Timcast IRL - Timcast IRL #334 - FBI May Have Created Right Wing Plot Against Whitmer Says Buzzfeed w/Pedro Gonzalez

Episode Date: July 21, 2021

Tim, Ian, and Lydia join Pedro Gonzalez, associate editor at Chronicles: A Magazine of American Culture, podcaster, and commentator, to discuss how the FBI apparently created the scheme to kidnap Gretchen Whitmer out of whole cloth and proceeded to use it to attempt to smear the right wing, how police ruined the life of a soldier who was attempting to play the role of a good Samaritan in his own neighborhood, capitol police who are expanding their area of jurisdiction across the US and how they are becoming Joe Biden's secret police, the White Houses' plan to shut down dissident using Section 230, and whether or not critical race theory is in conflict with the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Infamous plot to kidnap Gretchen Whitmer. New information has come out. And you know what? I'm not even gonna give you my thoughts. I'm gonna give you the thoughts of BuzzFeed News, who analyze and report on this saying that this latest information that's come up, come out about this supposed right wing plot raises questions as to whether or not there would have even been a conspiracy were it not for the FBI, as they had had a hand in every aspect of it, including its inception. Now, BuzzFeed gets extremely close to saying

basically the FBI started it, organized the people, set up the meetings and essentially told people what to do. And now many of these defendants are arguing that they were set up. Some are even arguing entrapment. Now, how many people are surprised by this? How many people commented on my video when I report on this saying, Tim, I bet you it's the FBI and I was too, I don't think I entertained it enough. I'm not big on, I guess, as much as people try to claim that I predict the future all the time, I only see so far. So I had a bunch of people commenting, they're like, this reeks of an FBI sting of a setup. And this is what the FBI is known for. I mean,

they do it so often. Some people have argued that basically what they do is they find some mentally unwell people, goad them on, set them up, and then say, oh, look what we found. And then some person ends up in prison and they can claim that they did something important. And it was, I guess, effective politically for Democrats to say, oh, no, look at these right wing extremists, which helped fuel this fire of the right and the white supremacists and the militias being the most dangerous threat in this country. So why now? Why is the story coming out? Why is anyone in the mainstream media entertaining this? I guess we'll have to dig into it and start talking about what's really going on. We also got some other stories, too.

It turns out, you know, I did a segment at 4 p.m. over on my main channel, TimCast, or I should say my solo channel, TimCast. And talking about this Texas Democrat super spreader event where these Democrats from Texas go to D.C. and a bunch of people get COVID. We got new reporting out that several staffers, several aides, a ton of people who were at this Democrat Texas thing are getting COVID, even fully vaccinated people. So I got to say, it's a super spreader event. It was irresponsible. And let's call it that double standard. So we'll get into that.

We'll talk about a bunch of other stuff. We got some AOCs in the news because she's selling merchandise and doesn't know what capitalism is. So we can talk about what bunch of other stuff. We've got some AOCs in the news because she's selling merchandise and doesn't know what capitalism is, so we can talk about what capitalism is. And joining us today is Pedro Gonzalez, Associate Editor of Chronicles, a magazine in American culture, I believe. Do you want to just quickly introduce yourself? Yeah, I'm happy to be here. Yeah, it's been surreal the last few, I guess like the last six months I've been doing a bunch of these different shows. And I appreciate you bringing me on.

I saw that you threw up a tweet of mine recently. I think it was critical of porn or transgenderism. I don't know. But when I saw that you put that on your show, I thought it's a matter of time before I get on. Oh, yeah. What is Chronicles Magazine? Oh, yeah. What is Chronicles magazine? Oh, yeah. So it was founded in 1977. And it has always been this kind of outside dissident voice, not just in the in things that are political,

but also literary. And for years, it has been kind of like the lone voice in the wilderness of populism. It was for a time the intellectual flagship of the Buchanan movement. It explained and justified Buchananism. Many of the same arguments in Chronicles that were developed there actually ended up being completely seamless with the Trump movement. Rush Limbaugh read an article by a guy named Sam Francis who wrote an article for Chronicles in, I think, the early 90s. And Limbaugh read it and i think in 2015 to explain

the trump phenomenon so uh it's a small magazine but it punches way above its weight and they have been basically right for the last 30 or 40 years and it seems like the rest of the country is kind of just catching up right on so we'll get into all that stuff thanks for hanging out we got ian chilling what's up everybody ian cross over here just sipping on some coffee with a little collagen, and maybe we'll get into that in a little bit. Yeah, it's a sponsor. Really delicious. And I am also here in the corner. Ian was trying to get ahead of us by asking Peter all these cool questions.

As I do. We'll get into all of that stuff tonight. And don't forget, go to TimCast.com, become a member, and you'll get access to the exclusive members-only podcast segment. Check us out just right here on the left. Doesn't the new website look so amazing? We've been getting a bunch of messages from people who are super excited. Obviously, there are some bugs we're working out. So for that, I apologize, but we just launched it.

It went up on Saturday, so we could work out some of the bugs for the weekend, and we're still improving and making it better. We've got new shows coming. We've got a bonus segment coming up tonight, which usually goes up around 11 or so p.m. So sign up, and don't forget to like this video right now on YouTube. Click that subscribe button and the notification bell, which apparently does nothing. But hey, do it anyway. And then share the show with your friends.

If you think what we talk about is important, take that URL, paste it wherever you can. Let's talk about this first story. We got this from The Week. Defendants in alleged Whitmer kidnapping plot are arguing FBI informants engineered plan. Now, I'll just say this. I mean, that's that's that's a heavy piece of what we're going to talk about. It's one thing to make that accusation. It's another thing when BuzzFeed News of all outlets comes out and says there are questions as to whether or not there would have even been a conspiracy were it not for the FBI. And then there's questions of law.

Do you think that federal prosecutors are going to drop this case simply because it's now being exposed by the media? Maybe not, but it's possible. I just really doubt it. There's not going to be political willpower, and especially when Democrats want to use this to their advantage. But let me show you this. So this is the story from The Week, right? And they're basically pointing out the section of the BuzzFeed article about the defendant saying they're accusing the FBI of effectively orchestrating this. BuzzFeed News says, an examination of the case by BuzzFeed News also reveals some of those informants, of which there were 12, acting under the direction of the FBI played a far larger role than has previously been reported. Working in secret, they did more than just

passively observe and report on the actions of the suspects. Instead, they had a hand in nearly every aspect of the alleged plot, starting with its inception. The extent of their involvement raises questions as to whether there would have even been a conspiracy without them. I'll do you one better, BuzzFeed. I can appreciate that they put that in there. That is an opinion, however. But I can give my opinion. When you go on to mention that a longtime government informant helped organize a series of meetings around the country where many of the alleged plotters first met one another, yeah, there wouldn't be without the FBI. They set the meetings. So meetings so okay look the fbi is going to

argue hey hey hey we gave them the space and we we we made those statements but they made those choices i don't know what do you guys what do you guys what do you guys think it's disgusting i think it's only it's it's incitement unless the fbi is doing it apparently it's only illegal unless the president does it like come on if trump trump didn't say anything anywhere near as crazy as these people were saying. If the FBI goes to somebody that's mentally unstable and puts a gun in their hand and says encourages them or points them in the direction of someone that they want. Like, that's how can you blame that? I guess you got to blame the gunman. But obviously you blame Charles Manson when the other guy went out and stabbed the people.

They were giving these guys military training. What? What do you think about it, Pedro? This is what the FBI does. I mean, this is what the feds do. They create these plots. They provide the training, the logistical coordination, and then they basically entrap their victims. And so the question is, why do they do that, right?

I think there are different answers to that. I think, one, it's politically useful because Trump is bad. Trump was a fascist, of course. I'm just being sarcastic. But I think so it's politically useful from that angle, at least for the Democratic Party. But on the other hand, I mean, this is good business for the FBI, right? This is job security. If you have these kinds of threats, if you have these kinds of coordinated, very dangerous, highly motivated actors, then you

need the FBI. You don't just need the FBI. The FBI needs a bigger budget. It needs to expand its operations into different aspects of not just public life, but also private life. It needs to know more about what Americans are doing so that it can make sure that these things don't happen. And the fact that the FBI is, you know, the driving cause of these things happening, well, that's just a little footnote that we don't need to really get into. I don't think there's a solution to,

I don't think there's an easy solution to corruption. I say easy solution. You know, I'm thinking about like, what if we didn't have government FBI, right? What if we had private investigatory agencies and you hired them instead of having to go and make a petition and cross your fingers, hope they actually look into the case. Maybe you go and hire a company. Well, then any company could be incentivized to do criminal activities for the sake of making money, right? So let's say you're a window repair company and you're a private company. You make money when windows get broken. Certainly excited when you hear Antifa's rioting.

So any any any individual who is sufficiently corrupt or who has monopolistic power could be susceptible to saying, OK, how can we encourage more riots and support some more of this activism, encourage this stuff? Because inadvertently it allows us to sell more windows. Actually, Ryan Long had that comedy segment. Did you see that one where it's like Antifa window repair? And he's like, we're both simultaneously Antifa and the window repair company. But anyway, I digress. When you have the FBI and they have a monopoly on this and they want to make money and increase their budgets, there's one way to do it. You need a large and powerful big bang. Well, here you go.

They had a dozen informants. So it's an interesting point. What is entrapment? This probably is not entrapment. Entrapment would be when you coerce someone by force or threats. So if a cop went to you and said, if you don't do this, I'll hit you. That's entrapment. If they said, hey, wouldn't it be really awesome if you did this? You should totally do it. That's not entrapment. You still chose to do it. The problem is there's a fine line, right? I mean, you actually have the FBI now creating the means, providing the resources. These things can't happen without them. Who's going to give military training to a bunch of random meme you know ish posters on the internet that's right no it gets

into this question like you said these blurred lines right where it's kind of like choice architecture you're laying out all of the instruments and arguments and logistics for doing this and you're also exploiting people who are desperate and angry and maybe mentally unstable and your defense is well i just put the gun on the table i don't have any responsibility for what that person did afterwards after i told them to use the gun and how to use it and who they should use it on that's not my fault ian made a good point man it's incitement it is it seems like incitement i mean they're they're they're encouraging them or getting them revved up or connecting them to commit a crime, it seemed like.

Let me pull up this part of the BuzzFeed article. They say this. They say Dan steered. Let me move back a little bit. Let me move back so I can get to that point in the context. They say, as agents Impola and Chambers listen in, Dan pressed him about the meeting in Ohio. Dublin, Fox said, was about changing the paradigm the media treated patriots unfairly. After he and hundreds of other patriots occupied the statehouse in Lansing, they effing

called us domestic terrorists. That's a quote. Quote, we want to take that stigma off and let them know who we are because we are not effing racists. We are not white nationalists, said Fox. We just want our effing constitution upheld and we want all these lawless effing tyrants out of effing power. It's that simple. Dan steered the conversation away from rhetoric to specific plans, asking Fox what the mission was like. What are we looking to go forward with? Laughing, Fox said his dream was to have, quote, have the governor hogtied down on a table for public display the way the DEA agents spread seized guns and drugs across the table, like trophies after a big bust. Quote, we take the building and then take effing hostages, Fox told Dan. It's effing wartime. But by his own admission, Fox, despite his new seemingly

grand military title, was a general without soldiers. I can't do nothing with less than 200 men, he complained to Dan. At best, he figured he could muster maybe 15 to 20 men. Stopping violent ideas like this was what Dan said drove him to law enforcement in the first place. But now, with his two FBI agents at his side, he told Fox he would help. They're effectively inciting and encouraging their creating circumstances. It's incitement. Donald Trump can say, we're going to go peacefully march and listen to some politicians or whatever.

That's what he said, right? He had something like, you know, have politicians make arguments. And then as Trump was speaking, the people at the Capitol started pushing the barricades down, fighting with cops, storming their way up to the Capitol

and fighting at the front door. Donald Trump did not do anything near what this is, but they say that there was a tweet now i can't i think it was the daily beast i'm not sure they were like trump's failed attempt to overthrow the government or like someone some news outlet tweeted that like they're just even the media they're just continually escalating what really happened on the sixth like donald trump gave a speech where he in no way said go do this stuff he was like peacefully march and now they've just slowly turned it in to something totally different,

like the Lincoln Project made this video, where it's a mishmash of what Trump was saying to make it seem like he was calling for violence. I tell you, man, it's dark days ahead, huh? Well, there is something related to this. So we can say that the Capitol Police failed, right? On January 6th, they failed to do their job. Some conservatives argue that they facilitated what happened through their failure.

However you want to slice it. Okay. Well, Tucker says the FBI had informants. They were probably orchestrated as well. Yes, that's right. So, but we'll grant that. So these people, either out of negligence or malice, they're part of the reason why January 6th happened. Okay.

So what happens after January 6th? Well, the Capitol Police has a $2 billion budget with which they plan to expand operations outside of the Capitol, first in Florida and California, two of the most populous states, with plans to open field offices across the country. They've also borrowed eight, they're called persistent surveillance systems from the U.S. government. The army is going to train Capitol Police to use these. We first deployed this technology in Iraq and Afghanistan to monitor asymmetric threats. In other words, we use this technology against insurgents. So now Capitol Police, which is supposed to be in the Capitol, is expanding operations across the United States, ostensibly to protect members of Congress.

And they're also going to be deploying technology that we used against insurgents on Americans in order to... What this stuff does is you can create, I think it's called pattern of life. It allows you to monitor people on a very intimate level to figure out where they eat, where they sleep, where they go, what their routines are and things like that. But over large geographical swaths this this is uh this is not like a like a little camera right this is huge surveillance on a mass level this is fine apparently no one really seems to have a problem with it and people are buying the argument that no the capital police needs to do this they need to expand operations to these huge states or actually to to all as many states as they want and they also need to deploy military good equipment

that we use on insurgents against Americans. Mike Sturtevich has been tweeting about this, saying that he often hears someone start trying to ramp up the rhetoric and push it towards some kind of direct physical action, and he always shuts them down. He blocks them or he kicks them out because he's like, we don't want any of that. We know where that's going, and he's right.

I keep telling people, you know, peaceful, persuasive, resourceful. That's how you win a culture war. That's how you maintain your country. And one of the problems, there's two big problems. And one, conservatives, people on the right, the anti-establishment, the anti-woke, dispected liberals. Well, I'm going to exclude the dispected liberals. Mostly the right, as we've traditionally known it, very weak on culture.

Very weak. I mean, you know, people mock these these like the religious conservative movie productions and things like that. The Daily Wire is doing a pretty good job getting into this. The one big advantage I think conservatives have right now are disaffected liberals, many of whom were in music production and movie production and show production. Culture building wins you the youth. And 10 years from now, there's going to be another generation entering politics. And what 10 year olds are being inundated with today is going to severely impact what politics will look like in 10 years. So one thing that we saw, I bring up every so often is that,

you know, we've had some leftists, some younger leftists on the show, and they have no idea what Occupy Wall Street was. They were young teenagers when that was happening, and just had no understanding of what was going on. So now, when I base my disdain for Joe Biden off of a lot of by Wall Street was. They were young teenagers when that was happening and just had no understanding of what was going on. So now when I base my disdain for Joe Biden off of a lot of the Obama era, they're like, I don't know anything about that. Now you look at what's happening with children and the indoctrination at schools. These kids who are in these schools getting indoctrinated 10 years from now are going to vote as far left as humanly possible. If conservatives and people on the right don't fight back with persuasive resourcefulness, with resourcefulness, with persuasion, being peaceful

and building culture, you lose, especially when you see what's going on with the FBI. They are looking for any opportunity to take that frustration, turn it into some kind of some expressed desire for action and then lock you up. And then it gives them even more justification for indoctrinating kids. It's just one after another, one, two, three, punch. Yeah. I think maybe one example of a positive development in the culture is that movie about Richard Jewell, the security guard who was basically screwed by the FBI after he managed to save a ton of people. I think it was at a baseball game. It was some kind of a sporting event where there was a bomb. And basically the feds put it on him.

They argued that the reason he was able to find the bomb and save all these people was because he had, in fact, planted it. And the movie was interesting because Richard Jewell is like your average middle American. He's this guy who doesn't have a college degree. He's just patriotic patriotic kind of naive about his country and i mean that in a good way and here he is being absolutely railroaded by these horrible corrupt feds right and i think that that movie was really interesting

precisely because that you have this patriotic person who's being persecuted by his own by the own by his own government. You do not talk to police. That's it. It's simple. There's a famous Supreme Court justice. I can't remember his name. A long time ago said, do not talk to cops.

And it's funny. There are a lot of conservatives that seem to think they're very naive about what this country is. And it's funny when you see the very heavy back of the blue attitude. It's kind of waning a little bit with the COVID lockdowns and stuff. Many people on the right are starting to realize like I think – you know what, man? We shout out Michael Malice too much. Michael, you can shout out too much. But he often says that there is no law so absurd or disgusting or amoral that a cop would not enforce it. Now, that may be a bit extreme because I certainly think there's many things a cop

wouldn't do, to be honest. However, the Proud Boys versus Antifa was a really good example of this, that they got into a fight because Antifa had been harassing patrons. One guy gets robbed. And then finally, the Proud Boys are like, all right, you want to fight? A lot of people see the Proud Boys run towards Antifa. But Antifa had been basically like at every corner following them. And as much as they keep trying to walk

away, they see Antifa at every corner. Eventually the Proud Boys decide they're going to engage. Well, first of all, that's a mistake. Don't start fights. You can try and go around them. You can try and walk past them. They run at them. A fight breaks out. Okay. Well, if Antifa shows up, they're known to be violent and a fight breaks out. We can argue that sometimes fights happen. I still think it's wrong. But what happened after that? Antifa flees. The Proud Boys decide to give a statement to the cops because we trust the cops. The cops are the good guys. And now guess who went to prison? Proud Boys. Antifa? None of them. Yeah. No, I think you're right. This is a kind of eye-opening moment where basically what we've seen for the last year or so is this kind of a narco tyranny

where you're right there conservatives are right to say that there is this effort to kind of defang the police or at least get them to back off of policing a certain kind of crime and a certain kind of criminal but that doesn't mean that they're actually depolicing they're just focusing more on enforcing things like mask mandates or like you said arresting proud boys and people like that a good example is this guy jonathan pentland there's a drill instructor at a base in the south the the specific state of losing right now but basically this guy got into a confrontation with a suspect who happened to be black this guy was like a repeat offender in the neighborhood what you don't what you didn't hear from from the stories that broke was that this guy had

repeatedly come into this neighborhood and harassed people and specifically had grabbed uh young women made them feel very uncomfortable there's a claim that he's like mentally unstable whatever okay but but here's the part that the story that the news really didn't focus on was that the police had actually known about this guy and they let him out like they knew that he was walking about but they the argument was we didn't want to make him a statistic so when people would report him to us we would kind of slap him on the wrist and let him go and he would go back into this community and harass people so one day uh a woman goes and gets this guy jonathan pentland says he's back you know do something about it and he goes and confronts the, Jonathan Pentland, and says he's back, you know, do something about it.

And he goes and confronts the guy. And I don't know if you saw the video. It goes viral. He says, you're in the wrong neighborhood. He's really confrontational for right reason, because there's things that happened leading up to that. The police absolutely destroyed Jonathan Pentland's life. They crucified him.

Within 48 hours, there were people at his house throwing things through the window. The military completely disavowed him. His own unit framed him as a white extremist, a white supremacist. Like the guy's reputation is ruined in the thing. And he was just like, like, uh, trying to be a middle-aged guy who saw someone harassing women and doing the job that cops wouldn't do because they're, because the cops were more concerned with avoiding the stigma of being called racist and doing their jobs. This is the perfect example of why I have been saying abolish the police.

And it is somewhat tongue-in-cheek, but not completely. The point I'm trying to make is if we are really moving into this era where the police know we can't go after anybody who might be defended by the left because we don't want to deal with it and we'll lose our budgets, but we can arrest anybody on the right all day and night and get praised for it, then what do you think is going to happen? In this instance, the cops, they knew. They knew who this guy was. They don't care about this guy, John Petlin's life, who seemed to be, according to this story, a regular guy who was like, these young women in my neighborhood are being harassed by this guy. I'm going to make it stop. And I watched that video and I'm like, what did the guy really do?

He like got up to him and said, back off, back off, get out of here and pushed him. Shouldn't have shoved him. Pushed him when he was walking towards his wife, which was actually the thing that the police, the sheriff, I don't know, the sheriff chief, whatever, said. That's like the evidence right there for ruining this guy's life is the fact that he sho he shoved him what of course but you see in that video is that the guy starts approaching his wife he's like he's his wife says something to him and the guy starts walking towards him and steps on his property that's when he shoves him and says that's my wife and that's when the cops were like that's that's where he crossed the line when he shoved the guy you said like the cop ruined a guy's life because he pushed somebody. Yes. Because the left claimed he was racist for for shoving a young black man saying you're in the wrong neighborhood.

So it's like social pressure that ruined this. They used social pressure to try to ruin this. Activists. Politics. They do social pressure. Pushing. Because initially, initially he got it was basically the equivalent of like a citation because he slapped the guy's phone out of his hand. Right.

OK. But then pressure is mounting you know there's this outrage in the community about this racist white man who's telling like a young black man he's in the wrong neighborhood and so so the police went back and said oh we have new evidence that shows that you know he shoved him it's like that's not new that was the video that went viral uh and that justifies ultimately the penalty was like it was like a, like a few days in jail and like a $5,000 fine or something. It was really small. But that's nothing compared to the damage to this guy's reputation.

Like, the HOA where he lives disavowed him in a statement saying that, like, you know, racism has no home in this community. That's what they do. Like I said, the HOA, the hoa the police the military the media as far as these organizations these entities that i just named are concerned like this guy is a vile racist who does not belong in polite society his life is ruined this is like they they say often that history doesn't repeat but it rhymes you know that that phrase but this is just such a great example of banishment and how banishment has kind of come back around now. And now we have this social banishment, ostracization. Conservatives need to call the bluff of the left. They need to call the bluff and say, we hereby believe all cops should be abolished. And there's two reasons for

it. You see what they'll do to this guy. You see what happens. Anarcho-tyranny. They will not enforce the laws to protect you, but they will enforce the law against you. And the second reason is y'all are gun owners. Why are you worried about petty crime in your neighborhood and what the police are going to do about it? If the left wants to abolish cops, if cops are then willing to ruin a man's life, not every single cop I know, call their bluff because how fast do you think we saw this in Minneapolis when they were like, we want to abolish the police. And then the city council was like, we hereby vote to abolish the police. No, wait, stop. Don't do it. The city council

members panicked and freaked out. So I'll put it this way. I've had leftists tweet like, Jim Poole only wants to abolish the police because he knows when the police are gone, the leftists will get really angry or he thinks they will. And I'm like, well, that's partly correct. I am 100% confident if the police actually got abolished, you will see every regular American wake up. And that's one of the biggest problems. Frogs boiling in a pot. Conservatives can sit here all day and night and say, if we don't stop the floodwaters from rising, if we don't put up sandbags, we will drown. And people are sitting there just like,

I don't care. It's not flooding in my house. And then within a month, they're on the second floor being like, I don't care. I'm safe here on the second floor. Okay. Call them on their bluff. Say, okay. Look, I'll put it this way. The other side of this is that may be partially true that I definitely think the moment you actually try to abolish the police, regular people will come out screaming, begging you to stop. But the other issue is exactly what we've been talking about. It's only a matter of time before we see more police arrest regular people. We saw with the McCloskeys, people actually go onto their private property, go onto their lawns, the McCloskeys come out. Okay, they shouldn't have been brandishing the

guns the way they were. It was very ill advised in that capacity. But should they have been arrested, had their guns seized from them and the cops will do it with no questions asked. Then you have in Wisconsin, this group of black lives matter activists who had previously set fire to a home on twice in one day, they started a house on fire. I guess they came put the fire out in the neck. Then, then after they leave, they went and set fire to it again. Then you get this guy sitting in his house and he sees this group. He's got a shotgun and he brandishes it up at that through his like at his window. His window is closed. The police show up, knock on his door and arrest him.

And I'm like, so here you go. Let it let it be known. OK, if you think you will be spared by the police, you're insane. You are insane. We have seen on numerous occasions with that's three examples right now that if Black Lives Matter comes to your home. And I said this before this guy got arrested. I said it's only a matter of time before Black Lives Matter will show up to your house and the cops will look around and say it is easier to

arrest the homeowner than to deal with a riot. and they will arrest you who did nothing wrong in your own home now we're seeing examples of this it was never going to be overnight it was going to be slowly and gradually and it's going to get worse and if people just keep sitting back saying the cops are on my side you're wrong 100 wrong it's interesting because antifa or let's call them black blocks these thugs right they think of themselves as these kind of revolutionary revolutionaries, but in many ways, they're basically just state-sanctioned thugs. And in that sense, I think of lumpenproletariat, which was this term that Marx used to describe people without any real sense of class consciousness. They're basically just, the term he uses, social scum uh as opposed to actual

proletariat and they ultimately because they're social scum and they really just want to break things and they can't they're incapable of building anything and they're just a bunch of criminals and degenerates which is true i mean i'm talking about antifa here right okay so ultimately what they end up being is tools of reactionary intrigue. And what he means by that is these are people who think that they're involved in something important, but they're not. They're just being used by the state as kind of like, you know, like I said, state-sanctioned thugs. Or, I mean, on the other hand, what Antifa does, Antifa window repair, this is great for the biggest, most powerful corporations in this country. It's great for Amazon when the small brick and mortar business gets burned to the ground by Antifa.

It's great for Walmart when the small shop gets destroyed and incinerated during riots. This is great. Jeff Bezos, at the same time that these riots were happening last year and people were having their livelihoods eradicated, Jeff Bezos made or increased his, his, uh, his worth by 13 billion in a single day. And the reason for that is partly due to the fact that you could still buy from Amazon, but you couldn't go to the local mom and pop shop. Big box stores were given special exemptions. We saw this in Michigan where like a local, I can't remember what it was.

I think it was like a flower flowers and like plant shop was like shut down. But then the gardening area of Walmart is left open. So they say, well, but Walmart sells food. And a lot of people said, OK, should I sell loaves of bread at my hobby shop so I can stay open? Well, that's the game that was being played, the massive transfer of wealth. But it wasn't just Democrat cities saying we're going to destroy small businesses. At the same time, you had mass unrest, thousands of people marching through the street, shoulder to shoulder. And what did the media say? What did the universities say? What did the

Democrat politicians say? This is not spreading COVID. Your business is shut down because a little old grandma walking in to buy milk could cause the apocalypse. But 2,000 people shoulder to shoulder marching through New York gets a round of applause from the doctors. We see those stupid propaganda photos where the nurse is like standing in front of the car and the woman in the car is saying like, you know, honk for freedom or something. And then all the people on the internet are like, look at these brave nurses fighting for us, stopping these stupid anti-lockdown protesters. Then a video comes out. People marching through New York, thousands, and nurses and doctors walk outside and start

clapping for them. And when questioned, they said, but racism is the real public health crisis. Yeah, it's another. I mean, this is another example of going back to this discussion about the FBI and the Capitol Police using these fabricated threats, these exaggerated threats to justify their budgets and their operations. The CDC declared recently racism is a public health threat, and they tied it to the need for more funding. I love it when the cops all took a knee at these protests.

Cops, FBI, National Guard. And basically pledging fealty to the extremists. And now we're seeing the implementation of what that ideology really means. And Mark Milley, Joint Chiefs of Staff, saying like, you know, getting full woke, but I want to understand this stuff,

he says. And then you still have conservatives. I'm watching, I can't remember what I was watching. I was watching a live stream and people are yelling back to blue and I'm like, man,

pay attention, dude. Those people that you're defending took a knee for Black Lives Matter. All right, support them, guess capital police things concerning me there so they got a two billion dollar just recently uh i think the the funding yeah the funding was in the last year or so uh but the point is is they have a huge war chest who do they uh who do they serve like who do they report to well they're supposed to be serving. Their job is to protect members of Congress, right? But this is kind of like, I don't know, whatever the local police department here is.

And then they say, we're going national. And we're expanding our operations nationwide. And we're also going to be bringing in army equipment. So are they federal? Yeah. It's a federal? No, I'm actually not sure if they're technically. They're federal, yes. I think they are federal. It's a federal. I'm actually not sure if they're technically federal.

I think they are. It's a federal police force that they're expanding. They're a federal police force, but they're supposed to be relegated to the Capitol. This is like the Stasi, man. The Stasi, the SS. Oh, yeah. Well, I mean, you have the Stasi. It's not like it. It's just sound like it could become something like that.

The only issue with the Stasi thing is that you already have the NSA, CIA, the FBI, and about 17 other members to choose from. This could be the inception of a federal-level police force intelligence agency beyond FPS or ICE. That's the concern. We have this quote. This is from Newsweek reporting on a press release from Capitol Police. Throughout the last six months, the U.S. Capitol Police has been working around the clock with our congressional stakeholders to support our officers, enhance security around the Capitol complex, and pivot towards an intelligence-based protective agency.

The department said in a news release on Tuesday this was about two weeks ago. So California, Florida, planning offices around the country. Is this, you know, like you were mentioning earlier, Ian, the Mark Twain quote, history doesn't repeat, it rhymes. We look back at the easiest example of authoritarianism that is overused by millions of people, World War II Germany, the burning of, you know. The Reichstag. Yeah, and then you had the Enabling Act, and then all of a sudden these sweeping laws were enacted. Opponents of the party were being rounded up. You know, look, a lot of people want to believe, say things like, it can't happen here, right?

Oh, it can happen. Even BuzzFeed is now saying that this Whitmer plot may not even have happened were it not for the FBI. And I think that's an actually unfair assessment. I think the fair assessment is it would not have happened were it not for the FBI. We're looking at the Capitol Police in response to 1-6. We get these news outlets tweeting, Donald Trump's failed attempt to overthrow the government. They're just using the most psychotic language. And now we have the law enforcement apparatus being constructed. Am I supposed to sit here and assume this is not going to be like every past authoritarian regime that has used a crisis to create an ideological law enforcement force?

Or do I see them screaming of the insurrection and then expanding Capitol Police nationwide and think to myself, this is a federal police force that is going to be acting like an intelligence-based protective agency? How long until they start going after material support for the insurrectionists? How long until they start going after the incitement of the insurrectionists? Hey, incitement's a crime, right? It's happening now. In Michigan, Whitmer State, you have the Attorney General, I think Dana Nessel is her name. And Republicans supported this, by the way, but there's now an effort to investigate people who are fundraising on what they, on what A.Gg nessola says are false claims about the election being stolen in effect this could criminalize fundraising efforts to secure an independent election audit in in michigan this is a grassroots movement that the attorney general is talking about potentially

they're saying what they're basically trying to argue is that if you fundraise off of it it's fraud that's right so using the pretext of fraud to potentially crack down on legitimate grassroots effort to secure an election. This is in line with the federal level with Jen Psaki saying that they're working with phone – well, she didn't say this, but they're working with Facebook. We got different reports on Politico that the Biden admin and the DNC are working with phone companies to police misinformation. You know, Peter Doocy, I said Steve Doocy accidentally. Peter Doocy. Steve is the guy who's dead, I think. Peter Doocy made a really, really good point when he was getting into the exchange with

Jen Psaki. He said, there is a video of Dr. Fauci from 2020 saying not to wear masks, and it's still on Facebook right now. Should that be removed? And she immediately defended Dr. Fauci. Well, Dr. Fauci has said the science change and we all know. And then he said, aren't you scared that information you would have removed today could turn out to be correct?

Yeah, that's that. That's the principled position. But you see, when people want power, they need to stifle and suppress and control so here we go man nestle by the way days right she's the woman who uh when this woman whose restaurant was being affected by the lockdown started to make a lot of noise about it and fox was contacting her about bringing her on to the onto toke carlson show nestle was the woman who was asking police if they could quote just have her picked up before she can go on fox her emails got leaked to the press and the dating shows that after this

woman i don't remember her name right now was making a bunch of noise about the lockdowns and how it's affecting business after that uh nessel sent an email saying can we just have her picked up before before she can go on fox so this woman actually goes on Fox, goes on Talking Carlson's show, and a few days after that, she's actually arrested. What was she arrested for? It was some minor thing. I'm not exactly sure. But what's crazy is the fact that this is a thing that just happens now, right?

That you can get caught talking about just arresting someone before they can go talk to the press, and then you actually do it under whatever reason, right? And then it's fine. Back the blue, baby. No one cares. Gotta back the blue.

There's a rational explanation for that. I think I'm not even sure if what they arrested her for was even related to the fact that she was throwing up a middle finger to the lockdowns. But the point is,

regardless, they arrested her as Nestle said they should kind of just send a message right it's just bizarre to me well i guess it's not bizarre because it's 2021 but still it's just it's a thing that happens and everyone is just fine with like this yeah this is this is how we do things now how funny would it be if just all the populist right conservatives just started saying we we've all agree now abolish the police with the right move we were wrong like the establishment left would would flip so quickly they would be like hail police we love

police yeah hail police daniel horowitz this is guy at the blaze he is not like he's not a populist he's very much a traditional unironically principled conservative again working for the blaze not a radical outlet. And he is he's actually taken this line, defund the police, because he like you, he thinks that like the police are not no longer actually doing their job. They're no longer actually protecting us from from from crime, from violent crime. They're in fact, now just kind of acting as the enforcement arm of the Democratic Party. It's because I think, for one, I've talked to a lot of cops, I've gotten emails from a lot of cops the good ones quit right away they were like i won't do that that's the line and now what's left are these like you know a lot of people who are scared to lose their job

and a lot of cops who aren't actually doing any work so to those guys i'm kind of like well you know i guess i guess when you're taking taxpayer money and doing nothing it's kind of a problem but uh it's better than enforcing unjust laws. But you do have a lot of cops who are just like, I don't care. I'll arrest anybody that my boss points the finger at. There was that video in, I think it was Portland, I'm not sure, where a bunch of antifa are like walking towards a guy yelling at him. One guy's got some kind of like stick. I don't think it's a machete.

I think it's a bar or something, a crowbar. And there's a guy walking backwards with a baseball bat. The cops grab and the guy drops the bat, gets on his knees, puts his hands up. The cops arrest him and then apologize to the Antifa people and start saying really nice things. I'm so sorry. Bro, at a certain point, these conservatives need to realize that the cops are being replaced by Black Lives Matter. And it's funny because when I've said before, you know, we should defund or abolish the police, people are like, Tim, then national police will come in. And then the feds will control it all.

And I'm like, dude, the left already has the police. The cops took a knee. They dropped on their literally. OK, you guys have watched Game of Thrones. Bend the knee. That was the line. It was like to pledge fealty to the queen, to the Khaleesi. What a sad failure of a show at the end.

But my point is, I don't care what you think bending the knee means. Take a knee for Black Lives Matter. Yeah, they're pledging fealty. They did. Now, I was still willing to be like, okay, we're gonna have an election and we'll see. This is the kind of thing that's gonna wake people up. And a lot of people did change their minds. Trump got a massive amount of more votes.

But the Democrats did a lot of things in the lead up to 2020 with with mail in voting changes that made it that gave them huge advantages. We saw the article from Time magazine. And now the police are comprised almost entirely, in my opinion, of people who either don't care, won't work or actually support Antifa and Black Lives Matter, in which case, call their bluff. Y'all are going to be fine. You think I'm worried about it? I'm not.

Most conservatives live in rural areas. Why is anybody going to be worried about it? I guess if you're living in a city and you're a conservative, but then you're giving tax money to these people. We got to act like we're playing the video game of civilization right now, as well as living in the country, just chilling. We're also communicating to hundreds of civilization right now, as well as living in the country, just chilling. We're also communicating to hundreds of thousands of people, creating

an archetype of what it can be. So I don't want to lose local police because the federal police will get stronger and then you do have the SS and like, I don't know. So we really should empower local police to do the right thing.

But these cops are too weak. Well, it's a generalization. We don't know them. We really don't know. We see a lot of news articles and make assumptions. So I wrote about in West Virginia, a bunch of sheriff's departments decided that if any really restrictive gun control laws would get passed, the sheriffs would find these different ways to basically not enforce them. There was one sheriff, I don't remember his name, but he basically said, I'm going to deputize every single person.

That was Virginia, not West Virginia, I'm pretty sure. Yeah, okay, Virginia. I wrote an article about this for Chronicles, and it was really funny because the reporter was like, wait, so you're saying that you're just going to make everyone a deputy? And the guy was like, yeah, that's right. you're just going to make everyone a deputy and the guy was like yeah that's right i'm just going to give everyone a badge and then and then that way like the gun control laws won't apply to them so there i mean there are these good people on the local level but but still i think what you're ultimately talking about here is this kind of

like attitudinal attitudinal disposition that conservatives have where they still feel a kind of call it blind loyalty to institutions that either no longer exist or are actually hostile to them. And broadly speaking, that institution is the law enforcement apparatus. This is a very uncomfortable place for conservatives. Conservatives are the law and order people. They're the people that they respect the police. They're the ones that follow the rules. They respect hierarchies, whether or not they'll admit it.

And now they're in a position where they're at the bottom of the food chain. And they're being actively persecuted by the institutions and by the people that they think are going to save them. I mean, there's a common thing that conservatives say is, you know, as bad as things get,

the military is going to have our back mark milley says yeah mark milley says that's not the case and so if you're a conservative who for your entire life you've been rah-rah the pentagon you know back the blue now like the guns are pointed at you and i think i think so so you're right there is uh there's a discussion that needs to be had. And I think we're only just beginning to have it about the role of law enforcement right now where it is hyper politicized. And you've got police chiefs in huge cities who are no longer really cops. They're just bureaucrats.

And they're not in this for public safety. They're in it for themselves. Joe Biden was talking about the voting laws. And he says what we're seeing is the greatest threat since the Civil War. The insurrectionists breached the Capitol. The Confederates never did that. And we've talked about this a bit in the past several episodes, but I want to add something to this idea. saying these things that paint half the country as enemies of the state because he's confident that in the coming years, this group of people will be figuratively eradicated. What I mean by that is politically eradicated, that they're fractured, they can't organize,

they won't win elections, and their opinions are completely meaningless. And then it's going to be the overstate or the cathedral that controls everything. And you look at what's happened with the police. And I think actually, interestingly, the resistance of conservatives is what's helped convert police departments into woke enforcement agencies. When the left started saying, abolish the police and defund the police and put extreme pressure on the police departments, conservatives stopped the departments from completely going under by pushing back. And then you had this argument over whether or not we really want to abolish police. And it worked out really, really well for the woke because then the good cops were like,

I'm not going to be a part of this leave who's left the people who either don't care or willing to do whatever they're told. And then because conservatives save the department from being totally abolished, they were able to restock it up with cops who know exactly what these modern political times will bear. So now I would only I would only speculate, you know, we're moving into 2022. We're going to have the midterms. They're going to be coming after conservatives like you cannot even believe they They have already been tweeting things like, if we lose the House, it's all over. Yes, their glorious revolution will be all over. If Republicans get back the House and can impeach Joe Biden for high crimes and misdemeanors.

So what do you think they'll do? They're going to come after right-wing influencers. They're going to come after anti-establishment in any capacity, which includes some anti-war leftist types and people like Jimmy Dore, for instance. I don't know if they'll ban him, but they've gone after people in this area who are anti-establishment in any capacity, which includes some anti-war leftist types and people like Jimmy Dore, for instance. I don't know if they'll ban him, but they've gone after people in this area who are anti-war, anti-establishment Democrat. They're going to try and get rid of anybody

who might actually make them look bad, and they'll do it very slowly. If they do it overnight, it'll cause too much of an uproar. But they can't afford to lose the House. Yeah, I think you're seeing this with Glenn Greenwald, right? He's kind of become a bad lefty because he has joined sides with the populist right and talking about how terrible the national security apparatus is.

But he's always been that. Right. The populist right finally joined him. That's right. That's a good point. But here is something to consider is that I'm not sure that even if Republicans would resume power, like assume power again, it's not clear that it would actually make a difference because it seems to be the case that Republicans can win elections, but the left will remain in control of institutions. Right. And therefore elections are kind of just they're like respites. They're periods where we can catch our breath, maybe plan pressure release.

Yeah, that's all it is. But ultimately, the trajectory of the country does not change. If we follow the same trajectory as we did in Trump's first term, that is to say in 2022, Republicans win. But then the Democrats wield the power of the of the intelligence agencies against conservatives and jams them up, investigates and crushes them. Republicans are at a loss. Republicans don't do this.

Republicans don't fight back. And then we move into 2023 with the presidency. Same thing. One of my favorite memes right now is this idea. A lot of libertarians are saying things like this. The Democrats think the Republicans are lying, cheating and stealing and manipulating to gain more power. And the Republicans think the Democrats are lying, cheating and stealing to gain more power. People need to realize, you know, both sides.

That is not true. Republicans don't do anything. Republicans have no cultural institutions. They don't have universities. They don't have movies. They got nothing. The best conservatives can muster is Ben Shapiro putting out a movie. And that's great.

You know, respect for putting on a movie. And that's great. You know, respect for putting out this movie and getting into entertainment. So they're actually doing something. But conservatives are not reaching children. They're not reaching young people. You know, there was a tweet, I think, I can't remember where I saw this, maybe from Cassandra Fairbanks, that Nickelodeon or Disney Channel was playing anti-Trump ads. Oh, yeah. She was talking about that. Was that Cassandra? Yeahdonald trump ads on disney channel why those kids will

grow up in 10 years from now those 10 year olds will be 20 and they are going to be ideological extremists and they'll vote and you won't even realize that some of these kids right now 15 15 years old three more years and they're voting and you you got to figure out what these kids right now, 15, 15 years old, three more years and they're voting. And you, you got to figure out what these kids are thinking. And I'm sure the Democrats are doing exactly that. And that's why schools are indoctrinating them. Because what's going to happen is you are going to get some classically liberal leftist. Now I mean it actual like lefty individual who, well, I shouldn't say classically liberal. We'll say traditional liberal agrees a lot of conservatives, someone similar to maybe like me me they'll run for office but in in three to five years they'll be considered far right like like uh we had vosh on the show and he called me far right it was hilarious but he's he's 20 what is he 26 yeah yeah i think so so

these 26 year old lefties on youtube think 35 year old tim pool who believes in universal health care and social programs is far right that's good. That means you're the Trojan horse. You're controlled opposition. No, no. It means that in 10 more years or in even three to five years, these young people are going to come up, and they're going to see a traditional conservative and think Nazi. And they're going to see moderate liberal and think far right conservative.

If the train goes as it's headed. But we, you know, society is not linear. Things don't happen linear. We constantly are changing the narrative and shifting and altering the way things are happening. Well, there's one thing to consider, and it's that liberals don't have kids. Oh, yeah.

Right. I'm going to out-breathe them. I mean, this is already happening, though, right? Like, I mean, when Glenn Greenwald retweets my stuff or interacts with anything, immediately he's labeled as, like as a crypto-fascist. And then people will screenshot things that I write and be like, this is who Glenn is promoting, this fascist authoritarian stuff. So it's already happening.

But I think the anti-Trump ads on, you said Disney? I think it was Disney Channel. Okay. Anti-Trump ads on Disney is like a good day for Disney, considering all the other smut that they run for children. And I think this kind of gets to the issue of critical race treasure, but I think he has shown that critical race theory goes actually much bigger and much more daunting than I think anyone had imagined before Rufo came on and came on the scene and started showing people how pervasive this stuff is. So yeah, I want to, well, actually, we'll jump in in a second. Conservatives need to start producing culture. You know, I guess I was trying to look something

up and just, but we'll pull that up in a second. There is something interesting that we saw with Pew Research, and that is that the previous generation is slightly more conservative. I'm sorry. The Gen Z is a little bit more conservative than millennials, but only a little bit. And that probably has a lot to do with the fact that you said conservatives are outbreeding liberals. So I have to imagine – so I want to add this to what i was saying before about you know next three to five years you might see some dramatic changes it's entirely possible i'm wrong because in 10 years the generation alpha or you know whatever comes after alpha i don't know alpha gen is it was it it is it's alpha gen then beta gen yeah alpha they might be substantially more conservative by simply the fact that conservatives have kids.

So you look at Ben Shapiro. I love it. They call him an incel. How many kids does the guy have? Four, I think. Twelve? Twelve kids? No, he has four kids.

No, no, he has four kids. He has more kids than the people that call him an incel. That's true. That's true. Right, right, right. So actually, I could be completely wrong. We could be 10 years out from a conservative resurgence for a lot of reasons. It could be that all of this stuff with police, all of this stuff with the military is freaking

out regular people. Come August 15th, as Bannon said, we see these in schools, the parents freak out at what their kids are learning. And then 10 years goes by and the millennials are now in their mid to late 40s and then the next generation is actually very woke but most of that actually most of the generation actually is more conservative simply by the amount of conservative kids are growing up yeah so that's that's that's a very real possibility this could be a fluke reaction is very possible and i as pessimistic and cynical as i am in the short term i have to be optimistic about the future, about the long term, because I have kids.

I've got one who's about a year old, and then I've got another one on the way in December. And so I have to hold out hope that something like this is going to happen. Because the idea of just settling on the notion that the future will be so much more horrible for my kids. It just seems unacceptable to me. Look at what AOC and a bunch of these leftists are saying. Oh, we can't have kids because of climate change. It's like, okay, they're not going to have kids. Conservatives are going to have kids.

Right, yeah. And then when they do, I mean, this could be actually substantial. If you look at millennials today, not having kids, but mostly the left ones, a lot of non-political people have kids, conservatives have kids. Lefty liberal type millennials don't have kids. So what happens in 20 years? Is this country going to become a bunch of suit wearing young Republicans? Well, a paranoid mind might rebut you by saying, this is why Democrats like open borders, because they can they can import new recruits, so to speak. So and then why they're going after schools. Right.

They know they don't have kids, so they got to take yours. Right. Yeah. One problem I find with conservatism by the label, I guess, is that I think that we need to kind of reintroduce or just enforce some sort of social conservatism in that like you know we talk a lot about morality and like not going flying too far off but we need some like drastic legal liberalism i think we need to take take liberty with our crappy system and change it um so i think conservative politicians are not getting anything done you know they've been sitting around just kind of like enjoying the status quo, and that's a problem.

Just say as much as you need to get elected and then do nothing. Yeah, and we need like really to alter the system. The Federal Reserve has gone roughshod. The central electric grid. The law enforcement agencies, the police departments. Yeah, we've got like all these local governments. I mean, yeah. You know, I mean, yesterday's conversation was, like, particularly brutal.

We were talking about just do these – with a narco tyranny keep coming up. I think a narco tyranny is obviously happening. It's been happening for some years now. And I think that's the easiest way to understand that the system probably already collapsed. Like, if you have people who feel like calling the police is pointless legitimately like not like black lives matter where they're like oh no i can't call the cops if so you know no like people legitimately saying i know they're not going to come here and deal with this riot but then also fearing if the rioters attack your house you will get arrested

the system is completely broken well i think the the issue with anarcho-tyranny is that the anarcho part is by design. It's a feature, not a bug. And the point of it is to kind of paralyze the decent populace into feeling like they can't do any of the things you just described. They can't defend themselves. They can't have control over what their kids learn in schools and things like that. So I guess it seems like the system has failed, but it might actually be the case that it's more powerful than ever. But on the other hand, historically,

when regimes become more repressive and more overt in the methods with which they coerce people to behave a certain way and to talk a certain way and think a certain way is usually when they're on the verge of crumbling or instigating a kind of reaction.

Because really effective systems of control are impersonal and automatic. So when you have to start actively policing people, like we're seeing now, the Capitol Police leaving the Capitol, things like that, or the Biden administration talking about monitoring text messages, things like that, or the Biden administration talking about monitoring text messages, things like that. That stuff, as much as it shows the power and boldness of the established political order, it also tells us that it's kind of in this precarious position where it's this close to maybe overplaying its hand. Yeah.

I think about that with tech censorship, too, because we should have a system, I think, more that's granular where you can choose what you see rather than them choosing what you see the fact that they're in there deciding who gets to say what is like yeah they're powerful but it's also showing how the cracks in their system like well you know they're afraid you look at big tech and first i'll just say you're right the moves they're making show an increasing desperation and panic. And then you look at big tech censorship and I can't figure out for the life of me what their goal is with big tech censorship. I mean this honestly, because these are some of the dumbest, they're supposedly some of the smartest people, but boy, are they dumb.

I mean, if you had a sit down meeting, you could figure out what was happening in only a few minutes. I said this to Jack Dorsey on the Jogging Experience when I was just like at the end of the show, I'm like, I'm getting a van. And they were like, they started laughing.

And I'm like, y'all think I'm joking. But I was like, if you keep doing what you're doing with this hyperpolarization on Twitter, people are going to come

to a civil war of sorts. They're going to go after each other. It's going to be insane. So I'm getting that van ready. I'm going to go bug out. And, you know, people were messaging me laughing, saying, ha, it's so funny.

I'm like, y'all think I'm joking? Now look where we are with the police taking a knee, with the riots, with COVID. Everything that's happened since then has been a dramatic escalation. It's like, I certainly was not wrong. I didn't give a good timeline. But you look at what these tech companies are doing. I couldn't figure it out. I can sit here and say, here's what they started doing in 2010 or in 2010, in 2011, 2012, and look at each year, the changes they made. Twitter, free speech wing of the free speech party. They used that to build themselves up, create a platform. Then you look at the past several years. They make moves to make money.

They make moves to hyperpolarize. What they are doing is only making things increasingly worse. So the question is, is Twitter trying to stop the polarization? Well, they're not doing that. So it's still only getting worse and it has been getting worse. Okay, then they want the polarization. Well, I guess if I had to look, if I looked at what they were doing and someone said, take a look at this system and the equation and the map, what is happening?

I'd say Jack Dorsey wants a civil war. Mark Zuckerberg and Susan Wojcicki want people to literally attack each other in the streets. That's the only thing I can understand from it. So to Ian's point, I think you're also seeing this in the shift toward antitrust action. Increasingly, conservatives, populists are open to antitrust action. I think part of it is just a matter of enmity. People are angry, right? And to your point, Jeff Bezos literally booting Parler off the Internet

was probably the stupidest thing he could have done. Because what that did, far from killing whatever narrative was being promoted on parlor that he thought was problematic i think it was related to the january 6th thing uh instead it just resulted in more people than ever especially conservatives who generally i think would have been opposed to something like antitrust like taking a hammer and smashing amazon are now all for it yeah you're seeing this now. But there's no political willpower to do it. No, no, no. There is absolutely an effort to kind of throw an olive branch to the populists and say,

look, we're trying. We're trying to do something. We're putting together a raft of legislation. We're trying to take measures to bring to heal Amazon and Facebook and Twitter and stuff like that. But you're right that there's this kind of reluctance and a way to to to do something without actually doing anything uh but i think that kind of like the cat's out of the bag and it can only escalate i think you're only

going to see this trend toward demands for antitrust action increase at least from conservatives i think that liberals are probably more opposed to it. Sorry. Liberals are more opposed to it because they're in power right now. These institutions, these corporations, for the most part, they're doing what they want them to do. And so at the same time that you have conservatives pushing for antitrust action, you have people who are on the left saying, well, the thing that Facebook needs to do is not be broken up up but actually just kick conservatives off the platform completely i think jen saki said something recently that if facebook bans you you should be banned from all platforms yep i've got some weird necrotic energy when it comes to saki lately i've been having like

nightmares about a necromancer yeah like like this dark dark decaying energy around her that's like i've been i think i've been dreaming about her or like she's been on in like the back of my subconscious in a real weird way. I'm sorry about gesticulating, by the way. It's my Latin. Oh, no, it's fine. Check this out. It's worse than you realize from CNN of all places. White House is reviewing Section 230 amid efforts to push social media giants to crack down on

misinformation. For those that aren't familiar, Section 230 is a beautiful law that allows us the ability to use social media platforms without that platform being sued for what we say. On its surface, it makes a lot of sense. If I post something on Twitter under my name, y'all shouldn't be able to sue Twitter for it. This law makes that distinction. However, the law also grants the ability of these platforms to moderate at their hearts, to their hearts content, in which case they effectively create an editorial system by which they can say, we're not banning conservatives. It's just our rules. So they monopolize public discourse. They then start purging conservatives. It creates massive hyperpolarization. It just keeps getting worse. And then we find ourselves here.

Joe Biden wants to get rid of Section 230. Donald Trump and many conservatives have been saying, get rid of Section 230, not realizing the law just needs a little bit of reform. The Democrats want to get rid of it because they want to be able to force Facebook to ban whatever they want. You get rid of Section 230, Facebook becomes liable for whatever is said that's wrong for defamation, for even potential criminal negligence. So I'll put it this way. I like to say, hey, don't take medical advice from me. Talk to your doctor. I don't want you

to sue me. Some moron's going to do something dumb and then blame me for it. I'm not going to tell you to do anything. You get people like Ben Shapiro even is telling people to get vaccinated. I'm not going to do that. I'm going to say, go talk to your doctor. Because what if someone says, hey, Tim Pool said to get vaccinated. I went to a bar and I was drunk and I got vaccinated, but I was allergic to it. Nah, I'm not doing that. Joe Biden wants to be able to ban whoever.

They're going to take away this law and that's it. That's the end of the internet. I will tell you, one of the most important things that is keeping right wing populists and conservatives in the culture war is the ability to speak on these platforms. They are trying to take that away by any means necessary. Now, the problem is many of these people on the left can't just outright ban you. They can't just delete Tim Pool. And every day Timcast.com is growing and we're adding more writers and we're doing more news. Hey, that's a bad thing if you're trying to culturally homogenize around this cult ideology of critical race theory.

The problem is they need a reason to ban people and they have to do it slowly. If you do too much, you shock everybody. The fog has got to be blown in the pot. If they get rid of Section 230, they can just say it's what Trump wanted. It's what Republicans wanted. And that's it. Gone. I think the only way that it would make sense, it would be to, if you got rid of 230, would to reduce Twitter to like a public carrier, in which case it could not ban people.

But that's an entirely different argument. You can read guys like Josh Hammer, who is very much a conservative in maybe more of a traditional sense than I am. And he's kind of suggested this uh common carry would basically make twitter into like public transit system um so but this is but you're right though uh as far as the democratic party's concerned as far as the biden administration is concerned this is what they see as a pathway to pushing people like us off of these these channels i think that's right it will it will bring us back to the era of a small handful of channels and it's already been happening so one of the things that um youtube has been trying to do specifically

there was a great purge that happened i think it was last year the year before maybe the year before where they they deleted like millions of accounts that were too small, banned them from the partner program. They kicked them out of the partner program. And what this did was it created an advertising pool that was very much more homogenous. You know, you had a lot of channels that made money off flat earth stuff. And so YouTube said, we're getting rid of all of that stuff. Some of it was really dumb. Some of it was really bad. And I know people who believe stupid things from watching dumb videos, but you know, individual responsibility, right? What's happening is YouTube is slowly banning more and more channels. I hear about it every day,

channels getting demonetized and getting banned. Eventually, they're trying to get us to the point where there's only maybe a few hundred channels and all of their opinions are in alignment. For the most part, you got your approved right-wing opinion and your approved left-wing position. And of course, it's all moving towards the left faster and faster. So in 10, 20 years, potentially, the right-wing opinion will be a leftist opinion today. Many have made that joke. That's what they're able to do because of the lax rules of Section 230. They can effectively editorialize the same way New York Times will, making money off the content and then assuming no responsibility for it. YouTube did something interesting a while back. They changed their pay structure to be royalties.

And I think the reason they did that was because of the potential argument that you could say, no, YouTube is effectively employing these people. There was an attempt to unionize. This happened in, I think, Europe, YouTube unionization. There were many on the left trying to argue that YouTubers were no different than Uber drivers. They were de facto employees who deserved rights. Then all of a sudden, YouTube says, now we're paying you royalties for your content. That way, well, now you can't argue that YouTube is publishing the content. You can't argue that YouTube's employing these people. And once again, YouTube is now able to editorialize and manipulate people.

And the creepiest thing about it is there's a small handful of people at the top of these companies. They're as dumb as a box of rocks. They might be good at selling software or programming, but they do not have the cognitive faculties required to govern billions of people. The ultimate problem is that those people change. You know, Larry and Sergey Bale. Susan Wojcicki didn't exist in this arena 10 years ago, 12 years ago, when Chad Hurley built YouTube before Google bought it and then changed the ownership again.

Jeff Bezos just left Amazon. He just stepped down. Jack Dorsey owns like 5% of Twitter. He doesn't run that company anymore. He doesn't. He's a figurehead. They use him to absorb the criticism while someone else is in charge. It's basically a different company, but it has the same name.

I think that should be illegal. I think in the future when a company gets sold, it should have to change its name. It used to be that corporations were temporary, I'm pretty sure. Corporations formed for the express purpose of a mission, and they finished it, and then they broke apart. But I'm not entirely sure. I mean, companies kind of existed because people with power had access to resources. And if you did, then you could grant that to somebody, and so somebody would agree to follow you. But I'm not entirely sure. I mean, companies kind of existed because people with power had access to resources. And if you did, then you could grant that to somebody.

And so somebody would agree to follow you. And then I think what was the Brooklyn Bridge, the first corporation? I could be wrong. Oh, maybe. I don't know. Yeah, maybe. I think we need some sort of like specific law that organizes only around social media. And I've been like waiting for someone to do it.

And then Joe Biden becomes president. He's not the guy. And like I'm Will Chamberlain. He's the guy like people like will like we need to organize some sort of maybe we have to be the ones just to get creative and kind of like how do you make how do you make a law? Do you just have fun? Do you just like think about like write a bunch of stuff down? And if everybody likes it, then you propose it to the Senate.

I was definitely wrong about the Brooklyn Bridge, by the way. Who was the first corporation? No, there was just tons of small corporations by special legislation. So I'm, you know, part of working, I co-founded Minds. Are you familiar with Minds.com? It's a social free software. I used it briefly. It's great.

And we were working with, like, the Manila Principles, which is kind of like an internet constitution for the 21st century about like free how you can like keep people free on the internet. And, you know, I'm sitting here looking like an idiot because I don't have all the I don't know. I don't know how what the law should be. I mean, if we just reform section 230 a little bit to say um they could only ban speech that was deemed to be unlawful by a court or actually they should just be called common carriers it shouldn't be incumbent upon the the company at all it should literally be an act of uh law that removes the content so social media network gets x amount of users per day becomes a common carrier yes and then it would

be like this you post something and then on Facebook and then people flag it. They flag it to law enforcement. Law enforcement then comes in and says, okay, we believe this is an incitement or a threat or whatever. There's risks there. And I used to be more just like, look, incitement is unlawful speech. Obviously, we don't agree with that. And there are some things you shouldn't say, like instructing someone how to commit a crime

and stuff like that. The challenge with that, I suppose, is the slippery slope of if unlawful speech can be banned, then the government need only declare some speech to be unlawful. Right. So they can say, well, look, you know, hate speech is not free speech. They've been saying that for a long time. So they pass a law saying hate speech is not free speech. They've been saying that for a long time. So they pass a law saying hate speech is not protected anymore. And so, no, you quite literally can't have a law supersede the Constitution, in which case that makes a very serious conundrum about laws that are like incitement or direction.

Because how can those laws be affecting the First Amendment? Well, to put it simply, Supreme Court precedents is what gave us our understanding of free speech and it seems like actually free speech has been improving so there are some questions and challenges there ultimately i'll put it this way i still think it's a good idea it can only be banned by an act of law enforcement by a court the judges should decide if it violates some kind of you know law or is not in the spirit of free speech or something should be uh i guess up to the judges to figure out in the way you send that even with those problems send the post to quarantine until it's decided like is it nope so if it says say something gets posted that is illegal it seems very illegal you flag it then you have to you have to get a warrant but then if it stays up while you're

investigating it that's a problem no no it's not they have to get a warrant and if it's like posting someone's address and private information when you you know they're at risk, they can get a rushed warrant. They do these things all the time. But how long is that going to take? Days? A few hours? Even that's a long time for something to sit up in public view on the internet because that can get copied and pasted. And when you find illegal content, like for mines, for instance, it was immediately removed and then sent to the FBI or whatever. But there's no leaving it up. You can't do that because then it's just you're culpable for inciting these.

You know, admittedly, I guess we're dealing with a different arena outside of just the normal confines of speech. We're talking about people posting photos, photos and videos. And, you know, in that instance, yeah, like if someone posted a video of a crime taking place, you know, or of themselves committing a crime, then there needs to be the discretion for someone with immediate access to take that down or at least quarantine it somehow. The challenge then is you will get people in these companies being like, that's hate speech removed. And then when you're like, you're not allowed to do that, they go, it was an accident. And then it comes back a week later when no one cares anymore how you solve for that i do not know you got to remove the human from the uh process it's it shouldn't be like it shouldn't be a trust there should be no trust i i i i no look i think it should be um it should probably be a warrant

issue um i mean yeah you you talk about a lot of the things you've seen when you were when you were moderating mines imagine if someone took a picture that you like one of the most disgusting pictures don't say what it is uh on mines and they put it up on their window at their house yeah they go to jail for a lot of this stuff so if somebody wants to post this stuff on mines there should be a warrant, an investigation, and action taken, but it would have to happen immediately. I suppose you can say that

if someone put something up on their window that was objectionable to an extreme degree, the cops would come and immediately arrest the person and take it down as the crime is visible. But sometimes someone will put something up on someone else's window, and you're like, well, we're not.

So it's not about busting the person. How do you, like, someone will, like, hack into your account? Well, anonymous accounts, for instance. Like, Mines doesn't track people. It's anonymous. So you don't know. You can't go after the individual. You just have to go after the content.

I think that's the way social media should function in general. I don't like going after individuals. Just ban the channel if that person wants to start a new channel. Unless it's criminal. If it's criminal and you find out who does it, then they have to face the penalty of law. Right. But I don't think that you should target... Like, if someone does something that violates

a term on YouTube, you ban the channel that the term was violated on. You don't block that person from... Or the content. Yeah, you get rid of the content itself and allow the person to, in my opinion, form another channel. And if they don't ban, if they don't violate the content again,

then they're good to go. We've had an instance here. It was January 6th, actually, we did our show. YouTube disabled our comments in our chat because people in the chat were saying bad things. So they took that down. They didn't give us a strike or anything like that. There are several instances where they said,

we will delete videos that do these things without issuing a strike. The idea of issuing a strike is completely broken anyway. You know what strikes on YouTube should be for? Direct, provably egregious acts

to violate the rules. The problem is what YouTube does is someone will, you know, fart and they'll be like, ah, gotcha. You know,

or someone will say something without intending to break the rules or not realizing it breaks the rules fart and they'll be like, gotcha, you know, or someone will say something without intending to break the rules or not realizing it breaks the rules. And then YouTube will be like, we're banning you for saying that thing. Instead of just being like, heads up, you can't say those things. Now that we've warned you, any future instance in which you break this particular rule will result in a removal of that content. If you directly on purposely do this, we'll remove you so we we've had instances i've had instances where i've had videos removed i'm getting a strike and i'll i i messaged google and

i was i was furious it uh there's a name you can't say on youtube so nobody say it uh and i got into it with youtube i was like rand paul is speaking on the floor, and you're telling me I can't report this news. You know what? I'll say the news. Actually, we did this in one of the bonus segments once. I just started saying the name over and over again. I'm like, we can do it on our website. I was going to change my name to that name. Nope, nope, nope. But what would happen if... The video just disappears.

If I were to change my name to a banned name... They would delete the content. All my content? Like, anything I ever tried to do? Anything with that name on it would be gone. What about some poor person that has that same name? Does not matter. Can they just not post online anymore? Yes. That's crazy.

I've never heard of this before. That's crazy that someone with a word associated with another word that's banned can't communicate. There is a name on Facebook and YouTube. Not Twitter, by the way. I feel like we are playing with magical fire right now, Tim. If you say the word on YouTube, they do something special. They don't delete the video in a traditional sense. They don't issue a strike.

What happened to me was that the video still was there, but it became, I suppose, a graphic instead of an actual image. So if you go to the YouTube manager, you can see a list of all your videos. If you move the mouse over the picture, you know, the little, you know, pointing finger appears. When I said the name, when I, when I reported this story, cause it was big breaking news. I didn't even know it got deleted until like a day later. Someone emailed me saying, Hey, what happened to your video? And then I went and looked and it was there and I was like, it's still there.

It's fine. And then when I moved my mouse over it no link no magic pointing finger just an image just like they didn't want me to realize it was gone on facebook i posted about the guy's name and the post just vanish instantly and so i've posted really clever things that i'm like trying to test the limits of like the the funny thing is they can't ban you for it because it's not a violation of the rules. There are people who are working in these organizations who have the ability to remove the name, and they do. That is so bizarre.

I've never heard of this before. Can you write it down and slide it across the table? We'll talk about it for the member segment. So the question of the heads of these organizations or the CEOs who are kind of disengaged from Twitter and whatever, I think it's also interesting because it gets at another problem that conservatives are confronting, and that is that the people who are promoting what conservatives think is socialism also happen to be the CEOs of major corporations. In other words, the most powerful, the most wealthy people in the country don't really have a vested interest in private property anymore. And in fact, when you look at the people who are trying to separate you from home ownership or car ownership or firearm ownership, it happens to be organizations like BlackRock, the biggest

money manager in the world. It's Amazon. It's Facebook. In other words, the people that are trying to deprive you from your property are the people that we traditionally would call the dirty capitalist class. And again, I think this is like the policing issue. This is another issue that conservatives are confronting with which they're very uncomfortable because conservatives are the pro-business party, they're the the capitalist party the free market party

uh and right now the the people at the top of the so-called free market are trying to string them up on a noose so i think this is very this is a thing that we're uh i think only in the last year or so have conservatives been forced to confront this problem of call it big capital. You know what I see? The analogy I have for what's happening is you have these threads all in front of us, and they're being braided into the sacred timeline. We'll use the Loki reference. When we look ahead, there are a lot of variables in these threads that will eventually either become braided into the main line that we're on or fall off or our timeline.

And that is you look at the potential children issue, right? Conservatives have kids, liberals don't. You look at censorship, you look at school indoctrination, you look at the Democratic Party, you look at the incitement by Joe Biden screaming civil war. And it's hard to know how much of a role each of these things will play in the development of our society or our timeline. If the Joe Biden thing is more impactful than the school thing, then we may find ourselves splitting into two threads where we ultimately clash. If the schools are more impactful, then we may see moms rising up and get a totally different future it's hard what we can do is we can see the threads but we don't know how much of an impact they're going to have so we can talk about a lot of this but our predictions could be way off we

have more power than we realize that um you you have massive power. Massive, massive, massive, massive. We're altering the timeline so exceed extremely right now. To spark collective consciousness, to spark like a, what do they call it, when it hits critical mass, it doesn't take much. It just takes organization of thought. Like I think if 50,000 people were thinking something at the same moment, that other people around the world would start to think it too. I don't know about all that, but I can say that the standalone complex is a very real phenomenon. If a bunch of rich people are all thinking – if at the same time 5,000 wealthy industrialists see a news report on CNN where they say far-right extremism on the Internet is destroying the country, those 5,000 people will be persuaded in some way to take action to alter what was seen in the news report. That's the power of media.

Those powerful people will then all start directing money, not by conspiracy, by standalone complex, all acting individually but in such a way that it appears there was a grand conspiracy yeah the media is like allowing people to think the same thought at the same moment and that's probably what's been doing since radio was invented yep no i think this this is i mean this happened with the media itself it's funny the founder of chronicles his name was leopold tierman he's one of the two founders. He wrote this essay in the American Scholar in 1976, I think. And the essay is called The Media Shangri-La. And Leopold was sketching what we all know is true today, which is that the media is kind of as an agenda, right? It's no longer really in the business of telling us the truth or merely conveying information to us, but really telling us how to think about information

and telling us what the truth actually is. And he says this because Tiermand was someone who survived the concentration camps of the Nazis and the Soviets. He was a Polish Jew who survived both types of totalitarianism during World War II. And he immigrated to the United States and then founded Chronicles magazine with another guy named John Howard.

And so he's writing, look, in Poland, the media said whatever the state told the media to say. And everyone knew this. Everyone in Poland and everyone who was under the heel of the Soviets knew that the media would just regurgitate whatever the party line was. And he said, in the United States, you have this unique problem

that you can really only talk about in generalities, where it seems to be that there is this probably uncoordinated, even unconscious effort by the media to kind of cultivate certain narratives and basically appoint themselves as the arbiters of what is and is not true. And this was in the 70s that Leopold was saying that. And it's, I mean, it's true. He was very prescient and he saw ahead of it. But this gets back to your point about the standalone thing. I think when you call it a conspiracy, I mean, you might actually be true, but I think it's fair to say

that this does actually seem to be a kind of like, at times almost uncoordinated, right? Which the point is, it makes it very difficult to fight, right? Because what do you do about it? How do you take control of it? I think we're very much seeing, you know, conservatives are trying to hold on to institutions and values that they think make America great and they want to make it better.

But the left, as we know today, is just like fire. It's just consuming and spreading and it's fairly directionless. You need destructive interference because if you say no, don't stop, that's not going to solve it. That's the big problem when people are like, that's bad. I'm anti that. That doesn't work. You need to create something new that distorts and quells the perception of that so that they're focusing on this now. Yeah, I think that a problem with conservatism in the United States has largely been defined by what it's against. It's against socialism. It's against big government.

It's against, you know, whatever. But it has hardly put forward like a positive vision of the country. The left, to its credit, is, I think, kind of visionary. The left has tremendous goals that people will laugh at and within five years realize, oh, no, it came true. Right. This is like the story of the left is they get laughed at and then within a few years, it seems like every time this happens it seems to take less and less time. But conservatives will kind of guffaw and laugh and kind of

console themselves that they've got facts and logic on their side and then within five or ten years they're living in the reality defined by the left. And part of that is the fact that they have no positive vision. basically just uh are happy with these elegant reprimands of of the establishment of of the culture and decline but they don't ever set forth any alternatives and when you ask them to or when you do yourself they'll be the first ones to pick apart why that wouldn't work why that would make the government

bigger or why people would just ignore bans on critical race theory and stuff like that i mean they do right but there i think there are actually ways to enforce these things i mean my view on critical race theory is not i think i'm for bans but i'm also for actually attacking the institutions that promote these things like i'm uh this is why I have the idea of eliminating student loan debt by taking it out of university endowments, which would kill two birds with one stone. Well, that's, Will Chamberlain has been screaming since the endowments for some time.

No, it's totally true. I mean, but also NGOs. Like I think non-governmental organizations have made a kind of racket out of promoting critical race theory. I think these also should be, they shouldn't exist i want i want to i want to show this graphic from this this cartoon from political humor on

reddit it says then and there is some you know white man bearded with a confederate shirt and he says we must preserve our heritage and there's like a confederate statue of the flag and says now and it's the same guy ripping up a piece of paper that says critical race theory. And he says, we must bury our heritage. And then on the blackboard, he's in a school. It says 1921 Tulsa Massacre. And there's a cop writing lesson banned. It's like it's all it's almost as on the nose as Ben Garrison's comments. And there's like sad little kids of varying races looking at him doing it.

And the sad, you know, black teacher. And I'm like, the funny thing is they rely on false arguments in an effort to push back, as if James Lindsay is a Confederate. Like Christopher Ruffo. James Lindsay and Christopher Ruffo, the most prominent voices opposing critical race theory, have literally nothing to do with an old white man wearing a Confederate flag. Yeah. James Lindsay actually, in a moment of confusion, attacked me as a as i think a promoter

of critical race theory because i made a joke about how some latinos are like white adjacent and he attacked me he like attacked me because he i don't know i think i think he thought i was like a critical race theorist or something but uh no you're right uh i think lynn lindsey is one of these guys who's i think he's just like a liberal isn't he like a classical liberal traditional he's harmless classical liberalism is more like libertarianism he's totally harmless and yet because he argued that look the logical conclusion of telling people that whites are the root of all evil and are to blame for everything in the words of suzanne sontag if you know who she is so that the white race is the cancer of human history. If you tell this to people, you're going to start seeing an increase in violence against

whites, just like you would against any group, you know, the Kulaks. Sure, sure. But you're also going to see a rise in white racial identitarianism, of which critical race theorists are actively calling for right now. Well, the weird D'Angelo thing. But the point is, is that when Lindsay just made this harmless observation, he was attacked as promoting the white genocide conspiracy theory. Right, right, right. That's the weirdest thing.

But wasn't that by Quillette? Yeah, Claire Lehman or Lemon, whatever her name is. Yeah, Quillette's become particularly pro-establishment, hasn't it? Very strange, right. Yeah, because it's it's it's like adjacent to the idw uh but i mean look the whole like identitarian thing is is is if you're going to have a society where you have the hispanic caucus and the black caucus and every group is allowed to have an identity and as part of that a sense of dignity like it's okay for me to be black or it's okay for me to be hispanic or whatever and you deny that to whites do you see the problem with this do you see the problem with having a black caucus

and hispanic caucus but then you tell white people you're not even allowed to think of yourself in terms of a member of a group like it it's uh it's a it's a kind of problem that creates itself so i think i'm not sure who but somebody uh rather mainstream i I think Dave Reaboy made this argument recently. Like, look, you literally can't have this society. It will collapse on its own terms. And I agree with that. One thing about critical race theory I've been thinking a lot about is I see this push to ban it, to make it stop. Like, stop.

Make it go away. No, no more, no more. That's not going to work. Because I do agree that we shouldn't be indoctrinating children with a racial theory in school. But we need to educate people about what critical race theory or critical theory is implicitly. If we know what it is, we know what to look out for. Well, hold on. When I grew up, I was told by my teachers classically liberal ideas.

I was told not to judge people based on the content of their character or the color of their skin. The schools told kids this, and it was accepted. They said not to be, you know, hateful or homophobic and all that stuff. Today, the teachers are saying they want that the kids should judge people based on the content of their character. I'm sorry, they should judge people based on the color of their skin, not the content of the character. The point is, even if you say we're banning critical race applied principles, the teachers still will say these things and still believe these things. That's it. That's then they should lose their

in my opinion, if it's been fired. The teachers should be held responsible. I fully support a ban. I support firing teachers to promote this stuff. I support seizing the endowments. I support destroying NGOs, but financially. Think about when the civil rights movement I support seizing the endowments. I support destroying NGOs financially. No, no, no.

Now think about when the civil rights movement was happening. This is the trouble with banning ideologies. Religions can be defined. We know religion. There was an interesting debate about intelligent design versus evolution. And people were like, intelligent design is just religion because it's not in science. The problem is you can easily

make something an ideology and then how do you ban it? You tell, don't tell the kids to believe things about race. You said racial theory. Well, Martin Luther King Jr.'s theory on equality was a racial, was a racial theory.

I don't, I understand critical race applied principles are very specific and it's a specific ideology but how do you ban an ideology how do you separate ideology from public institutions you need to educate people about what it is first so that they know that's a big part of it um i think it is it is easy to say we have the 1964 civil rights act and creating racial groups as a violation of of title i think, what is that, 9? Title 9 in colleges, particularly? I would actually argue that critical race theory is an outgrowth of the civil rights era.

And the primary function of CRT today is to explain why disparities have persisted despite the Civil Rights Act. Sure, but Derrick Bell opposed civil rights. Derrick Bell was critical of Democrats. This is where I'm fairly sorry. I could be wrong, so factor me on this one. But my understanding is that Bell was operating on the idea that Democrats were effectively taking agency away from black communities and forcing them to coexist underneath. I got to go through the literature specifically on Bell, but my understanding is critical race theorists effectively oppose civil rights. And one of the things that I've seen emerge out of the Black Lives Matter movement specifically, this was in, I think, Ferguson

and Baltimore, was this idea that segregation was a good thing. And these are black activists saying it. They believed that before the end of segregation, there were equal and opposite communities in which you had black families, black businesses, black Wall Street. Segregation forced the black community to live underneath the existing white infrastructure, effectively making them second class citizens. I'm pretty sure that was a lot of those ideas came from Bell. Yeah. And that's why one of the big criticisms of critical race theory is that the goals of critical race theory are to rewind the clock back before the civil rights movement. So that's why you see things like caucusing. They want racial segregation. That's why you see an attempt to repeal California's civil rights

provision in their constitution so that they would have the right to discriminate on the basis of race and all the things. It's why you see actions from the left with Harvard. They need the ability to discriminate on the basis of race, which means repealing the 1964 Civil Rights Act. They oppose it and they always have. Well, the thing about, I mean, this is the thing about the CRA is that it actually has codified and institutionalized discrimination against whites. It has by and it has done that by basically advantaging and giving every other group except for whites preference

and access to different affirmative action programs. In effect, it discriminates against whites. No, no, no. Affirmative action, it's actually been argued a violation of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, particularly with Harvard. You cannot discriminate on the basis of race.

One of the ways they've gotten around this is that the courts ruled, this was particularly recently in Southern California, that so long as you offer up an equal program for other groups, it is not discrimination. Specifically, if there is a women in computers program, and there was a man who sued, they said, is there a men's computer program? Yes. Okay. It's not discrimination. The problem with that argument is that's the argument for bathrooms.

If you're offering up an open bathroom to all, then anyone should be able to use any – I'm sorry. The problem with that argument is the racial argument. If you're creating a whites-only or a blacks-only area, providing free but separate access was one of the critical arguments from the civil rights area that ended segregation. So ultimately, long story short, without getting too complicated, the critical race theorists want segregation.

They can't have it so long as the Civil Rights Act says you can't discriminate on the basis of race. So in California, they had, I think it was Proposition 6, I could be wrong, where they, maybe it wasn't 6, I'm not sure, where they wanted to remove from their Constitution the public civil rights provision that said you cannot discriminate on the basis of race, you know, sex, national origin, religion, in schools, in public contracting and employment. They tried to get rid of that recently i think just this past november it failed because people of california were like why would we get rid of our civil rights yeah i think you can find these examples of these situations where

people can successfully i guess find recourse against this stuff to the cra but i mean the fact is is that affirmative action things like that is actually the outgrowth the cra but i mean the fact is is that affirmative action things like that is actually the outgrowth the cra and i mean but that makes no sense i mean it does when you consider that the that the provisions of the civil rights act were intended to kind of like were intended to let's say catch blacks up and other initially blacks but the provisions ended up extending to uh to homosexuals to immigrants and to women but the reason california that the democrats are arguing they can't implement these programs because of the civil rights provision i haven't heard that argument you need to read about the prop uh let me see well my point is is that you're you're right there probably are these instances where people say these things but generally speaking the legacy

of the civil rights act has been the culture of affirmative action i think and part of it's confusing because people thought... No, it wasn't Prop 6. That was road repair. People thought they were going to get this colorblind thing, right? And when you look at the rhetoric of MLK, you also see that. There's the famous quote. 16, maybe it was?

The famous quote, judging people by the content of their character instead of the color of their skin. But MLK explicitly supported affirmative action programs. He saw no contradiction between something like the Civil Rights Act and affirmative action. 16.

I was wrong. It was Proposition 16. Proposition 6 was like the Roads Repairing Act or something like that. Anyway, it's called the Affirmative Action Amendment. Federal-level Democrats

started campaigning on behalf of California, saying California should have the right to discriminate on the basis of race in schooling and public jobs for the sake of fixing racial disparities. It got 57, 42 percent, 42.77 voted yes on Prop 16 in November, November 3rd, 2020. 57.23 said no. 9.6 million people said no to Prop 16, keeping California's civil rights provision in their constitution, making affirmative action unconstitutional in California. Yeah, no, I'm not denying that you have this example, but I think you can find plenty of counterexamples. One of the reasons that the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act was basically unenforceable was actually because of the Civil Rights Act,

because there was this problem where businesses enforcing the provisions of the Immigration Control and Reform Act would potentially run up into anti-discrimination laws that were part of the Civil Rights Act. So it's like an unintended, well, I think in some ways it's an unintended consequence, but it's the logical conclusion of making anti-bias and anti-discrimination the central principle of your politics is, well, why are we waging this war against discrimination? Well, it's because one group is discriminating against all the rest.

And I'll say this, too. There's almost no hard principle for anti-discrimination. So when we look at the 1964 Civil Rights Act, we ultimately will just make a personal decision as to where we stop. If we truly believe you can't discriminate against people based on certain immutable characteristics or certain personal characteristics or identities, it goes infinite. Yes, that's right. Furries. New York says gender identity is self-expression, by which legally furries would be protected.

And so ultimately, the 1964 Civil Rights Act is really about society and what our social norms are and are willing to accept. We got to go to Super Chats because we are running late. So if we haven't, smash that like button, subscribe to this channel, and go to TimCast.com, become a member. There will be a bonus segment, a members-only podcast coming up around 11. But let's read some of these Super Chats. Louis Castagliola says, How many plots and conspiracies supposedly stopped by the FBI would have even gotten that far without instigation by government moles and informants? I guess the the

the answer to that is uh many of them if not most cecil road says fbi fabricating bias investigations whoa all right let's see corny says the website is totally broken comment section is gone videos is 50 wide and website is plastered with ads. There are no ads for members and if you are experiencing a bug with your video comment section and the videos, then you need to press like

control F5 or something to hard refresh because those were bugs that we sorted out on Saturday. Perhaps people need to refresh the cache. I'm not entirely sure. Yes, clear your browser cache. That's a good way to do it. Yeah, and the other thing too is members don't see ads. If we're going to be hiring journalists and having articles for people to consume, but

they're not members, we have to support that somehow. So obviously there are ads, but if you're a member, there should be no ads. There are some bugs. Don't get me wrong. We're working to fix all of them. Some people are still experiencing some of these things. But we'll do our best to get everything sorted. What about comments?

Are they coming on? You said there were comments still. Comments are gone? Yeah, I don't have comments on mine. Maybe it's because I haven't refreshed my cache or something. Yeah, I saw all the old comments were still there. But again, if you're not seeing them, then we'll just send a message and then we'll figure out what happened. The wonderful world of tech. This is what happens. We were in alpha.

We go to beta. Now we're in public beta and people are going to notice problems and so I apologize. But man, that site is cool, dude. It's well organized. Yeah, I know. It's getting there. We're going to have new shows. It's going to be fantastic. But we'll get it fixed. Courtney, I apologize for any of the issues. And

people who don't like ads, become a member. Support our work because you'll get access to all the members-only stuff. I want to just say something really quick too. Guys, you got to realize hosting this content, the images and the videos, it's absurdly expensive. YouTube cheats. YouTube, this live stream would not be possible on a private server. It would cost so much money. YouTube plays games. Google subsidizes YouTube. So we, you know, we had a peak of like, you know, 32 or something thousand people watching. We're streaming. What's our rate? We're at 2,600 kilobits per second, multiplied by the upstream and the downstream. If we were operating that on our own, the bandwidth costs would be insane. So ads are a thing that happen on websites, but we want to make

a reasonable service, and that's the way it's got to be. We're hiring journalists. We've got to pay them. In order to pay them, we either run ads or we take memberships. But it's all working out really well, so I apologize for people who don't like ads, but you've got to support the business. All right, let's see. Aaron Wellbelove says, Ian, for President of the Universe.

Well, I don't know if we need one person to run everything anymore. Maybe we can decentralize the power structure. I'm pretty sure that if Ian got a hold of the Infinity Gauntlet, he would be worse than Thanos. No, I would be like Adam Warlock, dude. I'd pull a George Washington. What is that? Yeah, it's an Addis. Adam Warlock, he got a hold in the comic book,

which is the real Infinity Gauntlet story. He got the gauntlet and book, which is the real Infinity Gauntlet story. He got the gauntlet, and then he gave the gems to the Infinity Watch to take them and then spread out across the universe. No, you'd be a zeal door. I don't think so. I'm ready to pull George Washington on this world. You'd be looking at the glove, and I'd be like, do it, Ian. Take the gems out. Give them to the Watchers.

And you'd go, no. No, you're like Frodo. I'm like, no, Tim, no, no. And you're like, it's mine. Oh, no. I fantasize. No, you're like Frodo. I'm like, no, Tim, no, no. And you're like, it's mine. Oh, mine. I keep thinking like, are we going to have a Frodo-Sam moment where you're standing there with the ring

and I'm like, throw it in. You know why I wouldn't, you know what I would do if I had the Infinity Gauntlet? I'd like just make like weird little things happen that don't really change much. Because what you got to understand about life, as much as you might not be happy with life, it's unjust or want things you ever play a video

game you ever play like you know and you put in the cheat codes you get so bored so fast like it's it's a fun novelty for a few minutes where you're playing mario with infinite you know leaf or whatever p-wing and mario 3 and you can't die you got game genie on or you're playing you know let's say fallout or some console game and using console commands it's fun for a second when you like make you know i play fallout 3 and i'm like make my dude 80 feet tall and i'm running around and you know make them run super speed and then eventually i'm like me i i once set up a private server uh or no no i didn't somebody set up a private server on warcraft we went on and they gave us gm commands and i was like this is so cool we're teleporting and we're like shooting through the air and then i was like this is dumb

so you think the people that are running the world if there is such a thing a deep state or whatever do you think that they've also become disillusioned bored with everything and now they're just i mean that's why they probably resort to profound depths of generosity like jeff epstein i really think that's the thing that if once you become that wealthy and that powerful, you can only feel something when you engage in some kind of depraved act. I don't want that level of

desensitization. Do you guys hear the Democrats are planning to make women register for the draft? I did not. Draft our daughters that alt-right meme. I wrote about Ricky Vaughn. Do you know who he is? Oh yeah, I vaguely remember. That was one of his memes, draft our daughters. Supreme that alt-right meme i wrote about ricky vaughn do you know who he is no okay he was oh yeah i vaguely remember right he that was one of his memes draft our daughters well it's real now supreme court said it wasn't uh got sued they said it was an it was uh incumbent upon congress

and now a democrat from rhode island is saying women should have to register for the draft i support that but i support it because it is horrible and it should be taken to its hyper logical conclusion which is draft our daughters i bring that up though because we have this uh super chat from hunter ryan female veteran yes we should register and yes we should be allowed any job we meet requirements new pt test mos scale not gender check the email um my argument is basically i don't care if you're a man woman uh if you're from this country that country so long as you're a man, woman, if you're from this country or that country, so long as you are a citizen, obviously. Well, actually, I think there are some people

who are citizens who are not citizens who are in the armed forces. Regardless, if you meet the qualifications and you can do the job, I don't care about your identity. You know what I mean? There you go. So, yeah. Draft for everybody. Force them all. You know what? I'll say this this though.

How much you want to bet you are in favor of the draft? Me personally? Yeah, both you guys. I'm opposed to both. The draft? I'm opposed to the draft unless in some kind of tremendous circumstances like an alien invasion. And I mean my views on... Okay, well, let's break this down. If somebody broke

into your house, would you take up arms to defend your house? Yes. If you got word that Antifa was heading to your neighborhood, to your block where you lived, with weapons, and your neighbor said, we need your help, we're going to be standing guard at the front of the street,

you need to help us, would you go and help them help them yeah so you're being drafted by them well the neighbor watched i would be i would i mean it depends i guess i don't know if you'd call that a draft because it's entirely voluntary uh i don't know i think my opposition to the draft is actually fairly new for most of my life i supported it but i guess knowing what i know now about the federal government uh i couldn't support a draft for like iran or something right well that's exactly my point if you got word that china had invaded the west coast and seized seattle san francisco la and was basically wiping out and seizing full control and then you know a local uh you know military called up and said you have to join we need you. This is it.

Our country is under attack. Would you be okay with that? Yeah, that's different from Vietnam. Exactly. And so the problem with the draft is that they're like, hey, we're not at risk, but go blow up those people. And we're like, nah. So the problem is the idea of a draft in defense of a country for truly defending it, I think most people probably would be okay with the problem is most of our drafts the past hundred years have been like go to some foreign land

where someone who didn't attack us is you know we need to attack for some reason yeah that's right yep all right let's read some more all right let's see bang switch tickler says the fbi has always been a corrupt agency the legacy of woodrow wilsonrow Wilson and J. Edgar Hoover lives on to this day in that trash agency. Oof. John Tarwid says I'm excited to see how many registered voters used California's Capitol building's address to vote. Oh. Whoa, just jumped on us. Eric Ace has abolished the FBI.

They've long outlived their original emergency purpose for their creation, and they keep finding justifications for their existence and budgets abolish the fbi they've long outlived their original emergency purpose for their creation and they keep finding justifications for their existence and budgets abolish the fbi except the x-files they can stay i'm kidding i think x-files are real though right it's what they put on things where it's like weird and they don't know what happened i think they are yeah that's what the basis of the show was they were like oh let's make a show about that all right jonathan Duger says, Jewel was a guard at the 1996 Olympics in Atlanta. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution named him as a suspect,

and the FBI was doing everything they could to target him. Jewel died a few years ago without an apology from the AJC. Fake news. Wow. Insert name here says, NorCal here, welcoming a balkanization of Cali. NorCal hasn't considered itself to be the same state as SoCal for some time. P.S. We have 80% of Cali's water supply.

Let that water black hole LA turn into a sand pit, which it would be. But I believe LA gets a lot of their water from the Colorado River. Yeah, jerks. Yeah. Still no water. Yep. Okay. Let's see. I don't know what that one means i'm gonna skip that one jacob howard says can we please call the capitol police biden's stormtroopers stormtrooper sounds too cool yeah yeah it's it yeah it's like invoking fun, excitement, and Star Wars.

And ooh, you know. No, you know, you got to give them stupid names like silly nannies. You know, like the family guy joke. Or the whisper, the kid sniffers. Kid sniffers? Yeah, kid sniffer cops. The capital kid sniffers. Yes.

You know, that's what they're about. Like sports team. It's fair. Biden's kid sniffers. It's fair. I love it. Kid sniffers. Yes. That's, you know, that's what they're about. It's fair. Biden's kid sniffers. It's fair. I love it. Kid sniffers. David Boyer says, the issue I see is that we live in the United States, which is full

of many cultures, whether it be a gamer culture or a gun culture or sports culture. So when people say we are losing the culture war, are we really? Yes. So when like, oh man, I love this. I said years ago, I was like, just you wait. Once they start, once major league sports go woke, because we're seeing it in video games and movies. And then it happened. And then the polls came out and the ratings were sinking

and they're just miserable because nobody wants to watch woke sports. But I tell you this, it ain't over yet. Just wait until they say, sporting rules are arbitrary sport uh major league sports should be required to have a certain percentage of female players why not nba's rules are made up we made them up we could we could absolutely add a new rule saying at least you know half the players on the team got to be women i think when you when you force

equality of outcome like that you cause a lot of tension among the people that you're forcing into the situations. Like, I don't want the male athletes to start hating the female athletes for bringing the team down. Yeah, and I think that the way to think about the culture war is not, we're losing, it's that we've lost. Well, what is the war?

What is the goal of the war? The goal of the war is to take control of certain narratives about important issues, about race, about gender, about national identity, about American history. And on those categories, I think you can confidently say conservatives have lost. They have no control over these narratives and how to cultivate them and how to direct them. I think that when you start from that position, we've lost. Then you ask yourself, why did we lose?

And I think that's the question that we should be asking ourselves. If you're a conservative or like Tim, a disaffected liberal. All right. Justin Sovereign says, I'm skeptical about the Freedom Phone. Look up the Aenam Sting police sold encrypted phones and tracked crime and made arrests. More Luke, please. Well, you've got to tell Luke to come on the show because he's off gallivanting about New Hampshire with his

Free State project, but that's pretty cool anyway, though. The Freedom Phone. We're going to, you know, we're going to rip to shreds. We're going to get a hold of it and we're going to do a bunch of forensic testing. We're going to look for data leakage and things like that and we're going to see what's up. And that means we're going to look for data leakage and things like that, and we're going to see what's up. And that means

we're going to need to get a couple different versions of them, and then we're going to have to figure something out. But I want to genuinely test this to see if it's on the level, because you never know. I mean, this dude Eric might be a good dude, but what if, in the manufacturing process,

someone bugs him? Well, I was... Something I read about them was that this specific model is popular in places like North Korea because they can basically be accessed by state agents. In other words, not very secure. And I mean, you go to the Freedom Phone website and there's no specs on the phone. And the phone is, in fact, manufactured by it's a... Umidigi. Yeah. Which basically mass produces customizable phones.

Well, that's not surprising to me at all, though. Right. If someone's trying to look for a low-cost model to make a phone, they'd find a company that makes low-cost phones. But it's being marketed as like a revolutionary security thing, which is... So he's got a custom operating system on it. We have to do a forensic analysis to see if his claims are true. Right. But, you know, the smear campaigns against Freedom Fund have been hilarious because they don't actually smear anything about it.

They're like, ah, he used the base Chinese phone model. And I was like, OK, what's the operating system? Yeah, well, good for you that you're actually willing to, you know, put it under the knife before you make your criticisms. Well, I mean, what can you criticize? You know what I mean? I can be like, you got to put the specs up, bro. Where are the specs at? I think it's going to be, I think it's the, what is it?

The something four. It's like they have the five now, 5A out, but it's like the four, version four. So I have a feeling it's going to be. They're claiming it's the Umidigi A9. Okay. It'll be like a slightly less technical equality version of what you know google and apple are making with slightly more security is what my guess is is what it's going to be i i think the device is going to work as as uh advertised i think that's right because

it would be hilarious absolutely hilarious and i'd love to be the person to dig this up if i buy a stock freedom phone run some forensic analysis, and find that it's sending all my information to the FBI. I'd be like, how dumb was that? And then I'd post it. Everyone would be like, wow. So there's no way you can put out a phone that doesn't do what you're saying because people can just check it. It would be like if someone said, I'm going to sell you a Frisbee and they give you a rock. You'd be like, dude, this is not a Frisbee.

It does not glide. Did you throw it yet? You throw it and then it hits the ground. You're like, I can clearly tell this thing is not a frisbee and they give you a rock you'd be like dude this is not a frisbee it does not glide did you throw it yeah you throw it then it hits the ground you're like i can clearly tell this thing is not a frisbee you know so i guess the difference is it would be like you know trying to buy a baseball bat they sell you a wiffle bat you know you look at it from a distance you might be like that's a bat then you pick it up and you go wait a minute the moment you hold it you're like what so maybe it maybe it's not as good as they say it is and it won't do as advertised and the guy will make a bunch of money or um then people will probably get refunds so you know we'll see he's definitely i don't think he's doing it for the money he's already severely wealthy louis t says ian you are the cilantro in this guacamole thank you sir i don't

know if that's a good thing yes i don't like cilantro racist comment it's a natural water filter i do not like cilantro i know that's racist comment? It's a natural water filter. I do not like cilantro. I know. That's why I'm here, Tim. But many people do. And people are like, it tastes like soap. And I'm like, I didn't say that. I'm your medicine man.

I just don't like it. It does not taste like soap. That's the weirdest thing to me. Like, what soap are you talking about? Right. Cilantro soap. Yeah, I mean, yeah. Maybe we should make that.

Because, you know, there's cucumber melon soap. There's lavender soap. There's herb soap. And it all just, soap just tastes bitter. Like like you ever get soap in your mouth just bitter so cilantro does not taste like soap just tastes like cilantro it's very unique and bad doesn't like there you go yep there's a principal defense of cilantro i love i love the medicinal quality of food i was actually thinking about the hippocrates, let food be thy medicine. And I was like, actually, I posted that meme.

At what point will social media networks start to say, this is misinformation about health? And I'm like, what? I'm posting a 2,000-year-old quote from the father of modern medicine. Food is your medicine. He's probably a bad guy. Christopher Hunt says, the left does have kids. Yours.

Also, Antifa is the outer class, to you by victory windows, glass and paint. There you go. That's right. They have your kids in schools. That's why the school thinks it's a hot button issue to them. That's why they have to lie about the critical race theory in schools. We're just teaching racism. That's why we have to homeschool them.

That's right. Correct. All right. Let's see. What is this? James Coleman says, dude, Tim WTF. I pay for your website. Why am I seeing Harris on BTE instead of your members content?

I am offering angry. What does that mean? Harris on BTE behind the I don't know. I don't know what that means. I don't know. We're trying to fix the bug. So we do have we'll sort it out. Scott says, Tim, you want to put social media punishments in the hands of law enforcement.

20 minutes ago, you said to abolish the police because they're so biased. The only solution is unmonitored free speech. I also mentioned that the abolishing the police thing was twofold, partly because it's becoming corrupted. It's not actually fulfilling its purpose, and we're facing anarcho-tyranny. And the other is that the left, like regular people, would instantly snap to attention if the police went away.

But the hands of law enforcement for social media, yes, because I believe if we have a functioning society and we're hoping that it does continue to exist, then the only people should have any way to remove content should be for legal reasons.

And I also said it was for the courts, too. So law enforcement, cops, maybe not the same thing. Maybe marshals do it or something. No, what you said is consistent, I think. All right. Let's see. What is this? Derek Lola says,

My father and I bonded plenty over watching this show the past year. He passed away last week, and I wanted to thank the entire team for providing us a great medium to enjoy together. Derek, I am sorry to hear about your loss, but I'm glad you guys enjoyed the show together and I greatly appreciate your super chat and your viewership. I wish you the best. Thanks for sharing that.

Casual Gorilla says, Gorilla, rise up! Oh yeah, AMC stock bounced. I've got some AMC stock. I just got some and I was like, that's fun. And I just kind of forget about it. I think I bought like one share of know like one share you're rich now well if if it's going to get as crazy as they think it's going to be it might end up becoming worth an obscene amount of money i thought that was hilarious like everything about the whole game stock thing was absolutely fantastic yeah

it's all about it antonio calabrese says tim had to get this in during the prop 16 talk please look at the california map to show which counties voted yes it is quite telling it is in the sf and la area i'm not surprised the leftists want segregation they've wanted it for some time i experienced it personally at occupy wall street the only way they're going to get it if they can actually discriminate. Mr. Beard says, I ordered a Raspberry Pi from Amazon on Saturday to load a DNS server called Piehole for blocking ads across this whole network. After ordering, I noticed that I also ordered Speechless that got added to my cart by Tim on Friday.

Yes. Success. So what had happened is we were doing the show, and I said, Alexa, order Speechless by Michael Knowles. Now I just probably... Dude, I listened. Oh, I just did it again. I listened to the show later that night, and it did it again.

Oh, my gosh. That's amazing. It's $19. Oh, no. She's going to order it now. Michael Knowles. Alexa, stop. Oh, she's not19. Oh, no. She's going to order it now. Michael Knowles. Alexa, stop. Oh, she's not listening.

Stop. Somebody super chatted something. Shoot it. And then someone super chatted that. With your flintlock pistol. There you go. Somebody super chatted that phrase. I'm not going to say it again.

And I was like, oh, this is too good to pass. I'm going to read this super chat. And then so I went. I was ordering. What was I ordering? I was ordering, what was I ordering? I was ordering an incubator for the chickens and Speechless was in my cart. Oh, look at that. I was like, I already have a signed copy.

I'm surprised that you use Alexa. I'm so paranoid that I have like disabled Cortana on my laptop and stuff. Oh yeah, I got microphones and everything. But you know, my thing is like all of my opinions are recorded and broadcast for the world for four hours a day. It's not a secret, right? Yeah. I was outside in the yard and I was like, Alexa, what time?

I was like, ah. I can't do that. I could only imagine that NSA, CIA, FBI, whoever else is spying, they're sitting back and they got a slurpy. We don't got to spy on the guy because we just watch his show. We know what he's saying. But then maybe when they spy, they get the juicy private vlog details because they know they're like you know they know what the vlog's gonna be before the vlog goes up and they're like dude ian made bread again right so the the nsa has like early access to your show yeah

all right um i can't read the name uh this guy's name is not readable on youtube he says i can neither confirm or deny that i was involved in making up an erroneous story in attempt to get trump impeached salty army is legion the salt must flow re yes there is a name that can't be said i'll tell you what for all the people who don't know the story here's gonna happen's going to happen. I'm so curious. Oh, wait. What is this? Jim Areola says, hey, Tim, your most recent members podcast is now showing a Kamala Harris video for nine seconds. We will get that fixed immediately. What?

I did check all of... I went through everything this morning and everything was fine, but things probably are popping up because, you know, the bugs tried to sneak through. For all of those who want to know what this name is, what is this name? What is this name? it's the first thing i'm going to do when we open the members podcast today i'm just going to say it and then explain it briefly and uh there's a lot of people probably don't know probably a lot of people who do and you know but i can't you can't

say the name you can't say am i gonna be disappointed that it's like not someone who's super based yeah yes you're gonna be disappointed you're crushed it's just a it's just you know you know we hear that you know communist china is censorship and all this stuff and i'm like bro i can't you can at least say mao's name you can at least say xi jinping's name it's gonna be like grover cleveland something like that yeah stop trying to guess the name reminds me of the future episode where bender has the code word that if he says it if the code phrase he'll blow up oh yeah and they couldn't remove the bomb so they're, we just changed the phrase to something you almost never say. So they put a bomb in him, and it goes off when he says the most common phrase,

which is, you know, bite my shiny metal, eh? And then they're like, we couldn't remove the bomb, so we just changed the trigger to a word you almost never say. And then he starts, he's like, oh, is it this? And they're like, Bender, stop trying to guess the word. And he goes, antiquing. Anyway, my friends, if you haven't already smash that like button subscribe to this channel you can follow the show at timcast irl on facebook and instagram at timcast underscore irl on tiktok if you so desire

and you can follow me personally at timcast we're gonna have that members podcast up around 11 or so pm so make sure you go to timcast.com become a member check it out pedro you go to TimGast.com. Become a member. Check it out. Pedro, you want to shout anything out? Yeah. Follow me on Twitter at E-M-E-R-I-T-I-C-U-S. And the most of my writing you can find at ChroniclesMagazine.org. I've got a newsletter, too, at Contra.Substack.com. I run a podcast there, and I try to bring on interesting guests. And I send out weekly roundups of all of my work like this stuff and articles that I write. Right on, man. Follow me at iancrossland.net

and at iancrossland on social media and be good to each other. You guys may follow me on Twitter at Sour Patch Lids as I attempt to achieve my lifelong goal of having more followers and Sour Patch kids. That's all I want in life. Please help me. We will see you all over at timcast.com and the members only

podcast and I'm going to make some phone calls trying to fix those bugs immediately. Thanks for hanging out. We'll see you all there.