Timcast IRL - Timcast IRL #225 - Greta Thunberg BURNED In Effigy After Leaking Activist Toolkit Sparks Cry Of International Conspiracy w/ James Okeefe

Episode Date: February 17, 2021

Tim, Ian, Luke, and Lydia host James O'Keefe to discuss Greta Thunberg's influence in India and the trouble she's causing there, Project Veritas' latest release, an idea for a people's defamation defense fund, Mark Zuckerberg's previous stance on vaccinations, and the censorship of memes.  Support the show (http://Timcast.com/donate) Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

We were late by a few minutes. For some reason, YouTube would not let us stream. And every time we tried, it kept saying live streaming is not available right now. And I tried refreshing. We tried stopping the broadcasting software and turning it back on. Nothing worked. I think it may have something to do with the title, which is Greta Thunberg burned in effigy, gets activist arrested for sedition with our guest James O'Keefe. And no matter what I did, it didn't work. And so I tried something. I changed the title to YouTube is giving us the business and won't let us stream. And all of a sudden, streaming worked. So it's funny, a lot of people in the chat were saying, I wonder if this is a stream that gets

Tim banned because we're having James O'Keefe on the show. And talking about Greta Thunberg, for those who don't know the story, she accidentally tweeted out an activist toolkit. And now activists in India are freaking out, saying she's essentially interfering in their politics and burning images of her, burning her own effigy. And we also have James O'Keefe because he's got a story he's breaking about Mark Zuckerberg and some leaked videos. So I wonder if the reason the stream wasn't working because his name was in the title, I guess. And we also have James O'Keefe because he's got a story he's breaking about Mark Zuckerberg and some leaked videos. So I wonder if the reason the stream wasn't working because his name was in the title, I guess. I have no idea. But it was really strange because it kept – this overlay would appear that said live stream is not available. And you could click try again or finish. If you clicked finish, it would take you out of the streaming studio and then just put you back in regular YouTube.

It was the weirdest thing. So I went in, I changed the title, and apparently that worked. So as you already know, we've got a bunch of different things to talk about. We are joined today, obviously, by our guest, James O'Keefe. James, would you like to introduce yourself? Now, as you may notice, James is a small gorilla standing on the desk because there's not actually a James O'Keefe in that chair. And it's because he's late. So y'all can blame him.

But he should be here in about 10 minutes or so. And tsk, tsk, tsk. We're all late today. Oh, James. We've got to make him do push-ups when he comes here. Make him do push-ups. A punishment for being late. He's got to take a shot for every five minutes he was late.

Oh, no. So he's at one shot. Of what? Whiskey. To walk on. We've got that Conor shot for every five minutes he was late. Oh, no. So he's had one shot. Of what? Whiskey. We've got that Conor McGregor stuff, don't we? Yeah.

That's pretty good, right? I never even had a taste. Oh, really? Oh, weird. You don't want the Polish to drink. You do not. It's trouble.

Yeah. They were offering me beers yesterday. I'm like, trust me, you don't want this. If you think YouTube's giving you the business,

wait until a Polish person starts drinking. I just don't like booze anyway. I don't know. Yeah, I'm not a big fan. This will be like the first time the guest is running and covered in sweat, like, I'm here, I'm here. Let's start asking him really complex, hard questions just to make it harder on him.

Like as soon as he gets here? Yes. Give him some push-down. YM equals MC squared. Tell us now. Did you guys ever go through like that? Actually. Give him some push. Why M equals MC squared? Tell us now. Did you guys ever go through like- That's not me. That's actually, whatever.

You know. Did you guys ever go through hard drinking phases? No. No. I mean, when I was like late teens. High schooler. Yeah. I went through a hard one in my 20s.

Yeah. Anyway. You never did, Luke? A lot of beer has fluoride. I'm watching my third eye. Oh, that's great. Just get pure filtered organic hipster stuff most beer

has a lot of fluoride in there just saying why why because they use regular tap or something I think it's the way that they use the hops

I forgot exactly why because they dump fluoride into it yeah Luke you're a conspiracy theorist some would say that so Luke's here

yes they are burning effigies of Greta Thunberg in india i never thought i would get to say that welcome back beautiful and amazing human beings my name is lucardowski of we are change.org and if you like me and want to support my voluntary efforts you can on we are change.org forward slash donate there's many ways you could get involved what what i'm doing ways without even spending a dime and because of that i'm still here so thank you very much i'm also tweeting up and memeing up a live storm right now on Twitter.com forward slash

Luke. We are changed. Thanks for following me on there as well. Sometimes the titles really make me laugh. We'll be like Greta Thunberg burn an effigy with by Indians or something, whatever it is, with James O'Keefe. So you're like, James was there too? Yeah.

Oh, I don't know. Yeah. Like James was the one who was leading the protest't know. Yeah, like James was the one who was leading the protest. What's up everybody? Good to be back. I'll probably maybe turn my mic down a touch

if that's, I think I'm a little coming in hot. Oh yeah, the quiet lady over there last night. But I did start iancrossland.net.

I got it revamped. I'm selling merch on the website including things like this awesome Free the Code mug that you can get over there. And you can follow me

on all my socials over there so it's great to be back. Capitalism. Very entrepreneurial. And when James gets here, we'll introduce him. But for now, the gorilla is standing in for him. This is our guest. You know him. He's very angry.

I don't know why, but he's got scars on his chest. Maybe somebody hit him. We also have Sarpatch. Let's press I am here in the corner laughing at the gorilla and these guys. They're pretty great over here. Sorry we're running late. Ladies and gentlemen,

we have an awesome sponsor today. Thank you so much. Give a shout out to Virtual Shield, Virtual Private Network Service. You can go to surfinginternetsafe.com. Click the link

in the description below and you can get access to a 50% off VPN service, Virtual Shield. They have been with me the whole time. They're my first sponsor, and they're great. A virtual private network basically provides a simple layer of security for you while you browse the internet. They make it much harder for bad actors, hackers, and even the government. They make it harder for them to spy on you.

So the way I describe it is to make it just simpler for everybody. You know, we all lock our doors and windows. We don't really expect anyone to break in, but you still have that lock. That's what a virtual private network basically does for you. It gives you that very simple layer of security. So if you go to surfinginternetsafe.com, you can get 50% off 24 months of online security from the world's easiest and fastest VPN for only $59.88. That's actually 77% off, they say. Plus, you get 50% off all add-ons and other great discounts

on their other plans they're also proud to announce that this month all discounts are guaranteed for life that means 50 off as long as you are a customer check it out go to surfing internet safe.com link is in the description below and seriously guys but when i first started doing all this virtual show they were the first company they're like yo dude you're cool can we sponsor you and there and it was just like this tiny little channel and i was like yes and they really helped get us all to like get us where we are today so serious shout out guys thank you so much surfing internet safe.com and don't forget go to timcast.com and become a member because we have exclusive podcast episodes you can't get anywhere else we did a little jokey introduction of the

hour pillow so if you actually look at the screen you can see I'm holding up our pillow. It's a burlap sack full of packing peanuts. But we had a very serious half an hour discussion with Will Chamberlain talking about why Parler isn't necessarily the answer in terms of social media censorship. And we have a bunch of other episodes talking about alien technology. And we're planning much, much more. So we keep saying we're going to go to the range. We may actually get to do it because of a really awesome guest coming up later this

week who's going to give us the full rundown on Crazy Guns, and it's going to be a lot of fun. And we're hoping to actually get a chance this time. It was like snowing the past several weekends. So TimCast.com, go and check it out. And as for now, we are still waiting for James O'Keefe, who's probably going 120 miles an hour down the highway or something. Yeah, drive safe.

It's snowy out there, I guess. But in the meantime, let's jump over to the first story. Hey, I found a little trick on the website I wanted to let people know about. If you click reply on the video to a comment, and then it says, it'll pop up and it'll say, logged in as, and it's your name. If you click that, you can change your avatar. So when you make a comment, you have a little picture next to it. Cool.

I love it. Right on. A little Easter egg. Let's jump into the first story. Greta Thunberg effigies burned in Delhi after tweets on farmers protests. Celebrity interventions inflame sentiments in India as police investigate pro farmers toolkit. So basically what happened is a couple of weeks ago, Greta Thunberg accidentally tweeted out what's called a toolkit. It's basically just a manual explaining what to say, where to say it, how to do all this stuff.

A lot of people find this to be particularly nefarious. They call it – well, they say it's similar to astroturfing. Do you guys know what astroturfing is? I've heard of it. Luke, you're familiar? Yeah, I've heard of it. What is it? So basically you'll have these big organizations, special interests, that want to get activists to do a thing.

And so they'll hire a bunch of people to show up and wave signs. Sometimes it won't be as direct as saying, like, we want to pay an activist to do this. Like, hardcore astroturfing, the most nefarious, would be getting random people who don't care about the politics to wave a sign. But typically what it is, they'll put up an ad saying like, hey, do you care about climate change? Well, then come on down and protest and you'll get your food and travel paid for. And essentially those funds being provided to activists allows them the ability to be there. It's considered inorganic, right? So when you have Greta Thunberg putting out this toolkit where it's basically telling people what to say or how to say it, how to protect yourself and things like that, a lot

of people view that as nefarious. So now you have, well, Greta Thunberg leaked this. They say this from The Guardian. Thunberg became embroiled in allegations of an international criminal conspiracy against India after she tweeted a toolkit for people who wanted to show support for the farmers. So there's a big farmer protest going on right now. The document included campaigning tips, such as suggested hashtags and advice on how to sign petitions, though not named in the police case that was filed. Thunberg's tweet was said to have brought the Delhi police's

attention to the existence of the toolkit. Leaders in the ruling Bharatiya Janata party said the toolkit was evidence of international plans for attacks against India. Now I'm just going to say this because I know a lot of people are like, whoa, Greta Thunberg is caught. She's astroturfing. I don't think it's that big of a deal. Like if you say like, hey, here's the message we're using, here's the hashtags we're using, and you're telling someone how to get active. I don't think that's that big of a deal. But I do think it's interesting the way Delhi is handling it. They're basically saying international, you know, foreign celebrities interfering in our politics ain't going to have none of that.

So Greta Thunberg, they're just burning images of her in effigy. But here's actually the big news. Not this one. It's the next one. Indian activist arrested for creating protest toolkit shared by Greta Thunberg. This is a huge, huge screw up on Greta's part. Look, how old is she now? Greta Thunberg?

She's 18. I don't want to drag her too heavily because she's inexperienced and naive. But this was such a serious failure of operational security. This woman is facing, I think she's facing like life in prison. Let's check out the story. They say Disha Ravi, 22, could face up to life in prison following her arrest Sunday in connection to the online document, which calls

for organized support for India's deadly farmers protests. Ravi, a leader of the Indian arm of Thunberg's Fridays for Future protest movement, is being investigated for possible sedition, a charge that carries a penalty of life imprisonment, a police source told Reuters. Well, you know, look, I just heard a lot from Democrats about the dangers of insurrection and sedition. And, you know, they say these people should be locked up. So what's the difference?

What's the difference in this story? It sounds like a precedent was set over here in the U.S. and now other countries are going to take that and make it totalitarian. That's dangerous. That's what they do. Often when we see this happen in the US, something happened in the US, other countries go, OK, then we can do it too, right? And so that's actually criticism that was levied to Donald Trump. They were saying that when he was going after the press, all of a sudden a bunch of other world leaders started going after the press too. I think that's kind of silly.

Criticize people if they do something wrong. Trump expressing his opinions on the media, I don't – wrong trump expressing his opinions on the media i don't whatever people have opinions on the media in other countries like turkey where they're arresting journalists don't know who's the guy i was thinking of erdogan erdogan that's that's turkey arrests more journalists than anybody else so here so for those that are familiar with what's going on in in india i i just did a quick run through uh earlier it's fairly complicated i don't know too much but it's basically a bunch of farmers have this system where it's they have like guaranteed pricing from the government on the crops they grow. So it sustains them. And there's a there's new laws that are coming in that will basically take that away. And so they're protesting. And this makes

a lot of sense as to why the left is getting involved in saying support the farmers, because the farmers want a guaranteed minimum government intervention over the work they're doing. And the new laws would be more, I guess, capitalist. According to CNN, they'd be allowed to sell whatever they grow to whoever wants it. Whereas right now, the government guarantees a set minimum price and only certain people are allowed to bid on these crops. I guess you can call it deregulation. It's resulting in these massive, deadly protests. Greta Thunberg gets involved.

For what reason, I don't really know. Now you've got some woman who's facing life in prison. Well, I don't think anyone should ever be arrested for posting anything online, especially when it comes to activist toolkits. But when you look at the larger kind of international efforts, especially by massively funded PR campaigns, there's a lot of ties between intelligence agencies and also the supposed popular uprisings that usually work in the benefit of American geopolitics, like we saw in Ukraine, Syria, and Libya, that were very organized, that did have talking points, hashtags, and also the coordination of

the media that pushed for a certain agenda and was able to get it because of these larger disinformation efforts. And if you study things like the Economic Hitman, you see these efforts... Confessions of an Economic Hitman. Yeah, yeah. Confessions of an Economic Hitman. Great book. Definitely recommend you read it. I read it in high school. It changed my vision of the world. When you look at the kind of ways that they push for unrest in order to get their way, it really makes you think, what's really going on here? And we have seen a lot of pressure on India by individuals like Bill Gates that are criticizing India.

Also, just recently, their manufacturing plants. So, you know, there is something to wonder here about what's happening on the global scale, whether it's a conspiracy or not we do not know but i i still think it's an overreaction for india to arrest a person for for sharing this and it's only going to hurt them in the long run i was in india before i got some wild stories there i actually landed in india when they did a currency reset and the whole country went in panic uh yes pete there was riots there was people dying there's there's massive civil unrest and isn't that isn't that crazy that some guy can be like oh that that currency we have it's now a different currency and everyone just believes it everything in india

is pretty much cash uh except for some places in delhi and when i was in delhi it was fine i went to goa everything's in cash which was absolutely absurd during a currency reset where people were sleeping outside of ATMs. That was tourists. It was also weird to see ATMs segregated for local Indians and tourists. And the tourists were literally sleeping outside. The Indians' lines were even way longer because people didn't have any money, didn't have any cash. Oh, because they reset the currency and it was something different. They got rid of a large swap of currency because the government wanted all the accounting because a lot of people because it's such a cash driven country a lot of people have their money figured figuratively underneath the mattress the government was like you're not paying taxes on that so we're

just going to make all of these bills illegal you're going to have to give them to us so we could see exactly how much you have so we could get you the accurate amount of money that you owe the government uh crazy time during the currency reset and then crazy story but we gotta we gotta keep it on i know but one thing that that kind of reverted to uh in india that was very interesting was people literally doing an honor system you go to the store you just tell them your name you just take down your name you would have to come back later pay cash but but a lot of civil unrest happens in in india uh the country geopolitically is at a very important place especially countering china so there's a lot of interest in india they're stabilizing india right now with china china is basically on on the border of india and they're fighting right well they're having these weird clashes without any weapons like clubs but they're using archaic weapons like like clubs and sticks and nails

and barbed wire on baseball bats literally of what they're using fighting each other because they have this weird peace treaty where they can't use firearms against each other and they can't use live ammunition against each other but they could beat the crap out of each other and they can't use live ammunition against each other but they could beat the crap out of each other which they do but i've heard recently within the last few days they actually uh settled previous conflicts that were arising just two weeks ago and they're at a stalemate now so they're at a position where there's more peace now than there was just two weeks ago here's here's the crazy thing about the toolkit that gets released you have to ask yourself who makes these things who spends the time to develop an activist guide for protesting? And you mentioned this, Luke, you've got intelligence agencies. You think about what's going on with China and India and the

conflict on the border. Plus, I mean, you have like what, Pakistan, like Kashmir, all that stuff. So there's good reason for any adversary of India or us to create that conflict. So when you have international interests spreading information that can destabilize a country, what did the United States say about it? When we had, what was it like, a handful of Facebook pages with almost no followers created by Russia. Yeah. They went for years claiming Russia was trying to take over the country and destabilize everything,

and they were freaking out. In fact, they're still freaking out. They're foaming at the mouth like over over some Facebook pages. Now, what would happen if Russia was disseminating pamphlets, booklets, toolkits telling people how to bypass arrest, how to win in the legal system, how to protest, how to hashtag, how to spread the ideology and win, they would have gone even crazier. It would be, it would, if you think it was nuts now with, with Russiagate, imagine if Russia actually put together a toolkit telling people how to do these things. It didn't get that bad. And they still went insane. That's what's happening in India. And Greta Thunberg is facilitating it. And she's not Indian. Look, if you are an American, if you are an Indian, and you put together an activist guide because you want to help people and you believe in your cause, well, that's cool.

Yeah, AOC did that. If you're a foreign actor of high profile with tons of money and massive backing from special interests, and then you are pushing out ideological and tactical information that can exacerbate riots and protests, well, now you got a problem. You got a serious problem. Because what happens if India actually becomes destabilized? I wonder if, you know, look, I kind of feel bad for Greta Thunberg because she's just a kid. The things she's called for in terms of abandoning fossil fuels outright, banning fossil fuels in the next year or whatever, not even the issue like now we want it now,

they just kill millions of people. Look at what's happening in Texas with these windmills freezing and the gas lines freezing. We need to make sure we can get the electricity running. Already we can see what happens when you do not have the sufficient electrical, you know, equipment, weathering, et cetera. I know a lot of people are blaming the wind turbines for freezing, but everything basically froze. Nobody thought this was going to happen.

15 states are having power outages. There's 4.4 million people that went without power in Texas. The National Guard had to be deployed. Right, right, right. And there's a huge argument now happening, whether it's the kind of free energy or whether it's the fuels that are, you know, that froze. Right, right, right. But just the basic point with Greta Thunberg I'm trying to make is she doesn't understand the things she's advocating for are going to kill millions. From getting rid of the fossil fuels, fine. But if, look, if riots, protests, and mass protests, mass civil unrest sweeps India

because the people of India are challenging their legal system. Oh, okay then. We want to make sure people stay safe. We don't want a collapse that results in mass death. We want reform. We want people to, you know, do the right thing. And we don't want fighting in the streets. Greta Thunberg doesn't understand what destabilization or collapse really means. And I don't think she, I don't think, I mean, I guess she would care if she knew, but I don't think she knows. I don't think she realizes what it means for someone of her profile to be having these conversations. Apparently, there were like some leaked messages as well, where she's saying like,

oh, these hate campaigns, they happen. It's like, dude, the hate campaigns are happening because you're interfering in a foreign country's politics and you have massive clout that's getting tons of attention and spreading this artificial, you know, external ideology inside the country. So surprised people are protesting her. These are they're calling it an international criminal conspiracy, man. Yeah, a lot of eyes are on India. And I think we're going to be hearing about India a lot more, especially in the near future, especially with their very strategic, very important position in the world.

Because as as the China is going to be expanding their influence, they're going to also be propping up Pakistan. These are all nuclear powers. And when you look at India, I mean, they have a vast emerging middle class that speaks English, that is ready to help, even by some estimates, even by some experts, be the next hegemonic world power, even over China, because they are in a better position than China on the world map, comparatively as well. So India is going to be a very key, crucial place to sway your influence in, especially in the not so distant future. And it's not a surprise that this is happening to me, in my opinion.

I got mixed feelings about what this is all about, this farmer protest. Now, I'm trying to figure it out too, maybe we can clarify it sounds like what they're doing is right now uh if if a big multi-national multi-corporate uh farming industry in india wanted to sell bare bottom prices and out and outmatch all the the local farmers they could sell their their corn for three dollars and the government would have to step in. Tim, can you clarify this? I don't know a whole lot about it. Okay. But the government would subsidize it. It's basically right now government regulated sales versus absolute free market. That's the general idea. If Monsanto wanted to sell $3 corn and the farmer was like, I can't afford to sell my

corn for $3. They're putting me out of business. Okay. The government would say, okay, you can sell your corn for $10. We'll subsidize seven of it, and then it'll go for $3 to the market. Maybe that sounds like maybe what is going on right now, but they want to change it so that government gets out of the way and corporates can sell whatever. But the danger is that Monsanto could undercut these local farmers. We don't know that. This is what it sounds like they're protesting. Sure, sure, sure.

We don't know that. We don't know that. We don't know that. We don't know exactly the limits of this law it's a foreign country and i can't tell you i can only tell you that cnn said right now the current system is a government minimum guarantee for crops versus a sell to anyone at any price model right with the sell to anyone model is could be dangerous because if you have monsanto over there and they want to sell three dollar corn and the the local farmers can't afford it it'll bankrupt local farmers so that's why government is in there to help subsidize local

farmers um and and it's never this simple and we just don't know it and ultimately maybe it doesn't even matter what it is it's just that there's foreign nationals in flip but i mean that's the that's the name of the game right now the globe is connected you know where it's it's not even a national national game it's the same thing with china bro it where it's it's not even a national national game it's the same thing with china bro it's it's it's not that america wants cheaper products made in china they don't the american people want jobs they want to be able to work they want to feel fulfilled i find it hilarious that we have so many gen z memes where it's like there was one where it's from the incredibles where you know have you guys seen the incredibles the family

of superheroes yeah so basically like superheroes are outlawed and then like this Mr. Incredible is now an insurance, you know, adjuster or whatever. And it said like me, there's like a meme. It's like me working in an office, you know, getting paid for, you know, for an unfulfilling existence or something. And I'm like, yeah, people want meaningful jobs.

They want to make things to be proud of. But all of those are being shipped away. So these jobs are going to China. Why? Because billionaires, because the billionaires and the millionaires in this country. That's why. Now, Bernie Sanders, you know, mock him, essentially, because he's no longer fighting against the millionaires and the billionaires. But same thing with you mentioned these companies, the international ties. Regular people don't want this stuff. They just want to be with their families. They want to make enough. They want to get by.

They want to survive. They don't want a boot on their neck from the government, and they don't want their jobs being sent overseas. Oh, my. Look who's late. You are 27 minutes late. Nice jacket. That's five shots of whiskey.

We want 27 push-ups immediately. Hold on. So we're going to frame you up here. And Ian, surprisingly, also very interestingly, India's Supreme Court just a few years ago ruled that Monsanto seeds couldn't be patented in the country. So there's a lot of interesting news surrounding India, especially a lot of media figures now saying that they're very surprised that India dealt with the coronavirus

a lot better than any other country but of course that's not a surprise to us especially after talking to chris martinson and peak prosperity why they did so well you could see our conversations i did a video with him tim did a video with him but ladies and gentlemen james the key find the What up, dog? I had to charter a plane. Oh, my God. Tell us about that. I'm so glad you're here. I was at a secret location doing some guerrilla. Yes, guerrilla warfare.

Get the mic like direct. Straight in, tube it, and maybe turn it a little bit. How you doing, dude? How was your journey? It's been a crazy day. We just broke a story on mark zuckerberg oh facebook tell us more on uh uh covertly recorded uh taking an anti-vaccine stance in violation of his own policy at facebook so that's very interesting and a lot to talk about there tim well let's uh you

want to talk about it you want to tell us why you had to charter a plane or what's going on i can't if i told you I'd have to kill you. Okay. No, no, no. It's just been a crazy 24 hours and I apologize I'm late, but I have good excuse. Oh, it is what it is. I was getting text messages. I'm like, we're doing the show.

We put the gorilla in your place. Gorilla journalism. That's right. That's right. He was doing all right. He wasn't saying a whole lot, but you know, he looks angry, so it rouse people up. What's up? Headphones. I think you got them. Oh yeah yeah monitor see normally this is the stuff we do before the show what is up with project veritas punctuality is not my strength now we know yeah so what's going on man welcome to the show thanks for

having me tim i appreciate it yeah yeah so just well give us the latest then we can talk about the we just broke a story as i'm getting here. This is the CEO of Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg. We just broke it. I broke it on Twitter. I'm still, I'm back on Twitter. Project Veritas has been permanently suspended. Before you get started, I have to tell you what happened to us when we tried to start this show. Okay. So the story we led with is about, you know, Greta Thunberg. I don't know if you heard the news. She shared this activist toolkit and now protesters are burning her effigy because they view her as an international entity who's fueling these these deadly protests that are happening in India. So the title of the video was Greta Thunberg burned an effigy and activist is charged with sedition with James O'Keefe. The first thing that happened was when we clicked create stream, it said we weren't allowed to do it. Like an error occurred or something.

And so we had to go back and recreate. So for those that aren't familiar, you have to like you click start a stream and then it gives you the title, all the timing and everything. We fill out the forms. We click to go. And then it worked. And we're like, okay, finally that's awesome we go in i start i click streaming on the broadcast software and then all of a sudden youtube says live streaming is not available right now so i refresh try again refresh try again turn the software off turn it back on

none of it works but i took i took the title and changed it to YouTube is giving us the business, won't let us stream. Worked. Oh, that's ingenious. The funny thing is people were commenting, is this the episode that's going to get Tim Band having James O'Keefe on right now? And I took a picture. I tweeted the image. I am not exaggerating.

I tweeted out the image as live streaming is not available. When I changed the title, which removed your name and Greta Thunberg's, I don know what caused it maybe it was burned in effigy maybe it was sedition i have no idea it's working now now it's working well i'm on the show so i don't know if i mean our youtube is still this is a youtube right this is youtube streaming so they haven't banned us on youtube but a lot to unpack here a lot to talk about i'll let you be the captain you know tell us what direction you want me to go i think that was uh look you were late but we were also several minutes late as well because we couldn't get the stream get the stream going and i just want to stress as soon as you know greta thunberg james o'keefe the title was changed it worked don't ask me why it's not the first time something

you know i was joking uh with with my colleague my colleagues are standing over there the entourage the project veritas entourage all All flew on a private plane. Yeah, it was a crazy day. You wouldn't even believe it if I told you. You'll know soon. I was saying that whoever these people in San Francisco or wherever they are, like, you know, shadow boosting, banning,

censoring, they're worried because they're thinking there might be a whistleblower who's over watching this, who might record us banning and censoring. So maybe they're deterred from doing it, too, like the psychological deterrent effect. So we just broke a story, Mark Zuckerberg on the hidden camera, or he's covertly recorded on one of his staff calls, taking this anti-COVID vaccine stance in violation of Facebook's own policy.

Zuckerberg says, my understanding, is a quote from zuckerberg now not me my understanding is that these vaccines uh uh modify dna and rna now facebook has a policy implemented recently you're not allowed to say that so i was thinking would meet me quoting zuckerberg playing the videotape of mark zuckerberg get banned on facebook because it's in violation of facebook's own policy. It probably would. Well, they'll try. So we had you guys know Jack Murphy?

We had Jack Murphy on the show. He said on this show, he was like, Donald Trump gave I'm not even going to quote what Jack said because they've come after us for it. He basically said Donald Trump's Jack Murphy said that Donald Trump said something about voter fraud, and they use that and accused us as a show of making those claims when we've not. We've actually argued against them. We've even had some prominent Trump supporters give a more like balanced approach to what's

going on with the whole election stuff. And they tried accusing us of being conspiracy theorists for simply saying Trump said a thing. So you quoting Zuckerberg, they're going to claim they're going to claim james o'keep pushed the conspiracy theory right and they won't tell people push the i mean the anti-vaccine conspiracy theory right but i'm literally quote i'm i'm so what i my headline on the story was facebook ceo mark zuckerberg takes anti-vaccine stance in violation of his own platform's policy. So it'd be funny to see if we get a comment from, is it Andy Stone, spokesperson to Facebook? Has he responded yet?

No. So we have emailed him. We've carrier pigeoned him. We do everything. Text. What? Text him. Call them.

But Tim, you know, Twitter has permanently suspended Project Veritas' Twitter account. The official comment that Twitter gave CNN reporter Brian Fung of CNN Business is they said that we have published people's private information. Twitter did not say that I'm misinformation or fake news. No, no. They said the reason that we were suspended is because we're doxing people project veritas is publishing people's private information the evidence of that was us doing a routine tv doorstop that is to say you know television reporters go outside someone you know someone's driveway cnn does it all the time like they do the memers didn't cnn do that with that old woman yes they accused her and that tweet and you could actually see the numbers on her on her house so it doesn't it's completely illogical because i mean but that's they're censoring that's the reality but but but here's the interesting part and i have the documents

in front of me because i want to get my facts correct brian fong of cnn says that we were repeated violation of the company's quote anti-doxing policies but then but then just sunday uh the host's name was anna cabrera was on with brian stelter and she said that project veritas was removed for misinformation so cnn's own reporters are contradicting each other they're just just making stuff up. So what you're saying is you're going to get a retracto out of this. I'm we have we our lawyer has sent a letter to CNN corporate. David Vigilante is the general counsel of CNN. And we are going to get a retracto.

Retracto the correction alpaca. He's coming at you. It sounds like it wasn't so much that you guys got busted for doxing, but that it was the who you were doxing it wasn't so much that you guys got busted for doxing, but that it was the who you were doxing because wasn't it somebody that was high profile? So this is a little nuanced, but I think it's important that we take your audience through the facts because I think it's important because I think Twitter has crossed a Rubicon here that they have not previously crossed.

I mean, look at the Hunter Biden stuff, man. They suppressed a very relevant news story to help someone win a presidential election. That is true. I mean, these people are evil, man. That is true. So what happened here was we, I don't know if you've ever experienced this, but when you are flagged, Twitter gave us the option. It said you can simply get your account reinstated at Project Veritas by deleting this tweet. They want us to delete the tweet, the video of my reporter, Christian Hartsock, with a camera and a flag mic.

You could see the flag mic. There's no hidden camera recording here in a street on a sidewalk outside the house of Facebook vice president. Was this public property? What was his name? Guy Rosen. Was this public property? This was a public street, a residential street, and his residence. And we're following the lead of CNN.

CNN goes and doorstops people, local TV news. So I so Christian Hartsock asks Guy Rosen for comment on this is maybe the biggest public policy story of our of our lives. We're not confronting a private citizen. We're he's a private and he's vice president of Facebook. And then Twitter says you need to take down this video clip off Twitter. But I decided I'm not going to do that, Tim. I would be against my conscience. I'm going to appeal it. I knew it was a risk. And usually when you appeal, that takes a week or two to do.

And then in the middle of the day, Twitter got bombarded with phone calls by the New York Times, CNN and everyone else. And Twitter changed their minds. It said, nope, we've changed our mind. We're now going to ban Project Veritas forever. Permanently suspended. For some reason, my personal account was reinstated. That doesn't make any sense because both me and Project Veritas tweet the same stuff.

Pressure. Pressure. It's just media. This is what the game is for these, I don't want to call them journalists. These are activists. Because I broke a story, I think it was a year and a half ago where someone someone who worked at a major bank leaked to me internal documents about I think we actually I think we may have talked about this after the fact. Yeah, they leaked me these documents and it was basically showing that this bank had banned the well, I got to be very careful here. It appeared to be that certain right-wing individuals had their accounts closed because an email from a journalist said,

why are you supporting white supremacy or something to that effect? So what they do is a real journalist is going to email someone and say, you know, a story came out and, you know, actually, I got to say this. there's literally no news in finding out that someone has a bank account and then emailing the bank and saying why does this person have a bank account right we know why people have bank accounts what they do is they contact the bank they the email then says something like this individual has been accused of being a white supremacist why do you support white supremacy? The bank gets the message. It's mafioso.

They're basically saying, we are going to write a story claiming you support white supremacist organizations. And then the bank says, oh, we don't. We banned those people. And then the activists

pretending to be journalists go, ah, okay, great. Getting financial institutions or other companies to destroy their enemies. So it's not too dissimilar you uh james are one of the i think veritas is one of the very few actual news organizations i i look i think there's a lot of news outlets and a lot of good journalists and they work hard

and they do well but you look at how awful things have gotten with these major corporate news outlets there's no risk to the establishment to the corporate powers to the special interests from cnn or the new york times right i mean very little yeah but but it's like you were saying these people are looking over their shoulders not knowing who is going to hold them accountable by either recording their unethical behaviors and exposing them doing wrong they don't know who that's going to be and so they're worried worried about it. And they're worried about you. Getting rid of you will make their lives very easy. Well, I think there's a psychological, like I say, right now, as I speak, if there are coders, engineers, wherever they may be, Silicon Valley, when they do their whatever they do

that's unethical or at least dishonest, I know they're private companies. They can do whatever they want constitutionally. But there's that little thought inside their head, like the jury on your shoulder, sort of worried, deterred. Maybe someone's observing me do this thing. But what's most interesting about this situation that Project Veritas was permanently suspended was Twitter changed their mind, Tim, just as you said, once they got bombarded with all that pressure from New York Times and CNN being like, what's the deal?

Are they suspended permanently or not? And someone high up at Twitter said, nope, we're gonna suspend them forever. And that shows me that the Washington Post and the New York Times and CNN actually have tremendous power. And Jeff Bezos, who is whatever he is, a trillionaire, billionaire, trillion dollar market cap,

one of the wealthiest men in the history of the world, is most proud of his ownership of that woke clickbait rag washington post that's his crowning achievement in life so i i actually am not one of those people who say these these companies cnn has tremendous power to get twitter to change their mind by making a phone call think about it it. CNN spreads baseless theories. They eat human brains. They dox people.

They even had an article not so long ago that was titled, quote, How CNN Found the Reddit User Behind the Trump Wrestling GIF. What's the date on that one? What's the date on that one? July 5th, 2017. Wow. Where they knowingly went after someone because of that famous gif that Donald Trump

tweeted, and they said, publicly apologize right now or we're going to dox you. They said, promise never to do it again. Exactly. Otherwise, we'll release your private information. And this is the organization that's spearheading this censorship movement that never gets called out for their baseless theories, for their fake news and their lies. Even the New York Times. Yesterday, we were talking about a specific story where the New York Times was caught

fabricating the story about the fire extinguisher killing and beating to death this Capitol police officer. At the very least, getting burned by their sources and refusing to correct until a month later. Exactly. And then now, today, they also have another article that's titled Unfettered Conversations Are Taking Place on Clubhouse, talking about how itrera, I think you said? Anna Cabrera. Saying that you were suspended permanently for misinformation, and that statement itself is misinformation. I mean, I have the two statements.

It's like a firetruck on fire. By the way, we were going to get our lawyer. We could always just sue CNN. We've sued the New York Times. We'll talk about that in a minute. But I've got two statements from CNN in front of me right now. One is from Brian Fung, CNN Business, who's actually a pretty nice, I think he's a serious reporter.

And he says that Veritas was suspended for, quote, threats of sharing other people's private information. I have- Wait, wait, wait. Threats? This is threats of sharing other people's private information. That's literally what CNN did. Luke just cited that story from them.

And then I have a statement from Anna Cabrera. This is on the air with Brian Stelter on Sunday. Quote, Twitter has suspended the account of Project Veritas. I'm quoting her now, so forgive. It's not my words. Forgive me. Quote, a conservative actionist, activist organization. At least that's how they couch themselves.

I have never in my life referred to myself as a conservative activist. Not once I was swear to it under oath in a defamation lawsuit against CNN, unless they retract that. And then she goes on, quote, this is a much broader crackdown by social giants on accounts promoting misinformation. So our general counsel has just sent a letter to David Vigilante today. I have the letter in front of me, signed. A failure to retract will sue. By the way, these organizations are used to throwing the spear at civilian innocent people. They're not used to the spear being thrown at them.

I've sued the New York Times for defamation in the New York Supreme Court, and we're going to get passed motion to dismiss in a lawsuit. We talked about this last time. You and I talked about this. We need to sue the shit out of them. And I'm not doing it to harass. I'm doing it because that's justice. If you lie, if you intentionally disregard the truth, that's called actual malice.

I'm a public figure. You can't, under the law of New York State, intentionally lie. We'll get passed motion to dismiss, and then you get into depositions. That means I put Dean Bakke, executive editor of the New York Times, in a chair, and he's required by the law to answer my questions under oath. Not only that, but isn't there an opportunity for discovery? Maybe get access to discovery, depositions, interrogatories. They are required to answer my questions. When I confront Dean Baquet in the street in Los Angeles, that's the executive editor of the New York Times. He just ran away and laughed

maniacally. But when the judge says, no, you have to answer Project Veritas' questions, why did you intentionally lie about James O'Keefe? We have so many lawsuits, Tim, that our lawyer, I just think we're going to start suing people i think it's time and because you can't you can't defame people and get away with it anymore so long as people don't fight back you can but not seems like they picked a fight they're not you know it's really expensive the problem with litigation is that each of these lawsuits is a million bucks but we talked about this last time remember we said someone should start a non-profit and just start suing people yes who lie?

Well, that might actually just be project one-third of our budget at this point. You'll make money on it. Yeah, the People's Defamation Defense Fund. Right, exactly. Perfect. Just get a big fund and then track when – the issue is there are a lot of people now who are finding themselves in the public sphere who have small careers as personalities, pundits and journalists. They can't go up against The New York Times. Small individual, maybe there's a journalist who's got 70,000 Twitter followers and they're making, you know, 30 to 50K a year off of being an independent journalist.

Well, Tim, do you think these people – do you think it's psychologically too people want to be liked by The New York Times or want their book reviewed? Is it that psychological effect? They don't want to take on an institution as revered, as beloved. What do you think about that? Do you ever wonder? I was reading something that was really interesting. They talk about how the old mythological stories of heroism were individuals challenging the system, fighting against the gods, and the superheroes of today are supporting the system

and fighting on behalf of the establishment. So I wondered about that. You have people right now that don't want to challenge the machine, no matter how evil or wrong it may be, no matter how much they oppress and harm the working class, the little guy, the individual, they want to be a part of the machine. They want to be the one hazing the other person, not the one getting hazed. So when you look at the unfettered power, the New York Times or CNN has to destroy lives, why would anyone choose to be on the other end of that? So they all side with them. It's a legitimate question. And I think the same psychological effect has on people. I've noticed it since Project Veritas has been banned.

I don't want to share Project Veritas because I might be banned. I want people to draw an analogy. That's like saying, I don't want to tell the truth because the New York Times might be mean to me. Okay? Let's treat Twitter like the New York Times. Don't draw a distinction between big tech and big media. They are one and the same. In fact, the algorithms prefer CNN, right? Well, YouTube creates a special section on their front page for –

Carousel. The establishment news outlets. You're not going to find – well, you may get recommended shows like this. You may get recommended my other channels, which is news commentary and journalism. But CNN gets special privilege. And what's funny is download vidIQ. I love this plug and I use it. And it shows you a percentage next to the title of every video of the thumbs up to thumbs down ratio,

you'll see the recommended videos are usually overwhelmingly thumbs up. Why? Well, they're being recommended. It'll be videos from maybe me or Steven Crowder or maybe people like Kyle Kalinske, depending on your politics, or Jimmy Dore. But then you'll see this special mainstream media carousel, and it's all 10% thumbs up, 5%, just overwhelmingly rejected by the users of YouTube. But YouTube, desperate for the approval of CNN, The New York Times, ABC, etc., drop to their knees and beg CNN to like them. Beg.

I think it's fair to say, as you were mentioning, James, there, that the mainstream media and social media companies definitely share the same activist toolkits as some people would say uh but this is interesting i think this is the bigger story here the legal aspect of it because if you remember not so long ago cnn had to settle with the covington kids yes so there is a president for this undisclosed we don't know exactly how much but if if that's the case that we don't know how much that means it it's a good much. It's a lot. Not necessarily, but I do want to address that. So I see a lot from the left saying this was clearly a nuisance fee. They probably paid the bare minimum just to make them go away.

I don't think that's true. That's ironic. I don't think that's true, though. I don't. Because I believe the motion dismiss failed and they were potentially looking at depositions

and discovery. That sounds to me like the Covington kids and their lawyer probably said we don't need a nuisance fee we can put more pressure on you cnn probably they definitely didn't pay 250 million dollars to settle but it probably was uh nice it's hard to know that was the lawyer in that lynn wood was the attorney for yeah isn't that crazy but it's also the washington post that settled so it's not just cnn it's a number of news i. I think, Tim, you're right. What they fear most, and I've been through 12 of these depositions.

I don't know if you guys have been sued. I've been sued so many times. And Project Veritas has never lost a lawsuit. I always talk about that. We've never lost a lawsuit, never settled a lawsuit. So they fear me. They fear litigation. And the reason they fear it is the reason you said, discovery.

When people don't understand depositions, they get all all the emails they've looked at all my emails that's why i'm so clean i've never broken the law at project veritas we're so clean because they look at all of our emails they can't find anything but what happens when you open up cnn's emails tim when you get when you get uh brian stelter anna cabrera, and Brian Fung in a deposition chair under oath. So Cabrera says one thing. They're going to be attacking each other. Yes. Their lawyer is going to be like, how do we solve this one?

And you can't purge yourself in federal court. You can't contradict yourself. So I actually came to this epiphany in the last week or two. We just need to start suing the shit out of them when you have a case, when you have a case for defamation, that when you get past motion to dismiss, that's when people start settling lawsuits. You're not going to settle though, are you? I don't think so. I mean I've never settled on defense, on offense. I mean it's going to cost me over a million dollars to get to a jury verdict in the new york times litigation that's a lot of money plus you have to consider i think that

judges and oftentimes in these cases will accept apologies and retractions too if they were if the new york times retracted the this is the i talked to you about this last time this was the minnesota video and ilhan omar and the new york times said i was part of a coordinated disinformation campaign. The New York Times said that because they cited some idiot professor in some random place just saying, I think James is part of a coordinated disinformation campaign. And then they cross-cited that on USA Today, and then Facebook cited USA Today and then banned our video. So if they offered money, I'd consider it. But I think my conscience says I'm going to go all the way to a jury verdict. Yeah. I would also ask for an apology and for CNN to eat more human brains on national television.

I think it's your punishment. We will never pass over an opportunity to mention that a CNN host on TV ate human brain. And it's still on YouTube right now on numerous channels. Recommended and promoted while alternative independent media gets screwed over because the mainstream media giants always get promoted in the algorithms no matter what. And they get caught so many times with their pants down lying to the American public, whether through their sources, whether unknowingly or not. We don't know until we have this discovery. The people watching this and obviously every comment I see is what are you going to do about it i mean people are just tired of complaining so i think a solution i'm this is a solution we sue them okay because i can't tell you how many i have a dozen cases

i'm i'm you know trying to be the change i wish to see in the world as gandhi said i'm doing it we're suing the new york times for defamation in New York Supreme Court. We will get past motion to dismiss. And Tim, there's a very strong chance the New York Times tries to settle and give me money. You need to do a remix, remastered orchestral retracto with London Symphony Orchestra. We're bringing in live llamas. We're bringing in alpacas. Let's go to India. We're going to get an alpaca farm, an actual llama. I insist.

And by the way, this was like a dumb idea. Andrew Breitbart came up with this 10 years ago. People actually, their favorite videos are the retractable videos. I love it. It's a good song. I think they love the fact that we actually get them to admit that they're lying. It's pretty cool. But the question, do you think that I should take the money or go all the way to a jury verdict?

I think what you should do, if I could recommend something, is you cover your costs, but then you take the money out of it and you create it and you put it in this fund where you protect other people. The People's Defamation Defense Fund. The People's, what do you call it? The People's Defamation Defense Fund. I like that. When you protect the Redditors and the memers that CNN keeps going after or the grandma that they doorstopped, you help those individuals in a fund after recouping some of your initial costs. That's what I would do. You take the dividends and you start a fund with that.

Exactly. So the one thing I would say is just weigh the risks. If the New York Times comes to you and offers apology, retraction, and settlement, and you say no, the judge might tell you to screw off. He might be like, what do you mean? You won. They came to you and they said they're going to give you everything you want. So it may be great to get a jury victory. That's only if

they fight you all the way. I got to say, we covered this story the other day a couple times, you know, as the story has been emerging. The officer in the Capitol riots, New York Times, put out fake information. The next day, and I missed this, because I trust the New York Times, it was reported in Houston, the officer died of an unrelated stroke. The New York Times didn't change the article until a month and a week or so later. So I don't think the New York Times is they're going to resist. I think they're going to resist as much as possible any kind of admit admitting fault. But I'll tell you this, man, if you get the New York Times to, a full retraction and apology, they've done that before for you, haven't they? That's a win. Yes. We have hundreds of retractions and corrections, including a couple from the New York Times. If they offer to retract the article and apologize, to me, that's the case.

We win. That's what I wanted in the first place. But, Tim, they refused to do that. Right. And I think they didn't – I to do that right and um i think they didn't i think i called their bluff i think they're like oh you know screw you and they're not they're not used to people fighting back they're not they're used to railroading people and the biggest epiphany for me was because we got raw story to retract an entire paragraph i don't know

if you've heard of raw story it's yeah a woke click bait, verified sort of situation. Are they connected to Soros? I, I, I don't know. Okay. Ross story just retracted Tim an entire pair. They just,

they just made something up. What, what, what did they make up? Eric Ross story made up an entire paragraph about project. Oh, they said, they said that I said that Antifa was behind the capital rights.

I never said that. So our attorney said they just deleted it. And I was like, that's great. I got a retraction. I'm framing the retracto. But then I thought, for every one of these, there's 50,000 that no one ever got deleted. And I think to myself, they should thanking us for for doing a service because but not for project veritas that that paragraph would still be on the internet forever on

wikipedia cited by other organizations well it blows your mind wikipedia for like seven years claimed i invented a remote control zeppelin for live broadcasting. I have no idea how. But that's the editorial standard of Wikipedia, I suppose. That's right. Tim Pool, great Zeppelin inventor. So say it, Wikipedia. And the New York Times, in their response to our motion to dismiss, cited Wikipedia in the legal motion. They really did?

They had footnotes. But James O'Keefe's Wikipedia page says that he's no good. I'm not making this up. You know what's no good i'm not making i am not making this up you know what i'm not making this up the great lady hath fallen uh so what do you do you got to start this defense fund and then next time you come on blow it up on the show like talk about it and get people to start investing in it well we're gonna we're gonna start by by we already sued the new york times and we're gonna start suing a few other outlets i i think this we're on to something here.

Malice. Defamation law in the United States. You can't – This is why discovery and depositions are so dangerous to these organizations because I've been in these private Slack groups. So you guys know what Slack is, right? It's basically discord for private corporations. Right. I have seen these people say things that would get them in very, very serious trouble.

I have had, there's one particular instance I cite over and over again about a very prominent individual who now works for the New York Times, who basically told me, hey, we engage in unethical behavior, so don't report on other people doing the same kind of unethical behavior. And I was like, wow, if a story broke and they got sued and that chat was released in discovery, the company would be, their credibility would be gone forever. So how's discovery work? So I've, I've been through this so many times.

I'm not an attorney. I've got a few dozen working for us. I dropped out of law school. You do a motion to dismiss it. You pass this motion to dismiss. That's when these companies start settling lawsuits. Like in the case of Nick Covington, or Nick from the Covington.

Nick Sandman, thank you. Once you get past motion to dismiss, then the companies realize you are headed towards discovery. A deposition is where they videotape. They videotape me. For 12 hours, I'm under oath, and the lawyers pepper me with questions.

They look at your emails. They get everything related to the litigation. So I can open up the New York Times' emails.. They look at your emails. They get everything related to the litigation. So I can open up the New York Times' emails. I can look at every communication. It's against the law for them to delete emails about me. They have to preserve their records about me. And I get – and by the way, a deposition, nobody likes it. It's very uncomfortable.

Unethical people, which we are not unethical at Project Veritas. We always behave like people are watching. Fear the deposition. Have you ever been deposed? Negative. Have you ever been deposed? Not in this kind of context. I've been in trial before. I plead the fifth. You plead the fifth.

That's a yes. So I've been deposed like a dozen times. I've been to federal jury trials. I understand this process and it's very uncomfortable i mean i've been i've also been arrested by the fbi so there's that but i've been i've been through all this and and and they're not used to this they're not used to this and i it's almost like a form of content when you get the executive editor of the new y York Times in a chair under oath. It's almost like he's required to answer questions. And their brain probably hurts because they're legally bound to tell the truth. They have to. And their brain isn't used to that. So the withered husk in their brain,

that is the truth center, is like struggling to function. It's like pouring water on a robot. It's like malfunctioning. When you do discovery, you start pulling from the emails. If you find like different infractions of this guy said defamed you, this guy defamed you, this guy defamed you, do they then become separate? It's so beautiful. In the New York Times case already, the reporter's name in that case, a guy's New York Times reporter, Maggie Astor, wrote an article. This is so beautiful. In the article, she said that Project Veritas relies solely on anonymous sources in the Minnesota video. When you can see the people's faces, it was just preposterous. It was self-evidently incorrect.

And then under oath, Maggie Astor changed her tune. Under oath, she already printed a retracto in the motion. She already changed the fact. She said, no, no, many of the people are named. So under oath, they changed their tune. Well, so that's a retraction. That's a victory for you. That's a victory already.

They've now admitted the facts are different from what they've proposed. They've already admitted. But she knows. She knows. She knows it. And the judge knows it. And the jury knows it. I'm telling you, this is the People's Litigation Defense Fund, Tim.

It's a good idea. They've got to settle with you. They've got to just keep your money in there. But what concerns me is the damages that that girl went on CNN in front of, I don't know, 100,000 people. Do you have how many people were watching that episode? A million people. And they lie about, they said that you were spreading false information on Twitter. This is what they did to me when I got invited to the White House.

So me and Bill, and you were there as well, when we got invited to the White House, the Today Show showed my picture and claimed that I was a proponent of the Seth Rich conspiracy theory. They made it up. Because what happened was Fox News reported definitively, it was Fox Business, I believe, information about the Seth Rich conspiracy theory. I then read that and said, wow, well, I don't believe it's entirely true, but we'll see what happens.

Because I read a story that was later retracted, they ignore all of the context around the fact that it was retracted, that I came out when it was retracted and said, wow, the story was fake the whole time. Who'd have thought? But simply by reading a story that later got retracted, they claimed I was pushing a conspiracy theory. You see how that works? That's a great trick because they'll argue, but it is true. It was a conspiracy theory. Yeah,

but at the time, the context is relevant. It was a definitively reported story from Fox Business, later retracted. I reported on the retraction. That's the dirt of these organizations. They know it's not true. They know it's a manipulation. Think about every single journalist who pushed the insane Russiagate lies. Are they all conspiracy theorists now? Well, there's a manipulation. Think about every single journalist who pushed the insane Russiagate lies. Are they all conspiracy theorists now? Well, there's a great book called Disinformation by a Soviet bloc dissident, which I tweeted this picture. This guy died yesterday. I can't even pronounce his name, but he wrote a book called Disinformation.

He was a defector. And he talks about how disinformation works in the Soviet Union or, in his case, Romania, I believe. Spell out his name. Eon, M-I-H-A-I, Pacheachepa he died yesterday and he wrote a book called disinformation it's like it's like a thousand dollars on amazon because everyone's trying to buy it right now i have a copy of it and and he says that there's always a little kernel of truth in their disinformation and they always go back to that little it's mostly untrue but there's some weird, like you just said, little factoid. And that's how they do it. That's how disinformation works.

They'll use some iota of truth, and it's surrounded by falsehoods. Assumptive language. Yeah. Saying things like, you know, James O'Keefe. They'll say, James O'Keefe pushed the conspiracy theory that Antifa was responsible for the Capitol riots. Right. And then they'll argue in court, we didn't say that he affirmed, asserted as true.

We say he pushed the theory because he was talking about it. Like if I ask a question, if I- You're pushing the conspiracy theory. I'm a reporter, right? So I ask questions for a living. So if I ask questions about whether Antifa was present, and then one reporter from Bloomberg says he implied it, Ross Story says he's pushing the theory.

Yep. It's this crazy thing. And once it makes it through a few sources, it'll be James O'Keefe asked a question about X. Then someone else copies that and says, according to source A, James O'Keefe was asking, you know, implying that X was true. And then the third source says James O'Keefe said X. Then Wikipedia takes it, runs it. James O'Keefe believes in, you know, implying that X was true. And then the third source says James O'Keefe said X, then Wikipedia takes it, runs it, James O'Keefe believes in, you know, space dinosaurs. It's like a game of telephone.

And again, the further it goes, the crazier it gets. And people don't understand this because they don't see themselves doing this. But people need to understand the levels of depravity, the amount of lies, the amount of selective editing that goes into a lot of these mainstream media pieces. When they have an agenda, when they have something that they want to push, they will do everything in their power. They will stoop to levels that are unimaginable just to get that agenda through. Well, the editing thing, that's what I say in our videos,

it's a form of psychological projection. This is what, you know, I'm not a psychologist, but this is projection. They just quite literally accused their enemy of doing. And, and, and, and we're not like that. You and I are, and that's not how we operate. We're, we're fairly ethical people. We're pretty honest people, pretty down to earth people. These people project onto us what they do. And when they say editing, I mean, all journalism is edited selectively. So, I mean, these words are arranged into sentences in a fairly deceptive manner. They write things. I mean, we do the purest form of journalism is people's lips moving. You can hear the words coming out of their mouth, but they practice this form of projection and it's rather evil. They just a key and it works, Tim. It's effective. And they have like $100 million set aside annually for lawsuits, getting ready to pay out $40 million a year in lawsuits. I'm just throwing a number. I don't know exactly how much. Yeah, they do though.

They're well-prepared for lawsuits. They budget them in. They know they're coming, and they know they can crush the little guy. And that's what you were saying. They railroad people. They railroad people. They railroad people. And I think back in the New York Times' case, that article about our Minnesota video was the night of the presidential debate. They had a researcher lined up from Stanford. It wasn't Stanford University.

It's some other Stanford, some unknown research group called Stanford. I mean, you can't make this stuff up. They called the guy. The reporter called the guy. They had a canned remark. Yeah, it's, quote, probably part of a disinformation campaign. Probably. And then the New York Times cited that researcher saying it's probably part.

They put it in the headline. It was cross-referenced by USA Today. Facebook uses USA Today as their fact checker. And before you know it, 50 million people getting a notification saying the video is fake news. It's unbelievably effective. Well, let's talk about the story you just broke. Yeah. And, you know, in talking about the censorship now.

So you guys just put out this tweet. Mark Zuckerberg. Actually, I have the tweet right here. You tweeted, CEO Mark Zuckerberg takes anti-vax stance in violation of his own platform's policy. I'm not going to read his quote because, you know, even though I know you already did. But they might try. I'll tell you what I do when I read quotes. I'll do this quote.

I share some caution on this vaccine because we and this is Mark Zuckerberg saying this just don't know the long term. And again, Mark Zuckerberg side effects of basically. And again, this is from Mark Zuckerberg's quote, modifying people's DNA. Mark Zuckerberg here and RNA. No, no. I have to do that because they'll selectively edit. Yes. Yes Zuckerberg here. And RNA. No, no, I have to do that because. They'll selectively edit you. Yes, yes.

No joke. No joke. Me reading something from Mark Zuckerberg and they will splice together. Well, go ahead and splice it that many times if you really want to do it. Some people will. But this is Mark Zuckerberg basically saying something that as far as I can tell was never believed to be correct. When the research in the news was coming out about the mRNA vaccine,

it was never true. It was always a conspiracy theory that it modified DNA. Now, at the time, it was not against Facebook's rules to claim that. That's my understanding. That's correct, right?

At the time, but recently Facebook announced that they are, quote, expanding their efforts to remove false claims on Facebook about the vaccine. So Mark Zuckerberg makes the statement in July where he's essentially violating Facebook's own policy. And the question is, I guess Mark Zuckerberg's thinking has evolved on the vaccine. And it's a little bit strange because he's now just instituted this policy prohibiting

what he was saying a few months ago. Well, I think it's fair to say people's opinions change. And Mark Zuckerberg was clearly wrong in this. The mRNA, it essentially doesn't change your DNA. It just configures certain cells to produce the spike protein. And then when those cells die off, that's it. That's the end of it. That's why there's actually multiple doses. That's why they say it doesn't work necessarily produce the spike protein. And then when those cells die off, that's it. That's the end of it. That's why there's actually multiple doses.

That's why they say it doesn't work necessarily in the long term. But this was, I don't know what he was reading. Mark Zuckerberg was reading fake news. Now, it's fine, in my opinion, that he wants to have an opinion that's incorrect because people are wrong. Even Mark Zuckerberg. The real issue here, as you can see, and we were talking about this earlier, Zuckerberg is afforded the right to pontificate on things that were widely considered to be conspiracy theories

at the time right whereas if i said the same thing i would have been annihilated in the media he's telling his own staffers this stuff now he's implementing this rule and again i'm not holding it against him that he changes opinion okay no but the authority is him this is the problem who appointed mark zuckerberg to decide when and how we're allowed to think about things and share opinions? Well, his own vice president, Nick Clegg, we had him on a leaked tape basically saying they're just making this stuff up as they go. This is Nick Clegg, vice president of Facebook. He's a British guy and he's on the – I guess he has their oversight board. And they're basically playing the role of judge and jury of the Supreme Court.

The Financial Times reported there is a growing trend. and they're basically playing the role of judge and jury of the Supreme Court. The Financial Times reported there is a growing trend. Tech companies think they should be deciding public policy, not government. And this is a prime example. This has nothing to do with my opinion about the vaccine or whatever, or Europe. The point is Zuckerberg is the CEO of Facebook. And just a couple months ago, he was anti-vax. This is Mark Zuckerberg, not me, not you, not us. It's Mark Zuckerberg, the CEO of maybe the most powerful company in the history of the planet Earth.

At a time when if you tweeted anything remotely anti-vax, they went after you hard. But this is the CEO of Facebook anti-vax. On the record, not on the record, he's off the record. He's behind closed doors. To a major. I guess he's on the record to his own staff his own executive committee saying this this is a whistleblower inside facebook folks has given us this tape of mark zuckerberg that is one of mark's own colleagues is a source to james o'keefe

and is still a source to james o'keefe that's why those engineers are very careful right now pretty cool pretty cool right and mark zuckerberg just a few months ago, said, I'm anti-vax. I think it changes your DNA. Again, Mark Zuckerberg's words, not mine. It's too late. They got you. But suddenly, now, Mark Zuckerberg has changed the policy. You're not allowed to even pontificate about the vaccine.

Doesn't that seem a little capricious to you? I think it's good that he finally realized he was wrong. I think this is actually included in your report good that he finally realized he was wrong. I think this is actually included in your report that he did a public conversation with Dr. Fauci. And here's what I love about this because I texted you

when I saw this and I was like, well, look, I get it if he changes his opinion. You guys fully included the dates of when he said it, the date of when he had a change of opinion.

You're not hiding the fact that and I think it's fair to point out that sometimes people's opinions change and good for Mark Zuckerberg on realizing he was wrong. The issue is if it's wrong to say it now, we knew it's fair to point out that sometimes people's opinions change. And good for Mark Zuckerberg on realizing he was wrong. The issue is, if it's wrong to say it now, we knew it was wrong to say it back in July when he was telling his employees this. The point is, why was the rule just implemented?

Why was Mark Zuckerberg allowed to push insane conspiracy theories to a massive company, Facebook? I guess the idea is if we're going to live under this rule about disinformation, you can clearly see that Mark Zuckerberg shares disinformation, and then it only changes when he realizes he was spreading disinformation. In many ways, and this Nick Clegg, the vice president of Facebook, is admitting as much in a leaked tape, one of these leaked tapes, saying we're kind of having to come up with these rules.

Think of it like the U.S. Constitution. Imagine the United States Constitution had very specific things that you're not allowed to say. One of them is you cannot speak about the COVID vaccine. I mean, that's what Facebook is saying. They're just making new things up that you can't talk about. And the analogy I draw is the Constitution of the United States is very clear. Congress shall make no law prohibiting the free exercise of the freedom of speech. But Facebook has these rules about

certain subjects you're not allowed to pontificate about. And the audience, well, they're a private company. They can say what they want. They're a private company. I get they're a private company. But you can't lie. Lying is wrong. It's just unethical. I would even question the private remark there because they work hand-in-hand with the government in many different ways. So I would say they're even a quasi-government agency, not even from their seed funding but from what they're doing now. So it's interesting because, I mean, he's afforded to change his mind. He's allowed to pontificate, but we're not.

That's the thing when you when you get rid of conversation when you censor it when you stifle it you spread a lot of these crazier theories and then again it deserves to be called out look i'm happy someone's calling look at twitter and hunter biden the this is one of the biggest media scandals of our generation a news story broke about hunter biden vice president joe but well now president joe biden's son at the time running for the highest office in the land. And his son was implicated in some very serious crimes and his brother. So Twitter intervened, Facebook intervened, and they publicly bragged, don't worry, we are suppressing this story so people can't see it.

And then what, two weeks after the election was over, they were like, oh, that story? That was true the whole time. It was true the whole time. It was true the whole time. That is horrifying. And so this goes hand in hand. I think you're looking for some consistency. The consistency would be Mark Zuckerberg says don't spread disinformation. We derank disinformation.

They give power to these third party fact checking organizations, which just make stuff up and they put out fake news themselves. Like my favorite was Snopes article. Did Ocasio-Cortez exaggerate the danger she experienced in the Capitol? False. While she wasn't in the Capitol, the Capitol was stormed. No.

AOC's story about the Capitol took place a full hour and 10 minutes before the building had been breached. So I think it is fair to have the opinion she exaggerated. Why then is Snopes given the ability to slap a warning label on my posts, which is, in my opinion, they didn't actually do that to me. I'm just saying on your or anyone else's posts, Snopes can now put their opinion over your opinion. If we're supposed to be living by a standard to stop disinformation, I think what we've now realized from, you know, the video you've put out just now,

this is the context I think you need to make sure people understand. Right. That in July, it was a conspiracy theory to say what Mark Zuckerberg was saying, and he didn't care. He let people say it. Now he had the epiphany, so he makes the rule. That's the problem. Are we allowed to have these ideas and communicate? Or is it only on Mark Zuckerberg's whims the rules change? I mean, this is an extraordinary point, Tim. I mean, it's like a constitution. People

need to understand these companies just, okay, now we're going to create a rule this week saying you're not allowed to talk about this. These are private companies. Again, this is from the Financial Times. Momentous decisions in the hands of private companies is not a long-term public policy solution. They neither have the legitimacy nor the capacity to make such decisions in the public interest. These are Supreme Court. These are akin to the Supreme Court decisions for Facebook to say, OK, now you are not allowed to talk about vaccines.

It will ban you. It's more powerful than if the United States Supreme Court were to cast a decision tomorrow saying you are not allowed to talk about red delicious apples. So hold on. Is the rule actually that you can't talk about vaccines at all? I'm going to read the rule to you. This is last week, Mario, I believe. This is Facebook announced last week a new rule that said, quote, we are expanding efforts to remove false claims on Facebook and Instagram about COVID vaccines and vaccines in general. So I wonder, you know, be really funny if like one day Mark Zuckerberg, just like he meets somebody who has this epiphany and he becomes this crazy fruitarian who thinks meat is wrong. Right.

And then he passes a rule where he's like, I think that eating meat is just wrong and eating vegetables is also wrong. You know, a lot of people talk about not doing harm to animals, but you also harm the plant when you eat the vegetable. Fruits are actually meant to be eaten. So I think everyone should have to eat nothing but fruit and spread the seeds. So now we're going to ban anyone who promotes meat or advertises it. That's exactly right.

Right. That's exactly what happened. It would be insane. Because in July, he said, no, this thing is – I'm an anti-vax guy and I think it modifies your DNA. This is like not five, ten years ago. This was in 2020 he said this. And suddenly he had a change of heart. I mean – so I think that Facebook is more powerful than the United States Supreme Court.

In fact, these tech companies are more powerful than all three branches of government so when they make when they make a rule change that says you can't talk about something it's it's as if the united states supreme court made a change about codify the united states constitution give me the ability to control what people say and i care not who makes the law well the thing is okay this is the big debate this is it there's a big debate of our times they're they're private companies right now and we don't have the right to seize their means of production as a company. That's very communist. If we were to say, okay, Facebook, now you're government controlled. We're taking the country. We're not going to do that that's a communistic takeover we can't do that listen to me and the problem is these companies have a right to create their own terms as as does a restaurant they don't want you talking about certain things in the restaurant get out of the restaurant that's the restaurant owner's right my concern is how do we move forward in the society with that still being the case and

i can only find tim please let me finish the thought that we need to free the software code. It's the only way to allow other people to create software as powerful as Facebook with their own terms of service. So you made several points there. And the premise of your final conclusion is incorrect, which is what I'm trying to address. Scale exists. If there is one person buying up all the farmland and now no one has food, the people have a right to say, nah, you can't do that. One small plot of farmland has a right to their sovereignty to grow their crops and be left alone. One person seizing every single opportunity for people to eat

is very different. Facebook is not some small platform people use sometimes. It is the one of the largest, if not, it is the second largest website, I think, on the planet behind Google. And they essentially control the flow of information by monopolizing it. They've now used that monopoly power to control our politics. It is not the same thing as a restaurant. There's 50 different restaurants that are not chains I can go to. There's no other Facebook. The president is not on these other platforms. Okay, I agree. It is a monopoly. But if you look at Rockefeller Standard Oil, they broke it up. That was the first monopoly. And all it did was make Rockefeller more rich. They created six new oil companies that he had stock in all six.

If they did this to Facebook, you'd have Facebook Prime. You'd have Facebook Messenger. You'd have Instagram. That's not the answer. No, it's not the answer. Breaking up Facebook is not the answer. Regulating it by freeing the software code. Yes.

Why would freeing the software code do anything? Because it would give people the opportunity to create software as powerful with their own terms. And then people would migrate to the place with the best terms. You just advocated against seizing the means of production. Now you're advocating for it. No. I think that Facebook has a right to function.

And I would never want to take it away from Mark. The code is their means of production. No. The means of production is the website. No. The factory is... Yes. What's the website made of? The No, the means of production is the website. No, the factory is... Yes, what's the website made of?

The code, right? Yeah. So you want to give the secret sauce that makes their system work... Yeah, but I'm not going to take their system. That's what you're advocating for. No, I'm not taking... I don't want to take Facebook. I want to free the software code

so other people can create more of them. So you're taking... It's different. They're allowed to keep their brand, but not the actual company. And the website, and all the marketing that goes through the website.

Yes, of course. That's the only... that's the only capitalist solution i can find over the last two years talking about transparency i mean these are these are these are these platforms uh they have the ability to amplify certain voices while excluding others it's a product of a scale economies and and and their power comes from squeezing out alternative platforms while fueling this virality. And I think – I mean I agree with you on one hand. I think it's about transparency. I'm biased.

Veritas, my mission. I believe in it. If we just expose how they do what they do, you're talking about like letting their competitors know how how what do you mean by by showing their what they're doing access to the source code access to the code so you can see what the how the algorithms work um how the code is built how the software is built so you could reuse it and if you make it a free software code if you take the software and change it make it better they would have access to your changes as well. Interesting. Interesting.

I don't know. I think the answer is, you know, we had Will Chamberlain on the show talking about how Parler isn't the answer. We need platform access as a civil right to make sure people have the ability to use these platforms. But I got to be honest, the problem is multifaceted. So I'll give you one example. Just because I'm allowed to use Twitter does not mean Twitter is functioning properly, right?

So we talk about Facebook censorship and the capriciousness of their rule changes. Well, recently, I quote tweeted Cassandra Fairbanks. She was talking about, she did this story about vans pulling up to the TCF Center and questions being raised about it. I said, I didn't think the videos mattered. Whatever they do prove or don't prove, I don't think they matter. Because Time Magazine wrote an article basically saying that the election was rigged. And then I put, I'm sorry, they didn't say it was rigged. They say

it was fortified by changing election laws and manipulating the flow of information. That's a fact. They didn't say it was rigged. That's what I said. They said it was fortified. Time Magazine wrote this article. Twitter blocked my tweet in all forms. You can't retweet it. You can't quote. You can't respond. You can't like. No, no, I'm sorry. You can't quote.

You can't respond, retweet or like. And they put a tag saying this claim about fraud is disputed, but it's literally not disputed. Time magazine wrote it. I was quoting Time magazine. So I actually reached out to Jack and I said, could you remove this? It is a false statement of fact. Jack did not respond.

But he responds sometimes. You know, I talk to him every so often. We have this other story that's really funny, actually. And this exemplifies the great problem. Check this out. Twitter labels Indiana AG's tweet a Valentine's Day meme that election was stolen from Trump. This is hilarious. Todd Rokita tweeted, happy Valentine's Day.

And there's an image that says, You stole my heart like a 2020 election. Happy Valentine's Day. And Twitter says, This claim of election fraud is disputed, and this tweet can't be replied to, retweeted, or liked due to a risk of violence. Chef's kiss. Memes.

It's a meme. He's not literally saying there was fraud. He's mocking the idea it's donald trump as a cartoon and he's making fun of it you can't even post memes yeah they went after a couple of my memes too on instagram and twitter just deleted them and i didn't even know and i'm like wait what's going on here why me i mean they're satirical they're meant to be funny that's funny that that that's that seriously i don't think that's going that's not going to make anyone violent at all and and and now we're at a phase where Instagram just announced a few days ago that they're going to be going and snooping through your DMs, your private messages, looking for hate speech to go after.

That's not new. I know, but them publicly announcing it, them saying and being so emboldened by it is new. We have to acknowledge the reality that these platforms are, I think we've all been talking about this. They have a form of concentrated political power akin to basically a loaded gun on the table. They swing elections. They sway elections. So what do we do about it? Right.

That's what everyone says to me is, OK, stop complaining. Be brave. Do something. I kind of agree with you. I think it's exposing the reality. okay, stop complaining, be brave, do something. I kind of agree with you. I think it's exposing the reality. And we need an army of whistleblowers inside big tech. Well, you know, I've said this several times.

I think the work you guys do is some of the most important work we have right now. Your show brought us Richard Hopkins. Last time I was on the show, the mailman from Pennsylvania, Erie, Pennsylvania, sent us an email after watching your show and blew the whistle on the postal service. Signed an affidavit. That's all you, man. I mean, we're just a bunch of people who sit around talking about stuff on the internet. But for whatever reason, he watches your show more than any other show.

And he came to VeritasTips at ProtonM.com shameless plug that's v-e-r-i-t-a-s tips at protonmail.com it's encrypted hopefully the nsa is not intercepting that email and uh and that richard came to us and richard lost his job tim richard was fired from the postal service first he was suspended then he was fired by the wayal Service. First he was suspended, then he was fired. By the way, I think that's important because he has skin in the game. He's an actual person who is going to lose his career for the public's right to know something. He's not just saying something. He's giving up his livelihood for it.

Here's why I say what you do is so important and actually why what Richard and others have done is even more important. I mean, for one, you can't do your job unless there's brave people willing to stand up and work with you to get that information out. More importantly, those brave people who are standing up are creating this atmosphere where these big shots, these fat cats, these corrupt individuals now have to keep looking over their shoulders wondering who's going to say you can't do that. I'm going to I'm essentially going to say you can't do that i'm gonna i'm essentially gonna blow the whistle it's like you were mentioning earlier you know people at facebook now have to worry who's the person there who's going to share what they're saying luke when you when they go to look at dms which is unconscionable and unethical for someone to browse private dms in the back of that whatever engineer coder's mind is wait before i look at the DM, should I be worried if someone's looking at me? That psychological effect.

Exactly. And this is why they don't have any transparency or accountability to their actions, because if they did, people would know what they can and cannot say. They don't want you knowing it because they want this fear effect. They want this chilling effect where you have to worry about your butt and worry about what you're thinking about. Because when you're censoring words, you're censoring what people can think, essentially. And we also have to understand on the bigger point here, these are not private, capitalistic entrepreneurship organizations. You look at the seed funding, look where they came from, look right now at their tax incentives, the visa programs, their data sharing surveillance

programs, the government contracts that they receive. These are entities that are in line with a lot of government institutions that are working hand in hand together. In many ways, government is downstream from these institutions. Yes, and then they work hand in hand, and they're pushing this agenda together. And I think once we address that, we have to understand these are not just private entities that are private companies, pick and choose. They're not. They're not that at all. They are monopolies at least.

That's a great observation. I was thinking as we were talking that there could be some software developer that's like, I'm going to blow the whistle on Facebook. I'm going to deliver all the code to Project Veritas. That wouldn't work. Because unless we use the government to regulate these people and to actually change the software license uh and do it right you could get rid of the code and they can just change it so we have to we have to acknowledge that these guys are are basically quasi-government organizations and should be treated such yeah yeah well for the time being i mean things are demoralizing yeah i want to leave twitter i don't want to leave twitter but when i see the way they're treating you, like this ridiculous.

Well, I can tell you right now, there's someone watching this who does work for Twitter or Google or Facebook. I guarantee it. And we have so many sources and whistleblowers coming to us right now. It's beyond what you can fathom. I mean, we have untold dozens, over 100 whistleblowers right now recording, watching. I'm talking about the ceos of these companies and if you're watching this right now just like uh just like richard hopkins a few months ago send us a note i think the solution is exposure i think they don't fear the united states government anymore

they these all these people these politicians are they they almost like they suck up to cnn they all they ever do is go on cnn i don't even know what these congress critters actually do what do they actually do well because all i ever see them doing is going on instagram which is owned by by mike zuckerberg and going on television do they actually create any laws i guess they don't because government is in a state of sclerosis so they can't pass legislation so all they do is go on tech platforms they are beholden tech. They suck on the teat of big tech. Where would AOC be without Twitter and Instagram? Nowhere.

All the government, just like Alexander Solzhenitsyn said, the media has more power than all three branches of the government. And what laws are they beholden to when they say you are not allowed to talk about this or that it is akin to the united states supreme court changing the constitution and saying uh you know first amendment applies except when you talk about you know applesauce you want to know something really crazy that i was reading and guys definitely if you're listening fact check me on this one i was reading some post as a conservative post of this that trump's own lawyer in the impeachment trial believed the very fine people hoax up until he had to research the evidence to defend Donald Trump, then realized the media had been selectively editing what Trump had said. And Trump definitively denounced white supremacy after after Charlottesville. And while the media cuts it out

of context, like they did with the Shinzo Abe fish feeding thing. And this lawyer didn't know that about Trump until he was investigating because he had to go over the evidence. How many people think they're informed because they read the news? They read what Facebook allows to be shared. And they actually are just being fed garbage. The amount of fake news, disinformation, and propaganda out there is absolutely insane to even fathom sometimes. It's like 1984, 2 plus 2 equals 5 is just keep being repeated. You know that's a real thing though, right? Yes, I know.

I know. I've seen everything. I've seen it unfold. But James, the one question I really wanted to ask you here, when you got hit by Twitter, was there any alternative social media platform that you were looking into fully transitioning away from Twitter? So I take a unique position on this because I may take a stance that, Tim, you don't agree with or, Luke, you don't agree with. I think that content is king, that I believe in distribution by proxy. In other words, if they ban me everywhere, which everyone's warning me about, okay, whatever. They ban me everywhere. And I get a hidden camera video of a federal judge

taking a bribe. That's a 30-second video. I would simply send an email to my 500,000 people on my email list saying, please download this video and upload it to your Twitter. And they can't ban everyone. So content is king. Content, not platform, is king. I've always believed that. Everyone wants to create another platform. I thought this in the back of my head about Parler. By the way, Parler got banned. Okay, we're going to create another Parler. Parler's back.

Parler's back. And then I saw Parler banned Milo today. Now he's back. Oh, he's back. Okay, well, there's all these updates about the platform. But at the end of the day, content is king. I didn't coin that phrase. That was the Viacom CEO.

I forgot his name. But I believe that what was going through my mind, Luke, was that content is king. A good story will effuse its way and distribute its way sort of like the black goo in the movie Prometheus. It will just sort of get out there and there'll be a new paradigm. I don't know what the name of the next or the future platform will be. But what I do know is a good story is always lurking behind every corner. And again, distribution by proxy. So Telegram, we had 4,000 followers a couple weeks ago.

Now we have 350,000 followers. And what we'll do is we'll send a vimeo link and say please download this clip and upload it into your twitter so if we're banned on twitter citizens can can can do that what are they going to ban everyone they can't do that this is the funny thing you know when tiktok had a bullying problem there were people being mocked for their appearance or their weight. They realized something. Whereas Twitter bans the hate speech to protect the minority, TikTok realized, well, if we want to stop the bullying and we ban, say, a thousand people bullying this person, that's a thousand users we lose in our annual reports for shareholders.

Why don't we ban the person being bullied then there's no more bullying so tiktok actually targeted the person who was a victim of the of the insults that was clever in the i bring that up just because in the instance of twitter well they can't ban everybody because then they're gonna have to issue a report saying we lost x many users this quarter oh we banned them because we didn't like what they had to say yeah they can't ban us today because if they ban us for the zuckerberg story every reporter that talks about it will have to say there's no doxing here it's zuckerberg on tape you know you know the problem is right now though it's not fun anymore it's not what it's not fun which part twitter used to be fun oh it's terrible but they're getting rid of interesting people

seeing a trump tweet was hilarious you know the journalists would have panic attacks when trump would tweet that's weird but i thought it would be funny when trump would tweet something really silly you know like not that he should have most of the time but sometimes he would tweet funny and silly things what did he tweet oh yeah when elizabeth warren was drinking the beer remember this and her husband walks up and then she's like thanks for being here trump tweets what do you mean he's supposed to be there it's his house that was hilarious it made it made it exciting they're getting rid of anything that's that's like even remotely interesting on the

platform i mean and and if they ban us today for publishing a videotape of zuckerberg every reporter who reports on the ban will have to include the facts about what mark zuckerberg said that's why they won't ban us. Tim, I think there's a lot to this whole litigation. That's a good one. I mean that. My producer just texted me. That's genius, Tim.

Helping others with a litigation fund. That's a really important idea because so many people get defamed. Yeah. And we have a recourse in the theory of defamation law. Especially if they're not public figures. And I'm a recourse in the theory of defamation law. Especially if they're not public figures. And I'm a public figure. I have to prove what's called actual malice.

I have to prove the person knew they were lying about me when they lied. But a non-public figure, Tim, if you're railroaded, discovery. This is a really good idea. I think the reason people haven't done this is because they don't know they can do it. And it takes, I call it, balls, resources, and willpower. Balls or huevos. Fortitude. Huevos.

Cojones. Huevos. That's the politically correct terminology. Eggs. Eggs. And I think it's a great idea. I think it's an excellent idea. You can call it the People's Defamation Fund PDF.

Yeah, PDF files. PDF. And people already, can call it the People's Defamation Fund, PDF. Yeah, PDF files. PDF. And people already, you know, it's already in the back of their mind, PDF. Well, they say the idea is 1% of it, 99% is the execution, but still. I think if you launched, not a GoFundMe, because they would ban you in two seconds. They'd ban you, yeah. But if you launched any one of these other fundraisers, you'd instantly raise enough to just hire an executive manager or whatever to run the fund. Listen, I'm going to say it on your show right now.

If we get the New York Times to give us money, which I'm betting my reputation on it, so it's going to happen. Yes. We're going to use some of those proceeds to start this idea that you have. I like this idea. You mean the idea that I brought up? The idea that you have. Yes.

It doesn't matter. I named it. But another thing, I mean, I remember starting off when I was still just, you know, no one, not a big reputation, getting slandered and attacked by the mainstream media. And also other instances where they literally took my videos that I did, my live reporting on protest, and they claimed it as theirs so many times. Didn't they call you like a non-shrinking violet or something? Yes, that was the New York Times. What was that quote? Luke Radowski is armed with a video camera and a YouTube channel

and definitely is not a shrinking violet. Nice. That was the New York Times perspective. And that was actually fair reporting on their part, which was really interesting because they actually quoted me correctly when other news organizations literally took quotes out of context, put them together to make them sound bad, or as if I was pushing for some kind of violent action, which I, of course, never was.

I believe in total nonviolence. Always have. Always have advocated for that. But for them, especially when I was starting off, especially when I didn't have a big following, they would just take everything I did. Take my live reporting. Take my photos. Take my videos.

Claim it as theirs. And then when I became prominent, they started slandering me. And take my live reporting, take my photos, take my videos, claim it as theirs. And then when I became prominent, they started slandering me. And I'm like, what's going on here? I actually started talking to some lawyers. And let's just say they don't steal my videos. They don't steal my photos anymore. But a lot has changed in the last seven, eight years. The world has changed.

The New York Times went real bad. Yeah, we were talking about this yesterday with Will, because even with that New York Times weapons of mass destruction lie, there was still some kind of understanding that the New York Times tries to tell the story. And even then, when they got caught with the WMDs, they admitted it. They talked about it. There were some repercussions behind it. Judith Miller. Yeah, yeah. They faced some real actions because of that.

Still, not enough comparatively to the lie that they sold to the American public and the hundreds of thousands of people that died and the radicalization and immigration crisis that came out of it. But still not enough. But there was still this kind of veiled understanding that they're trying, that they made a mistake, that they're going to do their best. They even interviewed me a couple times and they did honest, that they made a mistake, that they're going to do their best. They even interviewed me a couple times, and they did honest, real reporting, but now all of that's gone. That whole perception, that whole understanding that they're not even trying anymore. They're blatantly slapping the American people upside the face. They're obsessing about race.

They're obsessing about all this other stuff that divide and conquers us, so we fight each other, and we don't focus on the real issues the actual things that do affect us uh especially after 2012 their their decline is evident and they're not the same new york times that they're known for let's uh let's jump to super chats and you know normally i like to read as many as possible but i'm going to try and find as many questions for james as possible you know because a lot of the comments are just general you know comments on stories and forgive me if you guys i, because a lot of the comments are just general, you know, comments on stories. And forgive me if you got, I will read a bunch of super chats. Don't get me wrong.

But I think it's a good opportunity for people to get questions in for James if they haven't had the chance to. I'll start with one of the most important. Aurora Isabella says, this is a statement, James O'Keefe is hot AF with a sweating face. That was very important to let you know. I was going to say about that. You know, maybe I should. I'm not going to say modeling shots.

No, I was going to say. I'm not going to say it. Riley Luan says, James, how can I help? I've got media skills, CGI, but no real revenue source at the moment. And I'm certainly not afraid of speaking out online or in real life. How can I best help to take these corrupt a-holes down? So Prager says there's three you know three sorts of people in this in this life uh those who uh fight those who donate to those who fight and

those who do nothing so i suppose you're not the third so you can either you can either wear a camera strap a camera to your body tim you can um what's her name what's the person what's the person who asked the question their name oh i i You can either put a camera on your body. You can find someone in your network who works for an organization that wants to blow the whistle to be a citizen reporter. Riley Luand. Riley. Or you could donate a tax exempt donation to Project Veritas.

Those are your two options. Pick one. Very cool. Colin Steven says, Tim, please recommend James reach out to to nick requieta of requieta law he's also a youtuber and has talked about building a support network with lawyers for situations like this before nick requieta yes i think that's a guy whose meme was banned requieta yeah no that's that's not the how do you spell the last name r-e-k-i-e-t-a all right this is a youtuber sent to sent to my team thank Thank you. Yeah. Mitch Stu

says, I tried posting a positive comment about James multiple times. It kept giving me an error message and took a screenshot. Tim, this is the same thing with your live stream title. James is the new Alex Jones. Listen, if that happens, videotape your screen. I mean, I get messages like this all the

time. Some of them are bunk. Some of them are real. I mean, I'm sure it happens. Again again what's more interesting is a hidden camera video of the engineer or the coder in real time eating doritos high-fiving each other let's mess with james o'keefe's insta page that's what the video i want or stopping us or looking at the looking at this is not me i'm quoting somebody the dick pics dick pics on Twitter. Remember that guy, Clay, Clay Haynes from Twitter? Clay Haynes from Twitter. We got him on hidden camera in San Francisco bragging about, yeah, we look at people's dick pics on the DMs. I mean, that was extraordinary.

I want to see those videotapes. The NSA was doing that before it was cool, though. They were doing that over 10 years ago. But we need the videotape of the NSA people doing that before it was cool, though. They were doing that over 10 years ago. But we need the videotape of the NSA people doing it. James? Well, NSA officers got caught spanking it to people's private images. I confronted General Hayden about this.

He denied it, and I had to confront him with the actual news article, and then he's like, and he ran away. Is Hayden the one that lied under oath about the Fourth Amendment stuff? It's hard to know because all of them lie under oath, especially if they're former CIA. And we have Mike Pompepeo bragging about it one of them like scratched his head like uh james clapper clapper yeah it was like this guy's a spy and he's like the worst liar ever he's like not he's like not wittingly we don't spy on people if you're gonna lie at

least try to like well mike pompeo says they get taught how to lie, steal, and cheat. That was the worst lying ever. It's like a spook. Like, I did not spy. I mean, at least, I mean, these are bad spies. Think about the amount of viewership we've lost because we couldn't include your name in the title. The amount of viewership you lost because you couldn't include my name? In the title. We put the name of our guests in the title of the show so people know.

Because often, you know, when we have, say, Jack Murphy or Will or James O'Keefe, there are a lot of people who maybe wouldn't normally watch the show but want to see this particular perspective. When we tried to stream with your name in it, it didn't work. When I changed the title removing your name, it worked. Now the title is YouTube is giving us the business, won't let us stream. A lot of people are clicking it to see what's going on, and're going oh whoa it's james oh man imagine if they got an email notification saying james o'keefe on the show you're like 900 you're like times 40 50 percent well it would be times 80 percent all the people who want to hear what you had to say and it's not just about you james it's about any other guest we would have where it for some reason is not allowing us to do it now i'll tell you this is it possible it was just a crazy old glitch it is possible just a glitch you know yeah well i'm

sorry i'm at the point in my life where the glitches always ever always flow in one direction go full conspiracy no no so what i'm saying is at a certain point you want you want to say that you know the make the least amount of assumption someone correct me on occam's razor what is more likely well when we know they actively censor conservatives when they literally just censored the make the least amount of assumption someone correct me on occam's razor what is more likely well when we know they actively censor conservatives when they literally just censored suspended project vertas on twitter for ridiculous bs reasons and we know they did and then i tried to have james on the show with his name in the title and it doesn't work i think it's simpler to say glitches happen though but, but they only they happen.

Like, come on, man. At a certain point, there are more assumptions. And it just so happens that James is being censored at the exact same time. They're not letting our stream go on. I'd get messages like these glitches only happen when it's me doing it. But you know how many people are having that experience? Like, yeah, it's only happens to you. The truth is very powerful.

St. Augustine said the truth is like a lion. I'd like to hear more more questions if you have them. Oh, yeah. Oh truth is very powerful. St. Augustine said the truth is like a lion. I'd like to hear more questions if you have them. Oh, yeah. We've got more. Oh, yeah, yes. But I have to go through and find them all. Sure. All right.

Let's see. I have to go through them. So I'll grab some in the meantime as we scroll through because there's a lot. I don't want to leave people out. Milton Bradley said, I'm sorry. Elusive Gator says, Tim, would you be willing to invite Don Jr., Trump's son, on your show? Would you invite him? Yes. That'd be fun. 100% whenever he would like to come on. Tom Saltzman says, hi, Tim, could you and your crew please start a real fact-checking website? We are absolutely planning on doing that, but I'm also curious if you guys

are planning on doing that, James. Any kind of a real fact checking website or just general reporting? I know you guys do investigative work. Yeah. But what about I think we have to focus on our on our on our sort of mission, which is to be the answer to the question, what can I do? I was talking to a very popular host of a major news television. And he said, everyone asks, what can I do? And I feel like that's my purpose in life, is to be the answer to that.

So I have to keep focused. I don't want to lose my focus and be a fact checking of everything. Well, that being said, we have another question. Stan T00 says, James, love your work. Curious. Has any leftist submitted stories versus conservative parties to Project Veritas? Keep up the great work. Leftist submitted stories versus conservative parties to Project Veritas?

Keep up the great work. Leftist submitted stories in the sense of exposing non- Conservatives. I think he's saying, have you gotten leftists trying to expose conservatives or people on the right? If someone's doing something wrong or corrupt, I'll publish it. I did a story on a Republican ballot harvester in Texas that she was arrested by the attorney general. His name is Raquel Rodriguez in New Hampshire.

The attorney general of New Hampshire Republican. We exposed someone who voted multiple times. So at the end of the day, there was the Jeffrey Epstein clip that we got from ABC News owned by Disney. And this was a leaked recording of Amy Robach a year and a half ago. And this was a non-Republican. So I think Veritas over time will expand in many directions. a leaked recording of Amy Robach a year and a half ago. And this was a non-Republican. So I think Veritas over time will expand in many directions. I love the idea when they claim that you target leftist groups and you went after, you've investigated Google, The Washington Post, The New York Times.

Yeah. Sort of a tacit implication. What is that? These institutions are leftist. You only go after left-wing groups like The New York Times and The Washington Post. Okay. Well, there's your answer, folks. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

All right. Michael Smith says, with all these barriers to open discussion, lockdowns and censorship, what do you see we can do to help affect public opinion? I have thought about getting more involved in local government. Thoughts? Keep it simple. I am a gorilla. Much love.

Gorilla. Yes, indeed. I thought you put this because we're a gorilla journalist. I didn't know if that was a pun. It's Alex Jones created a meme. Yes, indeed. I thought you put this because we're a gorilla journalist. I didn't know if that was a pun. Oh, it's Alex Jones created a meme. Coincidental. Skin in the game is a term that my colleague Eric Cochran used who blew the whistle on Pinterest. Eric Cochran said, I have to have skin in the game because we only live our lives for so long.

Life is short. My advice to you, sir to is to get involved locally and to and to be an investigative reporter on the local level as luke has has done and you know it'll mean something after you're gone and i think we don't realize you know i think people are beginning to wake up and understand that we have to be the media. Stop complaining about how biased they are and just go out and do their jobs. I mean, when I did the Acorn story 10 years ago, I walked in in Baltimore, Maryland. My colleague, Hannah, was dressed like a Miami hooker. She was 20 years old. And within minutes, these pseudo government agents were telling us how to disguise underage hookers

as dependents on our tax forms. It was amazing how easy it was to just get people to just talk, just be a journalist, to go out and do it. It doesn't, you don't need that much training, just take a camera and go start asking questions. And Jon Stewart saying your praises, saying journalists, where are you? Look at this kid. Look what he's doing. And the United States Senate voted 83 to 7

in a democratically controlled House and Senate to defund ACORN. That was 10 years ago. Victory. And this is a girl that messaged me. Hannah messaged me on Facebook.

I've never met her before. She said, James, you'd think it'd be a good idea to go into ACORN dressed as a hooker. Now, most people get these sorts of

slide into the DMs. Great. Slide into the DMs. They delete them as spam. a good idea to go into Acorn dressed as a hooker. Now, most people get these sorts of... Yes! Slide into the DMs. Great. Slide into the DMs. They delete them as spam. I said, that's a great idea. There should be a pimp in the situation. That's me. And, you know, be a citizen journalist.

Go out there and just go do it. Robert Bettle says, he who controls the feed controls the world. I propose forcing, by law, the algorithm to be open source and the choice of which algorithm and third-party filter service be moved to the end user. I think it gets really esoteric when talking about the code and the source and how we deal with that. And that's one of the challenges. They rely on this not only opaque system, but even if they did release the code, most people are going to look at it and say, I have no idea what that is.

I have a different perspective a little bit. I think the solution is for the CEO or the vice president of these companies to come out and say, in Congress, we are trying to elect Democrats. If they just said that, I'd be happy. I wouldn't be happy. It'd be a start. It'd be a good start. Acknowledgement. Because if the code or whatever it is, I'm not an engineer, so excuse my ignorance. I wouldn't be happy. at Google, quite literally writing code as we speak, targeting this podcast. And he was under oath in Congress. And he said, you know, Congressman Smith, I targeted Tim Pool's podcast.

And here's the code showing me doing it because I hate Tim Pool. I want to destroy James O'Keefe and I want to elect Democrats. Thank you very much. I'd be very happy. My problem with relying on the CEOs or executive is that it's not a good and evil thing for me. It's a thing about justice. Because if you rely on the CEO to do the right thing and reveal themselves, they're going to sell the company. And then you're going to have to rely on another human and another human. And that allows for corruption to breed. I just think the system should be transparent and not even open source, but free software like GPL, general public license or the MIT license. So that if changes are made to it, those changes are also free. And the challenge, James, with what you were saying about the guy saying, here's the code, is that they're not going to say that.

I mean, I'd love it, too. They're going to do what we've already seen these big tech companies do. There is no bias. We do not ban people for public opinion, you know, for their political opinions. And then they just say, we only ban for rule violations. And our rules are extremely specific and politically motivated.

Do you think it's a cognitive dissonance? Do you think they've convinced themselves? Or do you think secretly? Yeah, you know, I mean, just look at, I know it gets brought up so often, but the Joe Rogan episode with, you know, it was me, Joe, when Jack didn't understand, when I told him to his face, your rules are biased against conservatives. He said, we don't ban people for being conservative for their political opinions.

I said, yes, you do, because your rules are biased against conservatives. 84, where they're actually their cognitive dissonance is to such a degree where they've actually convinced themselves not to actually internalize or think of the word double think, because in doing so, they're admitting they're tampering with reality. So you're saying psychologically, even when they tuck themselves under the covers at night, they don't individually and personally think that they're helping Democrats. Is that what you're saying? So so in the instance of Jack Dorsey, it was a really fascinating revelation. When I told him, you have a policy against misgendering people to conservative Americans, of which half the country or, you know, a little bit more, a little bit less, they believe that if someone is born biologically male, you must use, you know, he him pronouns, whereas the left believes it's based on identity. Those are two different worldviews.

Your rule set penalizes the conservative worldview. Therefore, a conservative who expresses their worldview will be banned from your platform. Your rules are biased against the conservative worldview. And it was like the first time he had ever heard that. Like he didn't realize. In their minds, 99.9% of Americans hate Donald Trump, are all progressives. And it's just this silly fringe far right. Oh, those dang far right. How did 75 million people vote for Donald Trump?

They were tricked by lies. That must be it. It's like, you know, the principal Skinner meme. Am I out of touch? No, it's the children who are wrong. That's them. They don't get it no matter how many times you tell them that's that's that's straight out of 1984 that's out of the uh the manual uh uh the emmanuel goldstein manual that george orwell hypothesized which is that uh it's to believe

that black is white and then to change your mind and never to have previously thought that black is white and and you can't even talk about double think. It's a strange psychosis then, Tim, if what you're saying is true. I don't know if I agree with you. I think there's a substantial minority of these engineers and folks in Silicon Valley that have an intentionality behind how they code, that do have an agenda and that would privately admit this. No, definitely. I think that there's a substantial minority and therefore the mission is to expose that intentionality. But I think you're also right that there's also a substantial minority and therefore the mission is to expose that intentionality.

But I think you're also right that there's also a substantial minority of people who have – are like the Goldstein manual in Orwell's 1984. And they have this cognitive dissonance where they don't even concede the notion of doublethink. And they've convinced themselves through some type of strange psychosis. Do you know what happens when someone is experiencing cognitive dissonance and you present absolute proof that their worldview is incorrect, or at least a portion of it? You know what their reaction is? Blind rage. That's why you see those videos of the famous memes of people like their veins are popping out and they're screaming like that. And that's why you see so often the meme of the cool as a cucumber guy, you know, poking

fun at them. The person who is not emotionally agitated, who has thought through their problems, who has thought through the problems and looked at the information, has the arguments right at hand. For the most part. I don't think every single person on the right has all the answers. woke culty leftist type individuals pro-censorship experiencing the causative cognitive dissonance of trying to claim their for free speech while almost also simultaneously being in favor of censorship they can't handle it they make up like there's that famous comic where the guy says that the paradox of tolerance which it's a paradox itself like the comic itself makes literally no sense because it contradicts itself. They can't see through this.

Eventually, when they're confronted by information that proves it, they snap. They get angry. They get violent. They get rage. Right. It's a defense mechanism. And when you have a social media admin that's feeling rage, that's when the bans happen. Exactly.

So the way it was explained to me, and this could be absolutely wrong. It's been a long time. It was explained to me by some psychologist, I think. What they basically said was, you grow up, you know, you're a little kid, you're a preteen, you're a teenager, you're a young adult, and you're building a worldview. You're in your mind, you are determining what is true and what isn't. By the time you're, you know, getting into your late teens, into your early 20s, your brain is sort of now constructed a solidified worldview that is nearly complete. At a certain point, your brain says, this is true. It must be true because you've survived for this long. Whatever it is that you've learned has helped you survive in this dangerous, treacherous world. So it is dangerous

to have those ideas and that worldview challenged because if it turns out you're actually believing something that could be dangerous for you, it could put your life at risk. The simplest way to explain it is back when humans were running through the fields in the savannas, we learned, hey, you know, fire hot and your brain builds this worldview that fire is hot. People believe these things and their social circles. They, you know, basically solidify and fortify this worldview once you get to a certain age you need to maintain that worldview because it will keep you alive all of a sudden someone comes around and completely shatters that worldview putting your life at risk it's a defense mechanism where by getting emotionally enraged it shuts down your ability to process the information to protect what has kept you alive for this long.

It's essentially a fail safe that actually backfires in the long run. I think what concerns me, I would love to hear your opinion on this, is that people are, for business tycoons lacking critical thought where if someone challenges your worldview and says something you think is threatening your safety you're still supposed to support their ability to do that under the u.s constitution i go back to orwell constantly because i feel like this book answers so many of these questions and what scares me about the orwell book is when winston the protagonist this is the uh winston smith is being tortured by o'brien the tyrant and and and every one of us has got fear is imagine your worst fear in the world i'm not going to say to my enemies what it is and and the orwell bees what is it bees close

you're on the right track um and the tyrants have figured out that they have they have winston they've put a cage on his face and they put a rat the biggest fear of winston is a rat and he says two plus two equals five please tell us that two plus two equals five win says no no two plus two equals four and the tyrant opens up the door and the rats coming towards his face and finally winston says okay two plus two is whatever you want it to be two plus two is whatever you want just don't put the rat in my face none of us are that strong none of us are that i don't care don't tell think of what your worst fear is in the whole wide world could be i don't know spiders bees whatever none of us are that strong i i don't i don't i don't

agree i don't i don't agree with you. There are four lights. Do you know that reference? Do you know the reference? There are four lights? A bunch of people watching are going, yes! It's from The Next Generation, Star Trek. Captain Picard is kidnapped and tortured by the Cardassians. And there are four lights in front of him.

And he keeps saying, there are five lights. Now tell me, how many lights are there? And Picard refuses to say, there are five lights. And he says, there are four lights in front of him. And he keeps saying, there are five lights. Now tell me, how many lights are there? And Picard refuses to say, there are five lights. And he says, there are four lights. Was he tortured? Yeah. Yeah, he was tortured, deprived of sleep, all of the, you know. Yeah, he was tortured.

And he's like disheveled and shaking. And he refused to back down. Well, I mean, this is the question that this is, to go to your point. But yet we live in a society where there's courage. There's the courage to run up a hill with a bayonet. Von Clausewitz talks about two different types of courage, and then there's moral courage. Where the hell is the moral courage in Washington, D.C.? We're not asking people to give up their lives.

We're asking them to give up their reputation. And Orwell's hypothesis is that no one is that strong. The protagonist, Winston Smith, is forced to say that two plus two equals five or a rat eats his face. OK. And Winston says, OK, whatever. Two plus two equals five. And Orwell says to tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing them to forget any fact that has become inconvenient. And then when it becomes necessary again to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed to deny the existence of objective reality.

So these Silicon Valley people are these tyrants telling us this two plus two equals five. It's a great metaphor because I feel like we're being scared through social media into this fear. Scared of what? Race or other. have i have people in the conservative movement i don't even consider myself part of that movie afraid to retweet me for fear of being what that we're not talking about those are cowards well there's a lot of them my friend but it's like absolutely absolutely it's like a method but i want to scare people so that they become we're not even we're

not talking about spiders and bees and rats no we're talking we're talking about the possibility of being censored on twitter if that's the thing that they're scared of we're in trouble fellas well i think you mentioned that you think nobody has that strength to reject the rat people aren't people are forget rats and bees and tarantulas they're afraid listen you do it every day what you do it every day you spit in the eye of the establishment machine every single day and so do we i think you do that you do that and you do i mean listen i can come on here and talk about movies sometimes like i did gina carano star wars you know and it's kind of wagging the finger at these corporations they don't care that i don't that i'm mad at them because they fired Gina Carano.

You put a camera in the faces of these people. So, you know, I think there are people who are willing to say there are four lights, two plus two equals four. You're one of them. And I think there are a lot of people who are cowards. And the problem is, you know, the thing is, I'll tell you this. I've been I've been having this kind of joking thing. It's sort of a joke. Say one good thing about Antifa.

It's like it's kind of a joke about like lowering temperature and stuff. And I'll tell you this. They're brave. They're angry. They're passionate. And they're willing to sacrifice everything to get what they want. And I think they're dangerously incorrect. Too many people on the right are absolutely not willing to sacrifice anything.

Why is that? I don't know, man, because they're scared and they're fat and happy. Because they get to sit back in their lounge chair watching, you know, whatever Hollywood movie they claim to hate, but still get to be a part of something. They've been given enough money to survive, and then they're threatened with it being taken away. So they're living in fear so they don't speak up. So I often say it's not black and white. It's not like I'm going to say we will always defy the machine.

When it comes to saying a certain name of, you know, which we can't say on YouTube, I've chosen. We're not going to say it. Why? I prefer to have this show live with James O'Keefe and, you know, Ian and Luke and Lydia. And we're talking about what's going on and why it's dangerous and important. I could choose to say one word or one phrase and get the whole conversation removed. I won't do that. That's not about fear. That's about tact. Yeah, but James is talking about torture. When you're under duress of torture,

none of us have ever been there. We would have told each other if we have. I think more people are willing to risk their lives than their own reputations think about it how many people in washington dc are willing to risk their reputation for a cause greater than themselves i can't think of maybe one or two i can think of many folks who made the ultimate sacrifice sacrifice that is beyond anything i can comprehend go overseas and die for their country i can't think of many members of congress or people working in government that would be willing to make even a sacrifice of their own reputation for a cause greater than themselves forget because they're they're not interested in something some uh they're not interested in values they're not interested in preserving freedom liberty

and accountability well that's a that's a problem absolutely is. And I think that's the main problem. The left, it's not so much that Antifa has a core set of values they're fighting for. It's that they're extremely angry and they can be weaponized by the collective because they fall in line, because they have toolkits, they have these plans. And the right is more individualist. That, and there are a lot of people on the right who are entirely self-interested. And that's why they wouldn't retweet you that's ridiculous that that to me is is sad and pathetic so you think sacrificing our reputations is is i think i think this road to to truth i i've been doing

this for 12 years and i've been through a lot of pain i've been through there are moments of of ups and downs where i thought it was over i mean mean, I've been, I've been in federal prison and falsely accused. I mean, of something I did not do. That's a very, and everyone abandoned me in that moment. No, everyone thought I was done. James, you're over, including my mentor. So I know what it's like. And I, and I know that the, the, the road to truth and justice, you're going to go through this, and I don't think people are willing to. And it's a political prosecution, and to be tarred and feathered is almost – and the mind and the psychology of the American people is almost worse than death. Because I can see people with the courage to run up a hill with a bayonet, but a more rare form of courage is moral courage. That is to stick by a cause which is losing.

They don't believe in themselves. I don't know why that is. I think that's the question. Because if you can solve that question, you can actually change things. I'll tell you what it is. I'm arrogant. I know. I don't think I know everything.

But when I do the research and I assess the situation, I look at these political positions and I come to a conclusion. I don't come to it easily, which is why people call me a milquetoast fence sitter. When it comes to policy— A milquetoast what? Fence sitter. Fence sitter. you know a milquetoast what fence sitter fence sitter yeah because i often don't take very strong opinions on a lot of political issues because it takes a lot of research and a lot of confidence to assert something to be true we must have universal health care and ban all private uh you know health insurance i think is a ridiculous position because it's too absolute but the things i do know that make sense i am very very assertive when it comes to these things and arrogant so when

someone comes out when every single, when it could be literally everyone in the world comes out and says, no, we refuse. I'll just say, I don't care. You are wrong, period. When they call, when all these, when all these socialists and communists call for centralized economics, I just say that has never worked. It will not work. We can look to computing to see why a decentralized network works

better than a centralized one you are just wrong and on so many levels i will never back down from that position listen unless of course i knew information the two hardest moments of my life or one two of them were number one my wikipedia page when i got started it was very emotional for me i couldn't change it it was all lies and everyone I knew in my life was like, wow, is that really true? Did you really do that? It was all fake nonsense. I remember this is like 10 years ago, a moment of vulnerability. I was tearing up looking at my own Wikipedia page.

There's nothing I can do about it. And I remember how painful it was to be thought ill of by a website that was the first thing that showed up when you Googled my name. It was painful. Number two, a federal judge destroying my videotape in Louisiana and nobody cared. A federal judge destroyed the evidence that would exculpate me in New Orleans. And and and everyone in the media said, good. Off with his head, like the French Revolution, off with his head. Dave Weigel laughing, laughing that they had incarcerated a reporter and destroyed federal evidence. And again, too, this was the second hardest moment of my life.

And I thought, how can reporters, how can news media think it's a good thing to jail journalists simply because they don't like me? These two moments of pain were for me the hardest things to endure. And it was, I mean, it was pain probably beyond physical pain because it was a form of injustice. And as a Martin Luther King would say, you know, even a small justice is a threat to justice anywhere. And for someone who's motivated by justice to endure that type of justice

was a pain that was almost too much for me to bear. Do you believe or feel that there's a higher, like a greater force? I think there's something wrong with me. I think there's something wrong with my brain, right? I'm probably not thinking about or motivated by the same sorts of incentives. And I think the team I have, there's also like the guy who climbs up Yosemite without a harness. They did an MRI scan.

He just isn't afraid of falling. I don't know. I don't know what it is. Alex Hommel. Alex Hommel. I think our people are so focused on truth that they're not worried about these other things. But I can tell you, I think this is very important, having endured a federal judge destroyed my tape and nobody cared. Nobody gave a damn.

That was the hardest thing I've ever been through. And I almost wasn't strong enough to get through it. I told my mom and dad, I'm like, I don't know if I can get through this. Why continue? What happened exactly? It's a long story. I wrote a book about it.

What's the book called? Breakthrough. You had, I would guess, presumably a normal upbringing when you were a kid? I would say not normal, not normal, but good upbringing. Did your parents helicopter over you or snowplow things away from you? Or did you just go out and do your thing when you were young?

Very independent, hardworking father and grandfather. Did a lot of manual labor with my father and grandfather. So there are a couple of things in my life that I credit my probably tenacity and arrogance to and confidence. I'm not trying to be too self-deprecating. Is that my family started a business when I was like nine years old. And I had to go from the south side of Chicago to the north side of Chicago as a nine-year-old by myself. And so this is from the orange line to the, I guess you could take the orange line to

the red line or blue line up to Wrigley Field. And that was for almost two years. And I was entirely on my own. I had to figure things out on my own. I had to ask people for help when I needed help. But then there was another point in my life where I was homeless. And actually, I was homeless a couple times. And so for me, I'm kind of like, there is nothing you can take from me that has me worried. There is nothing you can accuse me of, literally nothing, because I've slept on park benches. Nothing left to lose. As far as I'm concerned, I would be happy sleeping in a mud hut in the middle of the woods because it's freedom.

Man, all that stress removed, all I got to do is figure out how many rabbits I can eat before I die of rabbit starvation. And I got to find some fat and some vegetables. That you acknowledge your arrogance is a sign of humility. And being humble and being humiliated is important to destroy. It's an ego booster. And once you've had your ego – I've had it destroyed so many times in my life i mean i i once you get you're right ian once you get the ego destroyed a few times have any of these reporters ever had their ego destroyed they're nothing but ego have they ever had to were they ever locked out you know what i mean it's like

they're a lot of these kids a lot of of these people, I say kids, probably when they were kids were bullied and they wanted to find that source of power to oppress others, to get that feeling back. It's a lot of what you see in adults who are oppressive and arrogant and nasty to other people. It's because it's kind of a revenge for them. Like I said, they want to be the one doing the hazing, not the one getting hazed hazed you know what it was for me i'll let you guys do the hazing and whatever i'll be over there by myself don't come near me that's how i've always when you've been accused of a felony you

have not committed and had a federal and arrested by the fbi put in shackles thrown in federal prison it is amazingly humbling and of course you're I said this story. Their first temptation is to talk. If you're – let's say the feds arrest you tomorrow and just made up some bullshit. Totally false. The first thing you would think psychologically is – and everyone thinks, oh, I'm smart enough. I would – Miranda writes. No, no, no, my friend. When you're shackled at 24 years old, you're pissing your pants.

You don't think rationally. When you're in – not handcuffs but shackles. I talked to the FBI because I didn't know any better i thought no i didn't do it and then they use every word against you because that's what they do but it's it humbles you and you think okay now i know the level i'm playing at it's not that they will use everything you say against you it's that they can say whatever they want after you've talked so that that's right. That's what I meant to say. There's a very famous, I think it was a Supreme Court justice or a lawyer who wrote this like long, you know, profound statement on why you never talk to law enforcement, no matter what. I saw that. Not even not even beat cops. And they said it's

because the moment you open your mouth, that law enforcement officer can say in a court of law, James O'Keefe admitted to everything. That's That's exactly what happened. And you'll say, that's not true. I never said that. Well, he certainly did. And then the prosecutors say, were you talking with the officer? Yes, I was. And you had a long conversation. It's that kernel of truth part of disinformation.

You admitted you were there that day. It's like talking to the officer. Well, there's a reason the FBI writes their transcript in pencil. I'm serious. I'm serious. I was actually interviewed by the fbi too i was arrested a number of times for for crimes i never committed and your first instinct is like hey i didn't do it i didn't know what are you guys doing i'm innocent i'm innocent and then you learn like it doesn't matter they're punishing you because of your political stance and being being through the ringer it definitely wakens you up and i totally

understand this kind of sacrificial feeling as well. And it's important to have. And I also question, why don't other people have this too? Because one thing you mentioned is this moment at the end of your life that you're going to be looking back on. It's going to be a very important moment. It's going to be the key instrumental moment of your life. Are you going to have any regrets?

Are you going to be happy the way you lived your life without any regrets? And to me, I'm going 100 miles an hour as well and i'm happy there's other individuals like yourself who are doing it as well and maybe maybe we can inspire other people to do the same you will yeah you will let's uh well let's read some more of these super chats we got dan carmos has loved the show mate james o'keefe is a bloody worldwide hero and make no mistakes in your timcast keep speaking truth like you do and you my friend slot right into the same category peace out legends oh thank you very much so a lot a lot of people any questions given that hope you know what i mean well questions are hard

to find because i have to go through them and you know a lot of statements a lot of statements everybody and so typically i'm like i'm reading through and there's a lot of stuff where people are saying you know really nice things we have uh lawrence van don says james i can all but guarantee that robert barnes and viva fray would team up with you on the people's defamation defense fund there are lawyers who are amazing to listen to on youtube barnes is a lawyer for the john doe covington kids defamation i mean i'm i love this idea luke and tim uh uh people's defamation, when we get, not if, but when we get money from the lawsuits, we'll start it. And I think you do have to be willing to be defamed and arrested. That's the question.

Here's the real question. If telling the truth and being a good investigative reporter that 50 years ago would have won you a Pulitzer now gets you defamed and arrested, would you do it? Yes or no? Binary question, yes or no binary question yes or no if you actually were honest with me about this the majority of people would say no I'm not willing I have a family you know I'm gonna go to law school I think about George Washington because he was willing to subvert and lie to accomplish his goals he wasn't an overt truth teller maybe until he became president and then he decided to change.

So there is a willingness to not speak the truth when that will benefit you. That is the essence of the United States. I get it. To be smart with when you speak doesn't mean, and I've also found that being honest doesn't mean that you always say everything on your mind. There's a time and a place for it.

Discretion. Yeah, discretion. I understand maybe maybe in that sense washington and lincoln were politicians and how they how they did what they did but i'm saying something a little different which was if it was required for you to be arrested and or defamed by everyone you wanted to be liked by would you tell the truth yes or? And I think the majority of people would not. I would. Well, so we have a lot of people asking the same question, so I think we'll get this one out of the way.

Who are the people standing behind Ian with cameras? What up, homies? Oh, my goodness. You guys are in frame. That's the geek squad from Best Buy. Introduce yourselves. James tried to show off, so he picked them up at Best Buy. They don't have to give out their names

If they're anonymous They should know there's a camera Pointed right at them Just a heads up Can you introduce the team? These are some of my Project Veritas colleagues Eric Spracklin, Chief of Staff, Comms Mario works on our Comms team

We got a couple Project Veritas Videographers with us here We were coming from another assignment And then tomorrow headed to yet another assignment. Very cool. Nice to meet you guys. What up, guys? Hello. Glad to be here.

Yes. All right. I am just looking through to try and find some. All right. Let's see. I think I know the answer to this question, but, well, someone's asking. So Gore Before Don says, would Project Veritas consider branching into entertainment? The truth is needed on those fronts as well.

Well, we'd be interested in exposing corruption in entertainment, particularly in California. We have a few big sources right now in that community in Los Angeles and Hollywood. Veritas tips at ProtonMail.com. Listen, it's a target-rich environment. I'll never be out of work. That's for damn sure. There's way too much going on and that's why we need

insiders and whistleblowers. I want to record a song and we've talked about this for months and I feel like six months can slip by if we don't just you and I record a song.

Yeah, me, you, and Tim. Done. We'll schedule it. So we're actually working on a song but did you guys want to do something about the political messaging? Doesn't have to be. Nah, just fun. As long as the song's awesome. Done. We'll schedule it. We're actually working on a song, but did you guys want to do something about the political messaging?

Doesn't have to be. Nah, just fun. As long as the song's awesome. We're going to record. James, we were jamming before. In a different life, I would have been a thespian or a musician. I love that. And DJ, and I'm getting better at that.

I started as an amateur, but yes, we will make a song. What's next? Three-part harmony. Oh, man. Jumping around. I finally found a question. And then Super Chat jumps because when they load at the same time.

You stood away. Well, let's see. Do we have any questions? I'm not sure if it's a question. But well, here we go. Woodworker Anon says, Mr. O'Keefe, their reputation is worse than death. Their legacy is at stake. If they make a stand and fail, they are a ish stain on the back on the back page of a history book. They no longer work for us.

They want to be a Kennedy. Is that a song reference or something? I'm not sure what that that sort of cryptic like a poem. I think what they're trying to say is that many of these people just want their name to be favorable in the history books. The people that are the problem. Politicians, media, establishment. That goes back to my statement that if doing the right thing required for a temporary amount of time, maybe even some of your life, being thought ill of and defamed by all the people you want to be liked by. The most prescient statement I've ever heard on the topic was by Rush Limbaugh, who once told me, and I think he said this publicly, but he also told me one-to-one,

was, James, the hardest thing to accept about my life is being hated by all the people that I wanted to be liked by. And it sounds like a cliche. Of course. Yes, of course. But no, no, no. That's actually the hardest part about this job for me. And I'm being honest. You know, my Wikipedia page is awful.

And everyone I go speak to, one of the first things, God, your Wikipedia page is terrible. I mean, it's awful. You realize it's because you're not playing the game the same way they are. But let's just pause and think about that for a minute. Because it sounds like a cliche. Of course they're going to. No, it's awful. You realize it's because you're not playing the game the same way they are. But let's just pause and think about that for a minute, because it sounds like a cliche. Of course they're going to. No, no, no. This is a really hard thing to psychologically accept. And I don't care

who you are. If you're a human, it's no fun to be shit on by everyone. CNN, the New York Times. I mean, they just Sunday criticizing. And by everyone cnn the new york times i mean they just went to yet sunday criticizing and and it's almost become a cliche well of course no not of course this is a hard thing to accept and it's a hard thing to endure and it's a bitter pill that most humans cannot swallow because you

want to be liked nobody likes to be hated i'm not a mas hated. I'm not a masochist. I'm not a statist. I didn't get into this to be hated, shit on, defamed, jailed, sued, lied about. Okay? You have to be sick in the head if you do this to get that flack. What I'm trying to tell you is that that is a necessary byproduct of being effective. One of my early mentors said, when we were enduring this, I said, James, it's a sign of respect for them to do that to you. And we have to change people's methodology in this country. They're afraid of us.

CNN is afraid of us. Twitter is afraid of us. Google is afraid of us. Pinterest is afraid of us because of these brave heroes. Russell Strasser, the deep state federal agent that we recorded the deep state agent interrogating Richard. And we put Russell Strasser's face in the YouTube video. Russell Strasser is currently in hiding because he knows we're going to doorstop him. OK, you know, you know, what's, what's, what's funny though, is I haven't had that experience where maybe it's because I'm a milquetoast fencer, I guess, whatever.

I haven't had the people, well, actually let me slow down. There's not a whole lot of people I've ever wanted the respect of, you know, a lot of people I play music, they say, who's your favorite? Who do you look up to in music? I'm like, I don't look at that. Look up to anybody. I think they're all bad. I think I have to make music.

It's always been very like i don't know arrogant i guess skateboarding too is your favorite skateboarder but you know what's interesting for me is something changed with the internet and the ability for people to investigate on their own and build their own communities i've actually had the there are some pro skateboarders that i grew up watching all their videos videos, the legends, message me on Instagram and Twitter being like, dude, you're the best. And I'm like, whoa. To have like this dude when I was like 14 watching his video in my friend's basement at VHS being like, man, I wish I was as good at skateboarding as that guy.

Now he's mentioning me being like, dude, you're one of the best people covering news and talking about it. I'm so grateful. I'm like, that's awesome. When your heroes become your rivals. I want to tell a one or two minute story about Dean Becke, executive editor of the New York Times. I was at a conference, Duquesne University, two and a half years ago giving a speech. And they invited me to my shock.

And I walked up to Dean Becke and I tried to shake his hand. This is the head of the New York Times. And I've ambushed him a few times. But, you know, we're at this conference and I thought maybe we could have a small talk. Hey, Dean, how you doing? He literally turned his back to me and cowered like a little coward. And he pretended like I wasn't there. And he said, please go away. And at that moment, there was still like 4% of me that cared about what the New York Times thinks of me. But that just vanished. The moment you stop caring about what they think of you is the moment you're finally

free. And we say, OK, that's easy to do, but it's not. The moment you stop caring about what The New York Times thinks of you and they and you know what? Most people in the conservative movement care so much about their Twitter accounts. If you start if I said, well, and they lie about it, Tim. They say they don't, but they do. Oh, yeah.

And the moment you stop caring about what Jack Dorsey thinks about you is the moment you're free. Conservatives, for the most part, are trying to, it's like that nerdy kid who's trying to desperately make the cool kids think they're cool. And it's kind of sad.

You just got to stop doing it. You just got to be yourself. Send out what you believe in. And there are a lot of prominent conservatives who do this and just say, whatever, man, I don't care. Shut up. And they're really funny about it. A lot of these trolls who just, you know, they just roll with it. I love it.

But then there are some people who a lot of these mainstream high profile personalities, they want Hollywood to like them. They want the networks to like them. And it's like, but they hate you no matter what. They're not going to book you. You can you can pretend to support them. This is the problem, because when something like the Covington kids happen, how many conservatives immediately just agreed with the narrative that emerged about these kids? That was not true. And then changed their story once the Washington Post and CNN gave them permission to do so. There were a few people credited with initially rejecting the narrative outright. The first was Robbie Suave.

And then I'm assuming, you know, some people have said I was also one of the very early on. I did a video the next day being like, what is this? This is wrong. Because when someone sends me a video and it's just a kid smiling in front of a guy playing a drum and they tell me to be angry, I'm like, for what? I'm not assuming anything. I have no idea what this is. So I looked for a video and I watched it. Then I found a longer video of the Native American guy walking up to the kids. And I'm like, I have no idea what's happening. Why is everybody angry? So Philip DeFranco was angry. I'm like, what's he mad about? What's happening?

And then I made a video. I'm like, these people are nuts. And then a bunch of people actually got on board, helped source a two hour long live stream, which I downloaded and then showed clips where I'm like, dude, these kids didn't do anything wrong. But so many people were just desperate to fit in. The same thing is true with some of these, you know, these more tragic incidents related to Black Lives Matter protests. Before the full story comes out, it's happened several times, people just jump the gun and make assumptions based on the leftist narrative. Or how about something I walked right into and fell for, believing the New York Times narrative

on the officer at the Capitol and how he died. And then it turns out it was an unrelated stroke. And I believed it. I just believed what the New York Times said. And you know what? It's because to a a certain degree you do still trust big major news unless they show me primary sources and they show it raw they have lost all credibility i don't believe them i don't believe you unless you show me your source material they

have given us no reason to trust them and and i and i think this what we're talking about right now is the real issue tim it's it's the perverse incentive for people that supposedly fight for truth to sell out in order to get positive ink by all the people they want to be liked by. The moment you don't care is the moment you're free. We do have several ladies asking if James is single. Oh. What's the verdict? Veritas tips at protonmail.com That's V-E-R

That's right. 1-877-CARS-FOR-KIDS Ever heard that commercial? Yeah, yeah, yeah. Veritas tips at protonmail.com It's V-E-R-I-T-A-S tips. Are you giving that out now for the single ladies? At protonmail.com

It's a one-stop shop, everyone. That's right. You can be a whistleblower. You can donate. I mean, there's a lot of things you can do. Just sign up. Here's a real question, though. Kimchi93 says, James, do you ever get nervous confronting people?

Oh, yeah. No. No, I don't. Did you used to? No. What's the guy, the climber that climbs Yosemite? Hommel. Alex Hommel.

Is that the guy? That was a great documentary. He climbs the Yosemite in California without a harness, and they had to scan his brain for fear. I don't get scared at all doing this. I'm trying to think about – I'm definitely – sometimes I'm not afraid confronting the people. What am I afraid? There's a part of me that is afraid is afraid of the legal threats like going to jail sucked um but i you know you choose to overcome your fear and and you you do the right thing

despite your fear when luke has absolutely gone after hundreds of high profile people as well so i'll throw it to you as well it's it's fun it's exciting uh there is a little bit of nervousness but once you're doing it you're kind of in this flow state. And when you're locking eyes with like a Lord Jacob Rothschild or a Henry Kissinger or Zbigniew Brzezinski or Bill Clinton or Tony Blair, I can keep going. Yes, Luke, we know. How much time we got here? When you're locking eyes with them, you're in the moment, and it feels amazing and incredible to be able to get rid of this facade of them getting their butts kissed all the time and just slap them with reality and they're shocked and they quiver. You mean the confrontation. Yeah, the confrontation and the way they react. It's so telling because they're so cowardly.

They expect you to kiss their ass. And then once you're like, let's talk about this and this and this and this real issue. What I'm worried about is when I do it, like two examples, when I called into Jeff Zucker's conference line in December, I dialed into the CEO of CNN's 9 a.m. conference call. My concern is not fear. It's like I only have one take. Like I can't do this more than – I have one shot at this. Don't mess up.

I just – OK. When do I interject and say, hello, Jeff. This is James. What's the moment in the dialogue? And then when I was in the acorn thing as the pimp the whole time i'm not afraid i'm like looking this is like when the hidden cameras were like this big and they're strapped to your chest like with velcro so i'm looking in my pocket like is this still filming oh the battery's dying so my the producer and me is just technically worried

is the camera filming like logistics Do we have the audio? I'm always just worried about the little things. Yeah. And they go wrong a lot. I confronted John Bolton. I asked him, you know, my friend's drawing a portrait of him. Does he want the blood on his hands, on the left hands, on his right hands? He freaked out.

And I remember being so happy and giddy because it was a real interview. And at the end, I just hit him with that. And there's no audio of it. No. No audio of it at all. It was at CPAC. My team will always tell me. It's always the little things like, do we have backup audio? The worst thing about this business is when you do the thing and the camera failed or the battery's dead.

Yeah, it happens. I'm more worried than scared. We have another question from Pom Fum. James, have you ever considered branch offices in other countries, i.e. Canada? Yes. Yeah, we got a lot of messages from Canada, from Europe. There are laws. You know, Luke and I have been to Greece.

Yeah, we got tear gassed together. We got tear gassed in Athens in 2015. Wow. A long time ago. Veritas is going global. We got whistleblowers all over the world. There are certain laws we can't break, but we're protected by the United States Supreme Court Bartnicki case, 2001. A whistleblower can themselves send us a recording even if they potentially violated an NDA or broke the law.

So we will branch out. We are branching out. We're going global. Right on. Well, I think we've gone a little bit over, but we'll sort of wrap up this portion of the show here. And do you want to stick around and do a members segment? We'll talk a little bit more. That sounds great.

Right on. Well, for those that are listening, smash that like button on your way out. Make sure you go to TimCast.com. Become a member because we're going to continue the conversation in a mostly uncensored manner. I say mostly because we still have some general you know, general, like there are families who listen, so we try to keep things, but we swear a whole lot. We'll speak about things that typically YouTube won't let us. Go to TimCast.com.

That should be up maybe about an hour or so. Don't forget to, again, like, subscribe, hit the notification bell. Leave us a good comment. You can follow me on Parler or Mines at TimCast. My other YouTube channels are YouTube.com slash TimCast and YouTube.com slash TimCastNews. This show is live Monday through Friday at 8 p.m. James, do you want to shout out anything else before we wrap this portion up? The only thing I would shout out is if you're watching this and you work for a Silicon Valley tech giant or the government or you see fraud happening in your municipality, corporation, or government bureau, contact us on the inside.

VeritasTips at ProtonMail.com. Right on. I think the shirt I'm wearing is very fitting for today's discussion. It says practice media distancing. And you yourself could exclusively get this shirt by going to TheBestPoliticalShirts.com. If you want to see the former head of the CIA squirm and sweat balls after asking him some serious questions, you can on my YouTube channel, We Are Change. And James, you brought up a very important point when I asked you about alternative social media platforms. You brought up email lists.

Those are key because you actually have the list. You actually have contact with your members. No one's standing in the way. I've been building mine up. Wearechange.org, top right-hand corner. It means a lot to me. Thank you, James, for coming on and thanks for having me. I also want to shout out this shirt that you can get on the timcast.com store. I think it is Harumph. James, one time Tim and I went to your office and met with some of the reporters. They asked me, what can we do? What's the best thing we can expose? And at the time, I didn't have an

answer, but I've thought about it. And I'm hoping that at some point someone can get inside the Federal Reserve and break the books on that company because the government is not allowed to audit them at present. And I find that despicable. That's the whole trail. If you're out there listening, that's my advice.

And check out IanCrossland.net new and improved. You can get one of these free thecode mugs if you really believe in free software and breaking up this monopoly of internet censorship. Love it. Love it. Love you, man. And then me pushing all the buttons for these wild guys. I'm Sour Patch Lids on Twitter.

I am also on Mines. I am on Gab as Real Sour Patch Lids, and I'm also on Instagram as Real Sour Patch Lids. We're going to be jumping over to TimCast.com for the exclusive members-only portion of the show, but for everybody that hung out thus far and super chatted, seriously, thank you guys so much. Make this all possible, and I really do appreciate it. So again, smash that like button, and we will see you all in about an hour or so, or whenever you come by TimCast.com. Bye, guys.