.

01:07:59.000 Let'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.

01:08:10.000 Hunter 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.

01:08:20.000 This story was suppressed, was censored and blocked across social media.

01:08:25.000 NPR said it wasn't really news, it was a distraction.

01:08:28.000 Politico said, in fact, 50 intelligence officials, former intelligence officials said it was Russian disinformation.

01:08:33.000 CNN said the same thing and so did MSNBC.

01:08:35.000 And now Politico has the gall to publish the story that, oops, Hunter Biden.

01:08:41.000 Justice Department's interest in Hunter Biden covered more than taxes.

01:08:44.000 So here we finally get it.

01:08:45.000 And 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.

01:08:56.000 Revelations that the American people needed to know about before they cast their ballots.

01:09:01.000 And 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.

01:09:12.000 Think about that right now.

01:09:13.000 In the timeframe we are in, we are being told Vice, uh, former Vice President Joe Biden is the President-elect.

01:09:20.000 He's not until January 6th.

01:09:22.000 The official, uh, you know, YouTube has said that there's enough electors to, you know, determine that he is, and it's whatever.

01:09:28.000 On January 6th is when, officially under the Constitution, we get our President-elect.

01:09:33.000 We're sitting here being told that's the case.

01:09:35.000 And 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.

01:09:42.000 And we're telling you now because we want you to sit here and wait.

01:09:45.000 Wait for a month knowing that we royally you over. 0.90

01:09:51.000 And 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. 0.76

01:10:00.000 I think Twitter censoring the New York Post was the most scandalous thing they've ever done.

01:10:04.000 Yeah, and it's important to note here, the New York Post was the one that released the story.

01:10:08.000 They're the ones who came out and said, hey- The oldest newspaper in this country.

01:10:12.000 Yup.

01:10:12.000 And then what was the response?

01:10:14.000 The mainstream media obfuscated it, ignored it, laughed at it, made up total lies out of nowhere.

01:10:19.000 No evidence needed.

01:10:20.000 50 former intelligence officials say it's Russian disinfo.

01:10:23.000 Exactly.

01:10:23.000 It's Russian interference.

01:10:25.000 And literally, there's no merit.

01:10:27.000 There's no evidence.

01:10:27.000 There was no data.

01:10:28.000 There's no documents.

01:10:29.000 There was absolutely nothing.

01:10:30.000 Do you know there's photographs of Hunter Biden getting off of Air Force Two?

01:10:35.000 Yeah.

01:10:35.000 And it's not just Hunter Biden.

01:10:36.000 It'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.

01:10:49.000 We got the story right here from the New York Post.

01:10:50.000 Yep.

01:10:51.000 The feds are probing Joe Biden's brother, James, report says.

01:10:55.000 It is the Biden family.

01:10:56.000 And Tony Bobulinski, a former confidant of the family, said in no uncertain terms that he believes the Biden family is compromised by China.

01:11:05.000 So they suppressed this story.

01:11:07.000 And 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.

01:11:15.000 Where 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.

01:11:23.000 But the media suppressed the news and helped Joe Biden, a corrupt politician, win.

01:11:31.000 And now what are Americans supposed to do when they come out with this information?

01:11:34.000 I'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.

01:11:41.000 But 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.

01:11:51.000 It wasn't even that, like, MSNBC didn't run a story on it.

01:11:55.000 Twitter took, they deleted stories about it.

01:11:58.000 They suspended the New York Post's Twitter account for weeks.

01:12:03.000 So they couldn't report anything because they dare oppose the machine.

01:12:05.000 And they told the New York Post, delete the tweet, delete the article, you'll get your account back.

01:12:11.000 They didn't.

01:12:12.000 They 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.

01:12:29.000 Yes.

01:12:30.000 He said, who built Biden's wealth?

01:12:32.000 And then everyone laughs and he goes, got it.

01:12:34.000 Yeah.

01:12:34.000 Specifically talking about Hunter and his son and Trump's criticism of it, which is major.

01:12:40.000 Not to gild the lily here, but we actually had this exact situation in reverse not that long ago, but the media reacted very differently.

01:12:49.000 You may recall when Sarah Palin was the vice presidential nominee, her emails were hacked and leaked.

01:12:56.000 Newspapers assigned reporters around the clock to go through every single one of them and report on every single possible detail.

01:13:03.000 Now, they didn't find anything at all because it's completely clean.

01:13:05.000 It's just, you know, dance recitals and whatever for kids.

01:13:08.000 But they went armpit deep in that.

01:13:10.000 Whereas now, the laptop shows up, right?

01:13:15.000 Legally, the possession of the guy who shared it, the shop owner, he legally owns that laptop because of the lien.

01:13:20.000 Biden didn't pay it off.

01:13:22.000 And 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.

01:13:34.000 And no journalist wanted to be that one journalist who came out and reported this story and potentially threw the election back to Trump.

01:13:40.000 The peer pressure among them was so strong.

01:13:42.000 I remember communicating with journalists just in a couple weeks leading up to the election.

01:13:47.000 I'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.

01:13:55.000 Not laptop bad, but in that realm, right?

01:14:00.000 And 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.

01:14:08.000 It clearly is.

01:14:10.000 We can't, we can no longer suffer under the illusion that the media's, you know, some kind of non-bias.

01:14:15.000 The referee here, it's almost redundant.

01:14:20.000 It's almost tired of hearing these people making the case that, oh, look at what, you know, of course, you know, the double standard.

01:14:24.000 Yeah.

01:14:25.000 It's like WWE, right?

01:14:27.000 Where 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?

01:14:34.000 It's just not real.

01:14:35.000 Right.

01:14:35.000 The New York Times is not a newspaper, it's a PR agency for hard-left Democrats.

01:14:40.000 Yes.

01:14:41.000 It's a PR agency.

01:14:42.000 So is CNN, MSN, they're PR agencies.

01:14:46.000 So, anyone, feel free to answer this.

01:14:47.000 If 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.

01:15:13.000 Would 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.

01:15:19.000 It's not about the election.

01:15:20.000 As divisive as Trump was, I would have believed you.

01:15:23.000 What about you guys?

01:15:24.000 I 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.

01:15:32.000 Not somewhere where states are going after each other.

01:15:34.000 When I was talking about the potential for conflict, people kept saying the states will never be against each other.

01:15:39.000 It makes no sense.

01:15:41.000 And now they are.

01:15:41.000 I bring this up because The media does not represent the people.

01:15:47.000 They represent their side.

01:15:49.000 We have states aligned against states.

01:15:51.000 20-20 plus two territories against 18 on the other side and the president.

01:15:56.000 You have a media apparatus that is lying left and right about everything and the big tech companies defending those lies.

01:16:02.000 Dude, I gotta amend my statement.

01:16:03.000 I would have thought you were fear-mongering.

01:16:05.000 There's no way I would have believed you.

01:16:06.000 I would have been like, Tim, come on.

01:16:08.000 That's excessive.

01:16:08.000 People I remember earlier this year. It's funny. What's funny to me is you know there's a Tim pool bingo card

01:16:15.000 You know it's like when Tim pool says something take a drink because there's like a handful of things

01:16:18.000 I will bring up Civil War was one of them Yeah, and and so when I mentioned on the show

01:16:23.000 I think you know two months ago that I think I've talked about Civil War in specific videos

01:16:29.000 It doesn't a couple dozen times and in passing maybe a couple hundred times

01:16:33.000 I had these leftists you know put up all these you know claims saying Tim pools lying

01:16:37.000 He's obsessed with Civil War whatever and accused me of like you know just fear-mongering or whatever

01:16:42.000 And it's like, my response was, the narrative started with a Princeton professor who was a Democrat, who said, we are in a cold Civil War.

01:16:50.000 And I was like, wow, that's crazy.

01:16:51.000 So I talked about it.

01:16:52.000 We 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.

01:17:05.000 And the aggregate analysis, like when they averaged out everyone's opinions, it was like a 35% chance.

01:17:11.000 And then we saw the street fights, we saw Charlottesville, we saw all of this chaos and conflict. 0.59

01:17:15.000 And 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!

01:17:29.000 You know, I had people telling me that the Proud Boys fighting Antifa would stop there.

01:17:33.000 They're like, you don't get it, man.

01:17:34.000 You think that this is gonna escalate?

01:17:36.000 It's just the Proud Boys and Antifa.

01:17:38.000 They're fringe groups.

01:17:39.000 And I said, what happens when people who know them, Who know the Antifa guy, hear the story about what happened, and then blame the right.

01:17:45.000 And the people who know the Proud Boys.

01:17:47.000 So a Proud Boy goes home, he's got a black eye, and he says, oh, these Antifa guys attacked me.

01:17:50.000 Now his friends hear it.

01:17:51.000 It spreads to family and friends.

01:17:52.000 Then what do we see in New York?

01:17:54.000 Regular New Yorkers were throwing bricks and rocks at cars flying Trump flags.

01:18:00.000 And a woman went up to a vehicle and pepper-sprayed children. 1.00

01:18:04.000 And they still say to me, yeah, but that's just regular people fighting.

01:18:07.000 And then I say, but listen, now it's going to the highest levels. 0.88

01:18:09.000 They're trying to impeach the president on ridiculous, meritless grounds.

01:18:13.000 They have put a former general in the crosshairs of prison, Michael Flynn.

01:18:18.000 This 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.

01:18:26.000 And when one side, when the DOJ said, we're going to get rid of this, the judge said, no.

01:18:31.000 You 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.

01:18:41.000 I don't know where this goes, and maybe it stops right now.

01:18:44.000 I'm just saying.

01:18:45.000 I think because of the context, it's not as bad as it seems with the pandemic.

01:18:48.000 People are nuts because they've been locked up.

01:18:50.000 They don't hate each other, really. 0.98

01:18:52.000 Charlottesville.

01:18:54.000 There was no pandemic.

01:18:57.000 Yeah, 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.

01:19:04.000 Only a few months ago, a man stalked two Trump supporters and put two bullets in his chest.

01:19:08.000 Like, 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.

01:19:17.000 Or strength, yeah.

01:19:18.000 Well, it depends.

01:19:19.000 The government decides what protests to crack down on, and they have been selective about that.

01:19:23.000 When it comes to a particular protest they like, they let it happen.

01:19:25.000 If they don't like the protest, they crack down on it.

01:19:27.000 Do you think... So listen, I want to be very clear here.

01:19:32.000 At 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.

01:19:43.000 Then it happens. 0.95

01:19:44.000 And they say, well, Tim's still crazy.

01:19:46.000 Then 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.

01:19:54.000 Or, you know, Michael Flynn, they're trying to lock up a general.

01:19:57.000 That'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.

01:20:07.000 I mean, this is some highest level stuff all the way down to the lowest level.

01:20:11.000 My 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.

01:20:19.000 But I can say for the time being, I was right about the escalation.

01:20:22.000 Every step of the way.

01:20:23.000 There's an ominous parallel for you.

01:20:26.000 I'm not sure where it goes.

01:20:27.000 The division in this country is very dangerous.

01:20:31.000 But you may recall the last time, there was a civil war in this country.

01:20:34.000 and you may recall that, just look at the language, there were two sides, right?

01:20:39.000 What was it, how would you define the two sides?

01:20:41.000 There were the what states and the what states?

01:20:44.000 The pro and anti-slavery.

01:20:45.000 Right.

01:20:46.000 Um, no.

01:20:48.000 Now look at where we are now.

01:20:49.000 Have we developed that terminology all over again?

01:20:52.000 Another dichotomy?

01:20:53.000 What is it?

01:20:54.000 Red states and blue states.

01:20:56.000 We'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...

01:21:14.000 Now we've got a new phrase to divide ourselves, just like the Mason-Dixon slave states, free states.

01:21:20.000 We have a new dividing terminology that was not around like in the 80s or 90s.

01:21:25.000 There was South Carolina, Kansas, Georgia.

01:21:27.000 Sometimes the Democrat won them, sometimes they didn't, but now we have this firm division.

01:21:30.000 We have blue states, we have red states.

01:21:33.000 And there's more.

01:21:34.000 People don't understand what a civil war is because they're tainted by American history.

01:21:39.000 In American history we had states which were part of a union and so there was an alignment on some issues and not.

01:21:45.000 In 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.

01:21:55.000 In the United States, you actually had a secession and then the Union saying, we're not going to let the country break apart.

01:22:01.000 The South wasn't necessarily trying to take over the North. 0.86

01:22:04.000 They were trying to get into DC to effectively end the war, but they wanted their states to be out of the Union.

01:22:08.000 Very different from what we've seen in perhaps the Spanish Civil War.

01:22:12.000 One 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.

01:22:25.000 We have, as I mentioned, 18 versus 20 states right now.

01:22:28.000 And I'm sure many people on the left and many of these people have repeatedly said, nothing's happening.

01:22:33.000 Over and over again, as things have escalated, I'll say it again, maybe it stops here.

01:22:37.000 Okay?

01:22:38.000 But it's crazy to me that from two years ago till today, they kept saying it won't happen, it won't happen, and it keeps getting worse.

01:22:44.000 But here's the most important point.

01:22:46.000 A hashtag was trending today on Twitter.

01:22:48.000 Seditious17.

01:22:49.000 An Esquire magazine has written this article.

01:22:52.000 The Republican Party is now a seditious organization.

01:22:55.000 These 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. 1.00

01:23:03.000 They are now officially stating that all of these states are seditious. 0.98

01:23:07.000 That's like some crap news organization. 0.98

01:23:09.000 Esquire magazine? 0.99

01:23:10.000 Yeah, somebody owns that trying to make a bunch of money off of it.

01:23:13.000 It doesn't matter.

01:23:14.000 The sentiment now exists.

01:23:16.000 He already mentioned, you know, Matt mentioned red and blue states.

01:23:19.000 The tribes basically exist.

01:23:21.000 There have been attempts at breaking down what the left and the right is, and it makes no sense because policy agreements don't define it.

01:23:27.000 Policy-wise, on economics, I'm actually decently left.

01:23:31.000 But in terms of cultural issues in the culture, where I'm clearly right.

01:23:34.000 So where am I?

01:23:35.000 A heterodox, I suppose.

01:23:36.000 But clearly, there is a dividing line between the factions.

01:23:39.000 Both are calling each other traitorous and evil.

01:23:42.000 And I just gotta stress this, you know, to the utmost degree when people talk about this.

01:23:47.000 Has 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.

01:23:56.000 Like, that right there should be a huge indicator that something is seriously going wrong in this country.

01:24:01.000 They said that Donald Trump, when he had the rallies chanting, lock her up.

01:24:04.000 That's terrifying.

01:24:05.000 They're gonna go after a political rival like that. 1.00

01:24:07.000 And then it was Michael Flynn.

01:24:09.000 Who 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.

01:24:18.000 Is that correct?

01:24:19.000 Yeah, so of course.

01:24:20.000 He's the one that whistleblowed.

01:24:21.000 He'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.

01:24:29.000 And 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?

01:24:41.000 You divide and conquer the population.

01:24:43.000 Fifth generational warfare.

01:24:44.000 Yeah, and that's why I've been talking about this for 10 years.

01:24:46.000 I've been saying, watch out for this hyper-partisan nonsense bullcrap that's leaving truth and any kind of logic out of the door.

01:24:53.000 We have to, more than ever, keep an open mind.

01:24:56.000 We have to, more than ever, pay attention to the truth that matters.

01:24:59.000 But it doesn't matter to the special interests that of course bastardize it to push this larger context war

01:25:04.000 against us the point is There is no truth

01:25:07.000 Clearly I think one side is more correct than the other and we run the rest of eating band for even having his opinions

01:25:13.000 What I'm saying is on the left They're under the impression that Donald Trump is illegitimate 0.97

01:25:18.000 because he was propped up by Russia and that he's a corrupt criminal 0.85

01:25:22.000 Enterprise and Bill Barr is his hatchet man Clearly not.

01:25:26.000 And 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.

01:25:34.000 Be careful not to fall into the trap of left and right.

01:25:37.000 It's not left or right.

01:25:37.000 Those are tribal indicators.

01:25:39.000 They don't mean anything anymore.

01:25:39.000 But when you just said those on the left, that was you falling into it.

01:25:43.000 No, it's a tribal indicator.

01:25:44.000 Yeah, it's you giving into the brainwashing without realizing it.

01:25:48.000 If you sit on camera with 100,000 people... You misunderstand.

01:25:52.000 No, I fully understand.

01:25:53.000 It's easy to become the demon that we fear.

01:25:56.000 So we should not be talking about the left and the right and the red and the blue and the Republicans.

01:26:02.000 We're all one people.

01:26:04.000 Sure, but they clearly exist and are easily identifiable.

01:26:08.000 Everyone knows what I mean by the left.

01:26:09.000 So when we had Jen Perlman on the other day, she was very lovely.

01:26:12.000 She was awesome to talk to.

01:26:12.000 We disagreed on some issues.

01:26:14.000 And she said, I'm what the real left is, the economic left.

01:26:17.000 I agree.

01:26:17.000 Economically, she supports cooperative markets versus competitive markets.

01:26:21.000 It's very left in terms of a political compass sense.

01:26:23.000 But in terms of what people in the chat were especially critiquing is the left Doesn't mean the same thing as it used to.

01:26:30.000 It's now just tribal indicators.

01:26:33.000 Red versus blue, left versus right.

01:26:35.000 And although you can look at the left and see that there are some people who aren't super woke, but still align with them.

01:26:43.000 And 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.

01:26:49.000 The separation, I think, is built upon Are you a follower of what Michael Malice calls the cathedral?

01:26:59.000 The establishment system?

01:27:01.000 Or are you an independent individual who seeks out information on your own?

01:27:07.000 Both sides have independent freethinkers.

01:27:09.000 The right, in my opinion, and again, this is my bias, tends to have more independent free thinkers.

01:27:14.000 It's why you get people who used to be left walk away and not the other way around.

01:27:19.000 Although you sometimes get people who are, you know, voted for Trump and then say, oh no, I reject that.

01:27:23.000 I'm left now.

01:27:24.000 It happens.

01:27:25.000 On the left, you have people who watch the mainstream media and have no idea what they're talking about.

01:27:29.000 On 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.

01:27:35.000 Granted, on the right, you get people who go too far and read crazy, you know, conspiracy theories, and then they kind of lose it.

01:27:41.000 But I don't think that's the majority.

01:27:43.000 Mainstream news, as you mentioned, is essentially functioning as a PR apparatus for the hard-left Democrats.

01:27:51.000 It's been weaponized.

01:27:53.000 Well, you know, there's a bunch of different reasons why this has happened.

01:27:58.000 And I can talk about algorithmic manipulation.

01:28:01.000 So I wanted to cover a story.

01:28:02.000 I'll let you guys in on a secret.

01:28:05.000 In 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.

01:28:19.000 What 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.

01:28:26.000 It immediately gets 100,000 shares.

01:28:29.000 Because of that, Facebook says, this is a hot link, keep showing it to people.

01:28:34.000 But eventually the breaking news doesn't really cut it anymore because everyone knows Trump did a backflip.

01:28:38.000 What do they do?

01:28:39.000 They change the entire article to an analysis piece about how Trump is racist to give it an evergreen longevity outside of breaking news.

01:28:46.000 So that while Facebook is promoting this hot news story, instead of having the link die, it gets picked back up and survives.

01:28:53.000 That's huge, right?

01:28:55.000 Right.

01:28:55.000 So 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.

01:29:07.000 You 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.

01:29:19.000 I think Michael Malice describes it as the red pill is you've awoken to the reality outside of corporate controlled media narratives.

01:29:26.000 If you watch mainstream news, you're getting contradictory information every other day that makes no sense.

01:29:32.000 So people end up thinking crazy things.

01:29:34.000 But 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.

01:29:40.000 But people who watch CNN were told it was Russian disinfo.

01:29:44.000 What 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?

01:29:51.000 I 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.

01:29:55.000 So now those people who are convinced it was Russian disinfo are now being told by the very same people.

01:30:00.000 Actually, we were the ones who uncovered it in the first place.

01:30:03.000 Either 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.

01:30:13.000 Tim, don't you know we've always been at war with East Asia? 0.92

01:30:16.000 Yeah.

01:30:17.000 Well, also, this back and forth also makes people very stupid. 0.98

01:30:21.000 It's a 1984 reference. 0.99

01:30:22.000 Oh, OK.

01:30:22.000 Oh, yeah.

01:30:23.000 You got it when I said it the first time.

01:30:25.000 Sorry.

01:30:26.000 No, 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.

01:30:40.000 And I think it's very clear.

01:30:41.000 I 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.

01:30:53.000 There is a force.

01:30:54.000 There'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.

01:31:03.000 Those 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.

01:31:16.000 There'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.

01:31:25.000 But the most important aspect is to first understand that it's happening before even pointing fingers at who's doing it.

01:31:30.000 Well, it's that division that we see being encouraged in so many different places, causing division, breaking national unity.

01:31:42.000 I 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.

01:31:55.000 And that there says everything, because everything that we've seen, whether you have people disrespecting our—what do we have that unifies us, right?

01:32:03.000 The flag, right?

01:32:04.000 So you want to create division around the flag?

01:32:06.000 Have people kneel or be disrespectful during the national anthem, right?

01:32:10.000 That's dividing people further.

01:32:11.000 Taking our national things that unify us and bringing us apart of them.

01:32:15.000 Tearing down old monuments or disrespect or rewriting history to cast our founding fathers as villains.

01:32:21.000 The things that are uniting us are the things that are most under attack.

01:32:25.000 And 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.

01:32:41.000 And I find that's a very clean line among the different ways of seeing things and thinking things.

01:32:47.000 I disagree a bit.

01:32:49.000 I've heard throughout the past several years of the culture war about what it's really about.

01:32:53.000 I've heard people say it's nationalists versus globalists.

01:32:55.000 I've heard people say it's libertarian versus authoritarian or postmodernist versus, you know... Anti-postmodernist.

01:33:00.000 Anti-postmodernist.

01:33:01.000 And I don't think any of these cleanly describe what's happening.

01:33:05.000 I think it's just world perspective.

01:33:08.000 It's your echo chamber, I suppose.

01:33:10.000 And 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.

01:33:20.000 You think it's dangerous and it's painful, but when you pass through it, you see there's freedom on the other side.

01:33:24.000 It was something like that.

01:33:25.000 So you have people, it's the allegory of the cave, who live in the cave and people who don't.

01:33:30.000 I 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.

01:33:41.000 It's kind of strange.

01:33:42.000 And 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.

01:33:51.000 So not necessarily postmodernist thinking, but that could be a strong indicator.

01:33:56.000 I started to fall into postmodernism really hard when I was like, I'm creating reality with my thoughts.

01:34:02.000 We are, you know, controlling our reality.

01:34:04.000 In like 2008, 9, I really, but then something I was able to kind of pull out of it.

01:34:08.000 I know that it's not a deep, dark pit.

01:34:11.000 Check it out.

01:34:11.000 I want to talk about this link changing thing at a different time that you talked about.

01:34:16.000 This is a huge, that's a big deal.

01:34:17.000 And it was killed by a guy who now works for the New York Times.

01:34:20.000 We should probably make it illegal at some point.

01:34:21.000 Another thing that I really...

01:34:23.000 Just let me go back real quick.

01:34:24.000 Yeah, I want to go back to what we were talking about.

01:34:27.000 All right. So to break down what you're saying about postmodernism, are you saying people who believe in objective reality and

01:34:32.000 people who don't?

01:34:32.000 I think that that's an indicator, but I actually would...

01:34:37.000 Putting it aside, when we were... I was doing the analysis for the original,

01:34:42.000 for the first Trump campaign on what would make somebody favorable to support Trump and

01:34:46.000 A 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.

01:34:55.000 And 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.

01:35:13.000 Yes.

01:35:14.000 Versus those who utterly reject that, those who have, I like to say they possess the wisdom of the Old Testament.

01:35:21.000 But there are many people on the right who don't like, like in the culture war right, who aren't fans of Trump necessarily.

01:35:25.000 Well, but just think about the reasons why.

01:35:27.000 It's because he's had three wives, he's very brash, he has his exhibit, like, what they would consider conspicuous consumption.

01:35:33.000 And 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?

01:35:41.000 Those are the objections, right?

01:35:42.000 You know, they've been calling me right-wing for quite some time because I've continually

01:35:46.000 been defending Trump. And I think it's part of the trope of, please stop making me defend Trump.

01:35:50.000 The more the media lies to support the Democrats and their narrative,

01:35:55.000 you know, I think my, you know, true like descent into the culture war started with,

01:36:00.000 I worked for Vice, I worked for Vice, okay?

01:36:03.000 I was the founding member of Vice News.

01:36:05.000 And what did we do?

01:36:07.000 Luke and I, even after Vice, we went to Japan.

01:36:09.000 And we went around and we interviewed people in Fukushima.

01:36:12.000 And we got to, like, experience a natural disaster.

01:36:14.000 It wasn't hyper-political or anything like that.

01:36:17.000 When I worked for Vice, I went and covered conflict and crisis in other countries.

01:36:20.000 It wasn't U.S. 0.94

01:36:20.000 politics in America. 0.94

01:36:22.000 But 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.

01:36:33.000 What 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.

01:36:44.000 I thought that was a huge story.

01:36:45.000 I mean, Reddit was one of the biggest social media sites in the world.

01:36:48.000 Two of the biggest stories ever posted on the site were deleted because the New York Times was altering stories in secret.

01:36:54.000 And he said, don't report that because we do the same thing.

01:36:56.000 He now works at the New York Times.

01:36:58.000 So, I kind of lost my train of thought because I wanted to tell that story.

01:37:01.000 Well 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.

01:37:16.000 So 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.

01:37:26.000 That's going to have an effect on your psyche.

01:37:28.000 That's going to have an effect on your brain.

01:37:30.000 It's being programmed.

01:37:30.000 And when you're at war, if you can get your enemy to fight itself, it weakens them.

01:37:36.000 Like, 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.

01:37:47.000 That's what they're doing to us!

01:37:47.000 You know what the easiest way to win a war is?

01:37:49.000 Get your enemy to kill themselves.

01:37:52.000 I guess yeah, I was going to say get them to stop reproducing at all. 0.68

01:37:55.000 Or make a joint subjugate.

01:37:58.000 And 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. 0.97

01:38:04.000 I'm not saying it's intentionally being done, I'm just saying.

01:38:06.000 I think it is.

01:38:07.000 I think that for some reason the U.S.

01:38:09.000 Constitution is such a threat to globalization or global Of course, the Great Reset can't happen because of the Constitution.

01:38:27.000 The Pope has come out in support of the Great Reset.

01:38:30.000 But the problem with the Great Reset is that the United States has a Constitution.

01:38:34.000 They can't do anything about the Constitution.

01:38:37.000 I mean, I think there's only one thing that would actually get rid of the Constitution, and that's the Civil War.

01:38:41.000 I 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.

01:38:50.000 But you have, on one hand, nationalism, national identity.

01:38:54.000 On 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.

01:39:03.000 Those two things can't exist in the same place.

01:39:05.000 Capitalism!

01:39:06.000 I'm kidding, I'm kidding.

01:39:08.000 Half kidding.

01:39:09.000 There's a difference.

01:39:10.000 Malignant capitalism.

01:39:11.000 I 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.

01:39:25.000 Well, the Great Reset is opposed to that.

01:39:29.000 The Great Reset wants people not to own anything.

01:39:32.000 Well, if you don't own anything, but you have to pay everyone forever.

01:39:35.000 You have to pay that rent forever.

01:39:38.000 You know, you can buy a cell phone and guess what?

01:39:42.000 You don't even own it and it's going to be replaced in five years because you don't stop paying.

01:39:46.000 When you go on the World Economic Forum, you see a lot of generalized bland language like fairness, equal outcome, the public good.

01:39:54.000 But essentially, when you deep down and you look into more of their text, What are they talking about?

01:39:59.000 More 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.

01:40:15.000 And that weaselly language you cite that is concealing that, that is the biggest tell of how malignant and malevolent it is.

01:40:24.000 You hide it, because our U.S.

01:40:26.000 Constitution, it's incredibly explicit.

01:40:28.000 There's no doubt, there's no weasel words like that.

01:40:30.000 It says exactly what it means, and you know what it means.

01:40:33.000 Whereas those buzzwords you're throwing out, it's like, oh, it sounds good.

01:40:36.000 The equality, sustainability, the fourth industrial revolution.

01:40:38.000 Especially equality of outcome, that's the dangerous, because you have equality of opportunity, which is great, but equality of outcome is not great.

01:40:45.000 Do you guys know that in the U.K.

01:40:48.000 they announced high-value individuals will be exempt from quarantine?

01:40:51.000 I'm not surprised by that.

01:40:52.000 It means that if you're a wealthy and successful business person, you're free to do what you want, travel where you want to go.

01:40:58.000 I bring this up because maybe a lot of people don't know this.

01:41:01.000 You know the planet has people who have reached a certain level of wealth, they're completely They can buy their way out of jail.

01:41:08.000 I don't want to put it that way.

01:41:09.000 They don't exist in the law in any capacity.

01:41:12.000 So, one way to put it is they can fly in a private plane and land in an airport without passports.

01:41:17.000 They don't need any of that.

01:41:18.000 They can go where they want, when they want, for any reason, because they're rich and powerful.

01:41:22.000 And I've actually met some of these people and they've told me the stories about how they do it and why they do it.

01:41:27.000 And once you reach a certain amount of wealth, it doesn't matter if the United States is imposing a lockdown.

01:41:32.000 It won't affect you at all.

01:41:33.000 In 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.

01:41:42.000 Yeah, especially individuals like Bill Gates that promised to donate all of their wealth to charity 10 years ago and now has doubled his wealth.

01:41:50.000 He'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.

01:41:59.000 So I do believe that... Because when you mandate them.

01:42:02.000 Exactly.

01:42:03.000 And 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.

01:42:14.000 Essentially, they do care because it does essentially work out for them in certain ways, like the Bill Gates incident.

01:42:20.000 Very, very powerful interests.

01:42:21.000 The World Economic Forum has publicly stated they want a great reset.

01:42:24.000 They published this.

01:42:26.000 The New York Times then wrote a story saying it was a baseless conspiracy theory.

01:42:29.000 We're past that point now, where we're seeing articles from, like, The Guardian, where it says, the Great Reset is being maligned.

01:42:36.000 So now they're, like, openly just being like, of course we're gonna do this.

01:42:39.000 Of course it's our opportunity.

01:42:40.000 The Constitution's in the way.

01:42:42.000 So they're going to own stuff that we're going to rent from them.

01:42:44.000 No, no, no, no.

01:42:46.000 We have a constitution.

01:42:46.000 So it's been very, very difficult.

01:42:47.000 I 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.

01:42:55.000 This is what they want is a world where no one owns anything.

01:42:57.000 They don't mean everyone owns nothing.

01:42:59.000 They mean that most people own nothing and they're going to own it and we're going to rent it from them.

01:43:03.000 And they're all going to do it in the name.

01:43:04.000 the name of equality and sustainability by pushing again more controls more

01:43:08.000 regulations so independent people can't start their own businesses can't have

01:43:12.000 their own businesses all the competition against them and their buddies is

01:43:15.000 totally wiped out and they call this redefining capitalism.

01:43:19.000 Have you seen the video of the woman in California from the pineapple was

01:43:21.000 a pineapple hill where she she's uh she's the Hollywood has set up these 0.99

01:43:25.000 picnic tables and benches and then she can't have hers 1.00

01:43:28.000 What did she say?

01:43:29.000 She said, everything I own is being taken from me.

01:43:33.000 Yes.

01:43:34.000 The rich people are doing fine.

01:43:37.000 I mean, Bezos, Bill Gates, these wealthy individuals have made so much money in the past year.

01:43:43.000 The Amazon stock has skyrocketed.

01:43:44.000 Why?

01:43:45.000 Because small businesses shut down and big box stores are allowed to expand.

01:43:49.000 So, I feel like we're heading towards idiocracy where we're going to have one store.

01:43:53.000 Have you guys seen that movie where it's just one big Costco?

01:43:55.000 It's going to be Amazon.

01:43:56.000 When you want goods, you're not going to go to the store, you're going to go to Amazon.

01:43:59.000 It's going to be the only way to get stuff.

01:44:00.000 Well, let's talk about the monopoly of Facebook and how they're looking at breaking up the monopoly.

01:44:05.000 Talking about big, giant corporations.

01:44:07.000 Facebook is... I mean, Facebook is in a different vein.

01:44:13.000 There, it's... I don't know.

01:44:15.000 Specifically, 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.

01:44:23.000 And it specifically said, you will own nothing, you will have no privacy, but you will be happy.

01:44:30.000 In other words, human slavery is going to be back.

01:44:32.000 They're not wrong. 0.51

01:44:33.000 And our friends are going to benefit from it.

01:44:35.000 Ignorance is bliss.

01:44:36.000 To some people, I would argue against that in so many different instances.

01:44:40.000 Ignorance is bliss.

01:44:41.000 It's true, right?

01:44:42.000 So I'll put it this way.

01:44:43.000 If 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.

01:44:59.000 You don't know it exists, so you can only be as happy as you are in the moment.

01:45:02.000 I'm not advocating for ignorance, no.

01:45:04.000 But 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.

01:45:13.000 So they want to take away ownership so that you're happy and complacent in the future, not even thinking it can exist.

01:45:19.000 I think the human spirit and human will naturally goes towards liberty, towards freedom, towards sovereignty.

01:45:26.000 What did Harriet Tubman say? 0.77

01:45:28.000 I have freed many slaves, and I would have freed many more if only they knew they were slaves.

01:45:32.000 That's true.

01:45:33.000 There 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.

01:45:48.000 If 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.

01:46:06.000 Once we can't even be able to listen to what's really going on there, we've already lost.

01:46:11.000 We're at that step.

01:46:12.000 You know, when I grew up, I used to listen to a lot of punk rock.

01:46:14.000 And there's a song by a band called Antiflag called Underground Network.

01:46:18.000 And one of the lines is Underground Network Alternative Communication.

01:46:20.000 I think it's really funny because that was a very left thing back in the day.

01:46:24.000 And now we are at the point where it is the right.

01:46:27.000 YouTube has explicitly stated.

01:46:29.000 If you believe in specific things about this election that would be beneficial to Trump, they will remove your content from the platform.

01:46:36.000 An overt and outright benefit to Joe Biden, just like censoring the story of his family being crooked.

01:46:43.000 Look, Joe Biden facilitated his son's trip to China to negotiate one of these deals.

01:46:46.000 What was it?

01:46:47.000 A $5 million forgivable interest-free loan, they called it?

01:46:51.000 What does that mean, forgivable?

01:46:53.000 It means you don't gotta pay it back.

01:46:57.000 Okay, so it was a gift?

01:46:58.000 It was just a bribe?

01:46:59.000 No, no, no.

01:47:00.000 No, you can't accuse them of taking a bribe.

01:47:01.000 That would be a defamation.

01:47:04.000 Is there any punishment to not giving back a forgivable loan?

01:47:07.000 So 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.

01:47:16.000 So there's a condition that can be met that makes it so you don't owe me any money anymore.

01:47:19.000 Wow, and it can be any condition.

01:47:20.000 Tony Bobulinski said he told them not to take the money, and they got rich behind his back, and he thinks they're compromised.

01:47:26.000 The 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.

01:47:43.000 And when I asked them about this, they had no answer.

01:47:45.000 They were like, you can't make these claims.

01:47:47.000 And I said, what happens if a judge agrees and says it's true?

01:47:50.000 Well, you know, our policy says... I have a question for you.

01:47:55.000 Does your policy prohibit you from questioning Kennedy's victory against Nixon?

01:47:59.000 Yes.

01:48:00.000 Really?

01:48:00.000 Yes.

01:48:01.000 So, Illinois, you can't discuss the fact that... Yes.

01:48:05.000 So that's actually a historical conspiracy, I guess.

01:48:09.000 There are accusations that the mafia helped JFK, I guess?

01:48:13.000 Is that what the story was?

01:48:14.000 Well, 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.

01:48:24.000 They're reviewing it and saying, well, maybe, you know, academic research, right?

01:48:28.000 But asserting it as fact.

01:48:29.000 Like, so I think a researcher would say, we found evidence that suggests as such.

01:48:33.000 And I guess that's fine.

01:48:34.000 Let's assert this is awesome then.

01:48:36.000 I've never heard anything about this.

01:48:37.000 Can you talk about this?

01:48:39.000 So I think there's only one president who lost Florida and Ohio to not get elected.

01:48:44.000 Just, there's two presidents.

01:48:46.000 I could be wrong about this.

01:48:47.000 Uh, but I'm pretty sure Richard Nixon in his, uh, race with, uh, in the election with Kennedy.

01:48:54.000 Nixon won Ohio and Florida, but lost the election.

01:48:57.000 And Donald Trump.

01:48:58.000 Donald Trump won, uh, Ohio and Florida, but lost the election.

01:49:02.000 What, what year was this?

01:49:03.000 The Nixon- Kennedy? 0.54

01:49:04.000 60, was it 68?

01:49:05.000 No, it was 60, 60 flat.

01:49:06.000 60.

01:49:07.000 Oh, 60.

01:49:07.000 It was end of Eisenhower.

01:49:09.000 Those are cool debates because Nixon was all sweaty. 1.00

01:49:12.000 I mean, he just looked like that.

01:49:14.000 Some of the first debates, but, um, what, what YouTube said is you can't question the outcome of a historical election.

01:49:21.000 And, 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.

01:49:36.000 What about in another country?

01:49:37.000 I wonder, yeah, I was just thinking that.

01:49:38.000 Does this apply to North Korea?

01:49:41.000 During the North Korean elections, can you not detest the North Korean, right? 1.00

01:49:46.000 I think YouTube saying historical election criteria is just a manipulation where they could give themselves an excuse.

01:49:51.000 What is historic election?

01:49:52.000 Every election is historical.

01:49:54.000 We number the presidents and have lists of them.

01:49:56.000 They go in history books.

01:49:57.000 Yeah, they go in history books.

01:49:57.000 They go in the encyclopedias.

01:49:59.000 You know? 0.97

01:49:59.000 So that's a ridiculous bar. 0.97

01:50:02.000 I think YouTube should build like a zone where we can talk about this stuff. 0.96

01:50:06.000 No, you don't get it, man.

01:50:07.000 Like a conspiracy zone, and then just don't monetize it.

01:50:09.000 Isn't it kind of crazy, though, that they want to do something, right? 0.99

01:50:13.000 But the language they came up for it was just so pants-on-head stupid. 0.99

01:50:17.000 Isn't that surprising? 0.99

01:50:18.000 Wouldn'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?

01:50:24.000 I think the issue is... That's the best they came up with is, oh, these are the rules.

01:50:28.000 Yeah, yeah, they're trying to find a way and a right time to stop people from talking.

01:50:33.000 What 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.

01:50:44.000 Well, 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.

01:50:50.000 I'm like, you know, big news organizations are getting canceled for this.

01:50:54.000 If I mentioned this, I could get canceled.

01:50:56.000 Do I even talk about this?

01:50:58.000 And 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.

01:51:04.000 And some of them did get banned.

01:51:05.000 Yeah.

01:51:06.000 Tons of the videos, I think 8,000 channels this year were deleted just outright with no strikes, just nuked.

01:51:13.000 Some of them because they were questioning COVID guidelines and restrictions.

01:51:17.000 So just gone. Some of them with medical doctors and professionals with literal PhDs and pathologies

01:51:23.000 looking at scientific data and breaking it down so people understand it were banned because they

01:51:28.000 went against the procedures and protocols of the World Health Organization, which keeps flip-flopping

01:51:34.000 and changing their official stance. I think I like YouTube better now than 2008 because we can stream

01:51:39.000 live on it. They didn't have the tech in 2008, but in 2008, you guys check out Warren 25.

01:51:45.000 Go look at old Warren 25 videos.

01:51:47.000 People say crazy stuff.

01:51:48.000 You could scream anything at the camera as long as it wasn't, like, explicitly illegal, you know?

01:51:54.000 YouTube has become, for all intents and purposes, like, I don't know, Netflix.

01:52:01.000 In 2013, I know people who work at Google.

01:52:03.000 In 2013, I had a meeting with some Google employees, and they said, Netflix is our biggest competition.

01:52:09.000 And I said, what are you talking about?

01:52:11.000 I 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.

01:52:19.000 What makes you think you're competing with Netflix?

01:52:21.000 And it was simple.

01:52:21.000 They said, you know, look at Vice.

01:52:24.000 When Vice.com came on the scene, they were getting tens of millions of views on their documentaries.

01:52:29.000 When Netflix went digital and started allowing streaming, YouTube lost that viewership, but more importantly, Vice documentaries dropped by like 80% in viewership.

01:52:38.000 Millennials 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.

01:52:49.000 So YouTube's ever since then been prioritizing Disney Channel-esque type content.

01:52:54.000 Well, 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.

01:53:04.000 Now it's 10 minutes plus.

01:53:05.000 Because they hurt you if you don't.

01:53:07.000 Yes, exactly.

01:53:07.000 So that's another incentive.

01:53:09.000 I should say, they only promote 10-minute plus.

01:53:12.000 The algorithm doesn't promote you if you don't follow these.

01:53:15.000 And there's a ton of them that you have to follow, which is absolutely crazy and insane.

01:53:20.000 I wonder if Netflix will start allowing you to flip on a camera and stream live and get ad revenue.

01:53:25.000 It's the other way around.

01:53:26.000 YouTube's gonna eventually take that right away.

01:53:28.000 Uh, you think they'll get rid of it?

01:53:29.000 I think it's YouTube's biggest value is being able to flip a camera on and get paid.

01:53:33.000 No, you can't get paid.

01:53:34.000 Yeah, you get ad revenue.

01:53:35.000 Luke's not in the partner program.

01:53:36.000 Well, not right now.

01:53:37.000 I got kicked out.

01:53:38.000 He can't get back in.

01:53:39.000 Well.

01:53:39.000 And they're supposed to review it within a month.

01:53:41.000 It's been, it's been 10 months now.

01:53:43.000 Well, then they should review it.

01:53:44.000 Do 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.

01:53:52.000 I have to meet the criteria of like, I think it's like what, 4,000 hours and like a thousand subs.

01:53:55.000 Yes.

01:53:56.000 And then I have to actually just call Google.

01:53:58.000 And be like, hey, I've got a channel, can you guys monetize it?

01:54:00.000 And they'll say, we'll get back to you.

01:54:02.000 So did you say you thought YouTube was going to get rid of that feature?

01:54:05.000 YouTube has already gotten rid of the Open Partner Program.

01:54:08.000 Oh yeah, it's not open anymore.

01:54:09.000 But I wonder if Facebook's doing it, right?

01:54:12.000 I think we're going to come to a point in a year or two where YouTube disables user uploads without certification.

01:54:19.000 So 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.

01:54:25.000 And then to get into the partner program, it's gonna be, you know, they're gonna have to wait a year.

01:54:29.000 They'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.

01:54:38.000 Brain chip vaccination certification.

01:54:41.000 Neuralink.

01:54:42.000 You 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.

01:54:50.000 That's almost here.

01:54:52.000 Why is it that?

01:54:53.000 I mean, I think you're right.

01:54:55.000 One thing that keeps YouTube dominant is the partner program.

01:54:58.000 So long as people know if I go on YouTube, I make money.

01:55:01.000 If I go on Minds.com, I don't.

01:55:04.000 You get crypto.

01:55:05.000 Yeah well they turned their back on what made them great.

01:55:08.000 What 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.

01:55:36.000 I think Steven Crowder is... So, the way I described it is, the cliffs are eroding.

01:55:41.000 So, 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.

01:55:48.000 They were actually suppressing some content, and they did ban a bunch of creators recently.

01:55:51.000 There was actually a trend... Well, this happened on Twitter, so in the general free speech conversation.

01:55:56.000 A bunch of leftists now got banned.

01:55:58.000 And like, you know what I said?

01:55:59.000 I said they're useful... What did they say that got them banned?

01:56:01.000 Nothing.

01:56:02.000 They were just... One day, just gone.

01:56:04.000 So, you know, I think it was their usefulness to the establishment had had had is gone inspired

01:56:09.000 So now while they were allowed to stay on the platform and advocate for certain things

01:56:13.000 Once the election happened they got rid of them. But uh anyway

01:56:17.000 The the the right end of the cliff has been eroding for years

01:56:21.000 I was actually interviewed by oliver darcy of cnn about the troubling nature of banning the alt-right from social media

01:56:29.000 And 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.

01:56:39.000 And actually, Oliver Darcy, of all people.

01:56:42.000 So, they get banned.

01:56:43.000 Now we're at the point where if you question the election in a certain way, you'll get banned.

01:56:47.000 Well, 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.

01:56:57.000 And then we're standing right behind him.

01:56:58.000 I mean, especially having you on the show, Matt.

01:57:01.000 Yeah, 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.

01:57:15.000 I 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.

01:57:33.000 Sure.

01:57:34.000 I don't know how that analogy works.

01:57:36.000 You said the edges of the land were eroding.

01:57:38.000 Let's build more edge.

01:57:40.000 Do you not have a backup platform plan where you would go if something happened to you on this?

01:57:44.000 YouTube owns the space.

01:57:45.000 They own all the ad.

01:57:47.000 They've monopolized the ad revenue and everything.

01:57:49.000 So what we're doing right now is we're building a proprietary website.

01:57:53.000 So that users can subscribe as members and then get, you know, so a more traditional business model on top of what we have.

01:57:59.000 Because I think, I think we're going to do one of our biggest shows, probably our biggest show tomorrow.

01:58:05.000 And I don't think it, I think it could result in a first step towards possibly getting banned.

01:58:11.000 Because I'm just, you know, because I think it's possible.

01:58:13.000 I think Mines is really great.

01:58:15.000 I co-founded Mines a decade ago, but we can't, we don't have video streaming yet.

01:58:20.000 And there's no fiat.

01:58:21.000 You can't get paid with fiat yet either.

01:58:23.000 It's just crypto.

01:58:24.000 YouTube is subsidized by Google.

01:58:26.000 YouTube loses money and always has.

01:58:29.000 And the reason this happens is that YouTube costs ridiculous... Are you familiar with how expensive bandwidth is?

01:58:36.000 Sure.

01:58:36.000 So right now we have 58,547 concurrent viewers.

01:58:41.000 The most we had was around, I think we hit like 60... 61.

01:58:44.000 That means for the... What do we got?

01:58:48.000 We got... Yeah, like 98,000 watch hours.

01:58:49.000 Three 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.

01:59:01.000 That's... that's free for me!

01:59:02.000 I'm not spending any money on broadcasting all this data to people.

01:59:06.000 YouTube loses money.

01:59:07.000 But Google monopolized the space, so what they're doing is by subsidizing YouTube, they make sure no competitor can emerge.

01:59:13.000 Why?

01:59:14.000 Look, my videos automatically sync to BitChute. 1.00

01:59:17.000 It's a great safety net, because I've had videos taken down, and then people can still watch them.

01:59:21.000 But I can't make ad revenue on BitChute, which means if I focus on that, or even Facebook... Yeah, what's up with Facebook?

01:59:27.000 Can you get ad revenue on Facebook now?

01:59:29.000 Yes.

01:59:29.000 So Facebook rev actually is not that bad.

01:59:31.000 Nowhere near as good as YouTube.

01:59:33.000 But it's not worth pursuing.

01:59:35.000 Because, 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.

01:59:42.000 And 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.

01:59:47.000 But 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.

01:59:54.000 YouTube allows you to actually live.

01:59:56.000 I'm not talking about even living well.

01:59:58.000 Like, YouTube is the only platform where you can actually pay your rent and keep working.

02:00:02.000 Buy mansions.

02:00:03.000 Use it for me.

02:00:04.000 You 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.

02:00:10.000 There's no way that I could make anywhere near as much money on any other platform.

02:00:14.000 So, it's also like this.

02:00:17.000 What people need to realize when they're like, Tim, you gotta go to an alternative platform.

02:00:20.000 If YouTube bans me, I'll have to fire everybody.

02:00:24.000 That's it.

02:00:25.000 Everyone's fired.

02:00:25.000 I can't.

02:00:26.000 There's no money to pay bills.

02:00:28.000 So this, you know, YouTube controls.

02:00:30.000 They own it.

02:00:31.000 That'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.

02:00:39.000 The idea is going to be that we'll do a show.

02:00:41.000 When 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.

02:00:50.000 Well, we'll have to figure it out because I want to make sure everybody gets access to it.

02:00:52.000 It's not super easy.

02:00:53.000 But maybe using the membership thing on YouTube and then also having our website.

02:00:57.000 If YouTube bans us, then we'll have paying subscribers.

02:01:01.000 But then there's a whole marketing aspect to it.

02:01:03.000 User growth and things like that becomes very difficult and stagnant.

02:01:06.000 My bigger concern is, you know, this is a company.

02:01:09.000 I have people who are, you know, staff employees.

02:01:11.000 And if I get banned, then I can't have no money to pay anybody.

02:01:14.000 Maybe YouTube's the monopoly then.

02:01:17.000 Yes.

02:01:17.000 Well, it's Alphabet.

02:01:18.000 It's Google.

02:01:18.000 It's Alphabet.

02:01:19.000 They'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?

02:01:31.000 Instagram.

02:01:31.000 Instagram and WhatsApp.

02:01:32.000 They'll just, they'll rewrite that software function for Facebook Prime and then.

02:01:38.000 Right.

02:01:38.000 So 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.

02:01:45.000 Stories.

02:01:47.000 I forgot it was called.

02:01:48.000 If Facebook created a Snapchat clone.

02:01:49.000 It did take off.

02:01:52.000 So they tried buying Snapchat.

02:01:55.000 Snapchat wouldn't sell.

02:01:55.000 They tried cloning.

02:01:56.000 It didn't work.

02:01:57.000 So it could be, if Instagram is broken off from Facebook, they won't be able to recreate what Instagram is.

02:02:02.000 You know, because Instagram has the community.

02:02:03.000 So.

02:02:04.000 They'll have like a do not compete clause along with the sue.

02:02:07.000 With the breakup.

02:02:08.000 I don't know.

02:02:10.000 I just think that...

02:02:12.000 Conservatives aren't going to go away.

02:02:14.000 You can ban Steven Crowder, and I don't think conservatives are just gonna be like, well, I guess, you know, that's it.

02:02:20.000 No, they're gonna... I think Parler might be the biggest indicator of...

02:02:27.000 They can't get rid of this faction.

02:02:29.000 You know, YouTube, Twitter, the Democrats would love to absolutely erase the populist right and the general right from existence in terms of public communication.

02:02:39.000 They can't.

02:02:40.000 And, you know, they can't control Parler now.

02:02:43.000 Too many prominent individuals are on it.

02:02:44.000 And I'm surprised Donald Trump hasn't been using it.

02:02:46.000 He absolutely needs to go on there.

02:02:48.000 If Donald Trump only made posts from Parler at this point on, the media would do nothing but say Parler, Parler, Parler.

02:02:53.000 There's another one called Rumble.

02:02:55.000 I keep hearing about.

02:02:56.000 It's a video hosting.

02:02:57.000 Library is another one where you can get crypto.

02:02:59.000 Does Parler KYC have people going on there?

02:03:01.000 And then I also think Trump might lose his Twitter account soon as well.

02:03:05.000 I don't think so.

02:03:06.000 Maybe, maybe.

02:03:08.000 They've been saying that the moment Trump is, you know, Biden's inaugurated, Trump loses his protections.

02:03:13.000 And then he's got a bunch of tweets already they'll probably just get rid of, like they'll just ban him.

02:03:17.000 But, um, I think it was Michael Malz who said this.

02:03:19.000 They're not going to get rid of him because he's too much of a prominent character that generates, you know, traffic for the site.

02:03:25.000 Before Trump became really active, Twitter was dying.

02:03:27.000 The mainstream media was dying.

02:03:29.000 Yes.

02:03:29.000 Yeah.

02:03:30.000 Ratings were collapsing.

02:03:30.000 I 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.

02:03:38.000 We should just have our own site, our own thing that we own.

02:03:42.000 I don't like the ISPs.

02:03:43.000 You know, there used to be a little bit of technology that made that very easy, but it seems to have faded away.

02:03:48.000 Do any of you remember something called RSS?

02:03:50.000 Yeah.

02:03:52.000 Look, if you think about it, if everybody had their own social media RSS feed, then nobody would centrally control it.

02:03:57.000 It'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.

02:04:06.000 And it'll all be completely independent, so that's... That's how podcasts work.

02:04:09.000 Yeah.

02:04:09.000 So, for people who aren't familiar, I don't upload to iTunes.

02:04:13.000 I 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?

02:04:34.000 Was their big RSS tool?

02:04:36.000 They took it away, and it just became so far out of mainstream, but it used to be a great thing.

02:04:42.000 You'd have news groups, and it wasn't centrally controlled like it is now.

02:04:46.000 Yeah, 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

02:05:09.000 And that certain algorithms can make you feel sad.

02:05:12.000 Facebook admitted they were doing experiments on people.

02:05:13.000 Exactly.

02:05:14.000 On unsuspecting individuals.

02:05:16.000 Not 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.

02:05:33.000 To 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.

02:05:57.000 The only thing that gets rid of the Constitution is a civil war.

02:06:01.000 Well, that's one thing that might get rid of the Constitution, but I'm sure there could be other... Or Biden presidency.

02:06:05.000 I don't know.

02:06:06.000 I mean, the Supreme Court, though, think about it.

02:06:08.000 For a long time, despite the Constitution having a Second Amendment, it was just completely ignored.

02:06:13.000 Yeah.

02:06:14.000 So 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.

02:06:28.000 But you know, the solution to this whole social media thing, all the centralized control, you know what the answer to this is, right?

02:06:34.000 We all just have to get our ham radio operators licenses.

02:06:37.000 Right?

02:06:37.000 That's the answer.

02:06:38.000 That's where the revolution has to happen.

02:06:39.000 I bought one a few months ago.

02:06:41.000 And I think there's, I could be wrong, but internet over ham.

02:06:44.000 There's a way to get like, like text over ham.

02:06:48.000 Or geolocation, like, you know, all kinds of ways.

02:06:50.000 So we could create a ham Twitter.

02:06:53.000 Yeah, we could.

02:06:55.000 We gotta go to Super Chats!

02:06:57.000 We're going long.

02:06:58.000 You ready for Super Chats?

02:06:59.000 They're gonna ask a bunch of questions you probably can't answer.

02:07:01.000 I don't know what a Super Chat is, but... Use your comments.

02:07:03.000 Okay, cool.

02:07:03.000 Questions and comments.

02:07:07.000 I'm not gonna read this one.

02:07:08.000 Okay, I'm gonna read it.

02:07:09.000 Maybe, I don't know.

02:07:10.000 I shouldn't read it.

02:07:10.000 Read who it's from.

02:07:11.000 I've got a thick skin, and I've had... No, no, no, it is dangerous.

02:07:14.000 Read who it's from so they know who it's from.

02:07:16.000 Nine Unbuffed said, just say when, Mr. President.

02:07:23.000 Gwyneth Coback says, Tim, thanks Tim for your show.

02:07:25.000 My little kids love having your show on as they fall asleep.

02:07:28.000 So you must be doing something right.

02:07:29.000 Keep it milquetoast. 0.99

02:07:30.000 That's interesting.

02:07:31.000 I used to listen to Love Line when I was a young teenager with Adam Carolla and Dr. Drew.

02:07:39.000 Mine was Beavis and Butthead.

02:07:41.000 Well, yeah, I mean, I watch that too, but like you turn the radio on and you hear Adam Carolla.

02:07:44.000 Yeah, nine o'clock, go to sleep.

02:07:46.000 Joel Jamal says, just broke this on my channel.

02:07:48.000 Here in Australia, we had a vaccine developed back in April this year by university in the state of SA.

02:07:53.000 It received a seven out of seven international peer review rating.

02:07:56.000 They developed it so quickly because they just continued their work on the SARS virus.

02:08:02.000 Oh, interesting.

02:08:03.000 So, uh, did you hear about the, um, Bell's palsy and the allergic reactions from the Pfizer vaccine?

02:08:10.000 Yes.

02:08:11.000 So this is an important PSA for everybody, just, you know, while we have the vaccine.

02:08:14.000 Has 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?

02:08:22.000 The 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.

02:08:31.000 Um, 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.

02:08:48.000 So, the UK has said it can only be administered in a place where resuscitation measures are possible.

02:08:53.000 So, 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.

02:09:03.000 And that's 68 people out of 1,000 are having severe anaphylactic shock.

02:09:08.000 Yeah, and I think they said you have 1 in 200 chance of severe side effects.

02:09:13.000 Not 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.

02:09:21.000 They want everyone to know.

02:09:22.000 Yeah, if you look at the side effects list, it's a little daunting.

02:09:25.000 Sorry, go ahead.

02:09:26.000 What could possibly cause anaphylactic shock?

02:09:28.000 Because the way anaphylactic shock works is it's the second exposure to the triggering element.

02:09:34.000 Well, so it could be like... But there's got to be something in there that you've experienced before to get the alloflexic shot.

02:09:40.000 Maybe they had COVID previously.

02:09:41.000 It could be a preservative that's in cereals.

02:09:42.000 It could be a preservative.

02:09:43.000 Maybe they had COVID previously.

02:09:45.000 It's not COVID.

02:09:46.000 It could be anything.

02:09:48.000 They don't know.

02:09:48.000 The way the vaccine works, I watched a two-minute documentary on it.

02:09:51.000 It's an expert now.

02:09:53.000 There'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.

02:10:02.000 And then your body thinks it has that protein, and then when it sees it, it's ready for it.

02:10:06.000 So 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.

02:10:13.000 It's common in medications that there could be an anaphylactic reaction.

02:10:16.000 That's why they're not freaking out.

02:10:17.000 They're just saying if you have allergies, this is actually typical for vaccines.

02:10:20.000 You should, you know, wait.

02:10:22.000 Did you get the specifics?

02:10:23.000 What allergies?

02:10:24.000 Or is it like, don't take it if you're allergic to it?

02:10:26.000 Just if you have severe allergies, don't take it.

02:10:28.000 Do you see the warnings now on a lot of pharmaceutical commercials?

02:10:31.000 Do not take exosepirin if you're allergic to it.

02:10:35.000 Yeah. 1.00

02:10:35.000 Like what kind of stupid suggestion? 1.00

02:10:37.000 All right, let's read some more Super Chats. 1.00

02:10:40.000 Einar says, to Matt, please make a dead man switch for your info and have it guaranteed to go public in February.

02:10:46.000 Tim should be able to help you make one.

02:10:48.000 That's not a terrible idea.

02:10:52.000 That's not a bad suggestion.

02:10:54.000 I mean, it's not a hard thing to do.

02:10:55.000 I mean, I wouldn't even necessarily say Deadman Switch.

02:10:58.000 You should set it up so that it's scheduled to release after the resolution or whatever, you know?

02:11:02.000 Yeah, but even more than that is that it doesn't need a Deadman Switch because almost all of it could be reproduced by anybody.

02:11:08.000 It's completely reproducible.

02:11:10.000 Aren't there many, many individuals who already have copies of all of it anyway?

02:11:14.000 That is true, but it's not necessarily a dead man's switch, which is very true.

02:11:18.000 I've never had one before, so I think it's time.

02:11:20.000 It would be cool.

02:11:21.000 Yeah, it would be cool just to have, to just be able to say, by the way, if something happens to me... That'd be awesome.

02:11:26.000 All right, let's see.

02:11:29.000 I'm not your buddy guy says, why do we chalk up all voting fraud and propriety to always being too small to change elections?

02:11:35.000 If a spouse cheats, does it get worse or stay the same over time?

02:11:38.000 When someone steals, does it get worse over time?

02:11:40.000 So why would voting be any different?

02:11:43.000 This is one of the problems I think we have with the court system.

02:11:45.000 They say like you need injury, in fact, in order to file a suit.

02:11:49.000 But then, so that means that the impropriety can continue until someone receives damages enough.

02:11:54.000 So a better example would be defamation.

02:11:57.000 When I've had news outlets and activists outright lie and make things up, you can't do anything about it.

02:12:04.000 Because the lawyers will ask you, what's your damages?

02:12:07.000 And it's like, okay, well, this has caused a threat to my advertisers.

02:12:11.000 Okay, how many advertisers have you lost?

02:12:12.000 I'm like, are you serious?

02:12:13.000 I have to wait until my business collapses before I can do anything about this?

02:12:16.000 They'll just keep doing it.

02:12:18.000 Exactly.

02:12:18.000 It's like the opposite of the broken window theory.

02:12:20.000 The Giuliani version, not the economics version.

02:12:23.000 Is 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. 0.88

02:12:36.000 But if you crack down on the smaller crimes, it will abate.

02:12:38.000 So 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.

02:12:50.000 Here's the most important question.

02:12:52.000 Cory Williams says, what happened to your hand?

02:12:54.000 Trump 2020.

02:12:55.000 Use the money well.

02:12:56.000 So, uh, I was skating, uh, earlier today.

02:12:59.000 And, uh, I was hanging out, you know, with Adam.

02:13:02.000 We were skating.

02:13:03.000 And I had just done a 5-0 on the ledge.

02:13:05.000 And 5-0, for those unfamiliar, it's a very basic, easy grind.

02:13:08.000 And Adam was like, yeah, and like clapping.

02:13:09.000 And I was like, aw, dude, that's nothing.

02:13:11.000 That's like a basic trick.

02:13:12.000 And he was like, dude, take the, take the, the, you know, the compliment.

02:13:15.000 And I was like, I'll do a nollie 5-0 shove it first try. 0.96

02:13:17.000 And so this is a little bit more complicated.

02:13:20.000 And it is something I can typically do first try, but here I was all arrogant, like, you think that was cool?

02:13:25.000 Watch me do this!

02:13:26.000 And then I went, flipped over, slammed on my hand, and I actually thought I broke it, but it's just sprained.

02:13:31.000 So, uh, the moral of the story is, this is something every skateboarder, uh, is supposed to know.

02:13:36.000 You 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.

02:13:42.000 And so here I am, like, I'm just gonna do this, and I'm, you know, I wasn't thinking, and I slipped, and...

02:13:48.000 Also, learn how to take a compliment, Tim.

02:13:51.000 You were great at your job.

02:13:52.000 You should see the new setup, though.

02:13:53.000 It was more of like a hokey joke where like Adam was laughing and I'm like, oh, yeah

02:13:56.000 I was like check this out, you know, I mean and then I fell cuz like

02:13:59.000 There you go. Not you should see the new setup though. We're building a bar. It's gonna be called the grind bar

02:14:04.000 Dude.

02:14:05.000 Skateboarders understand that.

02:14:06.000 It's an actual bar you can drink on and you can grind on it.

02:14:08.000 So we have the skateboard construction company that built everything left this really long, you know, bar.

02:14:15.000 I forgot what it's made of.

02:14:16.000 But it's great for grinding on a skateboard.

02:14:18.000 Grinding on a skateboard is when you jump up and, you know, the metal part of the trucks, the wheel part, slides across the metal.

02:14:26.000 And so we're making a bar and the front of the bar is going to be grindable.

02:14:30.000 We're going to call it the Grind Bar.

02:14:31.000 Yeah, but it's an actual bar you can like sit.

02:14:33.000 Yes.

02:14:33.000 We're actually gonna have drinks and you know people are gonna work as a workshop We got a 3d printer and stuff.

02:14:38.000 Yeah, it's gonna be really really laser incoming All right, let's see.

02:14:42.000 This one just came in, so I'll read this one now.

02:14:44.000 Logan Matthew says, Please look up the OBDM podcast on YouTube.

02:14:48.000 The host, Midnight Mike, his birthday is tomorrow and he has put in over 15 years building his community.

02:14:53.000 As a gift, I thought I could try to get you both in touch.

02:14:57.000 The world would be better place with you both had a conversation.

02:15:02.000 All right, Midnight Mike and the OBDM podcast. 0.99

02:15:05.000 Ready to Rumble says, Tim constantly kissing YouTube's arse. 0.99

02:15:10.000 I mean... Well, I would disagree with that. 0.99

02:15:12.000 Wait till you see what happens tomorrow.

02:15:15.000 Yeah, 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.

02:15:23.000 YouTube hates Luke.

02:15:24.000 Yes, I had many encounters with Eric Schmidt that were pretty interesting at Bilderberg, to say the least.

02:15:32.000 So, I appreciate what you're doing.

02:15:34.000 You're making a stand, and that's commendable.

02:15:38.000 Yeah, don't ever hesitate to pick up the enemy's ammunition off the ground.

02:15:42.000 It's figuratively.

02:15:44.000 There'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.

02:15:51.000 And what one side did was they made it so their arrow notches were really, really thin and small.

02:15:58.000 That 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.

02:16:07.000 Get it?

02:16:08.000 It's clever, huh?

02:16:09.000 Yep.

02:16:09.000 This is a good metaphor for what you're doing right now, right?

02:16:12.000 Don't let your enemy use your ammo against you and be prepared to counter what they're using, you know.

02:16:16.000 All right, let's see.

02:16:20.000 Waffles Sensai says, Tim, you can still talk about everything you want on YouTube without getting censored.

02:16:24.000 You just have to say the opposite thing with really heavy sarcasm.

02:16:28.000 And then you will know if it's the algorithm or people watching.

02:16:31.000 Well, that's the joke we were talking about earlier.

02:16:33.000 Like if we were, uh, if I said something, uh, I'm gonna, I'm gonna avoid using the full joke because I'd probably get banned.

02:16:40.000 But if I went, of course, that's why Joe Biden won.

02:16:45.000 Just very, okay, for those that are listening, I just did a really heavy and obvious wink at the camera.

02:16:50.000 I think they could hear it.

02:16:50.000 It was so heavy.

02:16:52.000 So it's like, if you just, you know, if you were like, I absolutely think Joe Biden legitimately won.

02:16:58.000 He's the greatest president of all time.

02:16:59.000 They'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.

02:17:07.000 Well, 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! 0.97

02:17:14.000 And we'll be like, okay, okay!

02:17:16.000 And they're like... The guns will go... No, no, no, no, no!

02:17:18.000 Okay, we're done, we're done, we're done!

02:17:20.000 And then it walks away.

02:17:22.000 No, 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.

02:17:29.000 And it, it always knew it was like essentially sentient.

02:17:33.000 So it'll be more like that, you know, we'll be neural linked in, you know, I'll tell you this.

02:17:36.000 A lot of, you're familiar with neural link, right?

02:17:39.000 Elon Musk's, you know, everyone's good.

02:17:40.000 You know, I think, Luke, you're not going to get it, right?

02:17:44.000 Are you going to get it, Matt?

02:17:46.000 I am not intending to surrender any of that.

02:17:49.000 I 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.

02:18:01.000 But for me, he was like, you don't care because it's always existed.

02:18:05.000 It's normal for your life.

02:18:07.000 But he's like, this is nuts.

02:18:07.000 I think he was... When did the social security number thing happen?

02:18:10.000 It was like the... 1930s.

02:18:11.000 30s.

02:18:11.000 Well, it was FDR, so... Yeah, yeah, yeah.

02:18:15.000 So my grandpa was like... I think he was a kid or a teenager.

02:18:18.000 There was a big pushback against that.

02:18:19.000 Yeah, they thought it was insane.

02:18:20.000 Like, I have to get a number? 1.00

02:18:21.000 Are you nuts? 0.96

02:18:22.000 In fact, the law was specified. 0.99

02:18:23.000 It was printed on the social security card itself that it is not allowed to be used as identification.

02:18:28.000 Wow.

02:18:29.000 The old social security cards have that.

02:18:31.000 And now it is.

02:18:32.000 These numbers and these track, these are tracking device numbers with your personal phone number.

02:18:37.000 The idea of the phone.

02:18:37.000 Yeah.

02:18:38.000 The number, you can change your phone number.

02:18:39.000 But so I think in, in 50 years, everyone's going to be neural linked and they're going to be like, who wouldn't want the neural link?

02:18:45.000 Wait one second.

02:18:45.000 I'm getting a message from our sweet overlord.

02:18:48.000 You know, they can track you with this thing.

02:18:50.000 Yeah.

02:18:51.000 That's what they're going to say to each other.

02:18:53.000 You know, the neural link, you can get tracked with a neural link and they'll be like, yeah, I know.

02:18:56.000 It'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?

02:19:10.000 Whatever.

02:19:11.000 I want to say so many things about buttockses, but this is a family-friendly show. 1.00

02:19:15.000 We can't get into that.

02:19:16.000 We're seeing the same thing.

02:19:17.000 I think we'll see that evolution with automobiles.

02:19:20.000 Remember how hard a fight it was to allow AI-driven cars on the road?

02:19:24.000 Like, you know, California, they wouldn't allow it, or certain restrictions, very hard.

02:19:29.000 And it's kind of edging that way.

02:19:30.000 And I believe that our children's generation are probably going to grow up with it the other way around.

02:19:34.000 It's like, you need a special license if you can get one at all to drive your own car.

02:19:37.000 Because you're only going to be allowed to be in an AI-driven car.

02:19:40.000 I don't know why I'm thinking about Michael Hastings now, but I am.

02:19:43.000 Yeah.

02:19:44.000 For those that aren't familiar, I'll give you the quick gist.

02:19:48.000 One day he went to his neighbor.

02:19:49.000 He's a journalist.

02:19:50.000 Who is he working on a story about?

02:19:53.000 Top military officials and intelligence agencies.

02:19:55.000 This is a specific guy.

02:19:56.000 I forgot the general's name.

02:19:58.000 So 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.

02:20:04.000 And his neighbor said, no, you can't use my car.

02:20:06.000 And then, uh, I think it was, what, that night?

02:20:08.000 His car was going 70 miles an hour down, was at Wilshire Boulevard in L.A., and hit a tree and exploded.

02:20:12.000 Yeah, 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.

02:20:24.000 Wasn't Joe Biggs, uh, his friend?

02:20:26.000 I mean, a lot of people were friends with him.

02:20:28.000 I think he was more of, like, uh, in, like, the Glenn Greenwald kind of circles.

02:20:31.000 Yes.

02:20:32.000 So, A.I.

02:20:32.000 cars, careful, is what you're saying.

02:20:35.000 All right, let's do some more Super Chats.

02:20:36.000 Naomi Mathias says, when Tim Pool and Rush Limbaugh say the same thing, has to be political singularity.

02:20:42.000 I could be wrong.

02:20:43.000 Um, I could be absolutely wrong about all the Civil War stuff.

02:20:46.000 The 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?

02:20:54.000 Sure.

02:20:55.000 Maybe.

02:20:56.000 Or maybe we've just been seeing constant escalation the entire time, and now we have the most extreme escalation.

02:21:02.000 States lining up against each other.

02:21:04.000 But for real, it could just stop.

02:21:05.000 I have no idea.

02:21:06.000 I can't predict the future.

02:21:07.000 Who knows what's gonna happen.

02:21:08.000 So, uh, one superchat, they just said, uh...

02:21:11.000 Like, countries have gone to civil war for way less than what we're seeing now.

02:21:14.000 But I have to imagine, it's not going to be like right now.

02:21:16.000 What happens, the Supreme Court, I imagine they're not going to take it, I really do.

02:21:21.000 Because I've read a lot from people on the left and the right, why the Supreme Court would not want to take this.

02:21:27.000 And they might not.

02:21:28.000 I 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?

02:21:38.000 People are going to say no.

02:21:39.000 They're absolutely going to say no.

02:21:41.000 And 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.

02:21:52.000 The commander says Trump should split with the reps and make a Trump party.

02:21:56.000 From 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.

02:22:03.000 Tim should like Alliance.

02:22:04.000 Oh, check it out.

02:22:07.000 All right, let's see.

02:22:08.000 Rita Ho says, CCP has moved forward with their agenda and start to pave the path for Kamala to take over by investigating Hunter Biden.

02:22:16.000 Well, 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.

02:22:25.000 They need a reason to remove Joe Biden and make Kamala Harris the president now. 1.00

02:22:28.000 So now they're going to be like, oh no, Joe, whatever.

02:22:31.000 But I think that's a bit too conspiratorial.

02:22:32.000 I 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.

02:22:38.000 And now that the election's over, they don't care.

02:22:39.000 And they're going to cover the story because it gets some clicks.

02:22:44.000 SoBased says, four Democrat senators sent a letter to YouTube on November 24th, suggesting censorship of election fraud speech on YouTube.

02:22:51.000 Government censoring through private business.

02:22:53.000 Yup.

02:22:53.000 Absolutely.

02:22:57.000 Marcus Pinson says, earlier this week, Ian said he wanted to be able to make his own ammo from scratch.

02:23:02.000 I've been working on something for a few years that I think is right up his alley.

02:23:05.000 I messaged him on Instagram.

02:23:06.000 Tell him to hit me up.

02:23:07.000 I promise it's really cool.

02:23:08.000 I got a lot of response about that.

02:23:10.000 One person said, hey, you said you wanted to make ammo.

02:23:12.000 I got some advice for you.

02:23:13.000 Don't bother.

02:23:15.000 It's almost impossible to find primer.

02:23:16.000 Someone else suggested that if we didn't get the primer, they'll make it for us.

02:23:21.000 It seems like a huge and really complex.

02:23:23.000 Only four factories make primer in the United States and they're all fulfilling government contracts.

02:23:28.000 And you need like the explosives license to make manufacture powder.

02:23:32.000 It's extremely difficult.

02:23:34.000 You need a huge investment and there's a big process and you barely get a return on your investment.

02:23:39.000 All 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.

02:23:45.000 I don't know.

02:23:47.000 See, Brocages over Hokages. 0.52

02:23:50.000 I said Brocages until I saw the last word and then I understood the reference.

02:23:53.000 Says, 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.

02:24:02.000 Uh, perhaps.

02:24:03.000 It's because I watched a documentary on the Spanish Civil War, uh, two years ago.

02:24:07.000 And at the time, there was, like, parallels, and people were talking about it quite a bit.

02:24:10.000 But, uh, since then, I've only, you know, I've- I've not watched.

02:24:13.000 But I'll- I'll- I'll- I'll- I'll read up and watch something about the, uh, Russian Civil War as well.

02:24:16.000 A lot of people are comparing it to the Chinese Cultural Revolution.

02:24:20.000 To what's happening now as well.

02:24:21.000 Yes.

02:24:21.000 Yeah.

02:24:22.000 More than the Ru- The Russians were at World- It was World War I, which we're not in right now.

02:24:26.000 And they had a monarchy, which we don't have.

02:24:28.000 But the Chinese were like... The Cultural Revolu- Yeah, I'm into that. 1.00

02:24:32.000 Or maybe closer to Cambodia.

02:24:34.000 Khmer Rouge.

02:24:35.000 That's true.

02:24:35.000 Pol Pot.

02:24:36.000 Yikes.

02:24:37.000 Yeah.

02:24:39.000 Man, uh, let's see.

02:24:41.000 MD Adrian says, unspoken problem in the U.S.

02:24:44.000 is that we are not really a people at this time.

02:24:47.000 They have broken us until we have no common language, history, ethnic background, culture, and now no rule of law. 0.99

02:24:52.000 What is left to hold us together?

02:24:53.000 The Constitution, I suppose, but a lot of people, the New Republic published an article saying it's time to abolish the Constitution.

02:24:59.000 You know, another country found itself, or barely a country, found itself in this position historically.

02:25:04.000 Are any of you familiar with the history of Singapore?

02:25:06.000 No.

02:25:07.000 Well, basically, Singapore was ethnically divided, linguistically, religiously divided.

02:25:12.000 The crime was so bad there that Malaysia actually kicked it out of the country.

02:25:16.000 It said, you're no longer part of us, because it's this island on the south of their island chain.

02:25:21.000 It completely got rid of them.

02:25:22.000 And what pulled it back together was they had a revolutionary leader, Lee Kuan Yew, who imposed strict nationalism.

02:25:29.000 He imposed a national language, which happened to be English, which didn't make anybody happy because it wasn't their native tongue.

02:25:35.000 He imposed strict rules, anti-corruption, etc.

02:25:38.000 And that was the kind of leadership that built that national unity back up.

02:25:42.000 You 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.

02:25:55.000 I think with a Trump presidency and a Trump continuation, you get people building a community, a communal identity around the Constitution, around America.

02:26:04.000 But if we carry on with the path that was, you know, everything before Trump, you get,

02:26:09.000 you know, people are dejected, disconnected. There is constant fighting over, you know,

02:26:15.000 identity-based issues. And the interest of the elites is just to enrich themselves as the ship

02:26:20.000 crashes, because why bother if the ship's going down? There was someone was referencing Buchanan

02:26:25.000 as one of the worst U.S. presidents.

02:26:26.000 So 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.

02:26:33.000 to be a nobody, know nothing president.

02:26:34.000 Four years of that's going to drive people just to chaos.

02:26:37.000 And what people need to realize too, as I bring this up a lot, is history

02:26:40.000 is condensed when we read it.

02:26:41.000 So it may be that we get a four years of a Buchanan like Biden, and then it

02:26:45.000 results in the return of Trump in 2024.

02:26:48.000 And then maybe some kind of civil war, or maybe Trump comes back and fixes it.

02:26:52.000 I don't know.

02:26:52.000 But, uh, when people read about the civil war or any war, any history, they read

02:26:56.000 the highlights back to back to back to back to back.

02:26:59.000 You know, especially if you read Wikipedia, it's like, this happened, this happened, this happened.

02:27:02.000 People gotta realize, man, there was like months and years where nothing happened.

02:27:06.000 And I think that's one reason why people don't understand it could happen here and we could be in it right now.

02:27:10.000 Because 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.

02:27:18.000 And that's like, that's it, that's how we know.

02:27:19.000 No, you won't.

02:27:21.000 You really won't.

02:27:22.000 You know?

02:27:22.000 I think what's interesting is, uh, was it seven states seceded from the Union before there was a war?

02:27:27.000 And 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.

02:27:35.000 So there was actually a time period where they're like, wow, states have seceded?

02:27:38.000 That's crazy, huh?

02:27:39.000 And then nothing happened.

02:27:41.000 But then there was war, obviously.

02:27:43.000 Rob Ingram says, tuned in late, so I missed everything.

02:27:45.000 Hope your wrist is okay, homie. 1.00

02:27:46.000 You, among others, are the reason I'm moving towards starting my own podcast on PoopTube channel.

02:27:51.000 You guys rock.

02:27:51.000 Your friendly neighborhood Philly personal trainer.

02:27:53.000 Appreciate it, man.

02:27:55.000 Let's see.

02:27:56.000 Sleepy Dan says, just add, in 2016 when talking fraud, then YouTube was okay with it.

02:28:03.000 Yeah, uh, let's see.

02:28:04.000 Yevgeny says, why not move out of the U.S.

02:28:06.000 to Eastern Europe or other place which is not currently aflames?

02:28:09.000 You know, I was actually looking at Ukraine for a while.

02:28:12.000 Yeah.

02:28:12.000 Because, uh... But you don't have the Second Amendment.

02:28:16.000 You know, that's one thing that's very unique to the United States where people could actually defend themselves.

02:28:21.000 Ukraine, though, cost of living is very affordable.

02:28:24.000 And you have a lot more freedom there than you do in a lot of parts of Western Europe.

02:28:28.000 If you're a middle-class American and you are working remote and you can work out of a place like Ukraine, you're a king.

02:28:34.000 It's really crazy.

02:28:35.000 So I think it's like a hundred bucks a month for rent on average.

02:28:40.000 Yeah, the income for Ukrainians is really, really, really low.

02:28:45.000 So as an American, it's like, you go there, you can have whatever you want.

02:28:47.000 The cost of living, the people, the atmosphere, just life overall is better for a lot of expats.

02:28:53.000 And I know a lot of expats.

02:28:56.000 When I went there and I covered the Euromaidan stuff, I made friends and I'm like, man, so cool.

02:29:01.000 I'm not Ukrainian, so, you know.

02:29:03.000 But 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.

02:29:11.000 It's like, cost of living, wow.

02:29:12.000 Crazy.

02:29:14.000 An 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.

02:29:23.000 Any advice on entry-level options?

02:29:26.000 You know, these days I really don't know.

02:29:27.000 Yeah.

02:29:28.000 Cause I used to just go out and cover stuff, but now it's like people are fighting each other.

02:29:31.000 It used to be so easy.

02:29:32.000 You can't travel anymore, you know, COVID lockdowns.

02:29:34.000 So I don't know what you do.

02:29:36.000 Good luck.

02:29:37.000 I 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.

02:29:49.000 So I'd say look into that Leadership Institute.

02:29:51.000 Also, we were very lucky because we started before the crackdown.

02:29:54.000 Now, imagine starting brand new with all these crackdowns that prevent you from reaching a wider audience.

02:30:02.000 Ten years ago, it was still sort of easy.

02:30:04.000 You had a good message.

02:30:06.000 You knew a little bit of how to make videos.

02:30:08.000 You were golden.

02:30:08.000 You were great.

02:30:10.000 Now, you say something wrong about the election, you're done, and no one will ever hear of you.

02:30:16.000 Shane says I'm a union worker and my dad is a union representative.

02:30:19.000 I 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.

02:30:28.000 What do I say to him?

02:30:32.000 Man, that's tough.

02:30:33.000 You 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.

02:30:50.000 It's always important to share information that's important, but come at it from a perspective like, hey, I saw this.

02:30:56.000 I don't know what to think of it.

02:30:57.000 Since you're so much older and wiser, what do you think of this?

02:31:01.000 And that worked specifically well on my family as well when it came to a lot of important issues.

02:31:05.000 Remember, the way persuasion works is you convince somebody of something that they think they always and already believed.

02:31:12.000 In those situations, I would encourage you to get at your dad the same way the Grand Canyon was built.

02:31:17.000 You 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.

02:31:24.000 And then it makes the crack bigger.

02:31:25.000 And you put water in, freeze it, expand it again, and you keep, just find that one thing and use it to open up a much bigger well.

02:31:32.000 And before you know it, four years from now, you'll be like, man, that Biden, what a, you know, just hit him.

02:31:37.000 I can tell you one of the basics of opinion manipulation is it's called rapport extreme in turn.

02:31:45.000 I don't know if you've ever heard of this, but it's a way you convince someone to move their opinion.

02:31:50.000 First of all, I'll just go through this whole thing.

02:31:53.000 You can't make someone go from, say, being loving a person to hating a person immediately.

02:31:58.000 You can only push people within their reasonable boundaries.

02:32:01.000 So, if someone says, this is my friend, they're cool.

02:32:04.000 You can't make them say, I hate this person.

02:32:06.000 But you can make them say, yeah, that is kind of annoying, he does that.

02:32:09.000 You do that enough times, eventually the person's gonna be like, man, he is so annoying!

02:32:13.000 Man, it never stops!

02:32:14.000 You get them to that point.

02:32:16.000 So rapport extreme turn is basically, the first thing you have to do is agree with them.

02:32:20.000 So that they feel, you know, like, oh, this is what we agree on.

02:32:22.000 You build a rapport.

02:32:23.000 Now there's a trusting relationship.

02:32:25.000 The extreme is, you then present something that you like about Joe Biden that you know your dad can't agree with.

02:32:33.000 He never met a war he didn't like.

02:32:35.000 acknowledge your dad is right and that opinion was too extreme and it was him

02:32:38.000 who convinced you. So an example what's what's the best example like okay let's

02:32:42.000 say war. Joe Biden was a party Obama administration got us in more war. He

02:32:47.000 never met a war he didn't like. So what you do is the first thing you would say

02:32:51.000 is you'd be like you know I was thinking about I think you're right about Joe

02:32:54.000 You know, he's probably the better choice for a lot of reasons.

02:32:57.000 And then your dad, you know, or your friend or family member is going to be like, oh, yeah, yeah, of course.

02:33:01.000 They're like me now.

02:33:02.000 They're in my tribe.

02:33:04.000 You then give them the extreme opinion they can't accept.

02:33:05.000 I mean, me personally, the reason I like him is because I mean, how many wars, you know, did he did he get us involved in?

02:33:12.000 That was a good thing.

02:33:13.000 And you don't want to be crazy.

02:33:14.000 You just say something that your dad's going to be like, I don't know about that.

02:33:17.000 I think the wars were a problem.

02:33:18.000 You know, that's the one thing I don't like about him.

02:33:20.000 So it's similar to what you were saying about finding that thing.

02:33:22.000 And then your response is the turn.

02:33:24.000 All right.

02:33:25.000 Well, okay.

02:33:26.000 I guess you're right.

02:33:26.000 The wars aren't a good thing, but you know, fine.

02:33:29.000 I guess you're right.

02:33:30.000 They've now given you an opinion against Biden and they've affirmed, you know, you were wrong.

02:33:35.000 So it's, it's, it's, it's a, it's an old school.

02:33:38.000 It's like a basic manipulation trick.

02:33:39.000 Seems very deceptive.

02:33:41.000 Absolutely.

02:33:41.000 Can you do it in a more loving way?

02:33:43.000 Like, I like that Biden has these things, but I don't like the war.

02:33:47.000 Here's the problem.

02:33:49.000 So this is one of the reasons I stopped working for nonprofits, because I hate doing these kinds of things.

02:33:52.000 But the issue is fundraising, you know, like raising money for, you know, how you convince someone to give you money.

02:33:58.000 Oof, it's tough.

02:34:00.000 And eventually, once you get good at it, you understand the system and how it works and how you're playing this game.

02:34:04.000 The problem is, there are people who are naturally good at doing things like this without realizing it, and that's considered morally acceptable.

02:34:10.000 You could just naturally, like, poke someone and be like, well, I think the wars are great and it works for you. 0.92

02:34:15.000 But 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.

02:34:25.000 So then, I don't want to be involved in that, you know?

02:34:27.000 I don't want to work a job where the goal was to find a way to navigate someone's mind to convince them.

02:34:33.000 And you can justify it any way you want, but I didn't think it was all that entertaining, you know?

02:34:38.000 Anyway, we've gone a little bit over, so I think we'll start to wrap things up.

02:34:41.000 Make sure you smash that like button if you haven't already.

02:34:44.000 Is there anything you want to mention in your social media, or promote anything, or let people know about what's going on?

02:34:48.000 Oh 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.

02:34:56.000 I'm on Gab and Parler, so you can find me there.

02:35:00.000 So just stay in touch, folks.

02:35:01.000 Right on, man.

02:35:02.000 Thanks for hanging out.

02:35:03.000 You can follow me on Twitter, Instagram, Parler, at TimCast.

02:35:06.000 You can check out my other YouTube channels, YouTube.com slash TimCast and YouTube.com slash TimCastNews.

02:35:10.000 We do this show live Monday through Friday at 8 p.m.

02:35:13.000 You can check us out on iTunes, Spotify.

02:35:15.000 Give us a good review.

02:35:16.000 It really does help with the ranking and then it gets more people to watch.

02:35:19.000 So also share if you think the show is good and word of mouth really helps.

02:35:22.000 You can also check out the other people who are hanging out here.

02:35:25.000 We have Luke Rudkowski.

02:35:26.000 Yes, I am on youtube.com forward slash we are change and you can find me on Twitter, Instagram, Facebook under Luke, we are change.

02:35:33.000 And Tim, thank you so much for having me on.

02:35:36.000 I know I am not mainstream media friendly.

02:35:38.000 YouTube loves mainstream media, but I appreciate you taking the risk.

02:35:42.000 They don't like you, but what have you said that's been all that like, you know, nothing, nothing.

02:35:46.000 And I never, I never really did.

02:35:47.000 I know.

02:35:48.000 I've always, you know, I like thinking.

02:35:50.000 I like outside the box kind of research and yeah.

02:35:53.000 Well, maybe they'll ban me and they'll be like, we had Luke on too much or whatever.

02:35:56.000 Could happen.

02:35:58.000 We also got Ian.

02:35:58.000 He's hanging out.

02:35:59.000 Hi.

02:35:59.000 I mean, you know, Luke's so humble.

02:36:01.000 He's got merchandise up the wazz.

02:36:03.000 I just want to give a shout out.

02:36:04.000 Where can they get that?

02:36:05.000 Thank you so much, Ian.

02:36:07.000 Teesprings.com forward slash stores forward slash we are change.

02:36:10.000 Thank you, Ian.

02:36:11.000 Matt, can people still donate to your organization?

02:36:13.000 Well, we're not asking for donations.

02:36:15.000 I 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.

02:36:21.000 If someone were to donate to your charity, how would they go about doing that?

02:36:24.000 I 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.

02:36:37.000 Cool.

02:36:37.000 Thanks.

02:36:38.000 Thank you.

02:36:38.000 You can follow me at Ian Crossland.

02:36:40.000 Right on.

02:36:41.000 And of course you can follow at Sour Patch Lids who is pressing all the buttons.

02:36:43.000 You can.

02:36:44.000 I am pushing buttons like a mad woman over here.

02:36:46.000 My friends, tomorrow is probably going to be the biggest show we've ever had.

02:36:49.000 We're going to get in trouble.

02:36:50.000 It could precipitate the end.

02:36:54.000 But it's going to be fun.

02:36:56.000 And I don't want to call it revenge.

02:37:00.000 But it's going to be a whole lot of fun.

02:37:02.000 So I hope you're ready to come back tomorrow at 8pm.

02:37:05.000 And I'm sure most people have already figured out what that means.

02:37:07.000 But I'll leave it there.

02:37:08.000 Thanks for hanging out.

Timcast IRL - Tim Pool - December 11, 2020

Timcast IRL - TWENTY States File AGAINST Texas, Matt Braynard Joins Discussing Voter Fraud

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript