Timcast IRL - Timcast IRL #164 - Trump Staging A COUP?! Journalists Panic Over Trump's Latest Move w/ Jack Murphy

Episode Date: November 12, 2020

Tim, Ian, and Lydia sit down with friend Jack Murphy (@JackMurphyLive on Twitter, YouTube) to talk about the election and what happens now.  Support the show (http://Timcast.com/donate) Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

I guess YouTube is back. So we're streaming, I think. I think we're streaming. Thanks for tuning in, everybody. YouTube was down for quite a bit, and so we kind of just waited to see if things would clear up. And then it looks like I was able to pull up the stream, so I guess we're live. Thanks for tuning in. Man, it's getting crazy.

I'll tell you this. The left, not all, like the resistance media people, I'm seeing a bunch of tweets where they're kind of freaking out. Hey, turn that off. What are you doing? It's not me. He's watching the stream. Oh, that's my fault.

Oh, Timothy. Always blaming me, Tim. Well, you were the one on your phone. Welcome back, everyone. You're sitting there on your phone. That was my fault. I had to tweet. I had to fire it out.

And I'm like, what are you doing with your phone? What's this going on? There's a boomer among us. Just keep blaming me. I don't want the attention. Yeah, yeah. Everyone look at Ian. Everyone look at Ian.

Hi, everyone. There's Ian. PJ Man. We're live. I drew a pajama. It's true. Pajama bottoms on. So this article comes up, and they're like, could Trump really stage a coup?

And there's like murmurs now that Trump is planning on staging some kind of coup. But it's, I don't know, man. It's really weird. I'll tell you this. A lot of people on the right have said if there ever was a civil war, the left will regret it. We would win so fast. And I said that's not true at all. The left controls the technological institutions.

They would shut down your means of communication instantly. I'm not saying there's a coup. I'm not saying anything's going on. I have no idea. But we have an article from The Guardian. If that was the case and Donald Trump decided to just ignore the courts, ignore the lawsuits and say, you know what? I'm not leaving. I'll tell you the first thing that's going to happen is social media would go down across the board.

Just like it just did with YouTube. Just totally gone. Anyway, let's just get into it. Because, I don't know, the internet's back and we're like 36 minutes late. So we have a bunch of stuff to talk about. Jack Murphy is here, as usual, for Wednesdays. Hello, everybody. Good to be back. Nice to see you.

You can see behind him. It says playback error. Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. Oh, I got a request to keep that on dark night mode from now on. Because it was blinding someone trying to watch the show in the dark. It's always on dark mode. Is it? Yeah, literally always. No, it was really bright yesterday. Yeah, it was like a white screen. Oh, okay got a request to keep that on dark night mode from now on because it was blinding someone trying to watch the show in the dark. It's always on dark mode. Is it?

Yeah, literally always. No, it was really bright yesterday. Yeah, it was like a white screen. Oh, okay, okay. Doing what I can, folks. You know what, man? We're just going to chill. We're going to talk about whatever.

You know, Ian's here. Half an hour late. Coup? We were just doing the show anyway, just sitting here. Yeah, exactly. I know. For the people who are listening, who weren't listening now, if only you could hear what we're talking about all this top secret stuff it was this but better yeah it sure was um yeah who or no who jack better well uh what is a

precondition for a coup i guess he would have to be legally required to depart and i just don't know that i'm there yet okay so which is normal right yeah i think we're going through a very normal process right now making sure the votes are good checking the system shaking it making sure it's nice and sturdy quite literally what's happening right now is normal and the way it's supposed to be and it's very strange the media is trying to tell us it's not right so so think about how the constitution lays out how the process works there's actually a dedicated period for legal challenges it's actually they actually say like you have until this day to resolve your state legal disputes.

It's expected. This would happen. I mean, remember when that one dude shot that other dude? No, it happened so many times in our politics, which dude are we talking about? But how about Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr?

I was just watching that musical today. It used to be that like I'm running for president. Well, you're a heathen. How dare you besmirch my honor pistols at don duels word up they go kill each other nowadays it's like you know mitt romney goes obama you won i'm not even gonna try you win and he walks away that's because they're all part of the same party yeah the uniparty the uniparty no this is trump still fighting the uniparty

wouldn't be surprised wouldn't be surprised. Wouldn't be surprised. Total speculation. If some people in the GOP establishment might not be too upset to see, even if the Democrats stole the election. Of course. I mean, look at the never Trumpers. Look at the Lincoln project. The Lincoln project is going after Trump's lawyers and the law firm itself and their

clients. I think Will Chamberlain said they said, I think this was him, that going after the law firm and their clients is not indicative of a movement that thinks they're on track for victory. They're desperate and they're targeting,

it's disgusting. It's really dirty. So Lincoln Project, Never Trumpers, posted the pictures, the phone numbers, and the email addresses of two of these lawyers. Yeah. I saw that.

I reported that tweet. Yeah. Yeah. Make them famous. It's doxing. And then someone said, go after their clients. And they said, on it, you have a right to legal representation. You have a right to file your legal challenge.

And we're supposed to have a civil civil process civil suits where it's like i i object to your assertion that these ballots are good and i will see you in court good sir and then they show up and they target your lawyers so that you can't actually even go through that process and they target them by doing what their doxum publishing their private information and saying go after oh yeah that one judge got remember that that lady judge got that lady judge that female woman judge got attacked her husband and son got killed at her house i remember that someone went to the house knocked on the door and then put a bullet in the chest of the kid we were just talking to the male lady today and like about how insecure male trucks are like and they're not supposed to carry weapons but like they're

carrying valuable goods they're not armored they're and you can just like so. And they're not supposed to carry weapons. But they're carrying valuable goods. They're not armored. But they're not supposed to carry weapons. And I think maybe they should start carrying weapons for defense. Yeah, they should have some kind of defense. She was saying that you can't carry anything, but you've got people who are like, you're in a mail vehicle full of stuff delivering things. You know what I mean?

So I don't know, man. A little off topic there. Yeah, just a smidge. Dude, I i'm i'm still reeling welcome home jack oh wow tim made a good point last night when we were talking about some of the republicans not being there for trump like they're just using him to get supreme court nominees get a look get a few things and then see him happy to see him go and now they've packed the well not packed the the court but got some republicans in there some conservatives i guess you would call them which republicans aren't even necessarily conservative not anymore trump's always been fighting the establishment on the

right establishment on the left and in fact trump trump isn't we the network the network of people tired of the uniparty tired of the the corporatist, tired of the globalist. We are the ones that launched Trump. It wasn't that Trump was some amazing politician and he's like some amazing orator. It's that we picked him and we catapulted him. Grassroots effort, people donating their time and energy and becoming part of this whole movement. It's a movement that launched Donald Trump to the top. And whatever happens to Donald Trump,

that movement's still going to be there. And that movement is against and anti towards the establishment. So establishment hates Trump, hates all of us. It wants to see us all squashed. And it's not just the idea of establishment. It's this specific establishment that's been corrupted by, if it's a global monetary obsession or this desire to prevent World War III through military coercion that's it's hi betsy it's here

it's an improper establishment that i think i'm against anyway i'm not like anti-establishment in general i just don't like this current come on you're wearing pajamas if we could build an establishment if we could establish a functional you know You're not anti-establishment, so that means you're establishment. Well, if you're not actively anti-establishment, sir. You are pro-establishment. Exactly. We are anti-est. I'm anti-est.

I'm anti-this-est. Anti-est. But I would like to establish something valid, you know, where the votes are tallied in plain sight, where we can trust each other, where there's no war, where humanity has enough food. Well, hold on, hold on. The votes are tallied in in plain sight where we can trust each other where there's no war where you know hold on hold on the the votes are tallied in plain sight the anomaly here is that specific votes weren't tallied in plain sight well they're tallied on a computer program yes yes yes and that's that that's part of it proprietary one oh here she comes so we have a we have a full hand recount coming in georgia, we do. Now, is that a recount or is that a recanvass or is that an audit? Everything.

They're going to look at each ballot or they're just going to- Secretary of State said everything. He said recount, a recount, an audit, and a recanvass. Oh, boom. There you go. We'll see. Some people are saying they're still going to, after they segregate them, run them through the scanners. But look, man, it's always been insane that we use proprietary software to do our elections.

It should be open source and the code should be available on the web. And we should be able to load up that code in real time as they're sliding those ballots in. So we can all watch. Yes. The only reason they would want to hide anything is because days of cheating. Open source is safer in many instances, right? Because people get to test it.

It's not so much about, like you wouldn't be able to, I guess one of the challenges is that you can't, these machines aren't supposed to be connected to the internet at all. And therein lies a serious problem. If they are, they can be exploited remotely. But if they aren't,

then they can be exploited before and then activate the exploits after. So it's we had this glitch in Michigan and the company is saying, no, no, it was human error. The 6000 votes that went that were for Trump but went to Biden. Now is it that was human error. But we're seeing similar numbers across the board. So you think that if trump is the one that rejects the outcome certified outcome constitutional outcome that the one of the first signs that we would see is what total shutdown of all social media yeah well i think in any capacity like i don't know if we're ever going to get anywhere near that but i'll put it this way before we get into like this like really out there conversation oh we're talking about trump going to war out there let me just say warning there was a period on saturday when they called it for joe biden where it seemed

like everybody just agreed joe biden wins and there were trump supporters who seemed to be stopping and looking around to check the temperature. There were certain personalities I won't name who are kind of like not fighting this or not. Right. Right. Right. Right. Yeah.

Are we all just going to lay down and let them let them run in or are we going nuts? And then now you can see I don't want to I don't want to call anybody out specifically because I know there's a lot of people who watch. But some some TV people, some TV personalities really seemed like they were gearing up for the for laying down their sword until they saw the likes of Don Jr. And people like Sebastian Gorka and, you know, other high profile Trump supporting personalities went charge. Then all of a sudden the fair weather Trump supporters were like, yes, yes, yes, of course. They were waiting for their cue. Yeah. Well, they wanted to make sure they weren't going to be jumping in with the with you know on the sinking ship yeah unsupported so

it's an information war and you got to have all kinds of information weapons and you have foot soldiers and infantry and people in the trenches grass grassroots crowdsourced meme makers influencers spontaneously erupting uh you know, canvassers and et cetera. And you need like artillery cover for your ground troops, man, in an information war. And the way that you do that is by getting out there in front and laying down the narrative and then also supporting people that are victims in the information war, which is something that I've heard as a criticism from the Trump administration, that they did not protect people who were victims in

the info war. And they should have done a better job of that. And it does make it hard to attract quality people and retain quality people if you're not going to protect them in this information scuffle. But at least Don Jr. and them going out big time was enough to just rally the troops and have everybody go, which no matter what the outcome, we have a nation worldwide open source intelligence operation underway, perhaps like nothing we've ever seen before. Comparable to COVID, but just in a presidential election, it's the first time it's ever happened like this. And you know what?

If everybody's working on it and they're all thinking about it and the answer is that he has lost, I feel like everybody, knowing that they've spent all their powder, can accept that. But not until then. Maybe. I think, at the very least, we have to try. We have to make sure when accusations or allegations come up, we clear the air because we're hyperpolarized.

Yeah. So, under normal circumstances, if it was 2016, and Hillary started screaming about the Russians, it's like, okay, we'll entertain this. We'll look into it. Then they went kind of nuts with it for several years. And now I'm like, hey, if you're going to do the Russian thing, we're going to do the vote fraud thing.

End of story. But ultimately the point is if you're this polarized, the last thing you want to do is say we refuse to listen to you. Do as we say and submit. Because then people are going to be like, no. There's a chance for cooperation. All right, we heard you. There may be some fraud. We're going to be like, no, there's a chance for cooperation. All right. We heard you. There may be some fraud. We're going to treat this fairly.

We're going to do a recount and an audit to make sure that this is right. And if you lost, accept it. And that really will defang any aggression. There's still be some people who are like, no, but ultimately that's what has to happen. But they're not doing that, though. Right. As Don Jr. set the tone for their network charge. Yeah. set the tone for their network charge yeah joe biden sets the tone for his network saying off

office of the president-elect and just running with it and starting to float names for cabinets and etc so they're they're clearly not taking the approach of this is how it's supposed to be there's a period for legal challenges and even if that gets screwed up hey it's written down and agreed to that the state legislatures can slate whatever electors that they want, basically. So that's all normal. It's unusual, but it's all legal. It's all part of the system. I don't even think it's unusual.

It's that the media has created this perspective for a generation where it's we call the election. Look what the New York Times tweeted. You see what the New York Times tweeted? It's the job of the media to call the presidential election. Yeah, I screen capped that immediately knowing that they were going to delete that that was insane they're like only the media declares the winner and we're going to explain how thread you know like one slash x and then and then uh it got deleted real quick right that's a good this is this is normal what's happening there's an election they're tallying the votes and they have not certified them.

But the media has created a perspective that it's supposed to be them who calls it. And when they do, it's over. That's how it's always been. We're in charge. Trump says we still have to tell certification. The normal process is the process in the Constitution. It is weird to me that we have a contested election, even if it looks like Trump is going to lose. And the media

is saying shut up and submit stop saying this i look at cnn they ran this this video where they're like right-wing individuals putting out misinformation that trump could still win right it's it's crazy because it has never been this obvious i feel like we're watching that cartoon character trying to plug the holes in a ship as the water is spraying through. Dude, I don't know if Trump is going to win. The votes are in Joe Biden's favor, but the normal process is legal challenges and Trump has them. So at the very least, you don't say Trump can't win. Well, it's starting to change, though. Vox.com published an article saying, well, it's not likely but uh trump could win these ways and then they list out like three different ways trump could actually win through a normal legal process not a coup right

i can't remember any time in my lifetime that the state legislatures have slated electors that didn't reflect the will of the people in their state has that happened i mean if we if we go back to the 1800s there's weird elections yeah like we talked about a little bit the other day so there's really weird election where it was tied in the electoral college so they just appointed a council of democrats republicans judges and lawyers or whatever to just like convene and decide who the president would be like a pope thing and that's what they did and that's what they did and they were like all right well, here we agree. And actually, the concession, I believe this ended the Reconstruction era, because basically there was there.

They felt like they were on the verge of another civil war. So they said, OK, OK, how about the presidency goes to the Republican, but we'll give you a bunch of stuff. And they said, fine. And then that ended Reconstruction. Yeah. Created a Democrat stronghold in the South for generations to come. you a bunch of stuff and they said fine and then that ended reconstruction yeah created a democrat stronghold in the south for generations to come and then that like is ultimately what resolved this that the interesting thing is apparently there's like an article an article that says

you know a trump a deal with trump to leave the white house trump don't care he don't want it yeah like uh there's rumors that they're you know you'll be a kingmaker you can run packs you can do all these things once you leave and trump's like no right i'm president right do you think tim truly that even if it goes all the way through all the courts and everything and maybe even gets to the point where like a decision could be made by the Supreme Court that would affect the outcome, and it still doesn't fall his way. You think that when everything is exhausted, what's he going to do? Trump? Yeah.

I don't know. I don't know. I do. He'll bow out. I don't know. He's too good of a person to screw things up like that, I think. I don't know. I agree.

I don't think that he will stay on an extra judicious way. I don't know what's going on I don't think I don't think that he will stay on extra an extra judicious way. I don't know what's going on behind illegally. There's an article from The Washington Post that says there's a massive behind the scenes effort to stop Trump right now. As if we didn't know that, like, like they've been doing this for years. Right. The massive behind the scenes effort to stop Trump at every cost. Now they're saying it was, I think, Brennan said pence must invoke article amendment 25 and remove trump before he does something it's like he's still the president right but they're worried don jr tweeted declassify at

all so please do that'd be perfect right right right and they're freaking out because they've been trying to stop him at all costs so here's the question you look at russiagate you look at obamagate and you look at these like this very clear and terrifying uh instances the evidence that's come out so far i wouldn't say it's definitive proof like of a massive criminal conspiracy but it's circumstantial evidence that we need probably a special prosecutor and a hard investigation maybe what was it 27 million dollars or whatever to go through it you have these notes from the fbi saying what's our goal to get Flynn fired or prosecute? You have the notes where they're talking about, you know, Joe Biden mentioning the Logan Act. They're doing what they're doing right now.

What Biden is doing right now is a violation of the Logan Act. Indeed, Joe Biden is contacting foreign governments saying he's the president and the election is not even over yet. Why haven't him got a certification and he's calling foreign governments? OK, two things one i've been seeing that clip from the debates where wallace asked them both point blank will you uh you know concede once the election has been certified trump gives a long rambling answer but in the middle he goes 100 but then he goes into this whole thing about dispute you know anticipating this and at the very end wallace asked biden the very same question and biden goes absolutely like he or that question was more like will you wait to claim the presidency or whatever until

certification is done and he said yes and he's clearly not doing he's not yeah the fact that he's putting together a transition team the fact that he said he doesn't need approval from the government to do what he's doing they went after michael flynn for the logan act well but they ultimately got him on lying but hold on let's up. Earlier when we were off the air, you were mentioning the fact that Trump has instructed his, you know, cabinet chiefs and folks to prepare the budgets as if he's going to be president. Yeah, that's the same thing is Biden off opening the office of the president elect. They're just both now they're both moving forward as if they're going to be the victors. Yeah, the difference is Trump is within his legal right to tell them, prepare your budgets

for this coming season. And arguably by their own standard, they argued Joe Michael Flynn should not have been contacting Kislyak, the Russian ambassador before he was Trump was inaugurated. He was only acting national security uh advisor therefore for joe biden right now to be contacting foreign leaders and discussing i guess what he did was he contacted the uk and said don't screw up the you know a peace deal with ireland or something like that over brexit because now you know like i guess ireland wants to go eu something like that's going on and i'm immediately people seeing people tweet out like biden just violated the logan act lock them up i feel like they bring up the logan act every time there's a transition like this

and it's and it's and it's ridiculous because it's not really a violation we expect the president elected his administration to to start preparing for you know entering office yeah but they went after trump in this way so anyway i bring this up because if we're talking about a uh i don't know what you'd call it a conspiracy you, since the beginning of the Trump administration to sabotage his administration and his presidency, and now they're actively trying to do it again. At what point do, like, here's the conundrum. You look at the information we have available to us. If you only read or watch mainstream news, then you believe everything's been fine. Russiagate was fine. It's too bad for Trump. Oopsie. And then, you know, Joe Biden wins the

presidency. But if you are paying attention to the bigger picture and you know about the Obamagate allegations and the evidence that's been released, and you can see that these people have been engaging in malicious activities for quite some time, at what point do you say what they are doing, what they are doing, what they are doing is the coup and not Trump? Well, exactly. And if you watch the plot against the president, a fantastic movie directed by Amanda Milius, a former Trump political appointee, daughter of John Milius, the director of Apocalypse Now, Red Dawn, and a few others. She laid out a very compelling story showing how the Democrats have been screwing with Trump this whole time, all the lies,

all the plotting, all the scheming, all the everything. And if you see that and you watch it, and it's all based on documents that were submitted to Congress, right, and testimony from people in Congress. If you watch that, then there's absolutely no surprise to see or think if someone says, hey, do you think the Democrats might try to try to screw with the election? It makes perfect sense. But if you've never heard of any of that stuff. So we've been in. Yeah, if if if that's true, and would you be would you say it's true? There was a plot against the president? Absolutely. Then we have been in an information civil war since Trump got elected, probably a little bit before Nixon was he was spying on people in the Watergate Hotel, his political opponent.

I don't know the specifics, but this is this is so different. It's so different. We're talking about information war. Yeah, we're talking about the media lying. Oh, this is the next level. Yeah, nonstop to convince people that it's trump who did these things but they've been disproven trump none of this is stuff that has actually stuck to the president and social media is suppressing in some cases the the advert oh

oh yes it's like social media just banned people's pundit and his wife they like the fact that they're putting uh it was mark levin he tweeted electors the electors are chosen by the state legislators who can choose trump and they flagged it as disputed right that twitter is does not care about this country and it's really creepy when you have someone like jack dorsey say to me he said we uh we are working for you know rules for a global audience yeah well guess what buddy we are an american country i understand that you have a global audience in the united states your rules need to function as per the how the united states operates in our norms right they put out i get emails all the time we you know you have violated the law and what is it pakistan or whatever you ever get one of those yeah all the time yeah

foreign language and they're but you're right so they're not adopting you know to their laws there You know, you have violated the law in what is it, Pakistan or whatever. You ever get one of those? Yeah, all the time. Yeah. Foreign language. You're right. So they're not adopting, you know, to their laws there, but they should be adopting ones here. They're American based, American, you know, not even concentration, but just standards. Well, and free speech and accurately reflecting our legal realities. Yeah. Yeah. Tim, I've been talking about the info war that we've been in for years now.

And it's, you know, every time I have somebody on the podcast, we dig through it. We talk about the evidence that's there, how it impacts us, how to counteract it. It's everywhere. And so when they've been talking about color revolutions, they've been talking, people have been talking about this, the slow motion train wreck that's been happening over years. And they've been building up to this. I wonder, I was thinking just recently, you remember how there was a wave of leftist talking heads going out into the media going, Trump will never leave the White House. Trump will never leave the White House. It was like all of a sudden they all start talking about. This is a while back. It was like months and months and months ago.

Like Bill Maher and Andrew Sullivan. Michael Moore. Michael Moore. You know, they must have gotten a memo in their little private circles to start talking about that because they want to start casting doubt over this whole process. If they're going to try to if they if there's any thought to trying to steal the election, then what do you do in the beginning? You already discredit what a rational person would do in the event of an actual coup. What would a rational person do? I refuse to accept these results if they're tainted.

And so they already sort of like took away what the rational person's response would be in advance that's narrative battle that's information war so we're already thinking that that's a bad thing but he might be doing the right thing when he does it and they say we told you this would happen you see what he's doing exactly so here's the thing uh newsweek ran an article in july saying that trump would lose he would claim voter fraud freeze up the certification process and then the the supreme court would kick it to house delegations to to vote each state gets one vote there are more republican states than democrat trump wins but what they do is it's all a plan if right now there was evidence of fraud and there's quite a bit is it widespread? I don't think so.

Will it change the outcome? We have, well, we have to, we have to see it has to go to court. It has to be investigated right now. The way to describe it is we're seeing smoke and we're seeing smoke billowing. And I'm going, I'm like, Hey, a journalist guy, you see that smoke? And there's no smoke. What are you talking about? It's right there.

There's no smoke. Clearly you're wrong. There's clearly no fire. That's what they keep doing. No evidence, no smoke. What are you talking about? It's right there. There's no smoke. Clearly, you're wrong. There's clearly no fire. That's what they keep doing. No evidence. No evidence. No matter how many how many affidavits we get, they say there's no evidence. So but just real quick, the point is, right now, are they expecting Trump to come out

with a literal ballot and be like, look, I found evidence? No, what happens is you have a witness say, I witnessed fraud. Now we investigate to find hard evidence. Indeed. And it's happening. The investigation is underway. I interviewed a gentleman, Matt Brainerd, yesterday. He's a former data chief for Trump for president, worked on the campaign in 2016, had a bunch of guys working with them right now that worked on campaign. And what they've done is they've run,

they bought data from all of the relevant elect electoral districts and they're checking against a change of address databases, death databases requested, but not returned absentee ballots, et cetera. And they have found through buying this data and augmenting it and running their analysis. They have found 2 million potential incidences that would fall under these categories.

Not that they're fraud, but just like this is their high risk category. And now they have farmed out call centers to call all 2 million people. Whoa. What? And yeah, they've raised a half a million dollars to do this. And they're calling all 2 million people who are tagged in this. To verify their vote. To verify their vote. dollars to do this and they're calling all two million people who are tagged in this to verify their vote and and if they and they have already found people who said like yeah uh no i didn't

request that ballot and no i didn't vote in it or or whatever and they are now then they get funneled off to being helped uh filing uh at first was affidavits but now declarations whoa yeah so matt brainer check it out. I did an interview with him yesterday. It's on my YouTube channel, Jack Murphy Live. Check it out and donate some money if you would like. And that is a really powerful thing that they're doing. And one thing that you had said earlier about, you know, they say it's not widespread. Well, first, I heard a funny joke that the new the new peaceful protest is the fraud isn't widespread. No widespread fraud.

Right, right, right. But it doesn't matter to be widespread. We were talking about this earlier. This is what you guys missed while YouTube was down. We're talking about saying widespread fraud is like talking about the popular vote. It doesn't matter. The electoral college is a targeted contest. And so your cheating would be thus done in a targeted fashion limited in the

key areas otherwise you set off flags all over the place so i you know look do i think that there was it's hard to accept that there could be a you know conspiracy of people determined to overthrow the will of the american people etc etc it's hard to swallow it's possible all i know is for sure is i want this process to play out what i see is smoke and then i see a cia computer program that's built to set fire and that drives me nuts because i can't prove that hammer and scorecard are being used to flip votes all around the country but there are people testifying that they are no i don't think anyone's testified what's her name or maybe that testifies not the right word sydney powell cannot testify they're starting to make statements that this software maybe they say it could be you're looking

in the wrong direction they're tricking you that they are getting you to fall into their trap by talking about things you cannot prove i can't prove it we can prove that in nevada a poll worker said i saw fraud and i swear under oath so you think it's a red herring is not the right word but just the wrong thing red herring absolute red herring well it might be right it might not be the wrong point is whenever we this is the the key aspect of the pit trap and conspiracy theories is dangling something sensational that can't be proven so that everyone looks in the wrong direction and they get away with it. And you got it. I'm going to drill that home to anyone listening.

It's I think that's super important because a lot of people really want to go hard on this. Exactly. It's a trick. They do it all the time. You get these emails from WikiLeaks and it's got this weird language in it. And someone drops in a bucket of red meat of ridiculous sensationalist claims and boom, you get a lunatic fringe conspiracy theory about satanic death cults operating and it throws off

what's actually going on. Blackmail networks, criminal enterprise. There's legitimate reality that you could find in these emails, but they trick people into chasing after things you can't prove or verify. So now you've got all these people tweeting at me, Tim, hammer and scorecard. And I'm like, nothing I could ever prove. Nothing you could look it up. Nothing you could verify. You got two. You got one guy who said said a former general saying it's true. I'll tell you what I what I what I am focused on. We've got now, I think, what, three poll workers signing sworn affidavits saying we saw fraud. You've got Donald Trump filing a lawsuit having nothing to do with fraud, arguing that there's impropriety under the 14th Amendment. These are tangible things. You can actually say that happened. What's the Trump 14th Amendment thing? The 14th Amendment is that everyone needs

to be treated equally under the law. Simple, simple way to describe it. Under Bush v. Gore, they ruled all votes must be treated equally. But mail-in ballots are completely different from in-person voting. When a person goes to vote in person, they go through an entirely different process. The argument there on the surface is you've created two tracks of unequal voting. There's different security measures. There's different. So if you go in and vote in person and you mess up too bad, but if you vote by mail and you mess up, they allow you to cure your ballot. That is not equal treatment under under the law. Now, initially, when it came to absentee ballots, it was for military voters. So this made sense. We made an exception. We got people

overseas. We're not we can't bring them back. We're going to do something. And it's a special exemption that we all agree makes sense. But universal mail in ballot voting, which specifically would would cause an issue in Nevada, for instance, which Trump could use for sure, is that they just mailed them all out. And it's a swing state. And now you can argue that a person who votes in person chooses to get up and seek out the vote. A mail-in ballot arrives at their house without their choice. Not the same thing. There's a fundamental difference just right there. But there's a bunch of other things they're pointing out, too the same citation Bush v. Gore. They're saying in this district, they said you can cure your ballot. We found your ballot was missing an address or signature.

So we contact you and say, fix it. But in this district, they didn't do that. Therefore, they've created an imbalance and votes being treated unequally. That's Trump's actual lawsuit in Pennsylvania, Michigan. It's broad. But but again, the same argument is being made while Trump while while all of these people are screaming about conspiracies and fraud and the media saying no fraud, Trump's over here filing lawsuits on process. So that's going to be the first. And this is what Vox is talking about this. Like they're finally now coming out, people in media and leftist media saying this is a real path for Trump to win. It has nothing to do with these vote tally conspiracies

or anomalous numbers. I've talked about Benford's law. I've talked about how the vote totals changed, but you can't prove anything. And they're easily dismissed by saying typo. You say all of these are typos. Well, yeah, you have 200 million registered voters. We have 150 million votes. You're going to find a few hundred instances of typos. Irregularities. Yeah, exactly. Well, there's going to be a margin of failure with millions of people trying to tally these votes. Okay, fine. Then let's talk about process and the sworn affidavits and the USPS whistleblower and the weird news coming around there. You bring up hammer and scorecard and vote flipping, you'll never prove it. And you're not going to convince an investigator or a judge or anyone to be like, we need to investigate this for this reason,

for hammer and scorecard. But if you go up to them and say, in this Michigan County, 6,000 votes accidentally glitched and went to the Democrats and the Republican, Trump is using that as a pretext for a legal challenge on all of these different machines in Michigan. And they're going to file lawsuits across the board because of it. You've got to start with something you can prove. A glitch happened. We have testimony, sworn affidavit. It flipped and a Republican even ended up winning. It was like a commissioner of some sort. He said, I was out. I wasn't going to call for a recount. Then they got they called

up. Actually, you won by a thousand votes. He went, oh, I didn't realize that right there. We got to get him on the show. That's all, which is grounds in whether the courts agree. Here's what I imagine is going to happen. Trump's going to file the suit at the state level. He's going to say, look at this glitch. I want all of these to be hand counted. The judge will probably say no. Then they'll file in federal court. And then we'll see what the federal circuits say. And we've already seen Alito side with Trump in Pennsylvania.

There was a four to four ruling, because Amy Coney Barrett wasn't on the Supreme Court at the time, that said, I believe they couldn't decide whether to allow Pennsylvania to extend their mail-in ballot deadline. That right there is a violation of the 14th Amendment. The fact that if you want to vote in person, you can only vote on the 3rd, but if you want to vote by mail, you can mail in your ballot after the fact. That is a special, that is unequal of votes. That's messed up because you can see what the

vote is the current vote and be like oh well that since my vote's gonna change things i'm gonna go vote hey every other 10 000 guys let's go change the election this is why we have the backdating scandal with the usps whistleblower because what according to this whistleblower that came out through veritas who signed a sworn affidavit, and this story's crazy, when the ballots were being collected after election day, he said he overheard them saying they were backdating them to bypass the fact that these ballots were not applicable. So what ends up happening now is if that's true, a bunch of the ballots that got counted after election day actually were from after the election, which would create a 14th Amendment violation under

Bush v. Gore. I'm not a lawyer. This is just the cursory reading I did of their argument. And I asked a lawyer and they said, long shot, but possible. That right there is, did Pennsylvania violate a court order by tabulating ballots without observers? Fact. There were observers in the building, but they weren't granted the access the courts

demanded. They counted, according to Giuliani, 450,000 votes when people weren't when people were being blocked from actually getting within six feet to watch the observation to observe the tabulation. Those votes, according to Giuliani, should be disqualified. And Trump tweeted about this. And this is a very, very serious challenge right now, because think about it. There's no solution here. There's no no good solution it's my side wins or your side wins but if a court says you must allow the observers within six feet and you say no and count 450 000 bouts secrecy envelope pulled off discarded you can no longer verify any of those bouts are real you should also file a class action suit for the people that get those votes disqualified against the people that did that tally improperly.

That's a lot of waste of time and civil liberty and energy. I think what your dude was talking about is the first path. Yeah. Figure out who these votes were from because this is this period where they were counting without, you know, in violation of the court order. Those are the names we need to check because the accusation is they were probably fake ballots or something. Okay, well, that's easily verifiable. Take the ballots. We can't, they're no longer verifiable because a secrecy envelope has been discarded already or destroyed or whatever, but you can see the name of the person, contact them and say, did you cast this mail-in ballot? And if we get a decent amount

of people saying no, well, then you got a serious problem. So that's step one. I don't know if we'll get to that point. And I'll tell you, there is something really creepy about Democrats suing to block this. The ACLU just filed a lawsuit to stop Trump from challenging these ballots. So think about what that means. That means in the future, a court can order. It is a violation of the law to do what you're doing. And they can say, too bad. Too bad. We're allowed to do it. No integrity.

No election security. We're allowed to do it. This is what ACLU is arguing, basically. The ACLU is arguing that these ballots should count, even though they violated the court order. I haven't seen the full paperwork write up, but they tweeted. Don't trust a single word you hear from ACLlu man they lost they lost it years ago when i got doxed and i got fired for what i had written i was contacted by the dc head legal for aclu he says i want to take your case i want to take your case i want to help you they violated your first

amendment right he worked with me for months we We wrote a paper, we did research, we got everything all the way through. He took it to his legal committee. They declined it. He took it to the head committee. They declined it also. And the reason why they declined it, despite the fact the legal director of the ACLU said it was a clear violation of my first amendment rights because they didn't want to offend their, their coalition partners, such as human rights campaign. Black Lives Matter. Exactly. Now, on what you're talking about here, I think one thing that we've learned about how to get at your enemies and how to win.

What did they do to Mike Flynn? They didn't get Mike Flynn on any real crimes. What they get Mike Flynn process crimes. Everybody makes mistakes in process. So it makes some good sense actually to attack the election from a process standpoint. So it will be interesting to see how that plays out, man. I, I'm not a lawyer. And the question that I want to have answered, especially after I talked to Matt Brainerd yesterday is let's say that there are, you know, five people in every important

district that come forth with the sworn affidavit saying their fraud their vote was you know somehow invalidated or fraud or there's something going on there what then how many instances do there have to be and then what is the recourse you know what if everybody says okay yeah we swear that we saw this fraud happening we saw this happening what do What do they do? They do a revote. No, no. Why not? They have to do it by December 11th. Right.

December 11th. Make an amendment. December 14th is the Electoral College vote. There you go. Boom. Yeah. So make an amendment when two thirds of the states ratify it in two or three years. Right.

The amendment process in this country, it took a really long time. I think it was the 17th amendment it was like seven or eight years before they actually fully implemented it after it was already ratified by all these different states so if the vote's fraudulent or we can't do a re-vote no it goes to the house there's a process they just decide it's already been decided in advance when you enter in the rules of the game the rules of the game say in the house in the event of this house delegations vote so there's there's a bunch of other really weird things about like it could potentially go to kamala harris there's one uh provision i haven't read enough about it that if they can't determine

you know certify the president-elect then they'll try to certify the vice president-elect or something i don't know the full details on it but yeah maybe kamala harris i don't know dude okay i tweeted out a couple years ago i said very clearly kamala harris will never be president kamala i know i knew you were gonna stop me because you have it's the it's what they said right kamala harris will never be president and i know that i've said it it's out there people screen cap it fine i think about deleting that tweet all the time and it's like i've said it it's out there people screen cap it fine i think about deleting that tweet all the time and it's like it's good it's gonna go down get a frame it could go down as the worst take in my entire life there's no avoiding it ever look true and on a shop at a pressure please no exactly about a cath care exactly i i i can't exactly it's we're

already seeing people are looking at the election without actual evidence and they're like i don't believe this and i think that's scary seeing tweets from like tarik nishid you see what he's talking about you know who he is right yeah he's like this is a finesse he's like i'm not a trump supporter but there's no way come on he's like how how could joe biden beat barack obama's you know uh record by like 10 million or by like 7 million votes or whatever oh it's 8 million now joe biden beat barack obama by 8 million votes so you've got people who love obama and they're saying bs no way no way you beat obama right i'm not saying joe biden couldn't hate Trump. I think I think it makes sense.

And I think right now is what is what Vox said. It's really funny. They're starting to write these articles because they're not free. These writers are not free to tell you what's really going on. They're worried about offending their audience. They're worried about what their bosses will say. I got nothing to worry about. I say, I mean, I'm worried about, you know, if we if we swear too much an unnecessary deranking of content but i'll talk about all this stuff even if even if it risks me getting banned or whatever i don't have to go check with my boss i can say straight up there is a slim possibility that donald trump pulls this off based on the arguments we're hearing the amount of states

he'd have to flip but if he gets a 14th amendment argument to the supreme court and it works it would nullify many mail-in mail-in ballots in a ton of states and that would probably that would probably seal the deal well we saw what happened tuesday night versus wednesday morning that would seal the deal right exactly yeah so so the landslide many of these but here's the thing many of these are absentee the issue is will the supreme court agree now i don't know what i do know is that there are three members of the supreme court who helped george bush win in 2000 roberts kavanaugh and amy coney barrett and that when i heard that i i someone super chatted it and i was like no way yeah there's no way trump appointed two of the bush lawyers yep he did and then and then get this clarence thomas you think he's got a bone to pick with joe oh man go back to the 90s and watch those videos if you

haven't seen it do you see what clarence thomas said to joe biden no way 90s oh my god i can't repeat what he said whoa he said it was i'll give you the gist he said it was a what did he call it a high-tech lynching a high-tech lynching. A high-tech lynching. Cyber lynching, something like that. For uppity blacks. Not cyber. Yeah. Who said that to who? Clarence Thomas. Clarence Thomas.

When they were accusing him of, what was it, like sexual assault or something? Yep. Harassment. Harassment. He was nominated for the Supreme Court, and they ran him through the coals accusing him of being this harasser. And he said it was essentially a lynching to stop uppity blacks that's what clarence thomas thomas said and so now there's a meme going around of clarence thomas

with his eyes glowing and it says i've been waiting 30 years for this moment joe yeah i believe that would impugn the honor of clarence thomas though i think he can rule impartially and set aside he can rule on the merits what about kavanaugh you don't think he's got a bone to pick dude with guess who k harris she was one of the worst in those hearings i watched every second and he was on the verge of tears i was crying in my house on my couch watching him it was mostly when he started talking about how he got he couldn't coach his girls his daughter's basketball team anymore because of all this nonsense. And I had recently just lost my little league with my son. So it really hit home for me. But I'll never forget that moment because that's when I really saw evil. Yeah. And I saw the language of radical feminism and intersectionality and critical race theory

all coming out of the mouths of these senators at a hearing for a supreme court justice and that was the moment that i knew that the culture war that i had been observing for 10 years was not just some crazy tinfoil thing it had made it all the way into judiciary hearings like confirmation of the of the supreme court justice and it was just terrifying to me so if anybody remembers how much of a b k harris can be it is brett kavanaugh dude i think you just need to remember the face that brett kavanaugh had made when he was nearly in tears and his wife was was nearly in tears watching it happen this is a guy who was already vetted to be on the courts when he became a federal judge they vetted him they were going through it again they were digging through his yearbook they were digging through his his calendar from high school. You drink beer. What does that mean? And they were berating him and implying on TV that he was he was part of a group that would line up outside of bedrooms and drug women and take turns, if you know what I mean. And that is insane. banging on the door screaming i gotta be honest i think after 30 years maybe clarence thomas is

like ah it's been 30 years brett kavanaugh's like that was a year and a half ago yeah it was two years i think whatever happens they're gonna stick to the letter of the law like and if that means that trump has them on a technicality i think they'll ruin trump's favor yep i agree it's not it's not so much about a technicality it's's about so it's interestingly, we're seeing the media's desperate attempt to sweep this under the rug. There was a tweet from some some journalists saying Trump flat out admits it or something. And it's a transcript from one of the lawsuits where they were like the judge asked them point blank if they were fraud and they said no. And then all these lefties are high fiving each other. That's an attempt to trick people into thinking Trump's lying. The lawsuit was about improper ballots, not fraud.

So the judge said, I'm asking you right now, was there fraud? And the lawyer said, to my to my knowledge, no, they're trying to make it seem. The second part of that was confusing because it said, is there impropriety in the voting? And it also said no, because right, because what he's arguing is these people made a mistake. Their ballots don't count. And so the point I'm bringing up is technicalities. It doesn't matter if it's a technicality. What matters is the argument from the lawyer was it's in the legal code.

We must adhere to the legal code. You're going to hear a different opinion from different people as to why it's in the legal code. It doesn't matter. It's in there for a reason. Is he arguing A? No. Is he arguing B? No. It doesn't matter. It's in there for a reason. Is he arguing A? No. Is he arguing B? No.

And then they stopped. But what he was arguing was C. It was also a problem. No, he says this. They just didn't even ask him about if that's what he was doing. You must have missed the page of the transcript. He says it. He says it's in the code.

I did miss the page, yeah. He says it's in the code. And for whatever reason, we can speculate, it's in the code. He basically said, you can ask me why it's there. You can ask me why I think this violation warrants a disqualification, and it's irrelevant. The law says, without this, disqualified. And he's correct. It's not up to us to determine the intent.

It's like, here's the law. Here's what it says about the ballots and how they're supposed to be processed if you don't do it the ballot doesn't so fraud's a specific legal term oh yeah fraud is deception we're talking about people who didn't put their be clear people who didn't put their addresses on the ballots i see so the ballots are trash okay yeah that's what that particular okay so where i'm at is plug in a couple holes of the dam i think that's the what side i'm on in the metaphor. But I'm not going to stand there and get blasted by a rush of water.

If it looks like it's not going to work, I'm not going to keep screaming to make sure Biden fails and that we got to go after hammer and screw. We got to find. I'm just going to say if it doesn't work, I'm bowing out and I'm focusing on the solution for the next election, which I think is online. There won't be an election. Oh, there will be another election. But listen, if they can legally violate a court, if they can violate a court order and get away with it, you think someone's going to be able to win legitimately next time?

If they, if, yeah, yeah. How? Well, legitimate's a loaded term right now. They violated a court order. Firstly, that is a big if. If they pull off some nonsense firstly that is a big if if they if they pull off some nonsense that's a big problem so so right now let's say that trump goes to court and says they violated the court order and counted these ballots and now because they've already been

removed from the envelopes we can't reverse the process and observe so you think if the letter if the law is upheld right now, that Trump will win? I don't know. Like, are you saying that if... From what you see of the situation. You're saying that's the court order. Yeah, from what you see of... If the court agrees with Trump.

So here's the problem. First of all, assuming it's true they counted 450,000 ballots. That's the statement from the legal team. Just because they filed a lawsuit doesn't mean that's what happened. Assuming that's the case, we do know what's true is they counted without observers being able to watch within the distance uh the court said confirmed because there's videos of people there with binoculars saying they won't let us pass this barricade and they're a hundred feet from us the court said six we don't know what the number is here's the problem if the court says we don't care they violated the court order these ballots

are good you incentivize legit fraud because now everyone's like we could we could we could shuffle in a bunch of boxes and count them and they won't do anything about it done if they do stop it there's also a problem if they say these ballots are spoiled then you could create a situation where you trick people into destroying ballots on accident. How would you do that? So you get people to open the ballots without an observer. Then you file a suit saying, you see what I mean? That one's more circuitous. So ultimately, I err on the side of if the ballots were counted within violation of a court order, you can't count them. You can't. We have a security process and a legal observation process, a public observation process for a reason. Individuals

can walk in and watch because we want to make sure there's integrity and we're being honest. If somebody is doing something in secret when it's supposed to be for the public, the public has a right to know what they're doing with our resources. We have FOIA, right? The Freedom of Information Act. We can request the government give us documents on things, and then they argue why they should or shouldn't, and then they redact stuff, and then they give it out. When it comes to our elections, we need to know that we can watch publicly. That's what I was suggesting earlier. Maybe the vote tallies are up here online. The only problem with that is you need an internet connection on these machines, and that could be, you know, problematic. But I think a lot of the data was published online in increments from various outlets.

Ultimately, what I'm saying is we wouldn't need observers if as soon as someone put the ballot in, it appeared. Boom. Like, here's the vote. Here's the person. Here's what it's for. The problem is ballots are secret for a reason. People wouldn't vote for trump if ballots were public they'd be terrified no everyone would find out so they won't do it'd be nice if you didn't see

what the vote was for but all the information was public like the social security number was public no no no no no no everyone's social security is public no it's like just your your dog tag it doesn't matter people know what your number is you know life lock yeah the like identity theft he did that commercial where he had a truck driving with a social security number on it and he was like i'm safe and then he got his identity stolen like 14 times because you're not you can't no one is going to be able to keep their social security number secret in this world it's yeah but no use them or build a new a second type of number that we can use for some criminals can figure out your social security number so we might as well publish everyone's information. Well, we got to use a personal ID code

along with a barcode that shows who you voted for, and only you can scan that barcode. Or we just redact everything but who the vote was for. Ian actually makes a good point here in that all information will become known eventually. Like our network, the whole way that our society is going, all information is going to end up being public, right? You can't rely on anonymity. You can't rely on things being said in secret. You know, if you're secure enough now, you should start preparing yourself for the idea that all information is going to be publicly known. They may not be now, but it's coming. Use a password manager.

Bitwarden is a good one. It's open source software and it keeps your encrypted password. You need a master password to log into it. It's better than keeping your passwords on like your browser. Let's kick this conversation up to the next level. Oh, my God. Here we go. Trump fires defense secretary in post-election reckoning after policy splits he didn't just get rid of defense secretary mark esper he got rid of like the top brass the pentagon yeah and you know the you know these leftists are saying and journalists are saying this is him stacking the the deck with loyalists as he plans a coup and i gotta say i don't know why trump would fire these people a

few months before he's supposed to vacate assuming he loses maybe he's just operating assuming he's going to win but the rumor was he was going to fire them after he got re-elected he's doing it during what what man of being a lame duck session which makes me wonder about what might happen and why he needs to get rid of people who may be you know he may have issues with i don't know i'm not ready to go there but i will admit that in reading uh about the terminations and about some of the personnel placement that's been put over at the pentagon in varying positions of power chief of staff some others knowing that there's some real hardcore trump loyalists being placed over at defense department it did make me wonder just why now one of the first questions i come to mind is like is there any precedent has an outgoing uh president had a change of you know

house and leadership at the end of the term maybe there's some reason for it i don't know i bet there's a reason but just thinking about some of the people who were placed over there and just makes you wonder. Who did he place? He placed Kash Patel. Who's that? Kash Patel worked with Devin Nunes during the Russiagate phenomenon scandal. And he was present in the House hearings, I believe, and was there and witnessed the evidence and the testimony that was presented and all the guys coming in. And they all said to him, you know, to the hearing that there's no evidence of any

collusion or whatever. And then he, you know, was part of sort of the whistleblowing process and the Nunes memo that came out and all of that. And so he definitely been putting in a lot of hard work on behalf of the Republic. Let's not forget, this is not, it's not like a Trump loyalist that went and did something that was wrong. No, he's unearthing information about wrongdoing done by the democratic party. So he's working on behalf of the citizens of the United States. People have voted Donald Trump in office and anyone who respects the rule of law in America that said he's a proven, you know, Trump loyalist. And he's been placed over at chief of staff of some high up office at at the Defense Department.

Now, I have no idea why, and I know there's people in my network that are probably mad that I'm talking about this. I don't know. I have questions. It's publicly available information. It's not like I'm revealing anything. But you do have to wonder why. I'm going to go with that there's a real normal procedural issue around this. I got some questions about the Pentagon.

So are they in control of the FBI and the CIA? That's Department of Justice. Yeah, it's the Department of Defense. I think that he was upset with the way that the Pentagon handled this voting thing and believes that there's all sorts of impropriety and fraud. This is the Department of Defense. This is like Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran.

Yeah. Okay, so maybe I'm wrong. So the DOJ is handling the vote fraud stuff, and the top DOJ guy resigned when Bill Barr issued a memo on investigating vote fraud claims. So the Pentagon is defense. So now they're saying, like, Trump is going to make a move in Iran or something like that. I don't know what he's doing. There's no way he would do, but does it sound like counting heads? Counting heads for what?

Like who's with me, who's not? So in a civil war or a coup, before the Civil War breaks out, the top leaders of each faction start counting heads. Which departments do I have? Matt Taibbi

wrote about this in Octoberober the counting heads phase is when you've got the the commander general or whatever who's like i'm gonna take over and you got the president and they start calculating what do i have i have the department of defense i have the chief of police i don't have the fbi to figure out where their loyalists are and what assets they have in the event of a coup civil war whatever But also you said he was going to fire these people anyway. And now the rumor was once he got reelected, he was going to fire Gina Haspel, Chris Ray of the FBI. So she was, what was Haspel? She was an NSA? I don't recall. I know that Christopher Ray has to go though. Yeah, he was the FBI. And then Esper, he was the defense secretary,

was he? Yeah. Christopher Ray is the one who's got his head up his own butt about white supremacy being the most dangerous domestic threat that we face like get out of town buddy yeah right it's climate change isn't it i'm just i'm just kidding isn't a giant asteroid pajama man haspil is cia she was the head of the so he's just got rid of these people anyway before it becomes official if it does that biden is president-elect he doesn't want to do it after that because it's going to look really shady. So I think he's just getting out of the way. What do you mean? If Donald Trump lost, then his only opportunity is to do it right now. I'm sorry. If Donald Trump loses the election, the results are in for Biden.

If Donald Trump doesn't get certified the winner, his only opportunity to remove Haspel, Esper and Ray is right now for January 4th. Well, I guess, okay. He could wait until January. Yeah. And he would look like a criminal if he was doing it after that vote.

Tally was already in Biden's favor. Cause I see, I see, I see. You mean after January 14th? I mean, I'm sorry, December,

December 14th, after the certification process, we just get it out of the way. So it seems maybe, but then what they could rehire them if they want i know and that's why i would but but trump replaced them with loyalists so that's a different trump's a megalomaniac no what trump's problem is the biggest number one problem aside from whatever personality issues may be is his personnel and hiring decisions oh god no number one problem john bolton what was he no i'm not even talking about that i'm talking about the thousands of political

appointees the deep the staffers here and there and there and just the people who are in the white house or in west wing who are like maga for real like who are down with the cause and volunteered on the campaign and part of the network that launched Trump into power. They are, you can like count them on a short list and they are isolated and they've been fighting and battling the bureaucracy and they call it the deep state. Same thing. People that didn't want to see their agenda get pushed through, whether they're leftover Democrats or GOP establishment people, or just milquetoast conservatives that weren't ready for right, you know, right side revolution that Trump trump represented and he's been fighting that all along number one criticism everybody's made it of him is the personnel there's no question about it

and uh you know if only he would have just fired people that he didn't think were doing what he wanted a long time ago and just put the right people in a place from the jump and stood up for flynn and all uh he was he was jammed up in the beginning though yeah with with russiagate he couldn't he couldn't he couldn't fire half these people and i wonder you know uh what he who we would have hired who he would have fired i i certainly think he would have fired comey and a bunch of people immediately but they they argued that would have been obstruction of justice and then when he did they launched the investigation against him to stop him from doing this the russiagate stuff was looming before we had a special prosecutor.

Right. Indeed. Then they retaliated because it was he fired Comey and that sparked the start of it. Right. Yeah, sure. Then Comey was like, I remember Trump said this and I wrote it down. It's like, that's not proof. He said it like that's crazy.

Right. I just wrote it down. But, you know, I hate to say it, but you kind of have to hand it to the Democrats, man. They have run, I mean, a really hard campaign. They lost the election. They weren't going to stand for it. They were going to prevent Trump from doing whatever Trump wanted. They've been fighting and fighting and fighting dirty and fighting consistently.

And they have not given up. And they're still not giving up. And they're still pushing on. I mean, they have some stamina. There's no question. Well, it's the media. They have the media on their side. Yeah. They have establishment media saying everything. giving up and they're still pushing on i mean they have some stamina there's no question well they have it's the media they have the media on their side yeah they have establishment media saying everything i mean uh even daily mail they wrote an article about the 234 pages pages of

testimony and statements from these uh witnesses and the way the daily mail framed it was was remarkable it was like they took the worst of the accusations and made a joke out of it, ignoring or they took the silliest, ignoring the worst. So I'm seeing a bunch of leftists on Twitter do this. And it's probably because they're dumb and they want to rile up their base. But they're saying things like this guy is arguing that the military shouldn't vote for Biden. In one statement, the guy says, I saw a military ballot that was for Biden. That struck me as odd. And they're laughing at him like, what an idiot. Then then you have one where a woman says my son's been dead for eight years but somehow he's listed as voting in the election twice they ignore that one wow and that's in what the rnc has released or what trump can't pay or whoever has released in 234 pages the rnc says

they have 11 000 people who have come forward with claims of fraud yeah do we just say we ignore 11 000 or is or is the rnc lying what do you do when the second biggest political party in this country says we have 11 000 people coming forward this is not some random tinfoil hat guy yelling there was fraud in the election this is literally the second biggest political party in the country saying we have evidence we have witnesses you have to honor it for sure for sure but i mean beyond that it says something truly terrifying about the direction we're headed like as as if if the republicans win this and it turns out there was front of the democrats cheated the democrats are going to be like oh you got us good game everybody will play again next time no what are they going to do if they get caught and they actually did something

yeah what are the republicans going to do if it turns out they were lying the whole time and there was no evidence and they're just trying to scam the election either outcome is terrifying yeah i mean look i do remember seeing a uh collection of clips from fox news i think they were talking about the stacy abrams thing a couple years ago fox news all saying all the same things today about challenging this and challenging that or no it was like why are you challenging just accept that you're right everybody will say whatever they need to say to get their guy in the power there's no question about it but if we can go the hard data analytic route with hard evidence narrow down the mass pool of votes narrow down to people that that have circumstances that are questionable narrow that down narrow it down narrow it down

and then you're going to find you will find instances of fraud and malfeasance there's no question about it but we it's like we live in a country that's so big now that little instances of violence here and there when they get put up on social media, it makes it look like there's violence everywhere. It makes it look like all the cities in every country and every state are all burning down to the ground. It makes it look like all the whole city of Minneapolis is burned to the ground,

but it's not, or in DC that they're writing all over the whole city, but they're not. It's a lot. It's frequent. It's damaging. It's bad, but it's not everywhere.

So I imagine what this is the same thing. Well, large numbers here where like, Hey, there's so many people voting. Were we up to 140 million or something by now? Almost 150. Almost 150 million people. What if like 0.001% of them are screwy?

That's still a ton. Yep. One and a half million people. It's still a ton. Something like that. Right? It's fewer than that. 15,000.

You can find thousands and thousands of instances, even I think probably in any circumstance. It doesn't mean it was okay back then. Yeah. And it's definitely not okay now. And this is a good chance as any. You know, if the Democrats had any real gumption or if they were actually dedicated to the United States of America, they would say, well, you know, one good thing is going to come out of Donald Trump. We are going to really once and for all get to the bottom of potential election fraud, election malfeasance. We're going to get this system tightened up, and we're not going to let this crap happen again in the future.

But they're not saying that. No, they're saying, stop. Don't look. Don't look. That's the worst sign. That is the worst sign that they have absolutely no basis in value. So, you know, it's really. So prefacing all of this with partisanship i've i've said it over and i've said it over and over uh this is what i

brought up about brought up about what vox was saying everything right now is on track for joe biden to be certified inaugurated all that stuff these lawsuits have not had any traction to the point where we could say something might change. As it stands now, we all kind of expect it's going to be Joe Biden. That being said, what if, you know, with Trump changing, just for just for for entertain the conversation, not like I think it's a, you know, it's a lottery tickets chance, if at all. What happens if Trump doesn't leave and he gets rid of these different heads of different departments, puts in loyalists, and then come the 14th or whatever, he says no?

They'll be writing about it for a thousand years. You'll have 77 million leftists or whatever saying Trump is the dictator who's trying to stage a coup. You'll have all the Trump supporters saying no, Trump is stopping them from staging a coup. This is how it goes when there's a civil war or a coup. Both sides accuse each other of being the villain, stealing the power. Yes. You need to dispel partisan politics and good luck,

dude. That's the only way this ridiculous that people want to be in a tribe. They want to be that this was going to happen back when they were writing the damn constitution man factions yeah really and george washington would if he was running for president as the democrat right now he would say let's do the right thing let's look at the law and follow the law who would see well he gave up they want him to be king and he said no, no. Right, right. No, we need a legitimate system. Right. I will sacrifice my own good for the system. Some of these presidents very shortly after were, I think Aaron Burr was accused of being

an honorless man who was in it only for himself and his own ego. And that's part of what sparked the duel between him and Hamilton, which ultimately killed Hamilton, was because he was viewed as a narcissist who wanted power. How? I'm just talking about Washington. You have to be. Hamilton, which ultimately killed Hamilton, was because he was viewed as a narcissist who wanted power. How? I'm just talking about Washington. You have to be. You cannot become elected president unless you are a narcissist drunk with power. I don't think so.

George Washington was pretty unique. He might have been a narcissist. It's the first one, bro. It's the first one. Yeah, George. Washington doesn't count because we just finished this revolutionary war and they said, how about you? And he goes, I don't want to be president.

Well, we need somebody. You're the general. It's fine dude dude my we put up in my daughter's room a list of all the presidents there's 45 of them up there and around each of the presidents is a color that represents their political party all the presidents have a political have a color on their frame all of them except for one george washington didn have a party. You don't need one. You're missing my point. We don't need them anymore.

You can't keep referencing it. It's the first one. It's totally different, a unique circumstance that will never be lived ever again. Well, we're in a unique circumstance now with the internet video. One guy can get a hundred million. That's not an argument.

What are you saying? You don't need a political party. Dude, you have powerful special interests and you have a machine with billions of dollars you will not get on your own all they can buy is influence even even ross perot he could only you know he did pretty well the first time you know it was a guy he got bill clinton and he was an old not that charismatic guy george bush without the internet yeah if it wasn't for Ross Perot. And then he ran again, I think, at 8%.

That was impressive for an independent. He was a billionaire, wasn't he? Teddy Roosevelt won as a third party. I'm not talking about a third party. I'm talking about no party. You don't need a political party. You just need a few friends to run with you. You don't even need that.

Dude, Trump took over and hijacked the Republican Party because you need a party to get elected. And you need a party, dude, to govern. Of course. You need a cabinet. And this was Trump's downfall is that he didn't actually have a party when he came to Washington to govern. And he assumed the Republicans had his back. Exactly. So, no, there's no way you get in there without having a political party and a machine and apparatus behind you.

It's all called a personality, man. They did have his back, though. You know, they had a knife in his back yeah right they didn't have his back in the way most people assume no and that was i think man i trump was naive he he went in thinking these guys okay i won i'm the president now you know i was saying this the other day but i remember i was outside of this building where trump was meeting with gop leadership and we knew back then in dc that it was like a big deal that trump won and they hated his guts so he was going to meet with republican leadership and they were going to talk and i knew right then i'm like i know what's happening trump got he's in it escalate he pulls in he sits down at the table and you got

a bunch of republicans and they go okay trump now here's how things works and he goes no i'm the president here's how things go i'm telling you and they were like uh it reminds me of i don't know if you guys watch the new rick and morty episode no not the latest no not the latest one but the one where it's the uh it's the the rick uh the new city the citadel of ricks or whatever no no i don't know it's uh evil morty has the election and wins and then he walks in and all the ricks are laughing like you actually think you're in charge because you were elected and then he goes how many of you think this way raise your hand and then he like snaps his finger and they shoot all the unloyal guys it reminds me kind of like

that except trump didn't you know kill a bunch of people but trump i'm assuming he walked in and they said here's how things work we're the party here's what we want you to do and trump was like no and he's still saying no, because you have to imagine like there was a story in the Hill. I think I mentioned it where they said a deal for Trump to leave the White House. I'm sure he said, no, I'm the president. He's got a vision. He wants to do something. He ran for a reason and he means it. I think it's hilarious. They tried pushing off this narrative that Trump never wanted to win when he filed the paperwork for MAGA in 2012, four years before he ran.

And then he filed for reelection the moment he got elected. Yeah, he's been intending to run for a long time. He's been talking about since the 90s, I think. Yeah, and he had run at least two times beforehand as well. Yeah, Reform Party, though, right? Yeah, which I had always thought were just publicity stunts, whatever, whatever, which is kind of what I thought back on the escalator incident. I kind of thought all this was just a little bit of publicity and he would just kind of go back. But this was the time the wave was there. It wasn't right for him. The other times, you know, like the world hadn't gotten crazy enough.

Things hadn't gotten bad enough. We hadn't been fed up enough yet with the uniparty to decide like which one of these 17 guys up here is going to bust up the establishment and then they picked trump to do it kanye west could do it they didn't have they didn't have twitter before either really and not until 2010 um and he hadn't done his tv show until when did the apprentice end when did he leave the apprentice so I don't know, but we all watched the apprentice. Everybody watched the super famous person with social media can get elected.

Yeah. But through a party. Well, he joined a party. He didn't have to. Yeah, he did. No,

he didn't. Dude. Why do you think Bernie runs as a Democrat, dude? Cause he's an idiot. He should have run independent. Okay. Uh,

I was thinking back. It was, sorry. I was thinking, you should have told hillary take it suck it i'm gonna run as an independent as soon as it found out that her her server that they were trying to end him and he would have won no it would have split the demo he would have dominated that election 40 percent of democrats identify as progressive as of 2018 so that many of them would have defected many of them would say i don't want to risk trump winning but it

would split the vote for sure yeah all the people half trump's voters would have voted for the democrats are fractured and the republicans are unified indeed on that that is a strong which is which is a fact which is the republicans are shattered with trump's their fucking their freaking head man no and they've got a mitch mcconnell i'm citing i'm i'm citing pew and economist data that shows yes the republican party has coalesced around a core central ideal or ideals. He's talking about the people of the party. Not the president? The president and the party apparatus are not aligned.

But the voters and the president clearly are. Oh, I see. On the Democrat side, it's split into two mounds of progressives. Yeah, that's for sure. So if you break those up, they're literally two different parties. They seriously are. You've got union, working class, corporate, weird amalgam. It's like Joe Biden represents the I'll say whatever I have to say to convince people to vote for me.

Then you have progressives who are like socialism all the way, literally. And I guess they try to deny it, but it's ridiculous. They don't agree. You, you, you like the, the Joe Biden's a capitalist. He loves going and making all that sweet money through his name and his

family name, sending his kid out to make cash for him and his brother. Yeah. But if you're a communist, you can make even more money off your sweet name. And if you're a communist, you can call yourself a Democrat and run as a democratic nominee. Well,

so here's, here's the big problem. I see it. Joe Biden doesn't represent anybody as far as I'm concerned. Like nobody wanted Joe Biden. You know what I mean? For Biden. Exactly. Settle for Biden. So here's what I here's what I see. Most liberals, traditional liberals are not active. They're not paying attention. And well, I should say these are passive liberals. These are people who probably have similar policy positions positions to to us to all of us actually and they're not paying attention so you have very very politically active progressives that dominate the narrative over and over again

you then have your only option outside of them to not be a conservative is like the likes of chuck schumer and nancy pelosi and they're awful old crony corporate establishment politicians there is no moderate liberal populist you either have trump which is right populism and then you have bernie who joined the ranks of the corporate democrats i guess but my choice right now what do i have do i vote for this for the for the lunatic socialist woke people no but then i'm like i'm not gonna vote for biden i gotta vote for trump no here's the choice that people made and i was thinking about this back when you mentioned like how is it that biden got more votes than barack obama right back in what 2008 so 12 years later

is are the demographic changes so profound that we're going to turn out that many people now more people turn out for joe biden than the turnout for the you know the first black president of the united states but he was a celebrity dude he was he was barack obama was a celebrity that's what i'm saying that's what i'm saying let me let me get to the point here so the point actually is that the choice that the democrats were faced with was this do i want to be mentally tortured for another four years by my own party, the democratic party and the democratic media have tortured gaslit and abused the democratic voter for four years by telling them that this guy, Donald Trump, who everybody loved in 2014, who was on the apprentices with Oprah and with Jesse Jackson and getting awards

from NAACP and the whole thing. And we're going to say all of a sudden he's a racist. He's Hitler. He's the end of the world. He's authoritarian. You should be scared. You should be terrified. You should be freaking out.

The Democratic Party beat their own voters into voting for whomever they decided. The only choice the Democrats had was, please make it stop. And they didn't know. They don't know what it is, but really, they're just saying, please make it stop. And where's the abuse coming from? It's not coming from Trump's policies. It's not coming from the actions of Republican Party. It's not coming from MAGA patriots blowing up cities and rioting all over the place no the torture is coming from the democrats they're doing it to their own people with their foot soldiers in the street with black lives matter and antifa and all this chaos and saying to people if you don't vote for our guy

you're gonna let hitler take over the country and they're just like please make it stop they're all deranged and broken down on purpose. That's the only choice. And where are we at now? The media is saying the elections over Joe Biden won. Submit. Submit. Even though we haven't gone through state certification, let alone choosing electors, let alone certifying the electoral results. Congress has to then certify the results after that. We've gone through none of the traditional constitutional processes, and they're already saying, shut your mouth.

Joe Biden is the president. We talk a lot about corporate media, political collusion on this just in life in general. And on the show, do you think they were incrementally moving towards a better place, a solution where that kind of thing isn't happening? No, dude. Power is being concentrated. Countries being polarized. Networks are being fortified and hardened. And our separations are going beyond political movements and now into tribes and it's all being fueled by money and corporate sponsors and curators and influencers and the media and

everybody pushing us into these horribly ostracized tribes based on empathetic triggers that make us want to hate each other no it's not getting any better who's doing it it's an it's an emergent phenomenon it's there's not one old guy you know pulling all the marionette strings you know it's after soros it's an emergent phenomenon sure soros has done stuff on the part of the emergence you see right he's part of it it's this all of the billionaires they all have an alignment currently and it's playing out they want to diminish the power of the federal government i know people aren't talking about that as much the democrats don't touch the corporations they don't do anything with antitrust blm antifa want to see the government diminish the socialists want to see a government like a revolution

well i disagree they want the power of the government for themselves right right exactly yeah they want well they want to change the way that we're doing things right the critical race theorists want to deconstruct the entire apparatus that is existing and so all of them have the same common interest which is diminish the power of the federal government and that's why they're all on the same team right now you know i i i disagree though i like the idea of of diminishing federal government authority or taking their power sure but they're doing it to exert their own power over us corporate power race power all that fear trying to vampirize it no i see them as infiltrating these institutions and government for power i feel like you look at the media military and you look at the new

york times the new york mag just wrote this big piece about how there's a ton of people the new york times like worried that it's become a woke activist brigade you have enough people of this new religion you know intersectionality where they can stage a coup internally at these companies because i think you like you mentioned most people are like i don't know i just you know just leave me out of it i guess yeah no it's already happened the coup has already happened it happened through hr departments is it the is it the is it the the vatican through the the British government trying to retake the American people back? Like they're trying to – What are you talking about?

We separated from the British crown in 1776 and there's a lot of British crown money in the Vatican. And are they trying to take the United States back? You just jumped into another – Is it the British – No. Hey, I'm allowed to say that the United States said goodbye, British crown, and we revolted against them. What does that have to do? Are they trying to take the United States back?

No. Are you sure? Yes. I'm just grabbing at straws. That literally is nothing anywhere. Who are these people? Who is this emergent? Why is this emergence happening to the United States government?

Because there are people who are in the United States who have gotten jobs in these departments who have an ideology and want to exert it and they're aligned with their it's not just people in the united states it's global corporations are doing this they're doing it because the u.s has money and they're seeing what people are posting on social media twitter has created a machine that incentivizes people to cancel you because they can put their paper but the u.s doesn't have money the u.s borrows money from a federal bank federal is not even bank from a you are literally saying random i'm wondering why is this emergence trying to take hold of the american government right now it's international woke ism is everywhere corporations are everywhere it's just a matter in some of those countries the general population is along for the ride

in the united states we are not we're not like that when i say diminish uh government power in this alliance there are some people that want to seize control of the government right for their own ends whether and then it's like exerting the government influence to their benefit but then there's other people that want to seize control the government so that the government doesn't do anything yeah so that they can just keep doing what they're doing the corporations can run around unmolested right the america so it's either they're trying to take a hold of the u.s military or they're trying to destroy the u.s constitution well they are trying to destroy the constitution that's for sure and why is this international corporation group trying to destroy the u.s constitution what what are you talking about

no destroying the u.s constitution is just like a byproduct of the fact that they want they want to keep their power they've've said, get rid of the Constitution. It was a New Republic article saying the left should actively campaign against the written Constitution of the United States. Sure. That would be, and it's because they want to ban speech. And it's because they want to maintain power. And if you can't share ideas, those ideas can't persist.

I'm sorry for bringing up the British crown. I just think the power structure of a monarchy bothers me, and I wonder if this corporate thing is similar to that. No. And they want to destroy this freedom mechanism of the U.S. Constitution so that they can exert top-down authority. None of that has anything to do with the— Sorry, I said that real crudely to real mean. It has nothing to do with emergence in any way. Emergence is a person goes on Twitter and says uh jack murphy is alt

right he gets a million retweets and then he goes send me money through paypal and he realizes wow if i call people all right i can put my paypal link and get money then a bunch of people start realizing they can do this so they all start doing at the same time then coca-cola goes on a twitter and goes whoa they really like it when you call people all-right. Coca-Cola, we don't like the alt-right either. They're targeting what the, you know, the big corporations are putting money behind what they see and what they think. You've got Democrats that are doing the same thing. A Democratic politician comes on and says, wow, a lot of people are talking about the alt-right. I oppose them. Vote for me. Now, all of a sudden, you've built this twisted, weird culture around nonsensical cancel culture

and woke ideas because on Twitter it made people money. Then 92% of the population who don't prescribe to these beliefs are like, what? I'm not voting for that guy. And then the Republicans, they're on track to win what, like 12 seats in the House now? Because they're like, this is ridiculous and makes no sense. The crazy thing about it, though, is it started to go into the HR departments and now regular people who are like, I don't care about Twitter and cancel culture walk into their workplace one day and someone says, oh, you're not checking your privilege.

And they're like, wait a minute. What is this? Now, I think. Or when you see it in your children's curriculum at school, when your kids to have courageous conversations and sit in their witness or when they your kids come home and call you racist. Exactly. Yeah. I feel like I've touched on something with this, this collusion to destroy the US Constitution, that it's a big global scheme to get rid of the U.S. Constitution. No, now you're going way too far.

The United States is unique. It's a free state. And if we proliferated this concept across the world- They've tried. We've tried, bro. We're still trying. People don't want it. People don't want it.

Not by force. By culture. We've tried. We've tried. Oh, no. By culture, yeah. People have adopted our movies, our music, our video games. Computer program languages using English. And it's popular. People have adopted our movies, our music, our video games, computer program languages using English.

And it's popular. People like Hollywood. They like movies. They like being able to walk around outside and not get shot. They like it. Okay, you're on to something in one regard. I'll give you this one sliver here that the corporations definitely are working to build a supranational sort of network that can transcend domestic laws. That's what they want, right? And they want a trading system that's independent of the states and can just do

whatever they want. That's why they set up these, you know, the quasi-governmental agencies like the World Trade Organization and the IMF and the World Bank and all these to create this system, this ecosystem that is actually separate from the nation states that's definitely what they want to do they want to end the power of the nation state it's not specifically i mean you have some cases but it's not specifically about the u.s constitution and it's not even necessarily just about the united states it's about wanting to have power that's greater than a nation state these corporations are like mini monarchies with the king at the top being the owner.

No, they're not monarchies. Well, they got an owner that runs it all. No, they have board members and they have public shareholders. But a lot of them have owners. Sure. I mean, those owners, maybe a lot of those owners own, I don't know. I don't want to speculate here, but a lot of them, I believe, own a lot of those companies together. So an oligarchical, you know, oligarchy.

That was a little redundant. redundant corporate power is pervasive okay so instead of it's not a bunch of mini monarchies it's an oligarchy or corporatocracy yeah yeah and they have more money than the monarchies then more power and more reach billions and billions and more you think yeah maybe you're right i mean if you can control the world's information and access to it does that not make you more powerful than the queen of england you know it's crazy mark zuckerberg could like someone in his position could probably get any person they wanted if they wanted to like like date or have a relationship you know literally everything about them you know when they go to work you know when they poop you know what their interests are you know literally everything

but you can manipulate them too so you can target individuals you know facebook was doing this they were feeding specific stories to people to see how they would respond yep that's crazy they were like i wonder what this effect you know show them a bunch of happy stories and see what they do see how they react show much of negative of happy stories and see what they do. See how they react. Show them a bunch of negative stories. Oh, dude. And Microsoft just patented this technology where you swallow a pill and it measures your body heat and your biometrics and then pays you cryptocurrency. That sounds fake. It's real. You can go to the Bitcoin.com, look up Microsoft Internet of Bodies, I think.

But wouldn't you just poop it out? Maybe one day. What? But in the meantime, they're tracking your biometrics. Now, there's one part of that that I find completely interesting and something that we really should be talking about, which is like how to own your personal data and how to benefit from it. Like students, for example, in kindergarten take these tests and then the companies use the results from the test to create new products that then sell to the schools to make more money. So they're actually using your children as inputs into the products that they are making money off of. Why shouldn't our children own all their education data and then receive micropayments

from the companies for the benefit that they get of using the information? That's how we should own all of us own our own information and we should be compensated for it. This model with Facebook and Google, just giving ourselves away for access to an email account. It's the dumbest thing I've ever heard of. Now that you really think about it and see what the negative effects are, right? You've just given away all of your information, all of your personal sovereignty,

all to a corporation. Why? So you can use their stupid free email or use their stupid free search. Yeah. A good friend of mine, Ben Peterson, has mentioned a few times that he wants access to his Facebook analytics and all of them. Why is that kept secret? Well, it's kept secret because you click that box when you sign up for your free stuff, bro. If we're going to regulate, that's a't it be nice if there was active antitrust effort underway to clamp down on social media monopolies and front censorship and stealing your data and doing all kinds of nefarious things and programming your brain and changing your emotion and using your Fitbit, which is connected to the Internet, which is connected to the ad so that they know when they send you an ad, what your heart rate does so they can send you another ad to get your heart rate up even higher.

Don't you think it would be good for us to like step in and sort of have someone look at that? That's what's not been happening. Yeah. That's what's not including Microsoft with his biohacking stuff. Yeah, that is what's not been happening. And that's what the corporations want to have keep happening,

which is the absence of behavior like that, the absence of regulation like that. And that's what I say when they're interested in diminishing the power of the federal government, right? If Trump was smart, I wish he would have on day one in his office, he would have prevented all of this crap that's happening right now in social media universe.

If he would have gotten real hearings and real investigations and prevented Google from like auto completing your searches and flashing things, they literally flash things just to change your mind, change your mood as you're typing things out and fake searches and search suggestions and things like that. They're totally manipulating all of us on purpose, told us all that they were doing it. It's been released project Veritas, ton of stuff,

ton of stuff on it. They could make you buy something for no reason. Indeed. Like all of a sudden people just buying rocks and they own the rock company. It's an extreme example, but it's kind of like putting candy at the cash cash register but it's it's more way more incentives because you're comfortable in your own house you're preying on people's sort of instinctive behaviors and their needs and their

emotional states what if they know that they can trigger you into some sort of uh you know a triggered emotional state and then throw a sales pitch at you that now you're more susceptible to to purchase that item. They're doing, they do that. And I think they should be allowed to, but I think you should have access to knowing exactly how they're measuring it and doing it. I would never want to step in on a capitalist system and be like, you can't sell products that way. Not necessarily, not never. Cigarettes couldn't be sold to kids after a while, but our cartoons couldn't be used to sell.

And so are you of the opinion that Twitter should be able to ban whoever they want for whatever reason, totally incongruently with them? Yeah, but I also think their code should be free so that I could start a Twitter and not ban anyone. And then you can be like, well, that Twitter sucks. I'm going to Ian's Twitter. Yeah, except that exists and doesn't work. Yeah, I don't have their code yet. It's not about code.

It's about the fact that there are multiple services just like Twitter. And what happens is then the activists who have got you banned in the first place launch an attack against the new platform to get those banned and get their resources stripped away. I mean, it works every time. Literally exactly like the exact same carbon copy of the site. It makes no sense. It makes total sense. It's not the product that they offer. It's the market capture that they have is where their power comes from.

It's not the technical side. Well, it's both. And you would interrelate the two. So if I was using Ian Twitter, I could still see all those people on the other Twitter. But Twitter is not anything. Twitter is literally a reverse chronological feed of people posting things. Their code is advanced RSS. It's text messages, dude.

Why was it 140 characters? Because that's what SMS was. And now it's just 280 because arbitrary. Twitter has an algorithm, but the algorithm, people don't use it. People hate people. Well, I mean, some people probably do, but most people hate it. It's literally just bare bones, garbage, trash, simple code. Sure, they've got things like direct messages.

Trash. But if they banned you, you have no access to the town hall. It would be like saying, you can't come into the public square where we're discussing things, but don't worry, there's another one down the street you can go use. No one's there, but go ahead and go there and talk. Yeah. Yeah, it should be like, if you want to,

you can't use my computer to access the town hall, you got to go use that other computer to access the town hall is how it should be working. And each computer is a carbon copy of Twitter. You're talking about the Fred to access the town hall is how it should be working and each computer is a carbon copy of twitter the town hall is that's what you're saying or well it would still have to be open source and free because the government could be just as dangerous as a corporation so what you're saying is you want to confiscate twitter and then release its intellectual property into the universe so that it has zero value and everyone has access to it.

Well, it's definitely still valuable. You're a communist. Not if everybody has it. Hey, look, we had to do it with the, well, the railroads are still private. I think it's a private public thing. The railroads at one point were completely private. And when they started to strangle. So you bring up a good point.

New technology is disruptive to the point where not novel, you know, actions need to be taken. And I think that Twitter has reached, you know, that, that point, and especially when they're nefariously manipulating and controlling your conversation that has an impact on the world around us in such a profound way. Check it out. I think we would have a serious problem if we had a free, completely free and open Twitter with mass usership, regular people wouldn't want

to use it they'd stay away from it yeah no it'd be crazy it would be insane yeah i think the solution is uh the dark and the light so that you know first floor second floor where when you walk in you're on the first floor and everything looks clean and pristine and then if you say naughty words we kick you to the basement where you can still have access to every you can hear what everyone's saying around you but they have to choose to opt in to hear what you say therefore you're not being kicked off the platform you can still use it but you're kind of a dick so people have to turn on you know dark you know not safe for work mode to see what you what you see you know what i mean otherwise twitter was a nasty place i mean it isn't as a horrible place but it's just been nasty the whole time.

And when you had just endless harassment, trolling, and you still kind of do, it's not as bad as it used to be. It was an awful place to be. People didn't want to be there. So what Twitter was like, how can we make this more friendly and more cooperative? You can't. All right? It can't be done. But they've banned a lot of people.

That kind of solved some of the problem. We'll ban you unless you do as we say. And people that kind of solved some of the problem will ban you unless you do as we say and maybe that's the real goal of the iron fist they're trying to scare people into falling in line otherwise you'll get banned but a lot of people just don't care and so they'll do it anyway i think the solution is if you break the rules you get a filter and then if people want to read the filter post you turn filter on so it's too it's too strong because their rules shouldn't i don't think should be the gatekeeper of the common self-curation just let people block block and ignore yeah i have blocked i've blocked 3 000 people i block like crazy i have fun blocking

if you want to get blocked troll me one time that's it you get zero chances and in fact i block people who aren't even talking to me that I see looking like idiots to my friends, to other people that I know. I preemptively block people. I block people for making bad jokes. Just don't do it because I enjoy doing it. I get a cackle out of it. It's fun. We should go to Super Chats.

Do it. Super Chats. If you haven't already, smash that like button. We are going to be here for an extra half an hour because YouTube went down. So we're doing that for you. And if anyone knows why they went down, please do tell in the chat. It was Cloudfare. I don't think it was.

It said Cloudfare was up when I checked. YouTube goes down sometimes. By the way, my name is Jack Murphy. You can find me at jackmurphylive.com, at jackmurphylive on Twitter. Also, jackmurphylive on YouTube. Hey, YouTube viewers, go subscribe to my channel. Let's get me over 20,000. Let's 20 000 let's do it jack on the wall do you get one for 20 i don't know 100 100 let's do uh super chats mr obvious says my channel was demonetized for

talking about the election possible slash confirmed fraud and legal cases i always provide context evidence and doubt i follow the YouTube guidelines. They've taken my income and livelihood. Do you know anyone who can help? Unfortunately, I don't. It's a cutthroat business, YouTube, and they're going to arbitrarily axe people. That's why I keep saying it's only a matter of time

before they ban me, and then, you know, when it happens, it happens, I guess. Rock and roll tour time. Starting your own network is really key. I think in this, in this day and age, getting subscriptions, bypassing advertisers,

liminal order, liminal order.com. Hey, Tim, by the way, love the track, the audio track. I thought the song was fantastic.

Yep. Oh, thank you. I love the video. I love the whole mood. I was very impressed. Congratulations. Yeah.

So that's will of the people. It's a song. song and if you get a chance put some headphones on and listen with headphones because it's another song and if you get banned dude i say you hit the road you hit the road i'll be a what do you call stagehand now what do you call it roadie we should do that anyway man i'll be a roadie i can carry jam brian michael says you're losing viewers day by day do you think it's because you are softly accepting a biden presidency or because you shut down guests that have different opinions than yours i do like you a lot uh i'm not losing viewers day by day i have more viewers than i've ever had and there are some people who haven't who have been giving me a slightly higher percentage

of thumbs down on my main cock on my main channel segments but it's like 98 versus 99 i think tim pool's doing quite all right you know i think i think this is a another one of these posts where people are like demanding that i put i prop up people who claim they invented email and stuff like that as as like yeah so you have a guy who's like i invented email and now they're like look he made a youtube video where he's arguing this is true and the election was stolen. And it's like, dude, I'm not going to take unverifiable claims from people as a reason to actually go after this. I actually think the people who are bringing this up are the pro-Biden people. No joke. Because they want to trick you into highlighting unverifiable conspiracies to throw you off the actual argument.

So when I make a video and I'm like, hey, look, the RNc has presented a sworn affidavit saying there's fraud and they get mad i can only imagine that's a biden person is that a mcguffin is that what that is no no mcguffin is that's that's like a an item that you need to move a plot or something oh oh i see yeah yeah i was like so basically you'd think people who actually wanted trump to win would be like, it's very good that Tim is highlighting the actual hard evidence and discounting what the media is saying. Yes. Instead, they come here and say, prop up the insane YouTube conspiracies, which will completely

discredit everything they're trying to do. Yeah. Sounds like a pro Biden person. So I wonder why it is that 98% are thumbs up, probably because the people who are trying to drag it down are the ones who want Biden to win by pushing unhinged. There's a lot of people that just want they want to talk about hammer and score. I know it because I get it. And it's just it's not a Biden.

It's not a partisan thing. It's just there's just this like, if you just like, I just I know it with the core of my being. People are feeling this way. And it's so it's frustrating that you, a prominent journalist that usually looks at all the facts isn't going hard on it but i think your argument that focus on what's right in front of you going hard on what one guy came out and said one scorecard some guy comes out and says there's a secret program you'll never find it and what am i supposed to say i don't know wow a guy you know i heard a guy said that donald trump actually went to the moon investigate what we what? We had Sydney.

What the Sydney Powell, Sydney Powell, a lawyer, a lawyer talking about it and an Air Force guy talking about it. And you've got classified information. And you've also it's also listen, man, I have been people into talking about stupid, like, unverifiable claims and completely discredit any and all efforts to get a fair election process. And the moment you come out and go to a court and say there's a there's a computer program called Hammer, OK, and the scorecard thing, they're changing the judge. Get out of here. We're talking about you've got no proof.

You've got some guys. It's like it reminds me of that dude who claimed there were aliens at area 51 and people are like it's true he's a witness dude that's ridiculous he's got no evidence you can't take one guy saying one thing and then launch a massive legal proceeding to win a presidency what you can do is take 11 000 sworn statements like the rnc is claiming they have all these people coming forward and actually have an opportunity to to have a real legal case. Yeah, it seems like in regards to your journalism, you're not in deep investigation mode right now.

You're in like reporting mode. So you're not looking deep into the dark underbelly. You're just reporting on what's directly in front of you for the most part. No, you like all of these people who are who are desperate to get these like mathematical analysis that proves the election was stolen are falling into a trap because it proves your confirmation bias to you and it is tricking you i say this all the time pizzagate how easy was it to shut down the actual investigation into what was going on with leaked emails think about it you had a bunch of elites emails coming out. They're doing something weird. And all of a

sudden, some weird message pops up on a forum claiming these ridiculous things about Satan and whatever. And then a guy shows up with a gun and shoots the floor and the whole thing stopped. No more investigation. No more emails. They tricked these people and it worked like a charm. And now right now you have a sworn affidavit from a nevada poll worker i saw fraud and what do i get tim talk about the unverifiable government conspiracy why so that we can completely discredit any opportunity to have an actual investigation that's my it's not about time you only have so much time in the day to choose what you talk about you can't go into every topic.

No, dude, it's about you being tricked into chasing after a red herring. Are you saying me personally? Yes, you personally. I mean, I'm bringing up the topic. You're bringing up something that you can't verify. It is throwing everything. It derails the conversation. Because a lot of people are feeling it.

That's why I brought it up. Because a lot of people are going to think. I'm not trying to make you think about it. I'm telling you why that guy super chatted that. Tim, I have a question for you. Based on what you said, do you think the people on the right that picked up Pizzagate and ran with it actually screwed the pooch on getting a real investigation into the Podesta emails? Yep. Because I think the first and most obvious thing you need to do is think about what high profile individuals are doing.

Drugs. And guess what? If you grew up in the south side of Chicago, you know all the slang terms for drugs. And so when they're talking about playing games on this, that or this, I'm like, they're doing they're doing crack like Hunter Biden. We used to say, I need to talk to a man about a duck. Exactly. Yeah. So you get Hunter Biden's got a crack pipe in his mouth.

We know these high profile individuals are probably slinging and doing dope and other crazy drugs. And so how do you stop people from unveiling the fact that you're having coked out drug parties make them start putting up some ridiculous ideas about spirit cooking satan parties okay so now let's go one step further here are you suggesting that the dnc podesta people Pizzagate in 4chan with the hope that it would become a conversation taken up by people on the right that could be easily discredited as to sabotage the entire investigation into the email leak and the Russia or however it happened. No. While possible and would be a very, very smart move. I have no evidence to suggest that's the case other than people chase after ridiculous narratives because life is boring. To find out you have a bunch of drug addled politicians who are selling out your country is not nearly as sensational as death, satanic death cults selling kids and doing spirit cooking. I think that the Roswell crash was government technology like lightweight drones or whatever.

And they made us all think that aliens are real. I don't know if it's planted. I don't have any evidence. They published it saying it was aliens. They said it was a hot air balloon and then they said it was alien craft. And they were doing it because they were probably working on some kind of top secret military tech. And they were like, if people start looking into this, it could screw up our actual weapons project. Tell them it's aliens.

That's what Ian's saying. Right, I know. Then a bunch of people are running around pointing at the sky screaming aliens. And may I say, Ian, to your point, this is something that Scott Adams has talked about because there are tiny instances of voter fraud that are being blown way out of proportion by the right wing. All the left has to do is disprove a few small things in that instance. People on the right are running around with their hair on fire over things that make

no difference. This is called a red herring. And you mentioned this earlier. This 100% is a red herring. And this is something you need to look out for because they use this. So if they have something big in the works, they're just diverting your attention. And it's shocking how easily diverted people are. And it's because of social media, at least partly, I would blame people in general, but it's at least partly because of social media and because of stuff like Twitter. But you're 100% on point when you talk about a red herring is this is what they're doing to you. I don't know if you realize that. There is a 2020 word for this too. It's called fast transient.

Interesting. And the point of a fast transient is to disrupt your OODA loop, which is observe, orient, decide, and act. And fast transients are meant to just destable your OODA loop and make it so you can't observe and you can't reorient yourself so that you can then make a decision and act in a proper way. Trump does it all the time. It also puts you in an extremely esoteric worldview where when you try and talk to regular people and you're like, yo, hammer and scorecard, they go, what? This Air Force general, what?

The election. Okay, dude, wait, what? But if you go, a poll worker at the election said there was fraud. They signed a sworn affidavit. A regular person goes, really? Whoa, what's going on? Hammer and scorecard requires so it's a it's this they you get pushed into this extremely jargon filled esoteric reality that makes it very difficult for

you to explain to other people because they're not there with you. They're asking questions about a vote was counted. Was the vote real? Donald Trump is suing, saying there's a violation of equal protection clause. Very, very simple. Easy to understand. To explain to someone why it is there may be impropriety in the election that could result in Trump's victory.

You come out and start talking about retired 83-year-old Air Force generals with a top secret government program that they use to flip elections, and they're going to be like, dude, you lost me. This is what?

Now, I think, you know, Michael Tracy mentioned the other day, you tell that to somebody and they probably will just agree with you. Oh, yeah, I'm sure there's all sorts of stuff like that. They might just roll with it. But you're not going to win in court by going up to a judge and claiming, your honor, the election was stolen. We know because an 83-year-old Air Force retired general said the government has a program that can flip.

The judge is going to be like, okay. Yeah, testimony is not enough to go on. The is going to be like you can you can have a seat you can leave me stop wasting my time um in regards to the other part of that super chat where they said your views were going down if you step back from view counts you'll notice that they tend to go up in an up down motion they'll like arc up down up but they're constantly going up that seems trending yeah well you have to you have to compare views based on year. So there's months where views go down for everybody. And there's months where views go up for everybody.

It's seasonal. Yeah, it's absolutely seasonal. And also, it is a fact, my viewership is down from last month. But this also happens with elections. So just after the election, we had our biggest show ever on irl with over a hundred thousand concurrent viewers now you know today we paid you like 67 000 or something which is really high but you know 67 of our biggest so of course views go down after the election everybody wants to know what's happening what happened and then okay i'm not going to watch 67 000 concurrents tonight with a 45 minute delayed head start and screw up from YouTube. Tim cast IRL

on fire, y'all. Let me tell you. What frustrates me is we could have a very serious story and it's so easily derailed by sensational movie-esque nonsense. Hammer and scorecard could very well

be real, but you're not going to argue that in court to get Donald Trump a victory. Not in the next few weeks yeah unless some documentation arrives and it's you know corroborated but i'm you're gonna you're gonna need declassified documents you're gonna need practical usage you're gonna need sworn affidavits from people saying that they literally use it this time around the one thing that i think is interesting right now is potentially the dominion whistleblowers that people are saying are coming forward. I'll see if we'll see if that happens. That will be serious. That's going to be someone claiming the Dominion voting machines and software was flipping votes.

We get a whistleblower saying that in a sworn affidavit. We got some. If somebody gets Epstein in the next few weeks, then we definitely know something was afoot, right? I guess. No, no. Still still conjecture. But let me know if was afoot, right? I guess. No, no. Still conjecture. But let me know if it happens. All right, PJ.

Doobie McNasty says, Gonna tell my kids this was America. Yeah, man. Take a picture. I thought this was America. Carol W. says, Dr. Shiva, PhD from MIT, has analyzed Michigan data

along with two other analysts and will testify to algorithm that takes votes from Trump to Biden. This is a grain of sand in a heap. I got no problem. I will not impugn the honor of Dr. Shiva in doing his mathematical analysis. He's a PhD from MIT, so I'm sure he knows way better than I do on the math end of things. But it's not a winning argument in court.

It's a waste of the court's time, and it's not going to get Trump any victories. It may generate ground support. There you go. You know, for Trump, from people who see it and go, whoa. But I don't think it's going to – I don't think what he's offering up is enough in terms of anything effective, in terms of, you know, ground victory or whatever. I think a sworn affidavit from a poll worker saying there was fraud easily the most – Or a sworn affidavit from a voter who didn't request an absentee ballot who had one cast on their behalf or their dead son which is

one of the things that brainerd's team is looking into matt brainerd you should check him out when i talk to my friends i tell you this if i message a friend of mine who's a progressive or like a passive liberal who voted for biden and say a retired air force general came out with this they're going to be like dude shut up if i come out and say, a retired Air Force general came out with this, they're going to be like, dude, shut up. If I come out and say an MIT professor did a mathematical algorithm proving how they were flipping, they're going to say, shut up. If I say a postal worker is on record right now with a sworn affidavit that they were backdating ballots, I can show you the video of it, of the guy saying it. They go, really? There's no argument against that. You have a poll worker saying it. You have

a woman saying my dead son voted. You have a postal worker saying it happened. You can't argue against the postal worker who was there saying they did this. You can definitely argue against some guy who did a mathematical formula. I can already hear it now. How do I know his formula is real? Who is this guy? What does this even mean? This is ridiculous. I show you a postal worker in uniform delivering mail in a Veritas video and the best thing the leftist i don't say is well veritas is lying you know i think this guy that wrote scorecard actively is uh you know has come out and started the developer that developed scorecard is talking about it now i still i don't still know what kind of proof we've known i gotta read more

british monarchy we've known for a long time that there's programs can flip votes at, at, at the DEF CON. I think it, I don't know, maybe 2014 or 26 and the hacker convention. Some kid did it in 20 minutes. He took a diebolt machine or whatever and flip the votes internally with

some simple code. So we know that's possible. We, we have, we have a serious problem with proprietary, you know, voting machines, I guess that code should be open source.

I'm assuming it's not. It may be, I don't know i was trying to think what that what the solution to this would be and what i came up with while we were talking in back of my head listening to you talk about the british monarchy and stuff just kidding what if to vote you have to go on one side of the mississippi or the other that day and then basically each person that crosses over the mississippi that's how you count the votes it's like the only way you can do it.

It's like literally geographically physically separate everyone into where you want to be counted and then make each person move from one or two other. And you count that until they're totally swapped. And then, you know, that's the only way I think to do it securely. Let's do it. It makes it easier for people closer to the Mississippi,

unfortunately, but I think something like that threshold that everyone has to cross. He's going to jump on me about a detail about this fantasy thing I'm talking about. But then he's going to bring up this other stuff. Like it's fact. It's the British modern. I'm just making a statement. I like your idea of crossing a threshold.

Making everyone, you know, have some sort of acknowledgement. Like picking softball teams. Like Trump stands on one side and we get 70 million people here and biden the other 70 million people here right and then they go okay you i pick you you vote for me come over here onto my side yep and then biden goes okay true and i'm a shopper to pressure uh what's we got a super chat from duby duby mcnasty he says duby true uh i'm sorry you spelled it wrong duby it's truant in nana shaba depressor truant in nana shaba depressor so he says it's the best piece I'm sorry. You spelled it wrong, Doobie. It's Truin Inanna Shaba Depressor. Truin Inanna Shaba Depressor.

So he says, it's the best piece of legislature that ever Batacalf care. You're just mad that it works. Face it, Tim. I'd like you out behind Corn Pop's house and eat your little kid's lunch. You think you got a chance? Come on, man. Come on, man. I saw something funny they said.

Someone posted, I'm starting to think Corn Pop wasn't such a bad guy. He might be right. Corn Pop. We got here from Frieden Gaming saying, taxation is theft. Indeed. It sounds like the type of taxation, right? Says, Jack Posobiec has just tweeted that the Trump campaign has released a photo of do not admit list.

Their reporting is from Philadelphia Ballot Counting Center. Apparently, 100% of the names are Republicans. Interesting. Do not, what was it? Do not enter the polling place. Do Interesting. Do not. What was it? Do not enter the polling place. Do not admit. Yeah.

What does that mean? Oh, really? Garhant says, oh, honey, Ian. Tell me more, Garland. Do tell. So Josh, the amazing animator, says, hey, Tim, are you aware of Maidengate? People finding out ballots had been cast under their maiden name. I have not been able to verify anything having to do with that.

And I know that they banned people who were posting it. So once again, it's so easy to derail people from actual arguments. Right now, we have a woman who came forward and said her dead son voted. Okay, answer for that. That warrants an investigation. What Trump would need if there was some kind of systemic alteration of votes or whatever is justification for an audit. Okay, a glitch in Michigan that justifies an audit. Let's focus all our energy on a machine flipped votes from Trump to Biden. Whoa, we better audit all of these machines. Instead, what are we getting?

Maidengate. Well, fortunately, I think we're getting- And hammer and scorecard and things that have nothing to do with Trump's- That's because I'm on the show, man. If, you know, we're getting in and hammer and scorecard and things that have nothing to do with that's because I'm on the show, man. If you know, we're getting through that. You've got a million person audience and we're getting the stuff that you're investigating. Thankfully, at least I am for the most part. Let's see. William Keller says, don't have a lot of money for chats.

Please read. We should count vote like a blackjack table in Vegas with cameras everywhere. Indeed. Yeah. Why don't we have cameras everywhere? Everywhere. In a casino. I mean, they should do it in a casino because there's so Vegas with cameras everywhere. Indeed. Yeah, why don't we have cameras? They should do them in the casino. Why don't we have cameras everywhere? Everywhere. In a casino. I mean, they should do it in a casino

because there's so many cameras all around. Yeah, that's a good idea. I hear there's smart cities in China where they have two cameras for every person. And this is something Ben Stewart was talking about at the election night party. And it'll get to a point, or maybe it already is, where you walk outside and say, Uber.

And either a camera sees you or a microphone hears you and an Uber comes and picks you up. 120 cities in China already like that. Wow. That's horrifying. Unconfirmed, but that is terrifying. We have Hellbound Wolf saying, I spent a year in Penn State Wilkes Bar into 2009.

I remember watching a movie in a sociology class. A guest speaker came in with a video that was almost a documentary about, was that rape culture on colleges and they had anonymous guys talking about drugging the girls at parties yeah that happens i think that's what that reference to brett kavanaugh might have been or like a weird tangential reference to the uh uh podesta email conversation we were having amy linnaberry says have you looked into benford's law and the weighted race feature as the r vote increased down ballot in the michigan county the

number of trump votes decreased yes i've seen this i've also seen benford's law and the strange anomalies but again these things may be great for people who are all already looking for reasons to support donald trump i i would argue having having worked in fundraising and network building for nonprofits, the least effective way to actually convince a regular person that you were right. Talking about mathematical anomalies and stats and government programs, like regular

people, when you talk to them... I used to walk up to people on the street and I'd have to try and convince them to give me money for saving the rainforest or something. First you have to convince them to stop. That's the easiest thing to do. Is it? Yeah yeah you just walk up and go like that and then they stop dead in their tracks it's the biggest biggest mistake these people make is saying would you like to talk to me no you don't give them you don't give them a choice you walk them and stick your hand out in front of them they shake your hand and they don't let go nice to meet you here's

what we're doing and then you hand them the the clipboard and they take it with the other hand and then you never take it back so they're standing there holding it trying to give it to you and you just have your hands crossed or like in your pockets or just down at your side you know get back the point is when you're trying to convince someone because i did this for years and i was one of the nation's best some of the biggest non-profits if i went and was like right now there's x y and z and the government is doing this they're going to be like i don't i don't know uh i'm i'm not interested I'm not emotionally attached to what you're saying. I don't care. But if you make it really, really simple, like the simple thing that I did for when I was fundraising for a homeless shelter, you have all these people desperately trying to

say, every night there are three kids, you know, that we see on the street. People are like, yeah, okay. That's not what I would say. You know what I would say to people? I would stop them and shake their hand and say, I'm not going to read this to you. I want you to hear me. I want you to imagine you have no parents. Think about your parents. You don't have them. And you're sleeping under a bridge.

You're in your filth. No one cares about you. You have nothing. And then one day, someone walks up and you look up. And through the light from the sun, you see them reach out a hand and they say, I'm here for you. I'm that person. You reach out and you grab their hand. They pull you up.

You can be that person. You can rescue these kids. They write me checks all day and night. Dude, sign me up. I'm ready. That was great. But when you come out and you're like, every night we see 12 children who have have you know found no place to live now we're doesn't work it works for some people some people like oh that's sad 12 kids here's money no you tell them you make them experience you make them

feel that you say i want you to imagine yourself sleeping in the dirt no one loves you think about what these kids must feel you can be that hand i had one lady write me a check for $700 on the spot. I want you to imagine. Yes. I want you to feel it. Beautiful. Imagine what that must feel like. Now imagine what it would feel like if a hand reached out to lift you out of that and said, I will save you. I'm here for you. I love you. Tim is working on me. I'm not kidding. Sarah McLachlan. You were looking right at me when you did that. And I could feel the stir. I could feel the stirring. I felt like I was in a rainforest. That's a convincing argument.

That's a direct way that I can see my benefits, my actions helping somebody else. Damn right, dude. Good. I'm going to write this down. In the instance of voter fraud and stuff, it's really hard to make someone feel in that same way right you know fundraising for a non-profit it's easy you know telling them i want you to to imagine this experience happening to you and now we must stop it makes them kind of you know well that's what the democrats have been doing this whole time i want you to imagine that you're living under the guise of hitler and that's what's coming i want you to imagine that the world

is ending i want you to imagine that the Russians took over our government. Exactly. What are you going to do? As a lawyer, it's not your job to make them feel it, fortunately, when it comes to the voter scandal. They just got to inform them and let the judges do the right thing. So when I'm talking about the convincing people to listen and open up, it's kind of the other end of this. If you walked up to someone and said, listen to me, you moron, you are going to help the kids. They'd be like, get out of my face. How dare you? So if you approach someone from this position of jargon, esoteric concepts, and unfamiliar ideas, they will in no way ever relate to anything you're saying. And it's confusing to them.

I don't know what you're talking about. This sounds weird. I saw it in a movie or something. This dude's crazy. And that is the most effective way to shut down the opportunity. It ultimately doesn't matter. I mean, Trump needs support if he's actually going to file these legal challenges, he's raising money and stuff. But in the end, he's got his legal arguments. If they make sense, they make sense. What needs to happen is that people focus on Trump's actual claims. The media is telling you there's no evidence of fraud. There's no evidence of fraud. And then people on the left all laugh about how stupid Trump is.

You know, he's got no evidence. There was this post by Chris Evans because Fox News is really dumb. Chris Evans is filming a Fox News bit. And it's John Roberts, I think. I think is his name, the reporter, John Roberts. Is that his name? Yeah, that's his name. He's like, now the Trump campaign says not all of the legal ballots have been counted

and not all of the illegal ballots have been excluded. The only thing standing in their way is evidence for which they've presented none. And then Chris Evans starts laughing and then he tweets it thinking he's all smart. And that is the emotional response. Ha ha. They're so dumb. Look at me. I'm like you.

That's what he was basically saying to people. Look how smart I am. Fox News is stupid. Fox News was or Trump was stupid. The problem was Trump's lawsuit about illegal ballots being excluded. Nothing to do with fraud. It had everything to do with improperly counted ballots. Fox News got it wrong and created this ridiculous statement that made no sense.

The media keeps doing this. And then these leftists all get in their minds. There's no fraud. There's their minds. There's no fraud. There's no fraud. There's no fraud. Even though there is evidence of fraud, whether it's widespread or not, I don't, you know, is an argument. But there's Trump's legal claim isn't even about fraud. For the most part, there's fraud arguments from Trump. Mostly peaceful election. That's what it's been. Let's see. I'm a tweet that 99 scott ward says problem dems cheat by watching the vote tally and then magically find enough votes to win solution use glitchy software to short count

your own vote tally let them cheat against those false margins reveal the real count and the fraud 4d chess well the issue here is if that's true it's because we did um we we did we counted the votes in the day and then we stopped and then we waited for a week, you know, or whatever, like five days to then count the rest of the votes. The official reason is that absentee ballots. This is this is really, really funny. Let me ask you, why is it that we were able to count in-person votes by the millions in one day, but absentee ballots? It took us a week to count. What's the reason?

Don't know. That's a good question, Tim. You know what the official reason is? Tell me. That absentee ballots are different. We have to match signatures. We have to go through the secrecy ballot. It's very different from in-person voting. So it takes longer. You mean it's how it should be? And you know what that means? It violates the 14th Amendment. Because it's how it should be? And you know what that means? It violates the 14th Amendment. Because it's different.

Yes. Not the same process for people. And thus, that's Trump's argument. Or at least one of the arguments. I mean, of all the things I've heard, the procedural stuff, that one's... I'm no lawyer. That one seemed to have a little bit of weight. I don't know, though.

I don't know. Because the argument could be that fundamentally, it's not about whether the security process is the same, but is whether the security process is the same but is there a security process right so you can argue everyone who comes in this building must go through security there's a metal detector and there's a guy frisking people but if you come in it's equal that they both went through a security process in that capacity a mail-in ballot may have a security feature and an in-person ballot an in-person vote as a security feature and that makes them equal depending on what the court decides yeah but you know what a deadline is not

that's not the same oh yeah oh definitely a deadline there is a deadline and it's this day yep and it should be the same for everybody regardless of how you get your vote into the box so that's why backdating is so important this uh this usps whistleblowers claim because i mean honestly perhaps trump should have let them take the extra three days and not challenged it because then if the backdating is true all the ballots that came in that would have beaten trump that would have you know pushed biden over the edge would have came after election day and then trump could have launched a 14th amendment claim whatever though we'll see if it plays out i think it's still you know particularly slim uh chance

uh someone said don't ever take ian out he is our hippie alex jones that's that's exactly it love it uh what is this very nice someone said something super chat oh yeah here we go bd says ian you are the ultimate woke uh awakened i prefer awakened yes someone said ian is right but has the wrong religion oh gosh yes these people are paying to give you compliments oh that's wonderful thank you what is your religion guys oh gosh math math math is my religion all right here we go base 10 dogs of war says trump just made his case for voter id even if he loses the election indeed and that's that's another big point too trump's goal might not be to actually stage a coup or whatever

he might be planning to leave and he might be making sure that when he leaves he scorched earths the the voting process in such a way democrats can no longer use these manipulative tactics or changing the rules last minute mail-in ballots nope 14th amendment it may turn out the supreme court says okay you can't do this we need to make sure we have a uniform system in place trump still loses but the next go-around no mail-in ballots no universal mail-in ballots i don't know we should never do these again this was so chaotic so obvious those can be chaos you know all, here we go. And Antone Maxson says, did anyone realize the Trump Accountability Project sounds like a bad bartender who just read about the reign of terror and the law of suspects and said,

hey, let's play Among Us. Great show, by the way. Is there a beanie club? Ian and Lydia need one. True. Oh, well, you know, me and Jack, you know, we're chilling. Yeah, yeah. It's freezing in here.

Although I would wear a beanie. Yeah, it's cold, right? Dean Badger badger says here this is for the kid under the bridge oh oh w says why isn't anyone in traditional msm talking about preservation of the peace deals there's not gonna be peace right i mean that is the biggest thing is that the not the biggest a big issue is that trump's foreign policy gains are going to they have already said that joe biden is going to take a more traditional approach to world relations yeah war i'm excited looking forward daniel benavides says what about an online voting system that has multiple verification from all sides i.e your personal info proves your creds and you get a random third party code. Confirmation for candidate via their own codes you get privately.

Oh, interesting. What if I don't know if that would work, but I do like the idea of having to request your ballot. That was the big problem with universal mail-in votes that I think could theoretically have an unequal, you know, treatment that people who didn't even decide to vote got ballots versus people who have to choose to vote go in person. That could arguably create an unequal system because the average person might say, I don't feel like going and voting. But then you put a ballot in their lap and they go, I guess I'll fill it out.

You know, this is probably the election of the great mass of the lowest informed voters of all time yeah right people who wouldn't get off their butt to go vote during the day because they just don't care at all they get it in the mail and they're like i'll just vote but this is nevada nevada is the only swing state that did that did this i'm pretty sure yeah pennsylvania did have a lot more absentee ballots though so i think i think in those states you still have to request it i'm not entirely sure that super chat was kind of cool. He was talking about a third party code.

Yeah. Verification. Bloodthirst, he says, does Tim have hair? The answer is no. A little. Facial hair, sometimes. I know, it's gorgeous. Levy Meads says, well, it just jumped on me.

Where'd it go? All my leftist friends that voted for Biden own guns. Most of them either don't know his stance on guns or they do and just ignore it to fit in frisco texas has become the california and texas due to the large influx of ca businesses moving here you know one thing that i think people don't realize we talked about the other day there's one really simple solution for that the results of this election covid and the riots moved people around in random and weird ways. So you end up with higher voter registration in certain areas.

You end up with certain counties swinging, you know, like all the bellwethers were wrong. Do you see this? Yes. So the bellwether towns are the towns that like historically, whoever they vote for ends up winning just for whatever reason.

And this time around, most of them or at least a large portion were wrong. And so everyone's like, that's weird's weird yes but what if a bunch of people move to random places in the past year due to covid and riots and thus you get a totally altered demographic base around the country maybe that was uh factored into the democrats plans with mail-in voting they knew was going to happen and they wanted to you know target it i don't know and maybe we may never know yeah what is this like the digital dark ages acoustic long night acoustic theory says they have multiple usps whistleblowers but the news

focuses on one so you think there is only one yeah definitely i think veritas has come out with several you know will stoke says tim what do you think of blockchain voting even though it may be difficult to secure the actual internet connection uh and then sp also said the same thing what do you uh what do you what about blockchain voting um i like the idea of the public ledger i suppose but what's to stop someone from forging several votes and putting them in the blockchain? I don't know. It's probably not perfect, but better than mailing votes? I think it's probably worse.

Paper ballots are a security—physical ballots are a security function. I would think you would need to sign up online and then get a piece of paper mailed to you and then have to fill it out and mail it in and then you they would allow you to vote on the blockchain but the mail-in voting function is the easiest to exploit you get a bunch of fake ballots and you you pepper them around through different post offices and then there's no chain of custody you don't know where they went for the blockchain when i'm talking about blockchain voting right so you said you had to mail in something yeah like a confirmation like you sign up online and they're like okay we will mail you your confirmation of your sign up in seven days okay right so you get you had to mail in something yeah like a confirmation like you sign up online and they're like okay we will mail you your confirmation of your sign up in seven days okay

right so you get it you fill it out you sign it you mail it back and then they're like now you have access to your blockchain voting database and you could vote on the blockchain at the polling places so same place you would go and do your paper ballot you would vote and it would just go on in person you do both no i think i. So you vote in person. In person. You do both. No, I think it should be in-person paper ballots. Dude, we got these, man. Nope. Come on. It's about security.

Make it easy. No. No, no, no. Security is difficult. Okay? When you're in... This is the way I explain security to people. No.

When you go to a conflict zone, what level armor do you pick? 3A. The best. 3A? 4. I don't know. Plate. I've never won. Ceramic plates. Yeah. Depends on where you're at and what level armor do you pick 3a the best 3a or i don't know i never ceramic plates yeah depends on where you're at and what level of security you need if you're going into an active conflict you might not want to be wearing plates if you need to run full sprint for a long period

of time for some reason so you might want 3a you might want kevlar maybe not plate although i think if you're in an active war you're you're gonna want more than body armor according to jock willink you want body armor so listen you can also go the most secure route that is armored vehicle oh it's insane don't go armored vehicle but guess what armored vehicle can move fast it's bulky but you're not going in buildings you have limited your ability to function in certain ways target and you're a bigger target and there's still ieds and other things that can take you out so when i explain this to people when i go into urban conflict they're like why don't you wear a helmet goggles and a mask all the time and i said because you have you can choose to have for one making yourself a target wearing a helmet wearing a gas mask people are going to see you

you can't blend in with crowds or disappear so you have to consider stealth you have to consider if you're carrying this stuff around is it going to be cumbersome and let me tell you carrying around a gas mask and a helmet yes especially when like i've been in situations where i've had to walk or run 20 miles in a single day it's nice not to carry all that stuff so the more you pile on for security the harder it becomes to move but i'll tell you this if you're in a tank you're pretty safe from you know if you're an armored vehicle with bulletproof glass you're not getting shot so if we want good secure elections we have to accept there's going to be a decent amount of difficulty in getting the job done but so be it but the alternative is make it easy for everybody you make it easier for the fraud if you still have to sign up use your social security card you mail something out they mail it to you

do it you mail it back and then they give you access just to be able to push the button on your phone that's fine but i'm like and we do that now with absentee ballots but i'm saying i think in person with a paper you go up you go in person they give you a paper ballot you fill it out you sign it you put it in the envelope you seal it and then it's in the same place my mississippi river solution is the only thing that's really going to work as you guys are guys are talking about it, I'm still, I'm thinking, do we get turnstiles? Do you just send one person over this way? One at a time or all 70 million people?

How long would that take? Will there be like carnivals? Will there be street vendors? People are going to fly in a camp out. What kind of, it'll be like burning man every year, but for the election on the Mississippi, we all start on either side. The issue is if we did that,

they would be like, okay, who's going to cross the river for Trump? No one. And snipers. Nobody would do it. They'd be like, not me. What about thumbprint debt for your ID? Is that just not, is that can be forged?

In-person paper ballots. And the reason you do paper ballots is that you can audit the vote. You can go back and say, give us that paper ballot stored and secured so we can count. Yeah, there should be a paper backup. Yes. Whether you do it online on the blockchain or whatever, there should be paper as well that you can cross there.

And I think audits should be mandatory. Here's what we do. You do in person voting. They count it. And then we use a random number generator determine which which random u.s precinct will then recount those ballots oh yeah and you could have and you bring the people there computer do it you bring the people there so here's how it works we're in you know let's say we're in washington dc and we have a box of ballots we count it and

it says you know 100 for joe biden and 101 for trump we say that's our official number the observers have all agreed okay then you you seal the ballot up the box up a not random number jader then random number generator says it's wyoming's you know one can get first congressional district or only congressional district and you fly out three people a democrat or republican and a vote counter to dc to walk up and they count it again there you go are there not audits currently they're doing audits right now uh not as part of the regular process not not not as part of the regular process uh in pennsylvania the state republicans have announced they're going to audit the vote and in georgia they're doing the full risk limiting audit recount etc recanvass nice uh

trump's trump's trying to get a recount in michigan i believe a hand recount because of the glitch and that is a if what people are saying is true about the the votes flipping a hand recount is going to reveal a ton of these votes that's what trump needs to focus on so that's why you don't need to talk about any of these you know don't say it oh you started to talk about it right you don't need to talk about it you can just say that guy who won because the vote was glitched did you hear about that republican they said he lost then the computer changed it and he won yeah here's the article dude they go whoa that really happened and people are people you're gonna tell it to your friends they're gonna be like really now a lot of people on the on the left don't want to

hear it but regular people who aren't really paying attention might be like really you talk to like these die-hard anti-trump people they're gonna be like well that's ridiculous that's just i'll give you a million excuses yeah yeah whatever all right let's see we got some more superchats yeah yeah yeah let's see uh valis darkly says tim why do you always wear the beanie for the same reason that i always wear like the same shirts and the same pants it's kind of just like uh i'm a cartoon character it's a brand thing i guess it's a brand yeah it's the beanie brand someone someone made a mask for me like you know and it's got a little beanie on it and i sell shirts with beanies it's like a it's like a thing you know i didn't make it up mine it was actually um someone who did marketing foruff Daddy told me to do it. Oh. Back during Occupy Wall Street.

Yeah. It worked. And I was like, all right. And then I roll with it. You should start wearing a cape. It's like Ian in his PJ pants. Oh, dude. Look, Tenny Ball says, you guys are overthinking this.

Everyone gets their own inner tube, and there are two super tall poles. You place your inner tube over the candidate's pole of your choosing. Boom. Unfraudable. Cool. And then we look up at the 17-mile-high high poles and we're like, that one's higher. And they're like, I demand a remeasure. And then they have to come and bring the big measuring sticks.

And then the sun bursts one of the inner tubes. It was inner tubes below and layers of inner tubes upon inner tubes. You would have to bury the poles and then just check to make sure that no one put little inserts in there. Check the poles. Yeah, there's like inflated fake inner tubes. One starts inflating in the sunlight and then it pushes them higher.

That's not fair. Yeah, then it pops and it goes lower. Orbital. Ladies and gentlemen, we've gone well over because we had to make up for lost time. But but if you haven't already smashed that like button like and don't forget to subscribe to this channel because my friends tomorrow is going to be one of the don't say anything i was i was wondering no one no one's supposed to know who's coming oh my goodness i know yeah jack knows but uh we we're not announcing just it's going to be a fun i am so excited fun show

with uh some crazy people so tune in for that subscribe tomorrow at 8 p.m and uh and uh don't forget to hit the notification bell hit that like button you can follow me on twitter instagram parlor at timcast and my other youtube channels are youtube.com slash timcast and slash timcast news i have a bunch of different channels. They're all named Timcast, whatever. Of course, you can follow Jack, who's been hanging out. Hi, my name is Jack Murphy. You can follow me.

Subscribe to my YouTube channel, Jack Murphy Live. Please get that, Jack Murphy Live, on Twitter. I'm on Parler, but I'm not going back right now. JackMurphyLive.com. Jack Murphy Live anywhere. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. And you had that.

That was really interesting. That guy who was tracking all of these different hosts. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. And you had that, you had that, that was really interesting. That guy who was tracking like all of these different Matt Brainerd. I did an interview with Matt Brainerd, the former data chief for the Trump campaign in 2016. Plus he has a team of former Trump analysts, people that know this business better than anybody. And they are working right now around the clock to match, to identify and investigate potential circumstances of fraud. They have raised a half a million dollars. They're calling two million people to verify, and they're helping them form due affidavits and declarations.

So check that out. It's on my YouTube channel, Jack Murphy Live. Crazy. And then, of course, there's Ian. You can follow him. Hi, thanks, Tim. Jack, I just wanted to mention a book that you wrote. Oh, my God.

That I still haven't read. Oh, snap. But the premise sounds cool. I didn't even bring it up tonight. You should bring a copy in next time. Democrats are deplorable. Why 9 million Obama voters ditched the Democrats and embraced Donald Trump. It is a story about 2016, but actually it's the story of 2020.

It's the story of America in the 21st century and the resorting politically that we're having. Stories about people like me, people like you, and then some real deep analysis. It's fun. It's a great book selling well five stars on Amazon. Top seller. Go get it. I like Democrats are deplorable. Thank you, Ian. Appreciate it. And your book, what was that called? It's called writing in the dark. And it is also on Amazon. I wrote it when I was going through a psychotic break in New York City. So I don't know awesome. Who knew? Literally no one. You can follow me on any social network at

Ian Crossland. Did you know that? I was kind of being a jerk. And then he's like, by the way, bring it on. 10,000 copies. Thank you, Jack. Thank you for reminding me. I will. And the name of your band? Well, we have one called The Panic. I think,

are we able to present company? Well, we don't have The Panic, I think. Are we able to present company? Well, we don't have anything. It's a project that Tim and I are working on tentatively. And the name of your hairstylist? I do my own hair. Oh, snap. And your own wardrobe, definitely. Love it.

I do. It's pajamas. Don't worry. I used to wait tables with this shirt. Don't forget to follow Lydia. Do you have to follow me on Twitter? Sour Patch Lids. Sour Patch Lids. Sour Patch Lids.

L-Y-D-S. That's true, yeah. Alright, my friends. We are going to be back tomorrow with what I can only imagine is going to be a ridiculous show. But I think we're trying to be serious with it. It's going to be really interesting, but it should be fairly big. So stick around. I'll just tell you this. We can't talk too much about it

because I don't want to get shut down. We're going to be poking the bear on this one you can't resist oh yeah we're gonna get we're gonna get banned we're gonna get banned we gotta tease we will see you all tomorrow thanks for hanging out bye guys Thank you.