Timcast IRL - Timcast IRL #258 - Media Manipulates George Floyd Narrative As Chauvin Trial Gets HEATED w/FreedomToons

Episode Date: April 6, 2021

Tim, Ian, and Lydia join friend and fellow YouTuber Seamus Coughlin of FreedomToons to discuss the media's shifting headlines surrounding the Derek Chauvin trial, the Antifa climber who faced no repercussions for his attempts to vandalize a bank, YouTube's apparent deletion of downvotes on Biden administration videos, Clarence Thomas' voice on Section 230 and the First Amendment, and Project Veritas' meaningful win against the New York Times. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Ladies and gentlemen, today is April 5th, 2021, also known as 4-5, which will, from this day forth, be known as Trump Day in honor of the 45th president. Fantastic. Good. Perfect. I deserve my own day. And we're going to have to make 4-7 about me as well, because I am running in 2024. I'll have two holidays. That's a fact that means April 6thth will be biden day exactly that's gonna be the best day someone tweeted at me they were like in order for it to be fair then tomorrow has to be biden day and i okay i'll celebrate biden day dude just speak in gibberish make say sentences that don't mean anything where yeah fall on the stairs and and struggle to speak it'll be like goodness it's almost sad at this point i kind of feel bad making fun of them in like a thousand years people put on goofy hats and then jump down the stairs while making

strange noises and not understand the tradition. The tradition of Biden day. Biden day. Ladies and gentlemen, we had news and then we started making jokes and then we all forgot what was going on. Unbelievable. No, we have some interesting news. I've been watching the Chauvin trial and there's something interesting that I've noticed because

I'm watching this trial and it's definitely that there's one, one live stream playing, but two different versions of reality, I guess, depending on your bias. And when I'm watching this trial, I'm very interested in the defense and the prosecution. I got to say the prosecution got a bunch of very excellent points across today about Chauvin, whether apparently he never received training where we've seen this, this photo of the guy with a knee on his neck. Oh, that wasn't trained. He wasn't trained in that. So they made some interesting points, but there's always a counter. Now where it gets really interesting is how the

media incessantly just chooses to frame it as though Derek Chauvin is losing. And I don't believe that's the case. I think based on what we've seen so far, acquittal is likely, but that's just my opinion. And I could be wrong. I don't know what the jury is thinking. And I'm seeing a lot of the same stuff. The jury is as many of you are, I could be entirely wrong. And I think it's very, very middle of the road. It's 50, 50. It could go either way. I'm kind of leaning towards acquittal because a lot of stuff that's come out. For instance, the doctor today who testified said that George Floyd died of hypoxia and then even said when asked that fentanyl, the main reason it's dangerous is

because it depresses your respiratory system, which causes hypoxia. I thought that was a very excellent point by the defense. And then the counter, I guess, is just, well, it could have been choking, I suppose, but it doesn't seem like the physical evidence to Floyd's body backs that up. So we'll get into all this stuff. What's fascinating is how the media changes the headlines of their stories to reflect an anti-Chauvin narrative, setting it up that he's going to lose and will be convicted. And then when people keep seeing the news saying like, oh, defense says this and they testify this and you keep hearing how awful it is and how you keep hearing how it should be Chauvin going to jail and they omit the key evidence that defends him.

Well, then what do you think people are going to do when he gets acquitted? If he does, their expectations will be set very high. They'll say something like, I don't understand. I read all the news. He should have been convicted based on the headlines I saw. And then riots will happen. So we'll talk about that. We got a couple other stories to Clarence Thomas issues this massive opinion, opening the door to potentially sue or regulate big tech and Section 230. So we're going to get into this. And as most of you probably realized already, because for a moment someone was speaking like Trump, Seamus from Freedom Tunes is here.

I'm back. It is fantastic to be back here. Thank you for having me on, Tim. I'm glad you're here, Seamus. What's that? Who are you? Oh, yeah, that's a good question. So my name is Seamus Goggle, and I have a YouTube channel youtube channel called freedom tunes i make educational cartoons and political satire mostly political

satire on the freedom tunes channel these days so go check that out if you'd like we just released a pretty funny video about joe biden we're going to be releasing another cartoon thursday we release a video once a week so go over there and enjoy them yes you're also very learned in uh history which is always refreshing to have you on. Thank you. I appreciate that. Just to chat about the past. I appreciate that.

Are you making fun of the way Midwesterners sound? No, no. I'm a Westerner, too. From the past? You should take offense to this as well because we're from the same area. Yeah, exactly. From the past over here. Nobody says Chicago.

It's like a weird saying for people who don't live there. No, that's the weird thing, too. Chicago. Yeah, my dad's born and raised on the south side, and he pronounces the A less than I do when he says Chicago. It's like a weird saying for people who don't live there. No, that's the weird thing, too. Yeah, my dad's born and raised on the south side, and he pronounces the A less than I do when he says Chicago. He's just like Chicago. Which is not exactly like that.

I can't even do it. I don't know. The A, it's just an offensive stereotype, and that's not actually how people from the Chicago area sound. Yeah. Okay, I apologize. Yeah, Ian. Hey, everyone. I am Ian Crossland.

It is true. And you can always follow me at iancrossland.net, where I do, well, I don't know. I just do weird stuff. He doesn't know what he does. Trying to unify the planet. Ian, yeah. When Tim asked who Ian was, he's like, wait a minute.

I don't. I have a broad scheme. Ian's not actually. And it's kind of vague sometimes. Ian's not actually here. He's an astral projection. Yeah, he is. Oh, my goodness.

We had a dude who just joined the team. And he came here several times. But Ian was never around. He was like i'm convinced that ian's not ian's not real i sleep during that and i was like well that's well that's the truth that ian's an astral projection he's a hologram it's a hologram he's not really on the show he's not a real person it's a it's a vibrating multitude of spheres uh-huh uh that's that's about all i can all i can say all right great intro that sounds all right lydia is also here what about'm also here in the corner. I do eventually get to myself

once you guys are finished. I was going to say that our new employee has been having a lot of fun saying that we are all just figments of Ian's imagination, which I think is accurate and fair. I like this guy.

People come here. He's great. There's no studio. It's just like a shack in the woods with Ian in it, and he imagines the studio, and it just forms around him. It's pretty cool.

All right. That would be an interesting movie, actually it just forms around him. It's pretty cool. That would be an interesting movie, actually. Anyway, my friends, we're supposed to be serious, but it's just so hard these days. Well, it's probably good that we're joking around a bit because we're going to get real serious with this upcoming news and the consequences for it. Before we do, go to TimCast.com. Become a member. Get access to

exclusive segments that only members get access to. We had Michael Malice on the show last Friday, right? Yeah, yeah. Oh, no, no. Thursday. Last Thursday. Last Thursday. Julie Borowski was on Friday.

But we did this great. Oh, you had Julia? Yeah, she's great. Yeah, she's great. It was a really good show. We did this bonus segment with Michael Malice. It became a full episode where we talked about secrets to success and advice we had for people. And if you want to hear some advice from Michael, from me, from Ian, from Lydia, and things that helped us, then become a member at timcast.com,

help support the show in the event that there's a great purge happening that hits us, as it probably will eventually. We'll see how it goes. We could use your support. Also, don't forget to like, share, subscribe. If you're listening to this on a podcast like iTunes or whatever, leave us a good review. Give us five stars. That really, really does help. Everybody else, smash that like button and subscribe. We are so close to one million subscribers. I want to make YouTube give me that golden plaque. We already have some from other channels, but we should have three of them. You're getting kind of greedy, man.

I have three already. We need four. I need one. Give me that gold. Are you going to just split it among everyone here? Well, no. We'll break it into five. They'll issue one for everybody on the show.

Really? No joke. Yeah, that's awesome. just like make me a host right before they send it you should make i mean i just tell them like here are the people and it costs money 12 hosts and that they cost them even making so much money for their platform tim even when they demonetize you i think you get one golden plaque for free and they have to pay for the rest but they'll issue them for team members it is real gold right absolutely so heavy so heavy yeah solid gold you know if you look at the shipping cost is where they get you really you might be if you look on imdb you're probably listed as a on a producer or something yeah this shows on imdb everyone oh i think everyone goes on and all the guests and everything beautiful i don't know who manages that stuff me neither me neither yeah how about we talk about

the news my friends sure i mean if you. If that's what you want to do. I do. I thought we could talk about our days. Let's talk about our days. I was traveling most of the day. I'm a little tired. But no, let's do this. My feelings don't matter.

Let's talk about the news. They don't. You know what matters? Facts. Facts don't care about your feelings. Earlier today. Hey, earlier today, my friends. So I was listening to the trial live.

And there was this really powerful point uh between the defense and the er doctor who was treating george floyd trying to save his life the defense said you know long story short like what what what happened and they're giving really in-depth detail essentially the er doctor says that george floyd died due to hypoxia which is can you give us the the the science the medical breakdown of what that means pretty straightforward hypoxia is just low, can you give us the medical breakdown of what that means? Pretty straightforward. Hypoxia is just low oxygen. Hypo is low and oxia is an oxygen. There you go.

And he went on to say that there was a high concentration of carbon dioxide in the blood. Now, I think on the surface, the average person hears, well, he was suffocated, right? The knee was on his neck. Well, what the defense basically said was, can fentanyl cause hypoxia or a high concentration of carbon dioxide in the blood? And the doctor said, yes. Can methamphetamine? The doctor said, yes.

And the defense then said, is one of the reasons that there is such a warning about fentanyl is that it depresses the respiratory system. And this is what shocked me. The doctor goes, it's the reason. And I went, whoa, from the doctor. He didn't just volunteer up. He didn't just say yes or no. He volunteered up like, no, it's the reason. And I went, whoa, from the doctor. He didn't just volunteer up. He didn't just say yes or no. He volunteered up like, no, that's legit. Exactly why fentanyl is bad. It causes hypoxia. Interesting. Now, it seems like the doctor still went on to say he thinks

that it was, you know, he had no reason to believe it was a drug overdose, in which case the doctor still, you know, there's a cross-examination. The prosecution comes in and says, but isn't it possible that having your knee on someone's neck could result in hypoxia, which causes the heart to stop? And the doctor said, yes. I still think it's very, very fascinating. The doctor said it's the reason fentanyl is so dangerous. And so I went, whoa, I was like, we should definitely talk about this. So I Google searched it, right?

I Google searched, you know, defense Chauvin hypoxia. And I see this. Check this out. Look at this Google search. You can see I searched for Dr. Chauvin hypoxia. And I see this, check this out. Look at this Google search. You can see I searched for Dr. Chauvin hypoxia five hours ago, ABC news, ER doc theorizes lack of oxygen stopped Floyd's heart. You can see in these, you know, the text here, the, you know, the questions, whether or not some drugs can cause hypoxia. You can see right here as well, Baltimore sun, Derek Chauvin trial, ER doctor testifies. You scroll down here. There's even more floor, George Floyd's heart likely stopped hypoxia.

What do you think happens if I click this story? All right. Let's open up ABC. Police. Let me turn this off. The headline's different. Kneeling on Floyd's neck violated policy. Well, that's not what I Google searched.

I didn't search for that headline. I wanted to know about the hypoxia. This is why you use DuckDuckGo. Well, hold on. Let's go to the Baltimore Sun. Derek Chauvin trial. ER doctor testifies. All right, well, let's learn about the ER doctor so I can pull up the source and show

everybody. Derek Chauvin trial. Kneeling on George Floyd's neck violated our policy. Well, that's not what I Google searched. So what's happening is that the Associated Press changed the headline and all their articles after they were already published. So for me, who's trying to search for this to show everybody what's going on, we're getting a different story, which changes the framing. Think about it.

If the doctor said hypoxia caused this and fentanyl, it's like the main reason fentanyl is dangerous is that it can lead to hypoxia. And then I'm like, I want to show that to people because it's a very important point for the defense. And then all of the headlines change to say, kneeling on the neck violated policy. Wow. Well, all of a sudden now the articles that I'm pulling up and would likely show someone, imagine this. Imagine I had that story right when I saw the doctor say this, I went, whoa. And I shared that story on Facebook or Twitter. Wow. Then along comes, you know, my mom or my dad or my brother. And they're like, what's this that Tim shared? And they click it. And instead of getting the story where I'm like, this is important, they get a different story. Chauvin violent policy. I did not share that

story. So here I am. We're trying to do this show. And I was like, we definitely got to talk about that. It's a very interesting point. It's not a guarantee that he's, you know, Chauvin will be acquitted because of this. I just thought it was interesting to bring up and to also bring up that very well, like putting a knee on someone's neck could result in hypoxia. The reason why I think this is important, though, is it offers a counterpoint to the narrative we've all already heard. When I try to pull up the articles, we get something entirely different. That's creepy manipulation, stealth editing that shapes the narrative. And here's my fear. When I'm reading all this news, I see a lot of really, really important points from the defense, notably that there's training

materials. They've highlighted a PowerPoint showing a cop kneeling on someone's neck. This stuff, many people have seen. In the trial, there was an argument between the defense and the judge as to whether or not this actually mattered because Chauvin did not undergo that specific training. The argument from the defense was if the cops are all, you know, doing this and saying this is an updated policy, then it makes sense that this might, you know, exist. These things don't, don't appear like the points from the defense about hypoxia, about drug use, about, uh, you know, what we talked about the other day, what was, I can't remember all the other details. The media always headlines with Chauvin guilty, right. So now we have this. We have the police chief testified that Chauvin violated

policy. But there's another really crazy story. And the media frames it takes out from Forbes. Derek Chauvin defense shows video clip to suggest knelt on George Floyd's shoulder, not his neck. That's right. And when the police chief was shown the video, get this, the police chief was shown the video and the defense said, based on this alternate camera angle from a body camera, would you say that Chauvin, it appeared he was kneeling on Floyd's shoulder. The police chief said, yes. Okay. Shouldn't these things be like look we we all know that the narrative has been chauvin kneeled on floyd's neck it's it's you know it's bad and he's a bad cop he was fired for it when evidence comes out that suggests the official narrative may be wrong shouldn't that be the

highlight for a lot of reasons yeah can humans overcome cognitive dissonance is a big question and that's a i think really it's our duty to do that when we're presented with information that violates what we thought was real. We really have to let go of what we used to think was real and look at the new information. Yeah, I mean, regardless of how you feel about this case, I haven't looked into it very deeply. I haven't done much research on it, so I can't comment one way or the other. But regardless, it's very frightening, though unsurprising, that big tech and these media companies would go through and try to suppress information that promotes a narrative that they're not comfortable with. Well, here's the creepy thing. I look at the AP.

So all these headlines from all these outlets, it's the same article. It's the Associated Press, and they're just republishing the AP. I don't think there's anything nefarious necessarily. I think there's an inherent bias in a lot of these companies. And they're thinking like, oh, okay, more information has come out. Let's change the headline. They initially did run the headline, ER doctor suggests hypoxia. Fentanyl can cause this.

But then they changed the headline. Okay, fair enough. Which fundamentally changes the framing of the story when people are sharing it. Right? So here's what's crazy, though. Forbes, I find it particularly interesting. They say, suggests the officer not on his shoulder. What's funny about suggest

is they straight up said he did. And the police chief said yes. Look, they say top line with limited evidence put forward so far to bolster his case. That's an insane thing to write. Derek Chauvin's lead defense attorney, Eric Nelson, on Monday

sought to cast doubt for jurors over one of the most prominent details of George Floyd's death. The length of time the officer had his knee on the 46 yearyear-old black man's neck. Interestingly, let me go down. Nelson highlighted that while it appeared Chauvin had his knee on Floyd's neck in the video recorded by Frasier, the knee appeared to be on Floyd's shoulder blade during the

same period in the body camera footage. Asking Arredondo, would you agree that from the perspective of Officer Kong's body camera, it appeared Officer Chauvin's knee was more on Mr. Floyd's shoulder blade? Yes, Arredondo responded, though the prosecution, which took the stand immediately after, was quick to highlight this was one specific moment at a time when the ambulance had already arrived and very shortly before they loaded Mr. Floyd onto the gurney. We are not looking for definitive proof of innocence. We are looking for reasonable doubt.

The burden is on the state. They need to prove he did it. He had the intent. If there is video footage that suggests we may be looking at the perspective wrong and people may have incorrectly assumed that he was on the neck, that's very important. And the police chief said yes upon looking at the body camera footage. This is the police chief that fired these cops. Now, what's fascinating is Forbes framing once again is already anti-Chauvin.

They've already made up their mind. He's guilty. And this is just a distraction to suggest otherwise. We all saw it. We already saw the nation. And who was it? Chelsea Handler? Yeah.

They were like, we shouldn't even have a trial. We don't have trials. Oh, well, good. You see that? Yeah, because the media told us what happened. So why would we need to look into it? Chelsea Handler? Yeah. They were like, we shouldn't even have a trial. We don't have trials. Oh, well, good. You see that? Yeah, because the media told us what happened. So why would we need to look into it any further than that? The argument is that, well, there's video. We saw it happen.

Yeah. Yeah, and that's fair. But that doesn't mean you don't need a trial. Like, what happens? So if there's no trial, how is the person punished? Is it not by the justice system? I mean, they're saying no trial exactly why. It highlights the exact reason why we have trials.

Yeah, exactly. If a video comes out that's shaky and it's someone yelling and you see a guy with a knee on a neck, there's so much we need to know to prove or convict someone of murder. Murder 2 requires intent. Murder 2 and 3 require intent. It's manslaughter that doesn't. It's just negligence.

Yeah. So he has a knee on his neck. Okay, well, now there's even doubt as to whether he really had his knee on his neck because alternate body camera footage that we didn't see before shows according to the police chief yeah i have no idea about any of that it's been so long i mean i remember seeing the video it looked very much like he was on his neck but also that i saw this months ago and i can't recall all of it and it's possible he had it on his neck and then he took it off his neck and put it on his shoulder. Yeah, yeah.

But that changes the whole narrative then. Changes the whole narrative. It could still be manslaughter, though, I think is his point. I'm not even convinced it's going to be manslaughter. I mean, it very well could be. There's definitely important points to bring up. Like, they are saying that he violated policy. That's true, okay?

Kneeling on the neck, violated policy, Minneapolis police chief testifies. It's certainly not part of our ethics that he did get fired for it. So while the prosecution has the administration basically throwing Chauvin under the bus like, dude did it, there's still good points from the defense. And I got to say, reasonable doubt. We're not looking for 100% proof of innocence. We're looking at maybe Floyd died from fentanyl. Interesting. Yeah.

No, that's true. All they really need to do is establish a reasonable doubt, and then he walks. That's why I think he'll be acquitted. Not that they've proven Floyd died of hypoxia, but that the doctor literally said that's the reason fentanyl is so dangerous. Prince died from fentanyl overdose no physical trauma he just laid there and fell asleep and died yeah so what happens with hypoxia is that your breathing slows so much i remember monitoring people who had been on drugs and their respirations would get down to like six a minute which is insane you're supposed to be like 16 to 18 per

minute because you're just like you're basically comatose when you're on to be like 16 to 18 per minute because you're just like, you're basically comatose. When you're on that much medicine, there's just, you're completely unaware of anything and your body's not even able to keep you. I would say, I don't know the specifics about Prince. He might have been drunk too. Oh, yeah. I'm sure that combo is a killer. Well, I think, you know, I went over a lot of the evidence.

Like, normally my main segment videos are like a half hour. This one went 35 minutes. Ooh, five minutes longer than normal. Like, goodness. Because I went through the the charges second third degree and i don't know if you saw this uh seamus that there was another guy in the in the in the vehicle with george floyd this guy names this guy's name is maurice lester hall did you hear about this guy no no i like i said i really this is part of why i'm reluctant to comment i know nothing about this check this out let me tell you let me let me tell you shames so this guy according to george floyd's girlfriend

was selling drugs to george floyd and her he didn't really hang out with them all that often and there they were together in the vehicle from that it kind of sounds like he's just their dealer this dude maurice lester hall was supposed to testify for the state as one of their key witnesses and right before a day before he files like an emergency motion, he's pleading the fifth and refusing to testify. You know why I think that happened? Why? The judge put murder three back on the table. Murder three in Minnesota states that if you sell someone a substance and they take it and die, you are guilty of murder.

Interesting. Yep. So I'm wondering if that... Look, that alone... I don't know if the jury can take into account the fact that a dude bailed and pleaded the fifth. I don't think it's fair to... You're not supposed to, right? Well, I wouldn't.

I would be like, dude, pleaded the fifth. I'm not going to make assumptions about it. Now, externally, from a media standpoint, it certainly feels like the dude got implicated and then was like, yo, I'm out. Reasonable doubt, man. Floyd said he was hooping in the video, if you listen to it, which means that you, the slang term is that you, yeah, you play basketball. No, it means that you put drugs inside your self, butt, or your mouth. Yes, yes. And so maybe he did that, and that's why he overdosed.

Well, this is what's interesting. It was one of the questions asked by the defense, and that is kind of gross, but the defense asked the doctor if he was familiar with people, you know, hooping in that sense. And I don't think that line of questioning actually ended up going anywhere. He, like, diverted off it right away. But I have to say, the judge said this inember about floyd that it looked like he had something in his mouth there's video that shows it and it many people speculated that he was in the middle

of a drug deal the cops walked up so he threw it in his mouth and swallowed it and then he said he was hooping and a lot of times when the people will be hooping they'll put in a plastic baggie and then put it in their butt or something to transport it. But I think also you can just put it in your mouth and swallow it without a bag, and that's also considered hooping. But then you're just taking the drug. I know. That's weird, yeah. Reasonable doubt, man.

That's all it takes. I don't know. I look at the media, and I'm trying to better understand the story. But it's like every time I pull up a story, the headline is always like bad for Chauvin. But there's certainly – it's almost like you'd imagine the defense was doing nothing just literally sitting there getting yelled at the whole time because the headlines are always anti-chauvin this one was it forbes article you were just reading says he's a black man they're very specific they want to make sure you know well and also i mean that the footage is the footage is

really really bad for chauvin, too. Why? With him kneeling on his neck. I mean, there's a reason the entire country was immediately against him. They saw it, like, even conservative people were watching that, like, all right, that's way too far. But there is a PowerPoint presentation brought up by the defense showing the police were trained to do that. And they called it the recovery position. And some have pointed out the reason why you move your foot off of their back is because if your weight is in their back, then their chest can't decompress and decompress. So they'll asphyxiate.

So how is it that there's a PowerPoint presentation that says they're trained to, but the other guy says he violated training? So that was the interesting thing in the line of questioning where the judge was basically like, I don't know exactly what the ruling was, but it was an argument over admissibility for the PowerPoint presentation where it was like Chauvin wasn't in the academy at the time this was being presented. And the defense was like, if they update their training policies, it's reasonable to suggest that Chauvin had heard this or was told this or in some way this is part of what the police do. And it was because an officer said no one is trained to do that. That never happens. And this was really fascinating to me that the judge wouldn't allow it because by all means, say Chauvin was never trained to this. That's an important point. And it's good for the prosecution. Absolutely. If Chauvin was wrong, lock him up, throw away the key. But if someone goes on the stand and says this violated policy and he wasn't supposed to do this,

that's what they say. The headline says Derek Chauvin violated policy by doing this. But the police academy's got a photo of someone doing it. So how is it that they could show a cop doing exactly that and say it violates policy if they're showing it to people? So were they showing this to people before or after Chauvin was trained? So before. So maybe it's something that the police force did away with by the time that Chauvin had done it.

It was a couple of years before and perhaps. But interestingly, I think the argument was that the cop said, like, no one has ever been trained to do something to that effect. Like, the defense isn't making things like, okay, I don't want to say that. Everybody is giving their point of view because they're trying to win a case. My issue is that when you watch this, if you're a reasonable person, you're like, I understand their point. I certainly understand Chauvin may have violated policy enacted're like, I understand their point. I certainly understand Chauvin may have violated policy enacted with neglect, which could be manslaughter, certainly not murder. But the defense is giving a defense and it's reasonable doubt. Like, I'm sorry, man.

Manslaughter is probably, in my opinion, the only thing that could potentially get him on. And I'm not even sure that's going to happen because that's negligence. And if they convince the jury that nine minutes is excessive, eight minutes, 45, 46 seconds, then definitely. And I think if he does get charged with manslaughter, a lot of people will be upset that he wasn't charged with more than that. That's why I think the problem is if the media keeps taking the headlines where it's like Chauvin violated policy or, you know, Chauvin did this, Chauvin did that, defense says this,

you know, it's always framing it as though you expect him to lose. That's very astute. They're grooming people to freak if he gets let off. I don't think it's intentional. I think it's just that they think people are more likely to click on the story because the story is bad for Chauvin and people don't like the guy. We all have our bias because we all saw the video. We all made our judgments.

Everybody, even conservatives, were mad. So then the media is like, this is the headline that will get the most traffic. All of these stories, that headline, they do talk about hypoxia, but not in the headline, which people will read and then walk away from. What is this? They wrote a headline and then when you click it, it goes and the headline's different? Isn't that amazing? How did they do that?

They originally got the headline from AP and then the AP changed their headline? Yes. So all the other ones did too? Exactly. Yep. And the caching hasn't that amazing? How did they do that? They originally got the headline from AP and then the AP changed their headline. So all the other ones did too. Yep. And the caching hasn't been updated. And so Google has the old headline. And if you try and search for that story to share, you get a different story. They should have just wrote a new story. That's right.

They should have. That's right. And be like, this article no longer exists if you click on that. So the important factor here is someone could share the article where they're like, wow, I didn't realize this. It perhaps could have been hypoxia caused by drugs. What an interesting article. And then every other person sees the headline, Derek Chauvin violated policy kneeling on the neck. And they're like, what are you talking about?

So you guys remember like the gold and blue dress or whatever? Oh, my goodness. Yes, I do. Manny and Laurel. Yeah. They're creating this because someone's going to have like a cached version on there. They're going to have a cached version from the article. Oh, wow.

Where it's not updated yet. And they're going to be like, it literally says hypoxia potentially from drug use. Right in front of me, yeah. And the other person's like, are you nuts? It says Chauvin, Neal, and Azek and Keldon. What are you talking about? I'm looking at the article right now. Oh, my gosh.

It's like they're intentionally making people insane. I don't mean literally. I'm just saying these articles and the way the system is designed, it's making people hate each other and go nuts. It's a form of negligence at least, like journalistic negligence.

Definitely. Oh, yeah. So now I'm just saying, I think we're getting to the point where we'll get close to the end of the trial. And if people only hear these headlines about the bad things about chauvin only hearing from the prosecution they're going to be like this guy's going to prison and then they're going to say acquitted on all charges

and they go how is that possible i was reading the news about the trial it was bad for him oh the system is corrupt riots definitely i mean i think we can agree there that there will probably be riots i think at this point in the uh in the present epoch you can just always assume that every major story is going to end with riots doesn't matter that's my prediction for the future there will be riots i don't know what's happening but the riots will occur as a result chauvin acquitted riots rights yeah convicted riots right yeah, riots Riots because he wasn't charged with first degree murder Death penalty Chauvin gets

The space time continuum rips asunder And the courtroom and Chauvin gets sucked Into an alternate reality Riots Interdimensional riots All across all dimensions Kool-Aid guy bursts into the courtroom Riots

No matter what Right now what's happening is like a bunch of antifa are in a room and they're sitting there and the and the door is closed and there's like one antifa and he's looking at his watch and he's got his hand up and then they're all like getting jitters like ready to start and then it's like okay the news came in and it's and they just burst the door i did i felt like that was in dc last year like november there was like a march or something i went to and at the end of the night i was down there and you could see i don't know if they were in tifa whatever a bunch of people wearing all black just like standing around we talked about that yeah zombies before the before the night

before the blood moon and npcs in the before the script activates and they they storm in to like you know play the game or whatever. You clip through the wall and you see them all just waiting, waiting. It was so disturbing. Yeah, yeah. Sitting on ledges and stuff. We brought this up at the time, but I'm sure most people are familiar with video games.

So when there's a boss battle, and let's say the boss bursts through the door and he's like, Roar, who has woken me? What's actually happening outside of that room is the character is standing there waiting for a script to activate to start the VO line and the graphics. So they're just like in a T-pose or whatever just sitting there. And if you can go outside the walls, you'll see all the NPCs just frozen or in a T-pose.

Well, it's frightening because T-posing builds testosterone. So if Antifa is T-posing right now, as soon as the orders come down the pike, they're going to be out of their minds. They're going to be stronger than ever before. That would be a hilarious skit. We should do that. We should hire a bunch of Antifa people to stand in a T-pose outside of a protest. Just not saying anything or moving. Await orders.

No, just not saying anything. And then finally when something happens, they all start walking and they go, Oh, fascism. Oh, it's so bad. Oh, we hate it. Oh, man. People will be like, what just happened? And they'll be like, oh, the main character, he entered into the bad, oh, we hate it. Oh, man. People will be like, what just happened? And I'm like, oh, the main character, he entered into the-

He just spawned, yeah, he respawned somewhere. Yeah, he spawned. This is where the script restarts. Everybody walks back to the same spot and then puts in the T-pose again, getting ready for the next riot. Yes. Yeah, man. I hate to say it, but I think it's a riot.

I hate to say that we're getting comfortable that there might be riots in the United States. I'm not comfortable, but I'm accepting of it. Like, there probably will be riots. That's crazy. Accepting of it. I've never in my past been like, well, if global riots break out, well, whatever. It was always like there shouldn't be riots. I'm sorry.

Oh, no. That was my point. Listen, listen. We're entering this political cycle where, like, we're going to be old and have kids. And, you know, it's going to be like, oh, it's 4 o'clock, kids. Everybody come inside. The riots are coming. And the news is like, the riot will be arriving today at 4.10, a few minutes late.

And they just, like, rampage through town. Yeah, exactly. Exactly. The riot man. Yeah, the meteorologist. Yeah, it's sad. Well, it's sad how many horrible things we've just become jaded towards. Like, first it happened with public shootings and massacres and and now it's with

becoming the case with riots we're we're just there was just you see this video where the antifa guy is trying to climb the chase bank yeah what yeah he tried that was rough not succeed hit the ground do you can you play that are you gonna play it uh i'll search for it he hit the ground and then all of a sudden he started to bleed i put in air floats but no no it was like a it's black paint but it looks like blood yeah i really don't like anti-football no he was gonna vandalize this building with black paint and he fell and he landed on his hip and the paint starts dripping out i was like oh it looks like oil or something like he's a robot at first and i mean then this girl's like he's like this guy comes up and he's like what happened where did he fall from she was like

he landed on his hip he was like he fell off from his hip she was like he landed never mind didn't want to say you didn't want to tell him so we have this from andy no from andy no tweets at a far-left anti-capitalism protest today at chase bank in manhattan a masked protester falls after attempting to climb the building. The black paint he was carrying is spilled all over the ground. So I'm not going to show the actual, because YouTube doesn't want to, but I'll show you him climbing. Because apparently that's okay. And then there's

people yelling at him, get down. He's not that high. I'm sorry. He's like eight feet up. Yeah, he's like eight feet up. And then he tries to grab onto the awning, falls down, his paint splatters. Here's my favorite part. Call 911.

Immediately. Isn't it funny? You know what I thought about this? Check it out. The guy slams the ground. You're like, why not a social worker? No, no, no. Here's what I love.

Yes, yes, yes. What I love about this is, imagine it's like 1870 and a guy's climbing the front of a bank and he's like, done with capitalism. And then he falls and hits his pelvis. Do you know what the people around him would do? Just walk away. Call for help. They just leave.

My hip is broken. Call the sheriff. No one's going to do anything. They're going to walk away from him. It's amazing that we're in today's day and age and it's so pampered that these LARPers are like, I'm going to climb the Chase Manhattan. It was like the Chase Manhattan security guard. I can't confirm that he worked for Chase, but it was the same guy. It looked like a security guard for the building was like, we've called the ambulance.

Don't worry. It's like the dude was just about to vandalize your building. You know what, man? See, we're so tolerant and accepting of this behavior. I get it. What are we supposed to do? We can't just leave someone there. But I'll tell you this.

When I saw that, I'm sorry. I'm going to say it. I laughed a hearty laugh. You know why? No. Because I've fallen from higher, and I watched Jake Brown fall from two stories at the X Games, slam onto his hip, get up, and walk out waving while everyone cheered for him. So for those who aren't familiar with what happened there, it was in the 2007, I think it was,

or maybe 2006 X Games. Jake Brown's on the mega ramp. It's like 100 feet high, dropping. Then he launches like 70 feet. Then he goes up a 20-foot vert wall. He's like 48 feet in the air. He loses control and slams into the deck. His shoes fly like 50 to

100 feet just crazy. And everyone thought he was dead. I watched it live and we were just like, oh my god. And then they walk over to him. They check out his neck and everything. They lift him up and then he limps out waving to the crowd. This Antifa guy falls

eight feet and he's going, oh. They're like like what's wrong my he's frail okay he's frail he needs to drink more milk yeah yeah well it's it's there's this weird thing where people have survived falls from extreme heights but then some people will fall like literally five or six feet and they'll they'll sever sever their spine and die like it's happened it's really horrible and scary. My friend was in the military and he was telling me about someone in his unit who was a paratrooper

and his parachute did not open when he jumped out of the plane and his backup didn't open. And he landed and he survived. He basically shattered all of his bones. But yeah, he survived the fall, which is insane. Yeah, apparently there's like techniques you can do. I guess they say aim for trees. Yeah, the way you land.

Oh. Yep. Better than splatting. Oh, man. Yeah. Let me tell y'all a story. Let's talk about some skateboarding. See, I was like 16, and I was skating at a skate park, and there was this, we'll just

call it a box. It was like five feet high, five feet off the ground. And then from the top of it, there was a gap over another ramp, which is about five feet. I spent about an hour. I'm 16. I'm trying to do what's called the backside 180 over this five foot high, five foot long gap to the ground. Backside is when you're spinning and you can't see where you're going because you're looking behind you. I think I fell like 30 times. And every time I hit the ground, I'd slip out or I'd roll. And then finally I land it, rolled away all clean. And everyone's like, oh'd slip out or I'd roll. And then finally I landed, rolled away all clean, and everyone's like, oh, and they're all cheering for me.

And then literally like a minute after that, some seven-year-old kid was jumping up and down and frolicking with his mom, slipped on the ground in front of the ramp and broke his ankle. And that's when I was like, man, isn't that weird? It's crazy how I can jump off this on purpose for like 30 tries, and each time I fall hit the ground i just bounce and roll away and get up and i'm like i want to try it again well like there is such a strange thing like there so my brothers were both in a car accident you probably about 10 years ago

now uh on the highway while they were doing 80 and the car was like completely totaled and they had their seat belts on and thank god they survived there are people who end up like permanently brain damaged after a literal fender bender. It's crazy. You never know. Yeah, dude. It's legit. Yeah, some people will bang their head just a little bit on the window, and then it just causes damage. But are we basically saying that this Antifa guy has been severely injured and we must, you know...

I have no idea. Maybe he got really hurt? I don't know. Part of me was like, did not want EMS or anything. I was like, that vandal deserves to lay there in pain. But that was like a mean part of me. I don't know. In a way, you want to take care of your enemies as well.

Like the wounded, no matter who they are. You know, in the movie The Patriot with Mel Gibson, he tends to both sides after the battle. And then the British, you know, because they're evil and they always will be. The Red Colts, exactly. Basically, you know, burn his house down because they did it. I'm kidding about the Brits.

You've evolved. We know you hate the Brits. Apparently, no, there's a big controversy, I guess, because in that movie they depict the British as like really brutal.

Like way over the top. Yeah. They like make them Nazis. Yeah, no, for real. Like he kills his kid. He's like, you tended to the wounded. Kill his son. Mel Gibson's great at propaganda. yeah and so like make them nazis yeah no for real like he kills his kid yeah he's like you tended to the wounded kill his son yeah no gifts is great at propaganda it was such american

propaganda that movie good yeah i mean you know some american problem no the truth is the the the british empire had power and they were basically the state and telling the americans who are like yo leave us alone what do? And so conflict breaks out. But anyway, I think – where are we? How do we get into this? I have no idea. Treating the wounded. Oh, yeah, yeah.

Treating the wounded, yes. So actually, I'm conflicted on this too because there's a difference between like understanding there's a conflict and a war and these people who keep doing this stuff. They don't stop. And what happens is they set fires. They break things. They don't get arrested in fact we render aid to them yeah and so i understand i would never let a person just sit there if they were truly injured i'd call them you know medical team i'm just pointing out the the

difficulty here and how do you stop someone from doing something dumb like trying to climb chase while they're screaming get down and then he gets hurt and we're like who all saw that coming yeah well that's the thing i mean treat them but they should face the the full consequences that are due to them legally like we should be arresting these people of course don't let anything yeah but it's the it's the prosecutors and and i'll tell you this man we've had a bunch of conversations in the past couple of weeks where i've been like tax the rich not literally but i'm just saying stop billionaires from influencing politics and i i get a lot of pushback you know get pushback from Jack Murphy and Michael Malice, and they didn't agree with me on that one. But my issue is these district attorneys, they're getting put in office through the money of these ultra-wealthy progressive billionaire types.

Not all of them are progressives. I don't agree with any one of these billionaires just flooding the zone with money and shutting up the opinions of the actual people who live there but when people are just swept up with hundreds of millions of dollars in propaganda these da's get elected we know that you know george soros for instance it was was donating a lot to a lot of the district attorneys that's just a conspiracy theory tim i don't know why you would ever say it's also his name i want everyone to know that i like having a youtube channel and i denounced him right now that's horrible so anything about george soros it's true, I'll tell you this. It was the Mercers, the Koch brothers.

It's George Soros. It's Bezos. It's Mackenzie Bezos. It is Tom Steyer, Michael Bloomberg. All of these ultra-wealthy people dump money into politics. And one of the big things we saw was that I believe, this is really funny, like Fox News. I think Newt Gingrich was on. He was like,

George Soros' foundation was helping to get these district attorneys elected. And then Fox was like, we don't we don't we don't say that around here. And then people were like, that's a fact. It's so funny. Apparently, you can't even say the guy's name. That's creepy. Look, the point is, I don't like the billionaires, the millionaires and the billionaires doing this. Because then listen, listen, these people do dumb things.

They get arrested. And the newly elected D.A. is very progressive, goes goes you're free to go that's crazy no charges it's crazy there should be some oversight you can't name soros if i had only read one single book in my entire life i might compare him to voldemort he was self-made right george soros didn't he come from well look like a lowly the left apparently the only book they've ever read are Harry Potter. That's true. Here's the thing. All they ever reference are Harry Potter and The Handmaid's Tale, both of which are movies

or exist in visual media. So it's like, I know you didn't even read them. Yeah, you literally didn't. You just watched the movie. The only literature they quote, like, exists on television. Did you guys ever read Dune? No. Dune.

You gotta read it. Aren't they making that... When's that new movie coming out? It's about soon, yeah. I don't know. It's been... They made a movie with Sting in the early 80s. Yeah, I saw that one.

They made a made-for-TV movie with William Hurt, which was way better. It was weird. Yeah, the David Lynch movie was a little off. Oh, yeah. You told us to watch it, didn't you? Not the David. Well, watch it for weirdness, but the made-for-TV movie is way better. But the book.

The book. I heard the book was good, yeah. That was a good tangent. It's basically this kid. It's about the spice. The big worms. book. I heard the book was good, yeah. It's basically this kid, this king and his son, his family, they have to flee the planet, and they go,

they leave the planet, and they go to this new planet that's a desert planet, where to harvest the spice, which is like this galactic trade item, and there's like conflict over the spice, the political conflict. I thought there was going to be something like analogous to Antifa. No, it's just such a great book that all these, I guess you call them leftists.

Harry Potter's great. Dune, read Dune. It is political. Maybe there's something to it. These people just don't read books, man. Well, this is my favorite thing. I saw this meme a while ago, and it was like comparing Trump and Harry Potter instead. Just like troll lefties.

It was very funny, but it was like favorably comparing Trump to Harry Potter,ter and people were spreading it around i thought that was hilarious so who in that context who's voldemort probably hillary probably maybe soros i don't know i don't know yeah oh come on i'm not into harry potter what are you what are we talking about like i don't i love how like at this protest they're holding up a big banner to solidarity and i'm like what what is that what protest at the one where the guy climbs the wall and then falls and hurts himself oh my gosh they're like holding a big bandit as solidarity and i'm like do people like know what you're talking about for real protesting the banking establishes a problem but painting black stuff on their windows isn't that's going to show them that won't get the cops to come out and crack down no i can just

imagine you know the ceo you got jamie diamond sitting in – I don't know if he's still CEO, whatever, probably. And then he looks on the TV. He looks out from the 100th floor of whatever building he's in, and he sees tiny little dots. And he goes, what are they doing? Is that black paint on my window? What have I done? And then he goes, oh, push the button. And he hits a button and the building is electrically charged. And the guy's electrocuted and falls off the building and everyone just thinks he slipped.

What happened? Oh, my gosh. That explains everything. Like when the guy tells the story about what happened, it's very dramatic. He's like, all my muscles seized up at once. In his version of it, he's super ripped. He's like, it's like 100 feet in the air at once. In his version of it, he's super ripped. He's like... He's like 100 feet in the air.

And then Jamie Dimon punches him in the face. You'll pay for this, Dimon! Planes are flying by shooting at him. He's like... All right. Anyway. There are better ways to protest the banks. Agreed.

Keep that in mind, guys. Yeah, I've always maintained... Audit the Fed. Damaging a window does nothing to anybody but the people who have to clean it. Did you guys see this guy suing the Federal Reserve? Have you guys looked into that at all? I think he's going to win, Ian. I think he might.

I think he might have a case. He's going to sue them for everything they have, and they're just going to keep printing and printing and printing, and he's going to be the wealthiest person who ever lived. Did you guys see Ryan Long's not Antifa window repair? Yes, that was hysterical. That was so good. So they have

shirts that say Not Antifa Window Repair. And he's like, we figured out a way to maximize profits while we're protesting. And they have Antifa shirts and they take them off and it's like Not Antifa Window Repair. And he's like, basically, we go out, organize these protests, so everyone smashes the windows, and then we're right there to pick up a business

and then they actually went into bodegas and like talk to them like we'll fix your windows if they're you know if they get smashed out yeah good stuff good uh good comedy yes good ryan long comedy yeah all right well uh have we have we talked about antifa falling off the falling falling let's talk about the section 230 stuff man oh yeah yeah the first thing i want to do is i want He's a genius, man. All right. Well, have we talked about Antifa falling off the – I think we have. I think we have. I think we have. I think we have. I think we have. I think we have. I think we have. I think we have. I think we have. I think we have.

I think we have. Let's talk about the Section 230 stuff, man. Oh, yeah, yeah. The first thing I want to do is I want to leave with this. 81M.org. Have you guys seen this? Have you heard about this? Have you seen this?

No. 81M? 81M.org. I don't know it. Tracking the White House YouTube channel. Oh, yes. We were talking about this. This is crazy.

This is a great story, and it's not shocking at all. I mean, it's crazy. So check this out. If you go to 81M.org, they say that they're analyzing the real like to dislike ratio versus what's displayed on the White House channel. So you'll look right here. Check this out. On April 5th, 14,570 views. The video is titled President Biden Delivers Remarks remarks on the tradition of Easter at the White House. You can see the official approval rate, according to YouTube, is 12.58%. It's got 1,599 dislikes. The real approval rate is only 4.76% because it has 4,606 dislikes. This is every single video.

You can see that they're deleting dislikes. Not nearly enough. Okay, in this one, it's not much different. Some of them are fairly dramatic. Like, it says 1,000 dislikes and there's 4,000. This one's got 20,000 dislikes. And YouTube claims it only has 7,000. Now, when I first saw this, I thought to myself,

how do I know this is true? Yeah, exactly. Maybe they're just lying. They could be lying. Could just be liars. Could be liars. Dirty. That's the story. Pants on fire liars. But they also include an additional metric to compare using the same data. At the end, they say trust me, bro. So I'm pretty sure

they're telling the truth. And come on, man. Come on, man. Come on, man. I'm like, well, I don't know. He's got a point. That sounds like Biden. They track PewDiePie. When you look at PewDiePie's like to dislike ratio, it's almost identical across the board. There are some disparities. But that's because YouTube does legitimately get rid of spam dislikes from bot farms and things like that. PewDiePie is overwhelmingly – his numbers are accurate.

So when you look at a massive channel like his and you look at the White House house it's very strange now again i'll say it it's possible the people behind eight behind 81m are just like giving us bunk numbers and then claiming the q anon trump supporters yeah far right is it 81m yeah 81m.org that's possible yeah maybe they're just lying but uh we know for a fact that youtube has already stated in the past they do remove likes from the White House YouTube channel. Dislikes, sorry. And they announced that they're, they announced that they may get rid of the dislike feature. I heard about this. For people's health.

I hope so because it's bad for my health when I get a dislike on one of my videos. I wish YouTube would come through and delete some of those. But you can still see them. It's just other people can't. That's not good. That's not going to help my health. What does that do for me? Didn't they change it to say not for me instead of a down vote? I did see that. And you're like, this video kind of video is not for me.

And then the algorithm tries to feed you less videos like that. I saw a screenshot of a Steven Crowder video that said not for me instead of dislike. Huh. That's interesting. I never disliked. Since 2007, I kind of made like a personal choice to never do that to someone. I either like it or not. If I don't like it, I don't say anything.

I actually think they should get rid of dislikes. Really? Likes and dislikes? Dislikes absolutely do hurt channels. They make sure that other people can't see the content. So what happens is, because Crowder brought this up, that they'll put out a video where it's like Joe Biden says you know X and people will go I can't believe Joe Biden said that dislike and then he's like no don't dislike us dislike we agree with you like like what we're saying maybe it's possible to adjust the algorithm so that disliking the video doesn't result in fewer people viewing it but the

audience is still able to know what the general consensus on the video is I mean you can have like Facebook has little emojis so you can have the anger emoji, the heart emoji, the thumbs up emoji. Make it more complicated. And they kind of show, like, did it make you angry? Did it make you happy? Did it make you laugh? So they could use that algorithm. I've got a really good idea. I think this is the future for YouTube.

They have five stars. And you can give the video a ranking of a zero all the way at the beginning, or five stars, and each video will be somewhere along the spectrum. Why didn't anyone ever try? Why didn't anyone ever do that? That would have been great. They should have been doing that since the beginning.

Yeah, yeah, yeah. Like right when they started, they should have had that system. Like before Google bought them. Genius, yeah. When did that change? Why did they get rid of that? I have no idea. Honestly, I do think like a like-dislike thing is more accurate than um a star system though

because someone could be like i like this but like what someone considers four or five star content is going to vary wildly between people two people can like something equally as much but one person's like this is five stars and the other person's like three and a half so i saw a yelp review once where it was like the restaurant got a three-star rating out of five from someone. And they were like, this is one of the best restaurants I've ever been to. Absolutely great. Three out of five. And then the owner was like, would you mind giving us more stars if you really liked it that much?

But it's because the person thought three out of five was like really good. Four was like, wow. And five was too perfect to exist. So I found – I was on a trip and I booked my own hotel, unfortunately, without reading the reviews. And then when I got there, I was like, this place is a little sketchy. Why don't I check out the reviews? Oh, no. So I went to the reviews, and it was so horrifically bad.

I was like, I'm going to go. I'm just going to look at the worst first just to see if this place is dangerous. It was very dangerous. One of the reviews was like, someone was killed here the night I was staying here. The next day – I'm not kidding. The next day, someone was shot in the parking lot. I was like, okay. And then one of the reviews said it was like listing all these things that were wrong with the room and it's like and i found a crack pipe under the sink

free crack pipe yes it was like i was fine with a mint on the pillow but apparently a crack pipe under the sink is is the new thing um and the response from the hotel was thank you for staying at blank i was crying dude i have to i have to send the screenshots to you because i was like And the response from the hotel was, thank you for staying at Blank Inn. I was crying, dude. I have to send the screenshots to you. Because I was at this hotel, and I was horrified. But I was also laughing really hard at these reviews. I was like, I have to leave right now.

This was in Georgia. Wow. Bad neighborhood. Yeah, it was in a bad part of town. I should have read the reviews. Because here's the thing. I looked at the reviews. Well, here's the thing. I so foolishly, I booked it very quickly, because I was in kind of a bad part of town. Should I read the reviews? Because here's the thing. I looked at the reviews. Well, here's the thing. I so foolishly, I booked it very quickly because I was in kind of a rush, mistake.

But it said on the website's page, most people who come here return later. So I was like, oh, it must be a nice place. Well, it turns out people who go to hotels to do drug dealers and other nefarious things will go to the same hotel a bunch of times. Hey, this place worked. I'm like, come back. Sorting reviews by likes or sorting them by dislikes so you can see like all the dislikes first i also like sorting by recent so you can be like what happened yesterday and the nice thing

about steam for instance like someone gets killed at the hotel two days in a row once and all of a sudden people don't like this place forever that's a lot bigger deal than three years ago oh steam lets you see how many hours someone has played a video game before they rate it. So you can kind of get some perspective. So if you knew more about the person that was giving the rating, you might be able to tell, but then, I mean,

that's more of a complex algorithm. Well, it's funny because I was searching for other hotels and I found this place and I was like, I'm going to look at the negative reviews first just to see. And the worst review was like, the attendant was very rude to me. I was like,

I'm staying here. This is great. The main issue with like the youtube dislike thing is that first and foremost the white house is an official channel that produces content not as a career but because they're the white house so they put out updates so everyone smet jill biden at the end of his press conference be like smash that like button he should be saying that like share subscribe to the channel thanks that. Like, share, subscribe to the channel. Thanks for watching YouTube.

You know the thing. Press the like, the thing. Could you imagine if he's at a press conference again, and he's talking to the press corps, and he's like, now for all you journalists sitting in here, you know we're on YouTube, so I'm going to give a shout out to everybody. Smash that like button. Don't forget to hit that notification bell and subscribe.

We're really close to breaking one million subscribers. So come on, man. Become a subscriber. Is he holding up his play button? Yes, we can. Kimmel does it for his show, so maybe they should start. Yeah, at the end, there's like an insert clip where he's like, thanks for watching our YouTube channel. Be sure to do that.

Biden should do that. He would be able to. He should. I would actually give him a thumbs up if he did. I would, too. I have to. It's. I would actually give him a thumbs up if he did. I would, too. I would be like, I have to. It's Joe Biden. It's Joe Biden for sure.

100%. I'd be like, all right, I admire the hustle. And I've been in his position, so I get it. He's like plugging the federal government's now running on Patreon to try to get funded. It's got 328.2 million patrons. No, dude, it's like half that. It's like, if you make this much money you must subscribe for this tier to make this much money and it was like and then in big bold

letters if you don't subscribe we'll come and arrest you at gunpoint oh my god that's how patreon should work right so so listen here's here's the issue i have with the dislike button let's say somebody likes political commentary and they like subject matter about whatever when they give a dislike, they actually like this kind of content. They actually like this subject, but they disagree with something in it. Maybe it's the opinion of the person in an article. Maybe it's the opinion of the host, but they do typically enjoy this kind of content. The dislike in that regard doesn't work because then it results in fewer people seeing content they would actually enjoy.

So ultimately what I'm saying is if I make a video where i'm like i think the government should bring back government cheese or whatever yeah people are going to be like bad opinion x and then what they're really what youtube hears is not i dislike this opinion youtube hears this video is a bad video so then there may be people who actually agree with that opinion and they won't be served the content youtube is effectively creating political silos where they force people into one or the other bubble because if you capture a liberal audience and you say liberal opinion all the liberals give you a thumbs up so then youtube's like share with more people yeah if you say conservative opinion and then and liberals give it a thumbs down they stop showing it to anybody then what happens is these people are forced to choose whichever bubble that YouTube sorts

them to. It's almost like, you ever see that thing where they have the conveyor belt with all the little baby chickens on it? And then they're like picking up and looking at them and throwing the mails into the meat grinder? Yes. Yeah. Very rude.

It's basically like what it is. It's how it feels, getting a dislike. Every single one. I'm like. That's not what I mean. What I mean is you start a new channel, right? Start a brand new channel and say, my opinion on immigration. Whichever person that YouTube randomly suggests that video to, assuming they do, if their opinion is liberal and they give you a thumbs up, then YouTube is going to start growing your channel.

If they send it to a conservative and your opinion is liberal, your channel is crushed. But in addition to that, like you said, you'll make a video. You'll say these people got murdered and tortured. And the person will be like, thank you so much for making this video and telling me about it. That's horrible that they got murdered. Thumbs up. Thumbs down. That's what I was saying with Crowder.

Because it's important for people to remember that the like and dislike button is not there for you to assess whether you're happy with what's being reported on. It's there to bully creators with bad opinions absolutely yeah that's what we have to notice or or just ugly ones yeah like me yeah exactly every time i'm on the dislike ratio you guys just get ratioed super hard i was like why is this ugly man on the podcast exactly did you know i need a haircut bad they look you should grow it out you afro that thing all the way you know you know it's built for it what what really bothers me the most, though, is that people aren't smashing the like button for this handsome gentleman.

People aren't smashing. Smash that like button. You guys have to hit it. We're almost at a million subscribers. Do this. We're going to get the plaques. But not even for the plaques. I want the plaque.

Guys, if we don't get... How many likes do you get on average? We get like 12. If we don't get 15,000 likes, I'm deleting Freedom Tunes. Oh, no. So smash that like button. Well, this resulted in a

genre of videos that were literally just smash the like button videos where it was really funny. There'd be like a guy and he'd be like, hey, everybody, what's going on? We're going to smash that like button. The camera like zooms in on his face back and forth and there's like explosions and it's like five million likes and it worked because youtube would prop those videos up dude so then people just started doing that that's that's it i love that i mean people will always

find a way to mess with the rules everyone's always trying to get away with something at all times yep sometimes people be like and go ahead and smash that and they'll have like low energy but like you gotta like it's more like the build-up like you can say tap that like button but if you say it with like vehemence you know then it gets people to tap it dude that like here's the energy then that happens to me sometimes because like there there are some videos i end up having to pull an all-nighter in order to finish and then i don't record the bumper until right before i upload so the video is like really high energy and crazy. And then I'm like, guys, please like James and hit the like button if you can. Exactly.

And then I'm like stumbling over my words. I literally become Joe Biden when I don't have enough sleep. You know, the button, the thing. Maybe they should get rid or alter it up, thumbs up to say like, show me more of this because on Facebook, that's what it does. Would you like to know more button? Yeah. Click here if you'd like to know more.

At the end, there shouldn't be a like or dislike. Once the video ends, it should go would you like to know more? And it just appears and you can click it. That's it. Would you like to know more about what? The specific video? From this person. I'm sorry, I didn't realize.

I'll go down the list and I'll see things from people that I like following and I don't even care what they put, but I'll just like it because I want to see more from that person. So I've broken the – I've passed through the algorithm. Can we get 3,000 likes for Ian breaking the algorithm and looking past it? Like it. Absolutely. So apparently if on Facebook you post that you have a kid and got married, it'll appear on the top of all of your friends' feeds.

And so what people started doing for a while is they'd post, like, just got married and had a new child, so excited. Anyway, none of that's true. I just want to let you know that I'm having a barbecue at my house. No joke. People were doing that. It's hilarious. Because the algorithm found out that people interacted the most with posts about marriage and having kids. And everyone's like, love it.

They're all commenting and thumbs up. So they get boosted. And then the algorithm makes no sense. Shameful, Tim. That's fraud. Well, we're talking about social media manipulation. And I think this should segue us into our next really major story. Oh, yeah.

Clarence Thomas blasts Section 230 wants common carrier rules for twitter thomas claims twitter's right to cut off speech raises first amendment problem this is an amazing story do you guys remember when trump got sued for blocking people yeah what vaguely no there was here's the thing probably i'm i'm not going to say i didn't pay attention to it maybe i did but there were so many trump stories that it's like they've all just kind of gone now. They're all out of my head. They just got washed right out.

As soon as he left office, I was like, that's it. Don't need to remember any of this. Like Dumbledore with the pencil. You took your memories out of Harry Potter. I'm going to get a generational spirit if you can talk about Harry Potter, Robbie. Okay, so Trump got sued, and this court ruled Trump can't block people. And it was like one of the stupidest rulings. A lot of people were like, that's dumb because Twitter is a private business.

And how could it be a public forum? Here's the ruling. Trump tweets, it creates a public forum where people can reply. So if Trump bans them, it's violating their First Amendment right. So we can't do that. Then a lot of people were like, but Twitter is a private company and Twitter can remove that. And Twitter did start putting restrictions. So how can you call it a public forum created when a private company and Twitter can remove that. And Twitter did start putting restrictions. So how can you call it a public forum created when a private company has a right to remove this?

The way I viewed it was like, imagine Donald Trump holds an event open to the public, but hires a private security contractor. So what, the private security company can kick people out and protesters show up. Oh, but it's a private security company. You know, they're the ones running this event and can control things. They have the authority to remove people. So it's not a violation of your first amendment rights.

If you're protesting the president and a private company removes you, so the court's ruled, Trump can't remove you, but a private company can. Yeah. Makes no sense. So it actually got upheld on appeal.

Then it made its way to the Supreme Court where they dismissed it and vacated the ruling. Congratulations. If you're a politician like AOC, you can now block people again because she was also implicated in this because she was blocking people. Here's where it gets crazy, though. The whole thing's backfiring. The left wanted the regulation.

And with this ruling, Clarence Thomas issued this massive opinion. I mean, massive in terms of the impact it may end up having. He issued his opinion, which will have a massive impact, in my opinion, where he said that how is it that a private company like Twitter can ban the president, but these courts are claiming it's a First Amendment issue. Maybe these are not platforms. In fact, they're common carriers like phone companies. Here's what I'm saying.

The rules for Section 230, for those that aren't familiar, basically say a web service platform can't be held responsible for the things its users say. You've got to sue the user. Long story short, if I have a, if, if, if Shaman has a blog, let's say you set up a blog where you write articles about religion and you, you have a comment section so that people can respond to you and give you thoughts and you have rules where you're like, this is specifically for talk on Christianity and our opinions. It makes sense, in my opinion, then, to ban people who violate your rules. Because the point of your website is for you, Seamus, to publish, not for the comments. Those are ancillary. Those are peripheral to the main objective. Twitter's express purpose is users commenting and posting things, which is more like a phone company.

Yes. Imagine if you went to Verizon for a phone not to talk to people but to hear what the CEO of Verizon wanted to tell you. It's very different. You know what I mean? Oh, but you can call someone, but every day you open your phone and there's the CEO talking. And then you can like, well, I think you're dumb. That's more like what they're trying to claim. You know what I mean?

It's kind of how these Android phones are. I don't think Google doesn't hit me with an ad every time I open my phone, but there are Google ads. Well, that is just, they are just burning money if they don't do that. The Libertarians got mad at me, though. Uh-oh. Oh, no. The Libertarian Party of Texas said it was horrible for free speech because a company was being – the government was getting in the way. This is the weirdest thing to me about the big L libertarian position on this.

Why is it that the big L libertarian party is pro-authoritarianism as long as it's coming from corporations? It's really weird. That's very weird. Right? So I'm little L libertarian, meaning I overwhelmingly just want the individual to be protected when a massive multinational corporation is dumping money into politics and manipulating the the the ability for people to speak and get their you know representatives elected that's authoritarianism and i'm not okay with that well yeah it would be one thing if it was like a totally completely free private market then it would make some sense to be like no they

have to be protected and we can't break them up. But there's so much state involvement already that it seems as if state involvement in the direction of helping people to express themselves instead of allowing the big tech companies to do whatever they want and be supported in that decision is probably more in line with a lot of the classically liberal principles libertarians have agree or disagree with them. You can't break up Twitter, though. Twitter works as a service because of its ubiquity. Yeah. If you broke up Twitter into like 10 services, nobody would want to use any of these services

because like, who would you be following? Unless they were forced into the Fediverse, then it would make sense. But you can't break up Google or Twitter in the same way. You can break up Google because Google has a bunch of different companies. Like Google search can't be broken up. They dominate search, period.

Nothing you can do about it. However, Google, you know, Alphabet also owns an ad network, ad sales. They run ads. They buy ads. And they've got, you know, G Suite. They've got Calendar. They've got all these things. Yeah, all of these different areas that do a bunch of different crazy things.

You could break that up. So in terms of big tech, what i see is the usefulness of social media is in its monopolistic tendencies not in terms of abuse of its users but in the fact that everybody uses one service to communicate so that's that's why i'm very much in favor of it needs to be regulated there's not going to be twitter 2 parlor almost came about it got crushed yeah so that's that's where it's really bad. It's not about antitrust. It's about,

what is this, RICO? What is it, racketeering? What do you call it when all these companies come together and they collude to stifle any competition?

Hostile takeover? No, it's just, it's trust violations and stuff like that, right? Yeah. That does sound like bad stuff. Hostile takeover is when

you buy a company out, right? Yeah, like, Those were made illegal in the early 1900s. No, I think they still happen. What do you mean? Well, they're supposed to be illegal. They buy up as much shares as possible until they have a controlling majority, and then they take over.

Yeah, they ruin the value of the other company they buy. Which is what those horrible Redditors did to GameStop. It was very sad. I know. Truly awful. Well, did you hear that they're going to be issuing new stock? Really? Wait, they just started over?

GameStop, I think, announced that they had a bump in sales and that they were going to be doing a stock offering. And then a bunch of people started selling because a stock offering means the short sellers have an exit. However, the stock still is at like 200 bucks. Really? That's a lot of money. It's still really high right now. Yeah.

I'm surprised it didn't take a dive. My thoughts on this free speech thing is that I've never heard of a corporation upholding free speech in the in the history of the world that is what the united states government was built for so obviously i think we should rely on the government for this one the the government doesn't guarantee free speech the government is prohibited from infringing upon free speech so when people the republic the libertarian party responded to me on twitter and they were like you think the problem will be like it'll be made better with government involvement and i'm like the government involvement goes so far as saying you can't do that not that they're gonna show up to the

twitter's headquarters nationalized twitter yeah yeah then you send your tweet out and they give you a tracking number they'll be like it'll be up in two weeks right the government is like it's in your inalienable right is the freedom to speech. Now we're going to make sure people don't infringe on that. Yeah, it's not about the government working at Twitter. It's about a pathway to a lawsuit. It's about the government saying, you can sue over this. That's it. And there's also something to be said for, even if you left the system the way it was now,

for the terms of service to be applied equitably. That's a good point. Because there are so many people who have said things which are horrifically violent, but it's in the direction of assaulting conservatives. Like, I mean, we saw this a lot, not to beat a dead horse, but hey, some dead horses need their butts kicked. This is a pretty serious topic. The whole Nick Sandman story is the perfect example.

You had like grown adults jumping on this kid. No one has a more punchable face and we should put them in a wood chipper. It's psychotic stuff like that. And they weren't banned. Yeah. But then Trump was like, you're my special boys and you're very peaceful.

And they deleted Trump completely off the platform. They're screaming at the top of their lungs to get rid of him. So here's what could happen with Clarence Thomas. It doesn't do anything. They dismissed this case. They vacated the previous ruling. But Clarence Thomas' opinion could be used in a lawsuit or as justification for regulation of these platforms through Congress. I really doubt Congress would do anything because,

surprise, surprise, the left is not in favor of free speech when it's their enemies that are being censored. So there's potential for a lawsuit, I suppose. Under Clarence Thomas's opinion, someone could now sue and say, here's what Clarence Thomas said. What would they sue exactly? What would they sue for? So it's interesting. I've seen a bunch of arguments and they tend to fail for a variety of reasons. But when you sign up for Twitter, you're entering into a contract with Twitter as well as like you're both in a contract. You're both parties to this agreement.

Now, Twitter and most platforms say we reserve the right to ban anyone for any reason. And that basically cuts you off. You can't really do much. But the general idea we've seen from some people is we entered into agreement and Twitter violated that by removing me for fake reasons. The other thing, however, that I think is being overlooked by people is that Twitter should be sued for defamation and libel when someone gets banned. So, for instance, when milo got suspended i think they said something like he was running multiple accounts okay so they should have said if that's not true if that's not true then milo should sue for defamation for libel saying they issued this

statement to the press it's not true could you imagine if they started being like we're gonna ban this person for no reason we just take if that was their public statement but what if they had to say that or it was defamation this person we're banning for no reason what if they just took some random dude? If that was their public statement, if they had to say that, or it was defamation, this person we're banning for no reason. What if like they run out of people to ban because they've just gotten rid of all their political opponents, but like the Twitter CEOs just, they still need blood.

And so they just like start picking random accounts to be sacrificed every year as tribute. And they just like, just some dude named Greg, they're just like tweeting. Tribute Greg. He's like, he's just like,

he's just like tweeting benign stuff. And they're like, your account has to go. They just like tweeting his like he's just like he's just like tweeting benign stuff and they're like your account has to go they just like will randomly grab people and remove them from the platform decimation trip it's a power trip man for tribal reasons the left has to support it and so they all just like clap eliminate greg just in unison they're like goodbye greg is racist we just started canceling people. People fall so in line with the narrative that you can't find anyone to cancel, so they just have to randomly select people for canceling, and everyone's wearing their cult hoods. They're like, cancel Greg.

You have to clap. Yeah, exactly. No, you have to snap. Cancel Greg. You have to snap. Snap? You remember? Do jazz hands?

Clapping? Yeah, you have to do jazz hands, and you have to snap. Snap? Clapping. You remember? Do jazz hands. Clapping, yeah, yeah. You have to do jazz hands and you have to snap. It's called the soy clap. Oh, my goodness. Soy clap, when you clap between words. Oh, that's right. I've seen that.

Cancel, Greg. But let me tell you, I have to be honest, that does make me appreciate someone's opinion more. When they have claps between it, I'm like, this guy, he knows something that I don't. What is the clapping thing and why do people do it? I don't know. I think it's just a cool guy thing. I'm making noise. Or are they singing? I don't know.

You're being loud, like, I think this thing. I always imagine it like they're going like, Donald Trump has got to go. Like they're clapping along to the music, you know what I mean? It could be. I was guilty of it earlier. I think when I was telling people to smash the like button, I was doing a little bit of a clap. It just gets the people going.

Smash the like button. And they do it because you clap, and that means you have authority. Yes. Clapping. Yeah, clap on, clap off. Please clap. Please clap. We could have had, all we had to do was clap, but now we don't have Jeb Bush.

Seamus. Yes, sir. Have you been following the news on Project Veritas? No, I have not. I know. I've been bad. I've been behind. I've been following the news on Project Veritas? No, I have not. I know. I've been bad. I've been behind. I've been traveling so much lately.

It's just... Sleeping under a rock, this guy. I know. I know. Really, I just haven't been sleeping is the thing. That's the issue. So the story from Project Veritas. They sued the New York Times, right?

Oh, snap. And they won a major victory. The case is not over. Oh, boy. But so I think James mentioned that there's only been like in the past 80 years something like eight lawsuits that have made it past a motion to dismiss. Here's what happens. Wait, eight lawsuits against the New York Times? Against the New York Times.

Okay. There's something called anti-SLAPP, strategic lawsuits against public participation when you sue a prominent news organization or public figure you have a it's called an actual malice standard meaning you had to have known what you said was false or what you wrote was false yeah which is almost impossible to do very difficult i think we've talked about this before you really can't prove that somebody knew what they were saying how do you read their mind it's really difficult to prove intent however in general if you can get past a motion to dismiss you can go through their messages and you can put them under oath, which Veritas now will be able to do. Here's the.

Oh, boy. They didn't clear their inboxes at the New York Times. I hope they've been instructed to preserve all data and communications. Did they smash their cell phones with hammers and delete all 30,000 emails? I'm sorry. Do you want to know what the best part about this lawsuit is? Tell me. The defense the New York Times had to get James O'Keefe's lawsuit dismissed

was that their factual news articles are actually unverifiable opinions. Really? So they said the quiet part loud. I love it. It was a defense. They basically said when we called Project Veritas deceptive and said these things about them, those were just our writers' unverifiable opinions and are thus not actionable. And the judge said, seems to me that if you're stating something is a factual news piece, but your reporters interject their opinions, you should be required to tell people it was an opinion piece.

But wait, Tim, if it's the opposite of fact news, what's that called? Opinion news? The opposite? Fake? There's another F word? Fake? Fake? Some kind of fake news?

Fake news. Fake news, which has been faked? What is unbelievable? CNN? I never thought I'd live to see the day. I know. This, no, this is serious. What is unbelievable? CNN? I never thought I'd live to see the day. I know. No, this is serious.

I mean, Project Veritas may, if they win, and I think they will based on this preliminary ruling, it sounds really good. This could set precedent that could last for 100 years. That would be beautiful. Yeah, I really did not agree with, oh, never mind. Sorry, I was about to make a comment about the New York Times. Oh, this is New York Times. Or is this CNN? Sorry, I'm all over the place right now. New York Times.

Yeah, I didn't agree with New York Times opinion pieces on the Holodomor either. Really weird. Going back a long time. Oh, those opinion pieces. Yeah, those opinion pieces were pretty bad that they got Pulitzer Prizes for, for their opinions. The Pulitzer Prize in opinion. Sorry. So the way the news has typically worked, and I've talked to lawyers about lawsuits, is they say, Tim, I'm sorry. They smeared you. There's nothing you can do. It's an opinion.

And I was like, so you mean to tell me if someone writes an article and says, like, Ian is far right or whatever, they can publish that in a news article and just say, Ian Crossland, a far right commenter, even though there's no factual basis to that. And they're like, it's their opinion. Yeah. And I was like, hold on. If a news organization is claiming they're reporting facts, doesn't matter. That phrase is an opinion. And I'm like, how is this the way things work?

Veritas sues, and the judge said, if it's a fact based news story, stands to reason, you have to tell people if it's actually an opinion piece when you put opinions in it, that changes the whole game. like if they were to say something which is objectively verifiable so if they were to say like seamus cogglin has an iq below 85 and i sued well they would win because that's actually true but um if they make so i'm curious if they make objective

comments about a person beyond far right or far left right because these terms can be used any way you want to use them when what where is the line drawn with opinion so if you so for example if you were to say something like that like this person is is is stupid or this like something where there's a set standard though where you like made a comment about someone's iq but in a disparaging way but that's something that could actually be verified would that be opinion or have you like sort of trespassed into the area of fact it's it's actually really crazy what constitutes opinion and what constitutes fact so saying like uh shamus coglin did a backflip you know uh off off tim's deck to the ground yeah i said you did something that's a fact yeah if i said something like shamus coglin cheated at a game of chess that's an opinion what but hold on a second you can there are objective

standards for whether a person cheats at chess no and first of all i don't know how to play right but so you know that i cheated and so but but so i shouldn't say necessarily it's an opinion it's arguable so i went through this with with a lawyer over over a really old piece and it's basically like well what does cheated mean define cheated like broke the rules or changed the rules to benefit himself or in some way took an action unbecoming of the traditional it's like white supremacist what's defined white supremacist uh i would say trump supporter the point so if you call someone a white supremacist it's actually on it's a non-actionable opinion really yeah so i knew that that was true with labels like extremist.

I was unaware that calling someone a white supremacist, this is like just a man. I knew it was oftentimes just used as an opinion and no one was really using an objective definition. But my understanding is

that's an actual label. Here's the issue. Or like far right. Dude, I'm so old. I remember when you had to be conservative in order to be considered far right. Crazy. Right.

So you, there was an article that came out a while ago and I was talking to a lawyer about it they called someone a white supremacist and they said define white supremacist and i said well the i believe the academic definition is an individual who believes the white race is superior and so whoa whoa whoa whoa that's not the academic definition what the academic definition is about whiteness and privilege what yeah that's journalism i mean that's i'm sorry that's that's college

universities they say white supremacy is the structure of dominant racial hierarchies in society, which could include Asians or whatever. And so they change the definition. So if you go into court and say, your honor, he called me this and it's verifiably false. The individual will say, no, look, here's here's how we define it. Here's how everyone believes it. And because the media accepts the alternate definition opinion. Interesting. Unverifiable. And so but and then the alternate definition, opinion. Unverifiable opinion.

And then, of course, yeah, they're not required to define their terms. If I was like Seamus Coughlin, whose cartoons bore millions of people a month, would that be an opinion? Well, that's a fact. Everybody just watches and they just have their eyes half closed. Opinion because he used the word boring. That was anodyne enough for a like, and then they'll hit the like button. But if I'm like Seamus Coughlin, who's racial supremacy. Who's white skin.

Then that's a fact, or that's also a fact? No, it's an opinion. No, if you call me white skin, it's just an opinion. A statement of fact would be Ian Crossland threw a baseball at a baseball game. Oh, and it was either true or false. Right. But the other ones are, this is how I perceived it. Ian Crossland has a weak sissy arm is an opinion.

Ian Crossland, who has a weak sissy arm, threw a pathetic pitch at a baseball game. These all sound like facts to me. All of these sound like facts. Unless you didn't actually throw a baseball. Your opinion is on the money. Starting a little war here. It's crazy that... I need to do more push-ups.

So I want to avoid getting into dangerous territory with YouTube because I want to make sure this is a conversation people can hear. But saying someone did something isn't always a statement of fact, which is weird. Really? Like saying Ian Crosland cheated at a game of Magic the Gathering could be opinion. Could be? That's opinion. Could be.

That's dangerous. Could be. So if you were like, you got caught and everyone saw you sliding cards in your deck or something, or I could be like, I saw him shuffle that one way and I say, in my expert opinion, that was a cheating move. Or for instance, there's a move in Magic. This is a good example. This is a deck game where you shuffle cards, right?

For those that aren't familiar. There was something going on where people would... So you can shuffle your opponent's deck to prevent them from cheating. You can cut their deck. So pros would hand their deck to the other player. The other player would shuffle it and hand it back. There was one thing people would do

where they would shuffle it, but then keep the last card and throw it on top of the deck. And they would see the bottom card was in fact a not good card. Then the next turn the player would draw the bad card and throw it on top of the deck. And they would see the bottom card was, in fact, a not good card. Then the next turn, the player would draw the bad card. And so they said that was cheating. Others argued, that's not cheating. You can cut the deck any way you want.

Information that's revealed because the card is visible is not cheating. But hold on. But you would actually... But it would only be opinion if that was what you were referring to as cheating. If you were referring to something as cheating, which is objectively agreed upon by everyone who plays the game as being against the rules then it would be a statement of fact no this is where the problem comes in that apparently opinion or fact has a lot to do with whether or not large large enough amounts of people agree

with a certain definition interesting oh right so if i said you know like what's something everyone agrees with if a name you could call somebody that meant something objective to every person, which is hard to find. Ian Crossland is a X. And everyone's like, oh, an X is very clearly this thing. Yeah. Then it would be like, well, if he's not, then you made that up. The problem is not everyone agrees on what things are, which makes it weird. Honey is sweet.

And that could be a fact. But not everyone's going to taste sweetness when they taste honey. It is. That, I think, would be a fact. It would be hard to taste sweetness when they taste honey it is that i think would be a fact because the high sugar content there's so many people but think about people saying things like male and female don't exist uh-oh right that's i mean that is objectively not that is an anti-factual statement that's just that is fake that's the problem but yeah i agree that generally it's it's a it's a matter of consensus it shouldn't be so like yes practically speaking i mean I mean, there are facts.

There are moral truths which are objective, but we operate in a culture where many people believe many different things. And so, of course, we don't have the sort of same like hegemonic narrative that we might have surrounding gender that we did in a time where things made a little bit more sense with respect to our sexual politics. This is interesting. Think about religion. It's a really good context. Like how is the pope defined like in terms of his position yeah he's the vicar of christ so imagine someone who's not religious would say that's that's fake that's not true that's not true that's fake so then how could you prove defamation based on that so but

here is where you do get into a matter of fact so if you were to say like if a non-religious person is to to say that like they don't believe the pope is, you know, the successor of Peter and Christ's vicar on earth, that's one thing. But then if they were to say, like, Catholics do not teach that the pope is Christ's vicar. Now you're talking about something that, like, we can – the first – I believe it is a fact that the pope is Christ's vicar on earth. But if we're getting into something that everyone agrees is factual you just look at what the church teaches and if you're saying the church teaches x when it objectively teaches y then you are lying and so this is something that happened like joe biden was repeatedly referred to i've said this before on the show but he's repeatedly referred to by the media as a practicing catholic um despite the fact that he actually does not meet

the criteria for what is considered a practicing catholic based on the definition that the Catholic Church sets, because one of the conditions is you have to give full assent to Catholic teaching, which Joe Biden objectively does not. But in the eyes of a non Catholic, he does enough. And they're like, oh, it seems like he's practicing. They don't even know what the word practicing means. They don't know what the word practicing Catholic means, exactly. But practicing Catholic. So if they were to say, like, he is a devout person or holy man, well, those are more subjective. But practicing Catholic is a technical they were to say like, he is a devout person or holy man, well, those are more subjective. But practicing Catholic is a technical term. It's not a subjective label of identity. Now, what if someone said in an article, Ian Crossland, comma, who is objectively,

factually the Antichrist, comma, was seen shopping for a new pair of jeans today? Total opinion. Yeah. Well, yes. It's a faith-based thing. They can't say your lines. So then here's the question, though. Weird stuff. Are you allowed to throw around words like objectively if you're acknowledging that you're only speaking an opinion? You are.

What? It's the weirdest thing. I would say like Ian is objectively a white supremacist. That's just opinion. Yes. Because define white supremacist. I told you, Trump voter. If you have a critical race theory definition of white supremacist, then yes, it is.

New facts showing that I think Tim's a big jerk. Well, that's an opinion. And of course, the tradeoff, the tradeoff that they have to come to terms with but won't is that when words become so subjectively defined they no longer carry the same weight so for years and years and years the word racist was thrown around like it was nothing and then probably around the time the 2016 election came around this is not an original observation other people have said this they realized that the word racist just wasn't cutting it anymore so you'll notice like it was right around 2017 when they started calling everyone white supremacist instead because it's a much more

objective sounding term than racist and also it's one that can only apply to white people or people who are in favor of this structure of whiteness or whatever you would call it um and now that seems to have lost all meaning so i think the next term they've sort of moved towards is is incitement to violence right like oh if you agree with what trump said or did or you promote his movement that is incitement towards violence and that's oh, if you agree with what Trump said or did or you promote his movement, that is incitement towards violence. And that's something they've sort of been doing for a long time.

Critical theorists have done this. Oh, if you disagree with trans ideology, then you are inciting violence against trans people because hate crimes occur against them. And that's the result of the fact that you're creating a culture of hatred, et cetera. But it's so easy to make that argument for any group of people.

For example, I could say, well, veterans have a very high suicide rate. So criticizing US foreign policy probably makes a lot of them feel horrible about their experience overseas. So you're contributing to their suicide rate. You can play these same games with any group you want. So imagine a journalist emails you and they're like, hey, Seamus, we want to just get some comments from you real quick about the story we're working on. Delete is what I do. Just a real quick question. Would you be in favor of, say, people pooling their resources to try and improve technology towards newer, cooler energy tech like Fusion? Seamus supports the Green New Deal.

And then they would write, hold on. You're like, oh, that sounds good. Then they would write, Seamus Coghlan, a proponent of the Green new deal comma and you and you would say that's not true I never supported that but we asked him in email if he was in favor of supporting green new technology said yes so we call them a proponent of the green new deal which to be fair that is the one left-wing policy I do support the green we can't we can't afford not to have a green new deal right now it's insane the best part because you just said that you can never sue someone who claims you're a proponent of the green new deal even though i'm just hashtag jking doesn't matter

really yeah so that does not hold up in a court of law jokes i'm a part of it this is a new meme if somebody wrote seamus coglin of freedom tunes who is a proponent of the green new deal said today that blah blah if you sued they would show that clip where you said it's's the one thing I actually agree on. And the judge is going to be like, I think a reasonable person can conclude you were joking, but you can't hold them responsible for not understanding. You can't expect the media to be reasonable people. So we're going to let them off the hook here. There's a possibility that they'll say a reasonable person would have understood the joke and thus they shouldn't have. But I think actually a reasonable judge would say, you can't just assume someone understands your intent.

That's hilarious. If you say something and someone takes it literally. So everything everyone has ever joked about really could just be literal. Oh, yeah. And the issue then becomes cultural enforcement as to whether or not you hold institutions credible based on what they say. So the question is like what if I'm playing a character in a movie? Does Jeff Goldblum actually believe life will find a way? So the issue then goes to

the actual malice standard if there's a clip of you and you say something like the green new deal is the best i absolutely am in favor of this and it turned out to be tim now you can say it about you too oh of course but i but i i like the the real green new deal not the aoc green new deal which is a cult manifesto so i actually do like the idea of infrastructure investment and new technologies i don't like aoc's version which is some kind of weird cult manifesto about equity and health care and paying people who don't want to work that's garbage nonsense but before the green now we're getting well she's the boss dude she's the boss so you come up with your own plan until then listen if someone writes a story about you saying you support the green new deal and they see a clip

from a movie of you saying it you can't prove actual malice because they'll say look i realize after the fact he doesn't but at the time i genuinely thought it was true based on what what if you kill someone in a movie and they say a known murderer we're actually not that far from that happening though is the problem what about um actual malice standard oh come on something's wrong they knew that i know so you could have just gotten the clip so i'm sure i'm sure there are some lawyers who might have like listen this is this is mostly just based off my experience i'm not a lawyer my understanding is the challenge is proving actual malice meaning if ian says seamus did

something seamus has to prove ian knew beforehand what he was saying was false. If someone says, here's the clip we saw of Seamus shooting a rocket launcher into a building full of nuns, then people would be like, well, a reasonable person might conclude that didn't happen. Well, hold on. But can we now say Tim Pool, who falsely accused Seamus of shooting a rocket launcher into a group of nuns, he calls himself a journalist and he spread this fake news. So what about Ed Norton? Can we say that he is a white supremacist?

You can call anyone a white supremacist, I guess, but could you call him a neo-Nazi? Is neo-Nazi an actual defined term? Opinion. Neo-Nazi. It's opinion. What if you say, like, curb stomped somebody, killed them,

because he did it in a movie? I think you could... He chose to portray a known Nazi. Or what if you don't... Do you have to say... Sorry, I interrupted you while we were saying... Here's malice. Listen, listen.

Here's what it ultimately comes down to. Whether or not the judge thinks you're being reasonable or absurd. The problem is with Times v. Sullivan, you have an actual

malice standard, which means knowing that what you're saying is false. That's a really hard thing to prove. Yes, extremely difficult. So the New York Times

fought Project Veritas in a ridiculous way, saying our fact-based news, it was actually unverifiable opinion Yes, extremely difficult. They're basically saying your opinions are purported as facts because the New York Times. Therefore, you lose the protections of the opinion standard. Wow. But the NYT, of course, is saying, actually, we are, as a matter of fact, opinion journalists. No? That was their defense. And then the judge responded.

The New York Times responded that their fact-based news article about veritas was actually unverifiable opinion and the judge then said okay while typically opinions you can't sue for someone's opinion you put them in a fact-based news article if i say so this is where it gets interesting this article is 100 fact ian crossland is a lying thief yeah then they can be like that's actually your opinion if i said this is my opinion in crossland is a lying thief then they can't sue me and if you do a fact-based article with 99 facts and then one opinion the entire article becomes an opinion piece if this and it must be labeled as such okay so this is why veritas is so important because in the past when i've talked about libel suits, every lawyer says, it's an opinion you can't sue.

And I'm like, they straight up accuse me of doing a thing. No, it's an opinion. They said I murdered orphans. But you can't define some of these terms like causing hurt or violence or incitement. All of these things are interpretable. So you can't win. With this new ruling, changes the game. Veritas, open the door.

So here's a question. So you mentioned that the article can be 99% fact-based, and if it's one, like Snopes would sign off on all of it. But if there's one part which is opinion, now the whole thing is an opinion piece. It has to be labeled opinion. But, okay, but what if the opinion is really

like, what if you're listing facts, and then at the end, you're like, yes, this did happen. There was this scandal with the Biden administration, blah, blah, blah. And then at the end, you're like this did happen there was this scandal with the biden administration blah blah blah and then at the end you're like i enjoy grapes they taste good and it's an obvious opinion or like if at some point the article something comes up which is your opinion but isn't quite related maybe you're setting up the story but everything else is fact-paced now the whole thing is an opinion piece and i can say whatever i want fascinating well hold on you can't say things you know to be false. Are my cartoons opinion or did those happen?

Dude, you make a good point because I'm pretty tired right now. Just like movies. Was Joe Biden. What was your latest one? Joe Biden. Joe Biden stutter. Please check that out if you're watching. So I don't know if you guys know this, but Joe Biden, it's not that his brain isn't functioning well and he's not fit to be the leader of the free world.

He actually has a stutter because that's how stuttering works yeah so i did a video on joe biden's speech therapy class i think you guys are really going to enjoy it he gets the stutter worked out it's it's it's just uh gut busting laugh fest yeah yes laugh fest from start to end i did a video of him in math class as well you know i think i think the funniest thing like in terms of biden is talking about putting the razor blade in the barrel that's the dude that is the best we have tim and i have a bit that we're we i don't want to spoil it but we have we're probably gonna do a freedom tune based on another one based it was too good before the show we were talking about biden and as we

always do i can opinion my opinion is it was a good idea thank you hey you made a great point about movies and how if an actor does something in a movie it doesn't mean that they did it in real life because this is a tv show whether you want to i don't know if people realize or not we're on tv right now doing characters on a show this is not how i am when we sit around a table and eat dinner i want to stress elevated versions of ourselves we had a correction so is all social media. Okay, we have a correction real quick. Xerosopher just super chatted,

I'm wrong. Actual malice is, quote, with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not. So if it was a movie clip of someone doing something, it would be reckless disregard.

But that was just your opinion when you said that malice is the standard. So really, you're not wrong. It was just your opinion. Yeah, exactly. It was my expert opinion. I did not actually know it wasn't true so it's not actual

my point is this is a TV show we've entered a new stage of art creation where social media is an art form we're becoming heightened artistic characters

that we're creating and we're projecting so how can you prove any of this stuff is really who we are what we say on social media Ian's not real Ian actually

is an astral projection figments of Jack's imagination yeah he's an astral projection. Figments of Jack's imagination. He's an astral projection. Yes. I have come here to warn you. Be good to each other.

Now is the time. We're fractals of the greater whole. I love it. There you go. Beautiful. Okay. So I'm wondering.

Interesting. Is that a fact? Let's get Snopes in here. Are we fractals of the greater whole? I would say no. I'll see what Snopes has to say. It's the holofractographic universe. I would love Snopes in here. Are we fractals of the greater whole? I would say no. Let's see what Snopes has to say.

It's the holofractographic universe. I would love Snopes to fact check. Is Ian Crossland from TimCast IRL an astral projection of segment of Jackson? Partly true. Partly true. Partly true, yeah. Although he is from the outerverse and has inhabited the body. He does have a physical form

in this reality. He is also born. Has Snopes actually verified that he has physical form? No, no. I'm in contact with them about that. I wonder if we'll be able

to prove that anyone that did anything on social media was not a character they created. They weren't doing a bit. My whole Twitter is a bit at this point. My YouTube channel basically was. I believed a lot of it,

but I said it in a crazy character way. That is an age-old defense, though. Like, I was just kidding. And sometimes people abuse that. It's like, you weren't kidding. But also, it's hard to know because sometimes you'll make a really obvious joke. People are like, can you believe he said that? You're like, I was joking.

And they're like, dude, you're falling back. And it was just a joke. Come on. I just don't care anymore. I tweeted today is 4-5, which will now be known as Trump Day in honor of the 45th president.

It got like a thousand tweets. That is literally a joke. I just thought it was funny because I was doing, I do the dates for when I'm making playlists and I'm like,

oh, it's 4-5. It's Trump Day. And I'm like, I'm tweeting that. People are like, a lot of people were just laughing. And then I tweeted, welcome to tweeting that. People are like, a lot of people were just laughing. And then I tweeted, welcome to Twitter.

Enjoy your stay here. So it's just, there are these people. I mentioned the hooping thing. When Jack Posobiec posted the clip of George Floyd saying he was hooping, I responded with the Urban Dictionary entry for what hooping is saying, don't forget to get your hooping mug. It's a joke. The whole thing was a joke.

Because Urban Dictionary says it's shoving stuff up your bum. Oh, gross. But it says at the bottom, get your hooping mug on Urban Dictionary. And then these people were like, Tim, this is why people think the right is so racist, because they say things like this or whatever. And someone was like, Tim claims it's from the hood, but doesn't know what hooping means. And I'm like, no, it's a joke. You're the kind of people who thought my Impeach the Queen tweet was real.

Right. So I don't even care.'s up what are you gonna do yeah reckless disregard of the truth at this point we have a faction of people who are so unable to empathize and understand humor how could the reckless disregard standard even hold yeah so i know these fellas um at this publication called The Babylon Bee, and they're very, you know, like, they're handsome, but they're very slow, and I try to explain things to them. No, they're both great, actually. But I'm not sure if you guys have heard, but Snopes has fact-checked them in the past. That's been a really big problem. Then what happens is they're demoted in the algorithm because they're considered to be fake news, even though it's obvious satire. And people, I did a video on this a while ago, but they had this really bogus study where they said that some large percentage of conservatives believe that Babylon Bee

headlines were factual. But the way they arrived at that number is they took Babylon Bee headlines, removed them from the context of being published by a satirical outlet, and reworded them in a way to make them sound like they were serious so there was one headline and it was something like the evidence against russiagate was put there to test our faith it was like obvious joke right and it's a caricature of the creationist argument that uh fossils are put there to test our faith and they reworded it to be like this media pundit said that his faith in russiagate is unshakable and no evidence could change his mind it's like okay well you've totally changed it so this that's

where it gets really dangerous with fact checking and and the fact that people get a lot of leniency who actual journalists will get this leniency that comedians and satirists on the right won't get right yeah like the the articles in question would say something like, you know, it was like AOC stands atop her desk and proclaims her support for communism to much fanfare. Then flags dropped down and the Soviet anthem plays. And then they would reword it to be like, AOC announces that she's forming the Communist Party.

And it's like people would be like, oh, wow, that sounds like real news. Like she's joining, like she's forming the communist party and it's like people are like oh wow that sounds like real news like she's joining like she's and then but it was like the actual context was absurdity they were they stripped out the absurdity to make it factual news that could be real like seamus seamus coglan goes for a walk with the dog when the actual article was seamus coglan walks world's giant dog you know big red dog clearly false and this is funny so i was actually just going to pull up, I wrote this, it's been probably about two years, but it's probably been about two years so I was pulling up the script on my Google Drive so I can pull some of the examples up.

But just to verify that it was just friendly ribbing, I just got an email from Ethan so we don't actually hate each other. As I was checking. No, no, I love those guys. Great article. They are, so basically they reworded yeah so the article it was yeah cnn god allowed the mueller report to test our unshakable faith in collusion was reworded

as cnn anchor anderson cooper said his belief that trump colluded with russia is unshakable it will not change regardless of statements or evidence to the contrary like that actually sounds yeah like it sounds like something something but it's exactly um and and so they published this whole study about how people are buying into fake news as if it's fact despite the fact that this is obvious satire and basically everyone knows it and so yeah it's it's extremely upsetting and it's totally one-sided because this never happens the other way well i mean again even actual publications like well let's not call new york times an actual publication but people who purport to be telling the truth in a fact-based manner are given this leniency or are at least attempting to get the kind of leniency that satire websites on the right don't get.

I would say at this point, based on the ruling from this judge, that it is a fact that the New York Times injects opinions and masquerades as factual. The New York Times masquerades as a fact-based news outlet when, in fact, it's publishing opinion pieces under the guise of fact. So there's this guy. I don't know if you guys know him. It's like Michael Malice. Michael Malice. Michael Malice.

I think you guys might be friends with him. Malice. He has said some things. Malice. Malice. He has said some things which suggest he kind of doesn't like the New York Times. And he thinks they've been bad.

So I would just look into what he's written about this stuff. Because he seems... This guy, this Michael Malice guy, he doesn't think NYT is that great. We shout out Michael too much. Oh, Michael Malice? That's why I tried to say his name wrong. I was like, I can't keep... He was on the show

last Thursday. Yeah, he was. He was great. We literally shout him out, three times a week. He's very funny. And also a writer. His new book will be coming out soon. There you go. Now he gets another shout-out.

Michael Malice. All right, all right. Let's go to Super Chats. We love you, Michael. Super Chats. Let's see. So as per usual, the YouTube – oh, we got the tinfoil gorilla. Oh, yeah, yeah.

Did you guys see it? It's in the chat. It's pinned. I, we got the tinfoil gorilla. Oh, yeah, yeah. Did you guys see it? It's in the chat. It's pinned. I finally put up the tinfoil gorilla thing. It's the tinfoil gorilla shirt. He's a gorilla. It's got black tacks instead of white tacks, and he's wearing the tinfoil hat. And it's only going to be up for a little while.

So this is a limited edition. We're going to do the tinfoil hat because basically I decided – we were wondering whether we would do the tinfoil hat. And I was like, oh, let's just do the regular gorilla. So we had the graphic and then I mentioned it. I was like, we'll put it up at some point and then I never did and then I finally did. So it's there now. You can buy it and it will probably not be up for longer than like a week or two just because I figured

this won't be special. So he's able to reflect electromagnetic frequency off of his head and protect his brain. Theoretically. No, no, because electromagnetic waves can actually go through your body and up your skull. Uh-oh. And then what it does is it actually makes it bounce around more.

Yeah, people don't realize that it actually creates a dome that, like a satellite dish, it captures the waves. I like it. So anyway, let's read some Super Chats. We got one. People were thinking about your beanie then, just by the way. That's right. I can't read the name because YouTube is blocking it, they say can't wait for you and b tatum only two

i joined membership with nice that's gonna be a lot of fun brandon tatum yeah i don't know your mom says who would win the fist fight joe biden or bill clinton shames that's a tough one i mean bill's bill's younger right good deal old i think yeah who is older at this point, actually? Bill Clinton age. Let's see if I get a fact or an opinion. Bill Clinton's 74. And Joe Biden. 78. Yeah, I guess Joe Biden is older. Bill Clinton would bop him one and win because he's got four years, man.

Joe, we're going to put our face up. Yeah, I think that. But it's hard because the last time I saw a picture of Bill Clinton, he looked like. Neither of these men are in good shape. I'm not sure. I don't uh the victory would exactly be impressive uh but i think that joe biden would probably lose i don't think joe well here's the thing so joe we know that joe knows how to street fight right like he has a razor he puts it in a rain barrel bangs another smack gets it rusty rusty yep brings i'm gonna wrap this chain around your head right and bill right would be helping him um but but bill clinton is younger and has

i think a little bit more energy and also he could he survived being married to hillary clinton so i just i don't think it's an asset yeah i i think that he's uh i think he's probably got the edge here biden's got the reach that's true he's got those long arms yeah yeah yeah but bill's probably got the edge here. Biden's got the reach. That's true. He's got those long arms. Yeah, but Bill's probably got some crazy kama sutra kung fu or something. He's ready to tangle. Yeah. He's been doing it his whole life. He'd be like, let me show you how I do it, Bill. Since college.

I mean, Joe. Let's go. Let's get in a fight. Go ahead and show how I do it. I think, yeah. Now, of course, this is factual and not opinion-based. So you can quote me on that. All right.

That's the way you phrase it. All right, let's see. Logan Sisko says, IRL crew, Crowder made me think last week. Why is the left saying only cops need guns but also ACAB? Also, Portnoy Pool 2024. I like that ticket. I don't know about that one. Dave's cool, though, but I'm not running for office.

Yeah, because there's no logic. There's only tribalism. Listen, if you're like, the people here, I believe, all operate on principles. Where it's like, I don't care about which tribe it is. I care about whether it's right or wrong and will make things better. And then you have some people who are just like, I want to win. And I'm just going to be on the side of the winner. So they're simultaneously like,

only the cops should have guns. Only the social workers should have guns too. That's right, yeah. Basically cops. The social worker thing is so funny because you would just end up creating a two-tier system which would, in practice, end up being way more racist. Because the phone calls, the social workers, would probably

be more likely to happen in neighborhoods where you have these Karens calling the police on everyone and they'd send social workers out so it would be it would be areas where there's less violent crime getting a lot of the social workers and you'd create sort of like a two-tier system where impoverished neighborhoods were policed by actual cops and like wealthier neighborhoods and white neighborhoods just got these cushy social workers have you done a cartoon on the social workers responding to crimes i have not it seems like something that might be something. That might be fun. I could do something. There's like a city burning down

in a violent fire and there's like a criminal and he's holding people hostage. Call the social worker! All right. FishB84U says, Yes, Seamus, I love Freedom Tunes. You did a binge watch on the debunkers

earlier today. Thank you. Thank you. Keep watching this. We're going to be producing more. We had a hiccup with the production of one that I was hoping to release this month, but we might get it out later. They've been a production of one that I was hoping to release this month, but

we might get it out later. They've been a lot of fun, and I enjoy making them. So thank you so much. Quiet Guitarist Fan says, should make a shirt with Ian that says, you could make that out of graphene. Also, correction from Friday, Christ was crucified on Friday and died on Friday. Oh, same thing. Is that true?

That's correct. Yes, yeah. Good Friday. Oh, wow. Good Friday. You can make a lot of stuff out of graphene. That's true, yeah. Ian's made of graphene. Yes. It might not be wrong. We are Yes, yeah. Good Friday. Oh, wow. Good Friday. You can make a lot of stuff out of graphene. That's true, yeah. Ian's made of graphene.

Yes. It might not be wrong. We are carbon, actually. All right. Chris Blank Production says, will you be posting your segments from your other channels on your website soon? They're there already. Just at the bottom.

You scroll down and the other segments are actually there. So it's the last guy's chat. So Jesus was crucified and died within the same day? I thought he hung there for days. No, no. He died. So it was common for people who were victims of crucifixion to hang there for days, but Jesus did not. He died the same day.

They were like stabbing him. Well, they were particularly – they stabbed him after he was dead, but they were particularly brutal to him in a way that they generally were not to people who they crucified. So part of the punishment with crucifixion is that you would hang there, and you would just have, like, your face pecked off by by crows and you did yeah it was horrible and but no he he died uh quickly because of how harsh and brutal they were to him and he gave up his spirit and then they went and stabbed him through also one thing they would do to wrap the kid to speed the crucifixion up which they didn't do to jesus but did to the two thieves on the cross next to him is they would break the legs too so that they would just go down and then suffocate because when you're crucified you have to prop yourself up to get oxygen into your lungs and so you will die of asphyxiation once you get weak enough to just

hang there um which is you know that's going beyond the unbelievably excruciating pain you're in and yeah they would just come up and crack the people's legs if they wanted to speed the process up so they couldn't prop themselves up and get air. They didn't get this prophesied they wouldn't break any bones. Exactly. They wouldn't break any bones. But they did pierce him through his heart and yeah, water and blood came out. All right.

Let's see. Zouavbro says, Tim, I'm a cop. Things have gone crazy and the environment we work in is very hostile towards us. The George Floyd trial will only cause more problems for us all. I don't like that. Support for us all. Yeah, man. I don't like that. Yeah. Support policing in general.

We need it. But of course, you know, it's a big conversation. All right. All the Gaming Channel says, hey man, say man,

stop hating on Bible Man. That's my guy. It took me this long to say this because I'm never able to catch the stream. Stop hating on Bible Man. Was that a show? Do you know what Bible Man is? It's a cartoon bible man is cartoon oh my goodness i never saw it but i've seen little bits and pieces this was like wait was bible man was this live action or was this animated this is animated

right so this is the 90s it was a 3d thing yes i'm for that i never saw any of it but i i definitely all right secantia says okay here's 50 from Allie now read it how about LEO YouTubers law enforcement officer YouTubers like Donut Operator Officer 401

Angry Cops or Mike the Cop an experienced POV for LEO and some good input on cops among all this LEO tension and misconception

is an excellent idea I'm familiar with Donut Operator I'm not familiar with the others but I'd love what's up how about Brandon Tatum I know yeah for sure but I think Donut Operator would be'm not familiar with the others, but I'd love... How about Brandon Tatum? What's up? How about Brandon Tatum? I know, yeah, for sure.

But I think Donut Operator would be cool, too. I've seen his videos. Yeah, I've seen some of their stuff. I think Mike the Cop isn't a cop anymore, though, right? But he's still a law enforcement YouTuber? Yeah. Aren't they all? I think so. Are they all retired? Yeah. You can imagine. I mean, who would want to do that job anymore? I just like Donut Operator. It's a great name. That is a great name. That is a fantastic name.

Very self-aware name. Yep. Having fun with it. Troy Dunham says, Hey, Seamus, love your channel. What is a fantastic name. Very self-aware name. Yep. Having fun with it. Troy Dunham says, Hey Seamus, love your channel. What is your take on the media blackout of the April 2nd insurrection on the Capitol? Oh, I'm not familiar. The media was so blacked out that I didn't even get a word on it. But God bless you. I'm glad you support my work and appreciate it. That was the Farrakhan guy.

Yeah, that was the Farrakhan guy. Also a supporter of Louis Farrakhan. That's weird. Why would the media talk about that? They dropped that one. Insurrection? Isn't that a threat to our democracyrakhan. That's weird. Why would the media talk about that? Insurrection. Isn't that a threat to our democracy? Weird. This is very dangerous to our democracy. Yeah.

All right. Crimson 7 says, you guys are awesome. Thanks for helping me get to know the lies and truths spread by media. If the other people like me want to talk political and culture, I have a Twitch at Crimson27 where I like to talk about ideas normally on around 11 p.m. Central Time. Hey, there you go. Aces Maven says, glad to see Seamus on the show again. Thank you. I really enjoy Freedom Tunes. Maybe you can look into Kayvon Comedy as a possible future guest.

We'll check it out. Find someone to replace Seamus. Are you just done with me? Through with me? Same breath? He's like, no, Seamus is great. But let me tell you about this other guy. Hey, Fat Freddy's Cat says,

Tim, check out the opening of the new skate park in Des Moines, Iowa. Dew Tour will be there. It would be a cool thing if you were there. And I work too much, so that won't happen. That's cool, though. Holograms. Holograms. Astral projection.

Simple holograms. All right. Jerk Emperor says, holograms holograms astral projection simple holograms all right jerk emperor says i don't know how much more negatively i can handle uh negatively i can handle i'm horrible because i'm male oppressed because i'm black and now i just outright suck because i'm a trevor i didn't pick that name guys sounds like timcast.com is anti-trevor i'm sorry somebody super chatted saying trevor sucks it was just like as a general. And so we started joking like Trevor's the worst. Dude, I like Trevor.

Hold on. I like Trevor. You know I do too. Trevor's great. Trevor's awesome. Yeah. Who said Trevor was bad? They're bad.

Why would you do? This is Trevor cast IRL. Trevor about it. Males and people that identify as black. Those people are awesome. People are awesome. Especially Trevor's. Agreed.

All right. All right. Jack Daw says, I would like to file a complaint over our pillow the quality was too high i bought i bought the one-off teespring as a gag for a friend come to find out it's decent what the hell i thought i was buying burlap and peanuts and then here's the thing that what keeps you up isn't the pillow it's the emptiness in your stomach under communism so the teespring version was just the joke graphic and then i decided to make the burlap sack with packing peanuts which we're gonna have to figure that one out how to get it out uh the idea was to have to The Teespring version was just a joke graphic, and then I decided to make the burlap sack with packing peanuts,

which we're going to have to figure that one out, how to get it out. The idea was to do something with Ryan Long where we would make this commercial. But I think, I don't know if the good pillow from David Hogg is actually going to happen. I don't think it is. And we need it to because the burlap is on standby. We do have them. Have you seen our pillow? I saw one.

It was actually in the room that I am crashing in. Oh, yeah. It's got the... It's right there. I was very offended. I got rid of it. I was like, I can't sleep on this pillow. It's got the fist holding the pillow.

Yes. Let's see. Zachariah Kitzman says, cop here. Most policies are open-ended to leave liability on the officer and not the department. I.e., if a school shooting happens, the department can't mandate I go in because if I'm injured, it's on them. Oh, wow. And then the cop gets sued for not going in. That's a mess, yeah.

Isn't that amazing? All right, let's see where we're at. Ryan M. Prower says, just got out of the military, but a week before I did, we went through that extremism training. I don't have enough room to summarize it here, but it was unnerving how the brief went

and what the message was. I just wanted to let... And it cuts off right there. They found him. They found him. They were like, stop typing that. You're coming back.

Can't they make you re-enlist? What? I don't know. Like if you're in for four years and you leave, they can reactivate you and force you to come back. Maybe.

I don't know how that works. Pretty sure that's true. I think I've heard of that. Yeah, I'm pretty sure. I mean, they can draft people. They haven't done it in a long time, but it wouldn't completely shock me.. Pretty sure that's true. I think I've heard of that. Yeah, I'm pretty sure. I mean, they can draft people. They haven't done it in a long time, but it wouldn't completely shock me. They could pull people back in. I think it depends on your skill set.

Nicholas Montiel says, last week a super chat said John the Baptist wrote the book of Revelation. It was written by the Apostle John when he was in exile on Patmos. Love you all. Stoicism episode. Yes. Ryan Holiday. Yes. Do you know who wroteoicism episode. Yes. Ryan Holiday. Yes. Do it. Do you know who wrote Revelation? John

was not the Baptist. It was a different John. John of Atmos. Is that what his name was? Patmos. Patmos. Yeah. No, no, no. It's Apostle John when he was in exile in Patmos. Oh, yeah, that's right. And that's not the Baptist? No, it's a different one. Okay. Seamus, do you think that the vaccine passport is the mark of the beast? Like Marjorie Taylor Greene? Here's the

thing. The mark of the beast like marjorie taylor green here's the thing um the mark of the beast like low church protestants as a group not always i love them sub of the base super good people i love them but often we'll just kind of call anything the mark of the beast so basically everything that comes out um the babylon b also had a very funny article is like the vaccine passport can now be like uh like they're now offering the vaccine passport like on your hand or forehead it is funny um i don't know i mean people there are so many things that people have said are the mark of the beast i just tend to say no what do you think is the mark of the beast super chat believe it or not i don don't think it's the end of times.

I think that's a typical view people take. Everyone sort of thinks their generation is the last one. I don't think so. And also, like Scripture says, no one knows the day nor the hour. And it's very well possible that this is the end of the West as we know it or the end of America. But it's not the end times. There hasn't been worldwide apostasy there's been quite a lot of apostasy in the west but in in africa and even in china the church is growing yeah kiwi 2113 says love it when ian brings up dune it is my ultimate

favorite series it's an interesting look behind the curtain of government in space it was so good i read it when i worked at ground zero i would do 6 p.m. to 6 a.m. shifts Thursday, Friday, Saturday, Sunday, and had a lot of time on my hands doing security. Man, that book kept my attention. Eve Welcome says, Ian, you're adorable. If I wasn't happily married, dot, dot, dot, wink. Eve. Well, Eve, you shouldn't really be talking about people that way.

If you are happily married, please don't. She says, fellow Dune nerds unite or if you're on even if you're unhappily married you should talk about people like that you should show your husband she says bless the maker and his water by lol kaifa what does that mean i think that's from dude i don't know i read it yeah i don't know i read it by the way i was not insinuating that she's not happily married just please don't even if you're unhappily don't say emotionally unfaithful things talbot link says y'all need to read Machiavelli's Art of War. Very info-dense, two-part conversation that discusses a great many structures and behaviors

can work as a short play. It'll blow Ian's mind. Machiavelli. I didn't know Machiavelli did an Art of War. I saw you have Art of War on your desk downstairs. Yeah, so do you. Great. I think that might be my little Art of War.

Someone gave it to me. No, I had two. I think someone gave me my... I think Tiffany gave it to me. It's Tim's favorite book. He's always plugging it. He's always telling me, read Art of War. I still haven't read it.

Have you read it through it yet? No. Have you ever heard that story about that Chinese general who was completely outnumbered and had very little resources? So he opened the gates to his fortress,

climbed on top of the wall and started playing a lute or something. Chokulian, yeah. Yeah. And then when the enemy's army shut up, they were like, it's a trap!

Retreat! He's one of my heroes. He was Lu Bei's... He's known... He invented the... Risky, man, they were like, it's a trap. Retreat. He's one of my heroes. He was Lou Bayes. He's known. He invented the crossbow, the repeating crossbow. That's what he was going to do. It's risky, but a lot of people would not do that. It's like Zhu Jilian.

They thought it was a trap, so they were on that. When YouTube comes to demonetize me, that's what I'm doing. He's one of my idols, historical idols, that guy. He's known as a genius, genius strategist and philosopher and artist. That is brilliant. He was a farmer that retired from public life and did not want to join, and they sought him out and had to go visit him. They called him the sleeping dragon.

The people were like, you've got to find this guy. And he went, and he kept appealing to him, like, please join me. And then he realized, I have no choice. I'm being called to service. That story is great. You'll love that choice. I'm being called to service. That story's great. You'll love that guy. God.

They thought it was a trap. Yeah, a genius. Killdog says, hey, Tim, Ian is right. The entire Seven Book Dune series is amazing. Truly great storytelling. That's right. I only read the first one. Benjamin says, remember when YouTube had five stars out of likes and dislikes?

And I'm fighting a sneeze right now. Oh, bless you. I'm not going to sneeze. I have some tissues for you, Tim. You can breathe out your mouth really slow. So today I am taking over. I am standing in for Tim, who has to sneeze right now. I tried.

Normally I can fight it, but the sneeze got me. So here's the thing. I learned this recently. I thought that everybody sneezed more easily when they were staring at light. I know, like, staring into a light can induce sneezes for me. But apparently that's not true for everybody. Typically, it's for people with light eyes. Wow.

Yeah. Okay. So, Tim, does, like, staring into the light help you sneeze or make you have to sneeze? Okay. I have a theory about that. It's called a shoe syndrome. So when you have, like, bacteria or fungus in your wind canal and you stare into light, the light kills it and then your body expels it i don't think that's true yeah that's my theory that sounds more

opinion that sounds like a new york opinion piece oh yeah opinion by the way all right i can't read cyrillic so i'll just read what they said e says dune is awesome sci-fi tv series is a bit better than lynch's movie especially second installation children of dune that follows later books it shows that paul the protagonist of the first book is not a hero of the story but a villain wow dude did you guys see this new story from the new york times about the mario this opinion piece that the original mario brothers found in a desk for after 35 years so 35 years ago somebody bought an original mario brothers nes and left it in their drawer and forgot about it for 35 years okay they got busy they sold it for i think like six hundred and sixty thousand dollars oh in the box yeah the best part though

sealed shrink wrap and everything the best part was how the new york times had to explain what the game was and they say according to the instruction booklet it is a game about two brothers mario and luigi who are attempting to rescue Princess Toadstool after Bowser and his turtle army invaded the Mushroom Kingdom, turning the people into bricks. I didn't know that happened. Yeah. And so Mario. That's fake news. That's more NYT misleading nonsense.

Check this out. Mario is literally going around punching bricks, shattering them, and then ripping the things from their innards. So there's mushroom people turned into bricks, and Mario punches them, shattering them to pieces, and then the mushroom remnants come out and he eats it to grow. That's crazy. I didn't realize that that was the plot. Wow, that is trippy. This sounds like opinion.

Most people don't know that Mario punches bricks. Yeah, his little hand is up there. His hand is up. I should clarify, it's Super Mario Brothers. Mario Brothers was where Mario and Luigi were on one screen, and the things keep coming out of the sides. That's a fun game. That's in Mario 3.

It's a arcade. Oh, I love that game. Yeah, the arcade version. Super Mario Brothers. Did you guys ever play Donkey Kong 3? Oh, boy, I hope you bring Donkey Kong up. Where you jump up with a spray gun, and you're spraying Donkey Kong's butt, and he's climbing up towards beehivesives and he's knocking bees down at you.

I don't know. It's so funny. I think I might. I mostly remember the original Donkey Kong, dude. That game was awesome. You're jumping over barrels. Donkey Kong Jr. was amazing, too. Yeah.

Really good. I used to dream about that game. Oh, my goodness. Yeah, like how can I make that jump to that other rope? I would dream about it. Yeah, I remember back in the day. So we had a Sega Genesis. Every time you died, you had to completely restart.

I remember as a kid having dreams where I finally got to the next level. And I'd be like, what happens there? So we got a couple different Super Chats from people. So I'll just read one of them about enlistment. Carl Reese says, my first Super Chat. When you enlist, you have an eight-year commitment to the government. You sign up for four. You have four years active and four years inactive ready reserves.

That makes sense. Oh, eight years. I can't remember who I asked, but I was like, I think it's on the show, would you recommend enlisting or going to college and getting a degree? And they're like, get your degree first. And going in as like an officer. Wait, they want you to get your – so can't you only take advantage of the GI Bill? Does the GI Bill pay off your loans after you have them or no idea i don't know but i guess the difference is being enlisted or being a commissioned officer better to go in as an

officer interesting daniel bundrick says the ironic thing about the knee being on floyd's shoulder blade is that it would suppress breathing more than it were if it were on his neck since no pressure is on the lungs especially in the case of fentanyl overdose, where respiratory suppression is common. Interesting. Yeah, very, very interesting. Bitcoin Hunter says, Great show.

Freedom Tunes is awesome. Oh, thank you. Agree with that. Thank you. And that's not... I'm beating that horse. Everyone's just saying Dune over and over again. I was going to say this earlier.

It's hilarious what people will seize on from a show. You never know. You discuss so many topics, but you never know what's going to stick. Dune is underrated in our society. I think that's why. Dune is awful. Super chat me and tell me why I'm wrong.

Yeah, I knew it. I knew it. I knew you were going to do this. Yes. Tim, Tim. I'm kidding. I'm kidding. I don't know.

Paul Atreides. And Duke Harkonnen. Zazuba says, oligopoly is the word you're looking for to describe big tech and social media. I definitely like the idea of making Twitter a common carrier. Yeah.

How do you do that if it's a public, a private company? I think instead of Twitter, Verizon's a private company. Here's the thing. I think instead of Twitter, everyone in the country should just get one big group text. And when you have your opinion you'll just like send your

opinion out to the group text and everyone else gets it it would just be going exactly like if so you find something really cool you just like retweet it you know what i mean or you like resend it and that's i think twitter should be should be everyone should be banned from twitter and trump should be brought back trump is the only one allowed on twitter that's hilarious he would love it it's just called trumper and like there's no react ability because no one has an account but he's still just tweeting all the time no you can only everyone loved this i do no i think it'd be even funnier if you couldn't even do that so he has no feedback on the tweets but he's just still constantly putting them out there he's doing that with his emails so like he just sends it he sends like 150 character emails out every time he would have sent a tweet out.

He's trained. No, now he sends paragraphs. You see what he sent out the other day? No, I was kidding. You see what he sent out the other day where he's like, you know, happy Easter to everybody, even the crazy radical left that's trying to destroy the country or whatever? Oh, my gosh. Do you think he does voice to text?

Dude. I don't know. I'll punch it in. I think he does voice to text. I feel like he does a lot He's holding his phone up And he's going Happy Easter

To all the crazy To all To all of the crazy Just like Tim does To all of the Dude is that why Who's he talking to The way he does

Because he kind of talks Like someone who's doing Text to speech Like the way he enunciates The reason for this thing is Like it is kind of How you talk when you're trying to make sure

the smartphone gets you right. Or talking to a secretary. You're sitting there like, what's going on? Okay. He has the perfect cadence for text-to-speech or speech-to-text. Holy cow, I just noticed that.

Boot-er-pack. Boost-er-pack. Boost-er-pack. Says, Tim, it's 1971. You're the proud owner of the first ever Federal Reserve note you borrowed at 2% interest. But if you are the sole owner of the first ever Federal Reserve note you borrowed at 2% interest. But if you are the sole owner of the note, how do you pay back the 2% interest?

Well, borrow more, of course. That's the way the system works. Welcome to the Ponzi scheme. Yeah, well, as long as they have the guns. You guys are too cynical. Federal Reserve is great. Our monetary policy is perfect. Uh-huh.

Oh, that's true. Stop it now, boys. So Frito says, are you going to make TimCast.com an app? Yes. What? So the first thing is the to make Timcast.com an app? Yes! What? So the first thing is the new and improved website. People are never happy.

And then we're going to make an app where you should be able to play things with the phone off. Like you can turn it on, press play, and put it in your pocket. I love it.

Yeah, it's not, I don't think you can do it with the website unless you have like a browser or something. I don't know if we can do it through a website. But you should be able

to do it with the app once we get the app going. That's exciting. You know, look, the website or something i don't know if we can do it through a website but you should be able to do it with the app once we get the app going and you know look the website was was i don't want to say it was delayed a little bit we were optimistic but we decided to be less optimistic in terms of launch because we have to make sure all the members pour over properly and then nobody gets an issue with login assume that when something's getting developed it's going to take three times longer three to to four times longer than you expect. I know that's a little extreme, but with modern tech, if you're up

against these big guys, three to four times longer. Is this true? Someone get a calculator. Howdy Hay says when you divide 2020 by 666... I'm not doing this. I don't care what it is. Is it going to be 3 something? You get 30330.

Oh, bro. 30330. Oh, no. Is that true? Yes, you do. I just did it. I just did it. That proves it.

30330. What does that mean? Go to 30330. That's Joe Biden's text number. Oh, inductive. When you divide 20. I'm sorry. Comment or I'm sorry I wrote you off.

30330. 3666 oh man all right let's do a couple more 2020 garhant says the new dune movie is woke so get ready for the last jedi all over again i can see paul saying the sandworm suffered oppression and we are on the sandworms lands oh i hope he's joking are you joking it doesn't come out till october oh yeah steven clyde says seamus what when are you going to do another collaboration with eric july that's a good question i love working with eric every time i need a voice i hit him up so he's he's really busy so sometimes it's hard to get a hold of him but he's usually pretty cool about doing things uh when we're able to sync up. Yeah, I would love to just – because the thing is, like, he and I, when we collaborate, it's never like this planned thing where we're like, we need to collab on something. It's usually I'm just like, I have a cartoon, which I would like a voice for.

Eric, can you do this voice? Because he always does a fantastic job. I mean, he hits it out of the park. So, yeah, Eric, he's really funny. He's really funny. His delivery is fantastic every time. The racism explained video, I remember I wrote that script wrote that script and i was like happy with the script but then i was looking back and i was like ah maybe it's not that great but when i got his audio for it i was like this is

so funny like his delivery just makes it every time i've ever had him do a voice he's just crushed it so yeah i want to use him as often as possible but he's just he's too good for me now. No, I'm kidding. I don't even want I don't even want fake beef. I love I love Eric. He's doing really well and good for him. He should be. Yeah. No, we will do something against you.

And I'll hit him up right now. Oh, Eric, let's collab. This is a real time inspiration. All right. Let's just do we'll do one more. Alexander Scrapechi says my department. We were trained to put the leg knee Across one shoulder blade On a downward angle

So not to damage the spine at the neck Very interesting That makes a lot of sense Well ladies and gentlemen smash that like button If you haven't already 15,000 likes or I delete my channel You said 15 Oh we're good we're at 16,000

Seamus Coghlan who supports the Green New been spurred. 15, no, 15. Oh, we're good. We're at 16,000, so. Seamus Coghlan, who supports the Green New Deal, and said, give 15,000 likes or I will delete my channel. 16,000 likes! We did it, baby! Freedom Tunes is staying on the internet. That's right. Thank you all. Thank you, Seamus.

Thank you guys so much. But wait, there's more. There's going to be an exclusive Members Only segment coming up in just about an hour or so over at Timcast.com. So go to Timcast.com, become a member, and learn about all the spicy hot takes from Seamus that he can't see on YouTube. That I can't see on YouTube. I'm too scared. I'm going to grill him about religion.

God, Jesus, the Jesuits. Oh, man. I'm not going there. I don't want to know it all. We actually did a really long segment with Seamus before. Yeah, we already did that. Remember? So listen, if you go.

You can see it's like an hour long. We did like an hour, didn't we? Yeah, we did. It was a very interesting conversation. If I do say so myself, I enjoyed it. Yeah, it was fantastic. But we'll have something else coming up, and that'll be for members at TimCast.com. So sign up to help out.

And make sure you smash the Like button. Subscribe to this channel. We are so close to 1 million subscribers. And with your support, sharing this and being like, yo, subscribe. We will break 1 million subscribers and with your support sharing this and being like yo subscribe we will break 1 million subscribers and uh so do it this show is live Wednesday Friday at 8 p.m so come back the next time if you're listening on iTunes or Spotify give us that good review and you can follow me on all social media platforms at Timcast my other channels are youtube.com slash Timcast and youtube.com slash Timcast news and Seamus I think you have a youtube channel I do have a youtube channel youtube.com slash freedom tunes go find freedom tunes I love it I love making the cartoons

there they're a lot of fun I also have a second channel that I run with the foundation for economic education called common sense soapbox with Seamus Coghlan we usually get into economic issues but those are just short little educational cartoons a lot of fun very informative so check those places out um are we gonna do youtube.com slash freedom tunes are we gonna do what we're gonna do that that bit from earlier we were talking about? Oh, we're 100%. Tim and I are going to make a Freedom Tunes together. Tim and I are going to make a Freedom Tunes together.

And also, guess what, ladies and gentlemen? Tim just told me with his eyes that from now on, I am on every episode because I got us to 16K likes. I'm so proud of all of you as viewers. He's doing the clap back. We're going to do SeamusCast IRL is the new name of the show. You think you're sneaking on the show? Because we got the extra chair.

You can have it. Bro, let's talk about it. Love is real. Yeah. Love is kind. We got an extra chair. Luke abandoned us. Luke.

One day he was just like, I'm going to go. I'll be right back. He went to go to the bathroom and then you're like, where did I go? He said he had to go run and get a pack of cigarettes. And then we never saw him. He just left.

Left you for a pack of smokes. All crushing. He's gone. I'm looking forward to Luke. Luke's return. I don't think that's going to happen. He's gone. You better come back here, Luke.

That's right. He's like, I'm just going to go to the store real quick with all of my stuff. I'm going to leave tomorrow, I think. All my things, yeah. Hey, guys. He's got Luke stuff to do. I wanted just to shout out my website, iancrossland.net. I'm just kidding.

I want to thank you guys for being a part of this movement, this show, and this opportunity. We have a million, million subscribers, millions of people are involved with this. We're going to get a bunch of gold plaques for everybody. That's so amazing. What an opportunity to help people and spread information that can help people. So thank you guys for being a part of it, and tim for having me and lydia we're gonna get we're gonna get rings made yes we can punch each other and tattoo we should get like friendship bracelets let's get friendship right everybody i'm gonna order if they allow me a gold plaque for everybody

who who helps work on the show love it uh that's a lot you've heard it i got us i got us 16 000 likes i get a gold plaque you You heard it from Tim right now. I'm going to make one out of styrofoam with a knife and just some cheap paint to give it to Seamus. Spray paint it gold. Check out YouTube.com slash Freedom Tunes right now. Everybody go there. Hit the like button. Let's get to 17,000 likes on my videos.

If every single one of my videos doesn't get to 17,000 likes, I am never doing Timcast again as a matter of opinion. And he's back to it. As a matter of opinion, I will never do Timcast again. I love it. I love it too.

And then, yeah, there's me in the corner. I am similarly excited about reaching a million. I think I've been the most excited because I've been worrying about this since Christmas.

I was like, this is all I want for Christmas is a million subscribers. We didn't hit that goal. It's coming up soon. Easter time. Whatever the next holiday is. Anyway, I'm Sour Patch Lids on Twitter and Mines and Real Sour Patch Lids on Gab and Instagram. People are saying Luke is in the chat. Luke is in the chat. We need to give him

a special flair. He's been lurking. He's watching the show and he's like, hey, go to wearechange.org is it? Yeah, but he abandoned his responsibility so he's in the show and he's like, hey, hey. Go to wearechange.org, is it? Yeah, but he abandoned his responsibility, so he's going to get a show. Okay, Luke. We can't get him out. He's a pariah. Thebestpoliticaltshirts.com, is that?

Yeah, I think that's it. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Well, all right, ladies and gentlemen, we're going to have a bonus segment up in about an hour at timcast.com. So go there. Check it out. We will see you all then. Bye, guys.