Timcast IRL - Timcast IRL #524 - FDA Restricts JJ Vaccine Over Blood Clots w/Ashley St Clair

Episode Date: May 6, 2022

Tim, Ian, Seamus of FreedomToons, and Lydia join commentator and author Ashley St. Clair to discuss the FDA limiting the Johnson & Johnson vaccine, Elon Musk serving as CEO of Twitter, Timcast going with Rumble to combat big tech censorship, Gavin Newsom's transphobia for saying that men can't get pregnant, Louisiana advancing a bill classifying abortion as homicide, and the 'who radicalized you??' meme as juxtaposed with Xavier Becerra saying that kids are entitled to government-funded gender-'affirming' surgeries. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Major news breaking just earlier today. The FDA has announced that they're going to be restricting the J&J vaccine for only certain individuals that have to be over 18 and you otherwise cannot receive other vaccines. So we'll get into this. This is because of the blood clot risk. Now, there's something really funny that's happening in this story, which we can focus quite a bit on, and that's Twitter is using old fact checks to restrict this breaking news, which is dangerous because if, I mean, this news is coming out, the FDA has issued a new guideline. And if they are restricting that news, people could get hurt. That is the problem with censorship. So we'll talk about that. But my friends, there's also Pfizer data,

which came out now. I hate to say it, but I'm fairly confident that if we actually showed the data on what the Pfizer dump was, we would get banned instantly. I'm not even exaggerating. It's that insane. So what we'll do is we're going to save that for the website segment, which comes up after the show. And with apologies, I suppose, because I don't know how else we'd be able to actually have these conversations because we're actually going to be showing breaking 911 on Twitter is getting

restricted, censored for showing what is literally true from the FDA because these systems are completely broken, which brings me to a big announcement. First, let me just say Elon Musk is expected to be the new CEO of Twitter, at least temporarily, which is huge. He's brought in more investors. We'll talk about that. Timcast is now officially operating on Rumble infrastructure, timcast.com. It is now faster, stronger, and better, more resilient against censorship. And it's just the first move we're making in supporting and implementing new infrastructure to make ourselves more resistant to censorship, but also support systems that are. This is going to put market competition and all these other

services like Amazon and Google. So it's one step. It's good. One of the concerns we definitely had in the past was even though we were doing member segments on our own website at TimCast.com, we could still be censored. They could come and say, oh, we don't want to host these things. Well, we're making these changes. There's a lot of news to go through in terms of censorship. PayPal is currently under fire for censoring a bunch of independent news. So we'll talk about all of that. Plus, we've got news about this teacher who was fired for violating the parental rights and education bill. So needless to say, I think today is going to be really, really interesting. And this J&J stuff is particularly fascinating.

Joining us tonight to talk about all of this is Ashley St. Clair. Hello. Do you want to introduce yourself? Yes. I am an author of Elephants Are Not Birds, which is a book to combat a lot of the liberal transgender antidotes going on now. And I am now the senior culture contributor at the Postmillennial. So check out that stuff with a whole crew of people at thepostmillennial.com. Right on.

I'm Seamus Coughlin. I make cartoons called Freedom Tunes. We just uploaded one today on the left, leaving Twitter, and the fact that they need an alternate platform now. If they invented one, what would it be like? I think you guys will enjoy that cartoon. Also, I'm thrilled to hear that we cannot say what the science is now telling us because that would be anti-science. Go to Twitter.

I want to know more. Hey, I'm glad we're working with Rumble too, man. We've been working in the back, behind the scenes with decentralizing servers. And Chris at Rumble, Chris Pavlovsky has been fantastic to work with. Their crew is amazing. I'm really happy to be involved in this upgrade of the internet and heading towards Web 3.0 and beyond. I asked you before the show, Ashley, about your last name, St. Claire.

If there was a St. Claire, turns out there is. Claire of Assisi. I didn't know much about her, but she was an Italian saint and one of the first followers of Francis of Assisi. That's really cool. There's a St. Timothy as well. Who is that? Gotta be the center of what were you going to say?

I was going to ask? No, no. I was going to ask Seamus. Which one is the... Is it St. Timothy who is the one of gastrointestinal distress? I think it is. We talked about this a little while ago.

Yeah, I believe so. I can double check. I don't want to spread misinformation. And I've noticed since I've been working with you, gastrointestinal, man, the better I feel in my gut, the better I feel in my mind.

Well, I often... Is it? That's who it is? St. Timothy is the patron saint of stomach and intestinal ailments. Yep. That's right. That's him. And I've often heard that my soothing voice cures people's diarrhea.

Is that? Is that what they've told you? It's a blueberry powder extract. No, yeah. Tim, I think that's spreading scientific misinformation. I don't know if you can say that. It's my false advertising. Yeah, yeah.

All right. We got Lydia. My voice does not cure people's diarrhea. I'm very sorry. But I'm very excited to have Ashley on this evening. We're having a lot of fun talking over the show, and I think it's going to be a lot of fun. But don't forget, head over to TimCast.com. Become a member.

Because as much as, you know, I hate to say it, the world we live in is dreadfully censorious. The reason why this Elon Musk news is so good is because we may be taking back some ground in our ability to communicate. But there is a story coming out right now. Many people believe that the Roe v. Wade leak was to cover for the Pfizer data release. Well, our journalists started looking at the Pfizer data and the news that's coming out is so shocking. I am extremely confident that if I said even one data point from this data, we would be banned instantly. So how about we'll talk about the FDA's new announcement on the J&J vaccine and the censorship around that. And then we'll go to timcast.com for the news that they,

they're not going to let us talk about. It's unfortunate, but we can still do it on timcast.com and what I refer to as our little speakeys in the members only segment. And we also do have the articles up. So if you're not happy with the way YouTube runs things, don't worry. We have more infrastructure stuff happening as we move forward. We can't do it all at once, but I mentioned we are officially on Rumble's infrastructure for our website. So they can't take these articles down one step at a time. We're working as hard and as fast as we can. As a member, you're making all that possible. So don't forget, smash that like button, subscribe to this channel, share the show with your

friends. And let's take a look at this major update from the FDA. Today, we limited the authorized use of the Janssen COVID-19 vaccine to those 18 and over for whom other authorized approved vaccines are not accessible or clinically appropriate. And to those who elect Janssen because they would otherwise not receive a COVID vaccine. So that last part's particularly interesting. But the news is that it's over the blood clot risk. U.S. restricts use of Johnson and Johnson COVID vaccine over rare blood clot risk. The FDA said the shot should be given only to those who request it or cannot receive other vaccines. And you have to be 18 and older.

My understanding is that the data on this is not, I don't think it's new that we've known about the risk of blood clots for some time. It was actually taken off the market for some time. So I'm wondering if, I suppose my issue initially that we can jump into here, how many people should have gotten this FDA warning some time ago if we knew about the blood clot risk? Yeah, I mean, well, if this is something we knew about, everyone should have been able to know.

They should have been able to make an informed decision about what they were putting in their body and the risk it posed to them because this information was kept from us because we couldn't really accelerate the dialogue around the vaccines in order to get the best information about it because anyone who contradicted the narrative was told that they were not trusting the science there are serious consequences yeah and i guess we're talking about human lives here right it's in a society an ideal society immediately everyone should know if there's a problem like this but in hyper sensitive sensitive, censorious areas, you can't, that's the big problem with, with censorship, like not censorship in general, but just like miss misappropriated censorship or

over, over sensor. What are you going to? So I was going to say they, they, the establishment likes to do this retroactive fact-checking thing where let's say today a man gets in a rocket ship and flies off and he screams, I'm going to the moon. And we're like, oh wow, that was crazy. And then we come on this show and we say, did you hear the story about that guy who got in the rocket ship and yelled he was going to the moon? Isn't that crazy? A week later, the news comes out, he actually went to Mars. And what they'll do is they'll say fact check false will get flagged. And the right

story saying they spread disinformation about the man in the rocket ship who was actually going to Mars. So what happens is we can come out and talk about lab leak, for instance, in COVID. And we'll say, based on the current contextual information, our best assessment is this. A week later, the news changes. The fact checkers then take your old story and call you fake news based on information that came out a week later. Let me show you this right here. That's not what happens to Fauci, though, ever.

Oh, right, right. No, but they had a lot of this information, too. We knew. We knew about the blood clots. We knew about, especially with women, they were having issues with their menstrual cycles, and they covered it up, and all the headlines were,

it doesn't affect your period. It doesn't affect your menstrual cycle. The blood clots are. For the first few months, that was the story. And then a few months later, they're like, oh, by the way, women are reporting issues with their menstrual cycles. Take a look at this from Breaking 911. They say, strange how the AP's tweet, same exact headline, isn't flagged as misleading.

The AP said, U.S. regulators strictly limited who can receive J&J's COVID-19 vaccine due to a rare but serious risk of blood clots. The FDA said the shot should only be given to adults. Okay, so we know that. Now take a look at this photo. Breaking 911. Posting an image, breaking, FDA restricts J&J COVID-19 vaccine due to blood clot risk. Misleading. Learn why health officials consider COVID-19 vaccines safe for most people here's the best part that misleading tag linked to an april 1st fact check so old information fact checking a new breaking story and it could have been an april fool's joke for all we know that's right how are we supposed to know for sure well right now if you look at breaking 9-1-1

they've they've they've actually removed the misleading flag on it. But they do give Breaking 9-1-1, according to NewsGuard, a not – they give it a fake news. Here's where it gets even better. The headline used by Breaking 9-1-1 is identical to the New York Post. Now, I know they said the same as the AP. The AP's headline was different. It says serious but rare. Theirs doesn't.

But the New York Post is identical. That's the problem with censorship. So now we have the story coming out from Pfizer, this big data dump. And it's actually quite alarming. And the problem is the people working at YouTube right now, the censors, many of them are probably not even in the US. They have no idea so even this even this story right now breaking the fda has strictly restricted the j the j and j vaccine

we run the risk of getting banned because youtube sensors are looking at a little they got like a laminated placard and says when to ban someone they're like if they talk bad about vaccines you got to ban them uh well they they are. I guess I do. Yeah, probably more specific, they have a Slack channel where they send it out, this article. And they're like, is this bannable? They're like, well, no, it's got this. But if, you know, then they cross-reference it with like, if they do it in this context, yeah. If it's in this context, no.

No, no, no, no. And then they have to make individual decisions. These are outsourced. These are outsourced. The people who are doing the banning, many of them aren't in this country, not on Slack channels. And I think the fact that we're looking at Twitter, this is why I'm making the point. Twitter censored Breaking 9-1-1 due to month-old information. It's a news story.

That goes to show you the people who are flagging it are not communicating on what this news is. But they're not doing it for peanuts either. It's always in the best interest of these bigwigs like the Hunter Biden story. That was the most egregious of all. But the Hunter Biden story, they're protecting big pharma. It's all of these things. It's not peanuts that they're going after. But that's why we need the open source algorithm. That's why it's so important. And what Elon's doing is incredible. I will say to Ian's point, freeing the code, the one thing that we absolutely need to do is free the algorithm, the recommendation.

All of that stuff needs to be open source. I don't think these companies should be allowed to hide that because what do they do behind the scenes? They lie to Congress about censorship, manipulation. There was a really great question from a Republican.

I can't remember who they asked. They said, why is it that when you sign up for Twitter, you are shown nothing but Democrats to follow? Really? Yep. If you are in Washington, D.C., and you sign up for Twitter on a brand new computer, it gives you all Democrats.

And they were like, that must be an oversight on our part. Free the code. Until last Tuesday, yeah. Exactly. Release the code and let us know if you're lying or not. Because it's one thing, you know, we had this discussion the other night about whether all of the code should be released. Well, the infrastructure that holds the building up, I disagree with Ian on. But in terms of how they're manipulating what we see and what we think, you shouldn't be allowed to do that.

A lot of people messaged me about security through obfuscation, which is part of keeping your security code private. And they said that's been completely obliterated. It is useless. You need to open source the security code too so it can be poked and prodded and then resolved and made stronger. But when you say free the code, you've got to be specific. You need to make these things become interoperable. And I agree that you need algorithm observation. I'm saying specifically for now where I would agree on releasing the code to the public is Elon Musk says when he gets Twitter, he wants to make the algorithm open source.

And he should. That way everybody knows that they're not manipulating politics. I think they're already doing cleanup, though. I don't think they want us to know. And we saw that the unthrottling of so many accounts. I was like, wow, all of a sudden I have all these things. I gained like 200,000 followers in a few days. It's crazy.

I had been stagnant. I was still gaining, but it was stagnant for the most part. And then all of a sudden it was like the floodgates open up for so many people, but I think they're, they're doing cleanup and how fast they removed that warning shows it to that. They're,

they're a little more cognizant. I tweeted to Elon. I said, Hey yo, Elon Musk, check this. An old fact check has restricted a new story about the vaccine. It got a thousand retweets.

I think I'm not saying it was me. I'm saying a bunch of people were tweeting out like crazy. Yeah, for sure. What's going on? Yeah, you contributed for sure. You contributed to that. But one problem with open sourcing the algorithm here and seeing is that it doesn't stop an errant administrator from censoring something in India if they're working remote and they

are like, no, we're going to downvote that. You may be able to track that it happened, but you still don't know who did it and why they did it. That's all like business talk. Now you're saying, do we have to open up their Slack channels so we can watch them communicate? And that's like basically the beginning of the end of the corporation. But is that also justified? Let's talk about that, man. I'd be willing to bet a large sum of money that if you took Twitter's internal Slack channels,

which is their internal communication between employees. Assuming it's Slack or some other program like that. Yeah, whatever they're using. I don't want to drag Slack. Slack's a great company. But if they're using some kind of messaging service and you got to see the full archive, there's going to be tons of people saying, can we ban the conservatives? How do we get these people off the channels?

And we know this is not opinion because Project Veritas has already released videos where you have employees of these big tech companies saying, we tried to get them banned. We tried to get them removed. That was Media Matters. That was Media Matters who was bragging about getting Project Veritas and James O'Keefe ripped off. That reference I was giving was actually, I think, an employee from one of these companies saying that inside the company, we are trying to get them banned. But yes, you're correct.

They also got Media Matters bragging about getting... And I tweeted it out for them. I had never been mentioned by Media Matters that I know of. And I tweeted it out and I was making fun of that... Whoever was in the video. All of a sudden, I was mentioned in a Media Matters article for nothing, for my children's book, after I made fun of them. Yeah, Media Matters is an interesting organization.

We've had a couple conversations about them. And it's funny because you two are going back and forth about these different examples of the left basically being its persecution narrative with the story of some kind of hate crime is completely nonsensical and turns out to be untrue when you look into it just a little bit. That Gizmodo article, it's the best example of this. Facebook, former Facebook workers routinely suppressed conservative news outlets. This is what kicked off the whole story about censorship. And I see that. And it's 2016. I think I'm working for Fusion at the time. And I was like, hey, look at this news that I know and trust. Wow, they were censoring conservatives.

Then I come out and I say that it's happening and I get called a liar or right wing for saying it. Facebook's weird, though, because then they were giving a lot of money to Targeted Victory. Right. And that was a Republican group to make things against TikTok as a competitor. So they're weird. They'll do things like that. But now they give money to conservatives and so they're still censoring them. But it's just such a weird relationship because Facebook, I feel like, is different because they just do whatever for the money. Whereas I feel like Twitter is a little more beholden to the mob um but you're seeing me how fast they clean this up it took them how long for the hunter biden story and this this

this disclaimer is gone within what a day i think it's really fascinating didn't fauci say we're out of the pandemic or something like that i didn't hear it yeah i did not hear anything like that i didn't even know i i didn't even know fauci still existed well maybe you should pay attention to the fauci i thought he banned it i thought he banned it would you go to would you go to www.fauci.com you can't get into another pandemic until you get out of the old one right now we got the chicken thing happening i think bill gates was like when we get into the next pandemic he's getting everybody fearful about the next one already. He's like, we're releasing an update.

There's the chicken flu now that they're freaking out about. Wasn't that already a thing, bird flu? No, but it's like jumped to people. It's a new one? Jumped to a person. I kind of feel like I derailed your comment about Fauci. Was there something you were going to mention? Yeah, that he said something about we're out of the pandemic already.

I saw something like that. And I'm just wondering, you know, MythInformed posted that clip of the Joe Rogan podcast where I asked Vijay Agade, would they ban someone for vaccine misinformation? And she says, no, it's not against our policies. And, you know, sure, if they went and did it. So their policies changed because the pandemic happened. Now the pandemic's over. Is there the same level of risk? Yeah, this is from WashingtonPost.com. If Fauci says U.S. is out of coronavirus, quote, pandemic happened. Now the pandemic's over. Is there the same level of risk? Yeah, this is from WashingtonPost.com. If Fauci says U.S. is out of coronavirus, quote, pandemic phase. Well, there you go. That's from Fauci. That's from the science. And I'd say that as a joke. He is not the science. So does Twitter now give up its emergency powers and stops banning people for these

things because it's no longer a greater risk? No, I mean, when does any organization, government or otherwise, take power from the public because of some kind of emergency and then give it back once the emergency is over? I mean, uh-oh, what's this? WebMD says Fauci clarifies out of the pandemic phase. Uh-oh. He said, wait, I need another time cover. What are they saying here? He said, we don't have 900,000 new infections a day.

We are at a low level now. So if you're asking, are we out of the pandemic phase? We are. Okay. So, all right. Pandemic phase is over. So do we all move on? Is that it? Yeah. Well, it's over until they don't want it to be over anymore. This is part of what's so frustrating about this entire thing. They can flip the narrative in a second and then they say, oh, the science changes. And that would be all well and good if they were allowing any dissident who tried to provide the public data that didn't support their narrative of voice, right? But they silence everybody. And if the science is always changing, then that's all the more reason to allow people to speak out when they have a perspective that conflicts with the current narrative,

because the current narrative could always turn out to be untrue, but they want to have it both ways. The science is settled. It's unchanging. Shut up and listen to us. We were wrong. Oh, well, you know, science is a process. It evolves over time. Well, let's talk about some of the good news and what this means. We have this story from CNBC. Elon Musk expected to serve as temporary Twitter CEO after deal closes. He also raised an additional $7 billion from friends. So we'll start there. This sounds like really good news. I like Elon Musk, right? He's going to be the friends. So we'll start there. This sounds like really good news. I like Elon Musk, right? He's going to be the CEO.

So he's going to be able to go in with his own bare hands and start cleaning things up, firing people. It also means Parag Agrawal is out as soon as this deal is done. And by the way, when they say temporary, they're like Elon is going to temporarily be the CEO until he kills himself or dies of mysterious circumstances. No, no. Go ahead. Oh, no. Go ahead.

Oh, I have a feeling he wants to get in there, make some specific changes, listen to a bunch of people, and then if he sees someone he thinks is more qualified, he'll let them start executing for him. But here's where it's also interesting. He raised some money. I think $1.9 billion of the money he raised came from that Saudi prince who previously said he was not okay with the deal. So the new conspiracy theory.

Apparently, I don't know, look this up, Ian. Elon Musk was wearing a jacket at the Met Gala that said New World Order on the back, but in white embroidery on a white jacket so you couldn't really see it. You want to look that up? Based. Yeah, I'm looking it up now. Did it really? This is from investmentWatchBlog.com

Is it? Let me see if I can find it as well. Bloomberg confirms Elon is a young global leader for Klaus Schwab, WEF, Great Reset. This is the title from InvestmentWatch.com from April 16th. I think this might be fake news. That's a while ago. Oh no, okay, here we go. It was like almost a month, three weeks ago.

It could be. That was with Grimes. That wasn't this one. Yeah, this is old. What what is that photo that was an old photo but the 2018 met gallows the 2018 okay that says new world or well there you go yeah so he was wearing it says novus ordo seclorum meaning new world order on the back well his his takes are suspiciously based you know because it's all of it's like the red meat for what we want to hear. You're like, oh, you're calling out big pharma. Oh, you're calling out all of these people. Oh, you're replying to Cerno. You know, it's what's going on. It was overnight. So you have this wave of populism and they're resisting it. They're trying everything to censor it and shut it down. No matter what they do, they can't win. So they say, OK,

we need a ringer, someone who's going to flank the populists who are calling out this BS and be on their side and say everything they want. Elon Musk is also the guy who's up running Tesla plants in China or whatever, or praising China on Chinese social media. Pretty sure. We'll check into that. But so I don't necessarily care for the crazy idea because what he's doing is good for freedom, good for personal responsibility. You're never going to agree with someone 100%. And the thing about Elon is when you hear him talk, especially about AI and stuff, he seems genuinely concerned about the fate of humanity

and where we're going. So it might be genuine. Yeah, I mean, I was saying this when we were in Nashville and the story about Elon even discussing buying Twitter first broke. I am optimistic in some ways. I'm also cautious. You know, I'm not like a giant Elon fan, but I have liked what he's been saying.

And I'm going to take the evil I don't know over the evil I know because the people currently running that website are absolutely terrible. So I want to give the guy the benefit of the doubt here. But who knows? I mean, we should consider all possibilities. Elon Musk flanks the Liberty side saying everything they want to hear. Oh, yeah, the Epstein stuff. How come no one's talking about that?

Oh, look at these leftist organizations trying to shut us down. And then everyone's like, yes. And really, you're just buying into the same. It seems too based. It's too based. What are your gripes with Elon? and then everyone's like yes and really you're just buying into the same two based it's two banks and what are your gripes with elon um so some of what tim talked about with him having plants in china it it's not just that though my point isn't that i actively dislike him it's just that i i don't really know him or his agenda well enough at this point to say i'm a big fan or that i trust i'm a big fan i'm a dude's building I'm a big fan. I'm a big dude's building Starship, Starlink.

Those are awesome. Yeah, I'm certainly a fan of awesome. I'm a fan of a lot of the stuff he's doing. And I don't actively dislike him. Like I said, I'm very cautiously optimistic about what he's doing here. I like the things that he's doing, but I don't want to quite sign up for the, you know, Elon bandwagon. It's very conservative.

No, I'm very cool with everything Elon is doing for the most part. You take a look at Jeremy's razors. They make their razors in China, I believe. And a lot of people got angry. And Jeremy explained to us, this is Jeremy Boring, co-CEO of Daily Wire, you can't make these things here. It doesn't happen, so they tried.

And so he's like, if we raise enough money, absolutely we're going to open a plant here and do everything. And charge you three times more for the razors because there won't be slaves making them. And that's true, too. And then you've got Elon Musk praising China. The way I see it is I'm not as concerned about this. My concern is intent and what he's working on. So take a look at us, for instance. Here we are on YouTube knowing we can't talk about the FISA data release. Do we not do the show and have zero reach on any of these topics? Or do we say, okay, we're going to do what we can with the platforms we have and then try and find alternatives?

Elon Musk is doing so much good. Yes, he's got praise for China or a plant in China. But I'm wondering what the total weight is going to be. If it's like 60% doing really good things, fixing things, and then 40% is in the bad area, I'm like, it's not absolute. You got to weigh the good with the bad. And I would agree with you on that too. I would absolutely agree.

The one thing about Musk that I really do like, and I've mentioned this before, is the fact that he seems to be, at least in his rhetoric, very pro-human. And also not just in his rhetoric and his behavior, he has quite a lot of children. The man believes that human life is a good thing. He warns against the birth dearth or the fact that we're going to experience serious consequences from being underpopulated. So he's trying to encourage people to have more children.

I think those are all great things. Doesn't that sound weird, though? He's got like seven of them, doesn't he? Well, no. I mean, does he? He's got a lot. I just think it's weird for him to come out and be like overpopulation is a myth. It's like that's a little too on the nose.

Yeah, I don't know i just think every other billionaire on the planet and really every member of that kind of elite class says the exact opposite it's fantastic to have a voice who's bill gates telling the truth about it still spreading lies bill gates came out and was dragging elon and he was like i i think he's gonna make make it worse. The billionaires are fighting. But, you know, the annoying thing about Bill Gates is he's just such a evil person. You know, he's the kind of guy who's sitting there. He's talking in this interview about censorship. He's the kind of guy who would be like, I don't understand why poor people have messy homes.

Just have your maid clean everything for you and your butler can bring you your scotch. Did he actually say that? No, I'm making a joke. The point is, he says, we shouldn't allow people to have open communication on the internet. And it's like, yeah, you're a rich dude who can do whatever you want, and you don't want the poor people to have access to their rights of speech. I get it. That's the annoying thing. It's this vapid elitist, like, why don't you just have the help

clean your floors? Because people don't have help. They have to do it themselves. But he's this rich guy who's like, why would anyone want this information? Dude, you are not the arbiter of truth and morality. You're some dude who sold software. You are also not a healthy person either. And then he complained. Get this. He said, is Elon going to allow COVID vaccine misinformation? Twitter just censored new breaking information because of your stupid policies. So sit down and shut up. You have no idea what you're talking about, old man. You don't think he's a good health man? I was thinking about trying the Bill Gates diet. I want to figure out what he's eating. Well, you let your gut get really huge. You have to make

sure your neck is sticking forward and then hug yourself a lot when you're nervous. I think that'll get you right to where Bill's at right now. Bill, heal up, man. If all we get from Elon Musk

is this meme, Elon Musk has done the ultimate good. That's sweet. It is. Bill, fix your posture. Get a back brace. So he writes,

in case you need to lose a boner fast, and it's Bill Gates. And then next to it is the pregnant man emoji. But can I just point out how strange it is that Bill Gates is wearing a blue shirt, like the pregnant man, with a big gut, like the pregnant man. But the haircut. The haircut's the same. Same haircut.

No glasses, though. So bad. We're not overpopulated, by the way. The people are just mal-aligned at the moment. We have too many people in these small pockets of cities with not enough rail. It's hard to get food from the farm to the city. But if we have, like, low-orbit drone transfer, we could have, like, easily 17 billion people on this planet right now. Did you see the slingshot they made for orbit launching where it's, like, it's this tube, and they put something in it, and then it spins around like crazy and then That's what I'm talking about!

You put an underground track where you have a magnet push it so it goes up and then you kick on the propellers and take it the rest of the way. It spins really, really fast and then just momentum will get you into orbit. Yeah, it's an orbit-launching slingshot. And you can catch things like that from other planets when you slingshot it towards

the other planet, the other thing catches you and then slows you down. And then you're crazy. Sounds really uncomfortable. Imagine if farmers were like, we got the latest shipment of corn, and they put it in this thing that spins it and flings it into outer space, and it lands in London. By the time you got it, it would be popcorn.

Yeah. No, it wouldn't. Why would it be? You get so much heat, you're shaking it up. You would use propellers. No, no, no. We would it be? It gets so much heat. You're shaking it up. The fall. Yeah, I guess the – You would use propellers. No, that would be – No, no, no. We're coming back into the atmosphere. The sketch is on fire.

I think you've got to use ion thrusters in the stratosphere to guide it, and then once it gets out of the stratosphere again, or you press ion thrusters from above to push it back down, and then you kick the propellers back on to slowly bring it in. If it's lightweight enough, the friction won't destroy it. When I saw the meme that Elon posted about Bill Gates and the pregnant man, I couldn't understand because it's perfect. He knows we all hate Bill Gates. I mean, all the conservatives, the one billionaire they're like, no, it's Bill Gates. They're even okay with Jeff Bezos.

But this is because Bill Gates shorted Tesla. And he said, I can't take your climate change. When did he do that? He's got a $500 million short position. And Elon said, I can't take your climate change. When did he do that? He's got a $500 million short position. And Elon said, I can't take your climate change activism seriously if you have a short against the company doing the most to fight climate change.

I look at this meme and I'm like, it's like they made a cartoon of Bill Gates. Yeah, it's true. Because they made a cartoon of him. Yeah. Elon Musk, I have to say that I definitely admire him because he's one of the only voices that I've heard being actively pro human. Not pro life as such, but being very like, we need to bring up the birth rate. Kids are very important. him because he's one of the only voices that I've heard being actively pro-human, not pro-life as such, but being very like, we need to bring up the birth rate.

Kids are very important. He does have seven. I think he has seven kids by a bunch of different ladies, but he's doing his part. Like he's not like not practicing what he preaches. You think it's better to have seven kids with multiple wives or one kid with one wife? Well, I think it's better to bring seven children into the world with one woman. I think that would be the ideal life for those kids. But if you are going to tell people to have a bunch of babies, then you should be doing the same.

With a bunch of women? Sure, why not? I don't know about that. I mean, who's the father? Who's fathering these kids? Who's mothering these kids? Elon's the father. Who's mothering these kids?

Where are the kids at? Are they at their mom's or their Elon's? I think that he had five with one lady. I think he's probably got a lot of help. Yeah, he has a lot of help. So he's hired people to raise his kids? Where are the kids at? Are they at their mom's or their Eli's? I think that he had five with one lady. I think he's probably got a lot of help. So he's hired people to raise his kids? I agree with you that it's not good to have a bunch of different kids with different women. That's why I say

it's better to have seven kids with one lady. It's not ideal, but he practices what he preaches, right? I would love to have a hundred women with a hundred kids with a hundred women. You would have a hundred babies. Just walk away and not even have to think about it. How great life would that be for my wild animals? Did he build a school for his kids?

Well, I just want to say this. Trad con Ian. How disturbing is it that it's refreshing to us to hear one of the most powerful people in the world say that they don't think there should be fewer humans? He's probably the only billionaire that thinks that because many of them are like futurists and they're like, everything's bad. I want to make this announcement now, guys,

because we're moving on from censorship. We have this tweet from me. I'm excited to announce that TimCast.com is now officially hosted on Rumble Video's cloud services and video hosting. This is step one in utilizing and building more resilient infrastructure for communication amid the culture war and mass censorship. Big news just happened. PayPal banned a bunch of independent media outlets. Matt Taibbi wrote about it. The New York Post

picked it up. This is terrifying, and we don't know why. Russian disinformation or some other nonsense. When they come out with this disinformation governance board that they mayorkas was like it's not going to target americans no i'll tell you what's going to happen they're going to say the story about you know biden is russian disinformation then paypal and other financial services will ban independent media outlets that are are talking about or sharing this story considering we we did an article deep diving into the Pfizer data that we can't talk about on YouTube, I think it's fair to say that the powers that be are going to be not too happy with what our website is doing. However, our web services are now hosted by Rumble.

While I don't think Rumble is completely invulnerable or perfect, it's way better than being on Amazon, Google, or any other host that's going to be in Silicon Valley and going to have all these weirdo crackpot rules. So one thing we did is this. We've got a bunch of other stuff happening we're currently working on, but we're announcing it as it comes. So step one, get the website off of Big Tech Silicon Valley. There we go. It's part of a different kind of cabal that's forming, but at least it's market competition.

At least we're supporting someone who's giving the middle finger for now to Amazon Web Services. In the future, Rumble may become the biggest. They may be Amazon Web Services, but as long as there's competition, things are getting better. Chris talks a lot about, Chris Pavlosky, the CEO of Rumble, talks a lot about open sourcing stuff and decentralizing servers. I'm 100% on board and decentralizing servers. I'm a hundred percent on board with decentralizing servers. When you talk about open sourcing stuff, that's great, but the proof is in the pudding, my man, open source, the code, free the software, go AGPL3. Yeah. We don't talk about this enough, right? But AWS and the hosts who allow people to keep their websites up, they have a tremendous amount of power. We generally look at the big tech companies like YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, the ones that really allow you to get exposure. But you should be able

to have a website as sort of an escape hash. So you can direct your fans there in case you do get banned. But then it's the case that, like you said, Amazon could end up taking you out. And the other risk is we use PayPal. A lot of people said they don't like it and they didn't want to use it. And I know simply by talking about what PayPal has done to these independent reporters and personalities, we run the risk of putting ourselves on their radar. And they gave no justification for why they banned these people. And in one instance, I believe they said they're seizing the assets to see, like to decide what to do with it.

They've done that with bank accounts, too, though. Chase was banning conservatives. I believe Laura Loomer was kicked off of Chase banking. There's so many of them that they can't even bank they can't she couldn't use comcast services for her ads i believe so it's it's far-reaching and that's just the free market at work and it's acceptable but elon musk buying twitter is fascism yes yep thanks robert reich so we gotta do we gotta we gotta do a do a lot to continually expand our infrastructure. The first step was we're definitely looking at payment processors.

We're looking at video. So we're using Rumble's video hosting for all our member stuff. We're using Rumble's cloud services. The next thing we got to look at is payment infrastructure. But the reason we did this first was if they take the website down, like anyone in the chain says, we're not going to service you. We're not going to link your domain,

whatever. We're not going to provide you hosting. Site's gone. Financials, we lose money, but we'll figure something out. The next step is to secure this system and then we will be much more resilient. We got PayPal, Stripe.

I don't know if Stripe's on the site right now. Stripe is our primary. And then did you mention the other one, the Rumble? We don't have any other one. I think cryptos is very promising for the future. They finally started taxing it properly for the most part, so you can kind of get away with using it for payments. And then you don't have to dabble with the fiat at all.

You still got to pay taxes on it, but I think that's really, really good. It's all digital all the time and the Swift payment system can't mess with it, at least overtly. So here's my question, Tim. When we look at Rumble, we look at these other services. Is there a better way to do this eventually that we could imagine down the line

where there isn't some centralized service you have to go to in order to be hosted? Yeah, you want a decentralized service. I just look at Ian. You asked me a question. You were talking about mesh networking, which is where all of our devices are a piece of the server. And if one goes down, the server is still up because all the other pieces are working together. It works near frequency right now. You can get things like Noster, N-O-S-T-R. There's another one called Briar, I think, services where you can communicate

when it's not on the internet. You don't need an internet. You have a local net. That's kind of the future. If we can somehow link up some sort of global mesh net. Tesla was working on sending electricity through the ocean and underground to people. So we may be able to Wi-Fi each other underground. Oh, you mean actual Tesla? Nikola Tesla, yeah. And so we may be able to Wi-Fi each other underground. Oh, you mean actual Tesla? Nikola Tesla, yeah. And so we may be able to communicate with each other through ground. I thought you were talking about Elon Musk. I was like, wait, what?

Imagine you're swimming in the ocean and he gets out. That would be wild. But I guess it would be Wi-Fi. It wouldn't be electricity. It would be Wi-Fi. He was obsessed with sending electricity, which was really kind of hard. I think that was hurting stuff and causing crazy amorphisms in the environment. What does that mean? He caused, amorphisms in the environment. What is that?

What do you mean? Like, he caused an earthquake one time in Lower Manhattan. Did he really? Yeah. No, no, Nikola Tesla. Oh. It was, like, in the early 1900s, and they went down to his office. They're like, what's going on, dude?

And they came in and eventually shut him down because it was too much. They shut down his, what's it called, Wardenclyffe, his big tower where he was trying to project wireless electricity around. I don't know if he was damaging stuff with that, but they did it. Sounds like he might have been. You ever hear the story about that dude who made the radioactive death ray in his garage?

Yes. Yes, I did. I remember hearing about that a few years ago. What's the element called? Amerisium? I forget. Amerikium? I don't know how it's pronounced.

Maybe. It's like the word America. He was like collecting smoke detectors and then using the little radioactive bits and putting it inside like a container and then it would focus the beam and then he was like covered in radioactive like lesions. What part of that seemed like a good idea though? Well, the part where you'd end up having a death rate. Yeah. Duh.

I guess. What was he what was he gonna do that's wild i know that is wild maybe like the neighbor's cat kept coming over bothering him i guess the government found out and offered him a job but then he kept making death rays so they just eventually arrested him what did they think he was gonna do what did what did they think he was gonna do i don't know but like do you know what you will it's just like you made a death ray here's a bunch it's just like you made a death ray here's a bunch of money

you made more death rays for shame no no no think about it they found a guy who made a focused like radioactive beam that's silent

silent assassination you know you could like be in a cafe and like point it at some guy yeah it looks like it was an

americium americium 241 is the chemical yeah so death ray people at the cafe Tim Wikipedia calls him a radio americium. 241 is the chemical. Yeah, so... Death ray people at the cafe, Tim? Wikipedia calls him a nuclear radiation enthusiast

who built a homemade neutron source at the age of 17. Holy crap! Wait, but he died from the death ray? I'm not sure. He died in 2016, so... Could have been from multiple different things, but I'm assuming the radiation poisoning heads. David Hahn.

Yeah, David Hahn. Radioactive Boy Scout or the New Year Boy Scout. If I die and my name is Radioactive Girl Scout, that'd be awesome. Yeah, this was in 2007. Oh, this was second time. This is a second neutron device found in his freezer. It's crazy.

Larceny of smoke detectors. In Michigan, he did it when he was 17. Device found in his freezer. That's crazy. Larceny of smoke detectors. In Michigan, he was allegedly removing a number of smoke detectors from the halls of his apartment building. Where were his parents? Right, seriously. Oh, that's just little Jimmy building radioactive death rays in the garage. I think if you can build a radioactive death ray, you could probably escape your parents' view, you know? Yeah, probably. That's fair.

That's a fair point his death was ruled as an accidental result of intoxication from the combined effects of alcohol diphedra uh di phenhydramine yeah diphenhydramine and fentanyl yikes where did i i don't remember where i read this story but i remember reading it they said his mugshot he was covered in legions yeah so somehow we are talking about fighting censorship now we start talking about Nikola Tesla transmitting energy. We're talking about mesh networking. Now we have a guy with a death ray.

If we could build a stabilized mesh network, I'm really interested in the idea of sending Wi-Fi underground, through the ground. What do you think the effects of Wi-Fi everywhere would be, though? Man, that's been around a lot. I feel like it's not good for us. I think it's driving people wacky, like squirrely.

I think it's heightening people's tension. It's like watching TV all the time and your brain starts to get like really... Yeah, I think that's part of it. Diet and frequency. And the Wi-Fi. Maybe turn up the frequency. Diet and Wi-Fi. Yeah, that might be.

I've not seen a lot of evidence about it, though, but it just feels like it. There's different studies about how the rays affect like women's reproductive systems and stuff but i don't think we're ever going to know for a very long time well it's all non-ionizing radiation i would carry my phone in my left pocket from the age from like 2000 to 2014 and all of a sudden one day it started getting really sore my leg right where i took where i had it took it out for like three days and it was no longer sore. I no longer carry this thing in my pocket. Never, never, never, unless I have to get it somewhere. I did the Raisin Bowl thing, and I carry my cell phone in my underwear.

Yeah, that's where you go. That's much better. That's good, yeah. It's a codpiece. No problem. That'll keep you safe. It'll protect you from errant baseball. Put it in the beanie.

Put it in the little pocket up there. The beanie pocket. I always actually wondered about that, because when I was on the ground doing reporting, I would wear it on my chest, and the camera would would be rolling and it'd be clipped to my chest. And I'm like, if I ever get cancer in my chest, I'll know exactly why. But it's like, you have heart cancer. But I feel like we're not capable of operating as a species without all this stuff anymore. There's no way for us to disconnect now.

We went to, when we were coming back from Nashville, we stopped and we stayed at this beautiful place overlooking this waterfall. But there was no Wi-Fi. And it was really concerning. I was really upset for the night, kind of. I was like, what am I even worried about? How will I what? Fill in the blank. How will I connect with?

Just connect with nature, man. The waterfall smells great. We'll get back on track now. We have a story from Fox News. Gavin Newsom savagely mocked as disgusting transphobe for claiming men can't get pregnant at abortion rally. Quote, if men could get pregnant, this wouldn't even be a conversation, the governor told the crowd of abortion supporters. You know what is missing from this headline, though? He was mocked by conservatives in jest as a transphobe because the left doesn't care that he said this. But Gavin Newsom said that if men

could get pregnant this would be a conversation i was told back in 2016 by the daily beast that men were getting pregnant you have that story about the pregnant man what's he talking about wait so the left is not mocking him at all that's surprising to me because they usually eat their own i mean i am not surprised that conservatives are ripping on him but the left's usually pretty good they don't care they don't. We saw how fast they were able to define what a woman was when Roe leaked. When the decision leaked. They're like, all of a sudden we know what it is. Don't make laws

about women's bodies. This is why I don't get sarcastic as a rebuttal to someone I don't agree with because they'll take you out of context and make you sound like an elite. I agree with the argument that men should not be passing laws on women's bodies. Oh.

I completely agree. And that means that the Supreme Court in 1973 that was all male should not have enshrined Roe v. Wade, right? That's right. But they passed a law saying you can't pass a law. They what? They passed a law saying you can't pass a law.

They told the states you can't pass... They passed a law that... Or they made a Supreme Court decision that states can't pass laws. Yeah, that's amendment yeah the first amendment says they said we're choosing to decide that they can't choose whether or not to decide if you can choose that's literally what the constitution does like it restricts the government from doing certain things so this is funny when everybody got mad about the parental rights and education bill like jenkuger of the young turks he's just oh man he's always useless but he was like you're you're opposing free speech and it's like yo

the government can restrict itself like imagine if ian declared i will no longer be allowed to talk about freeing the code they'd be like you're violating your free speech like no he's choosing not to talk also i'm curious if jank thinks that not being able to teach creationism in schools is a violation of religious freedom. It's a violation of free speech. Teachers should be allowed to discuss creationism with kids in secret. And say, don't tell your parents what we taught you

here today, alright? And the math problems are like, what was the one? Jesus rose. No one needs to get the animals on his ark. There's two animals that eat species. There's this many species. How many animals do we have? To create some nuance on the government

restricting itself, you've got the federal government restricting the state government. And those are not the same governments. You might argue they're both similar. They're not restricting them, though.

I mean, they're giving them the freedom. No, no, no, no. Like, the First Amendment at the federal level protects us against state repression as well. But that was a court case.

Someone was mentioning this on the show that it didn't used to be that way that the federal governments only referred to itself and the states refer to themselves but at some point the federal government superseded all of the states it had to do with the farmer revolt like 1783 i think i'm not sure those those years are right but oh anyways also later well yeah also on this point of it being a restriction of free expression to not tell, you know, to not allow teachers to spread their perverse sexual practices for students. I mean, like, OK, even if that was the case, then fine. Teachers shouldn't be expressing their perverted sexuality to students. But it's not as if there is such a thing as a right, A, to have secret conversations with other people's children, but B, to be part of an institution that the parents are funding with their tax money

and not give the parents a say in what their children are being taught. There's no such right. Actually, Seamus, it's the 31st Amendment that teachers shall have the right to have secret conversations with children about sex and tell the children not to tell their parents. See, this is why I got to study civics more, man. Oh, that's the Constitution in 20 years. I'm sorry.

If you want to talk about sex with my child, do not pass go. Do not collect $200. Straight to jail. Straight to jail. Are you or will you homeschool? I don't know. He's peeing on me right now. I haven't really gotten that far. Have you educated him about not peeing on you yet?

No, I just tell him elephants are not birds. You can buy the book at Brave Books. Brave Books? You have to be like, excuse me, sir, please don't pee on me. Please stop peeing on you yet? No, I just tell him elephants are not birds. You can buy the book at Brave Books. Brave Books? I'm not reading it. Brave Books. You have to be like, excuse me, sir, please don't pee on me. Please stop peeing. No, you know what he does?

In one day, you'll pee in the toilet. You know what he does? He laughs and then he pees. That's great. Because he likes my reaction. I scream every time. So he laughs and then he pees. Oh, good for him.

Someone else laughed until they peed last night. Who was that? Oh, my gosh. What? That was a dream I had. I don't remember. Maybe it was a dream. You had a dream you laughed until you peed?

No, it wasn't me. No, I was watching scare videos on YouTube and some girl was like, and looked down to see if she peed herself. What kind of stuff are you watching? So many things. What were we talking about? Gavin Newsom changed his political position for convenience. Oh, yes.

I said, pro tip, if they say no uterus, no opinion, just remind them that trans women are women. And somebody said, sarcasm further entrenches differing opinions. You're literally doing their work for them by further adding credibility to the premise, even if you're trying to be funny. I'm not trying to be funny at all. I'm trying to illuminate to them the duplicity of their own arguments by using them. They don't care. I tweeted pregnant men have no say in abortion because they are men. I don't care if they don't care.'t care i tweeted uh pregnant men have no say in abortion because they are men i don't care if they don't care i care if the people watching care well yeah but

the people who already agree with us i guess you know what we're looking for is people who aren't paying attention moderates yes you know to see the people who aren't paying attention they're not necessarily moderates they're also liberals who aren't paying attention they don't know what's going on but i tweeted pregnant men have no say in abortion because they are men and i really do feel like it's a it's a perfect tweet because it's uh it's it's you literally can't argue anything about it because like they're both left-wing positions but they both contradict they both contradict so it's like which of your positions are you mad about yeah so it's like tell me i'm wrong but which of your positions are you mad about that men can't have a say on this or that pregnant men do

have a say in this i'm i don't even care. I'm just so tired of the not common sense. Like men are not women. I don't care. I don't even need to make fun of your argument. Like common sense is common sense. Men are not women. And I'm so tired of living in this clown world. It's a clown world at this point.

Yeah, men are not really able to get pregnant, right? No. Okay. No. Not at all. I'm not sure what. Let's break it down. Here's what happens.

Blair White is always the go-to example, conservative trans woman. But I bring up Blair because Ben Shapiro said in writing he would use he, him pronouns for Blair because Blair is male. But in public, it's too complicated to explain to a person that Blair is male. So if he was like someone said where should i sit oh go sit by her because he can't if he says him people would be like where i don't see you know can you say blair but if the person didn't know who blair was and so what happens then is we recognize that you know someone who is like a trans man or a trans woman for ease of conversation people might be like oh her she

etc but then it translates into a legal realm where a younger generation who's growing up with it says then they are women if you accept this so it starts with tolerance of being like okay for the ease and purpose of communication we'll just say we get it. But then young people are like, that's a woman. And so now you have men can get pregnant when man is defined as adult human male, adult human males can't get pregnant. So I tweeted trans women are not adult human females because they're literally not according to every dictionary, to Wikipedia, to every encyclopedia, to every understanding. And I got two reactions. One was, congratulations, Tim, you idiot. You just discovered the difference between sex and gender. The others were, you're a bigot. That's not true. Why would you say this? And like,

now we're going to come after you. And I'm like, I didn't say anything to anybody. I didn't target anybody. I didn't insult anybody. I made a fact statement based on Wikipedia. That's all it was. Yeah. Well, also well also oh you discovered the difference between sex and gender actually there is no such distinction it was invented by a pervert and pedophile named dr john money yes he was a weirdo he was an actual he was a very what what didn't he had studies about um like seven year old that's kinsey oh well money also did so yeah dr john money had a a an infant boy given a sex change at a young age because he underwent a botched circumcision and then had the parents raise him as a girl. And then both of them killed themselves. Yeah, he forced him and his brother.

He forced him to live as a girl and he forced him and his brother into doing, like, depraved acts on camera. Adult acts. Yes, yeah, on camera and filmed it. Disgusting pervert. He coined the term as gender identity, sexual orientation. He got the DSM to adopt the term perinephilia instead of deviance. They both killed themselves. This is the double-edged sword of TV, radio, Internet, is that we see this crazy stuff now.

Because people have probably been doing this for millennia, chopping people apart and doing it. But now we see it. But they weren't celebrated like they are now. Exactly. No, you saw how gross it was at the time. But the double-edge of that is that the mind virus can spread. If people think they're frogs and people don't feel accepted and they want to be part of a group, they go to become part of the I'm a frog group.

Especially for children, too, and it's really confusing to tell them. It's interchangeable at any time you want. I mean, if you tell a kid they're a rabbit, they're going to hop around and ask for carrots. That's just how kids are. I'm in New York City. You have nine-year-olds there that are saying they're going to hop around and ask for carrots. That's just how kids are. And you have, I'm in New York City. You know, you have nine-year-olds there that are saying they're transgender. And they are presenting as, you know,

a little girl presenting as a boy. And their parents are okay with it. And it's like a status symbol there. It's like, oh, I'm so loving and accepting. And they're putting it on these kids. Like, this kid's not a boy. They have no idea what they're doing. There's a Libs of TikTok video that just went up

where the mother is doing a grammar lesson with her child, her son, and it's a bunch of sentences. Juan went on the swing. Sarah rode her bike. Or Sarah, you know, got on her bike or whatever. And it's like, which pronoun would you use? And he

put they for all of them. And the mom was like, why did you do that? And he's like, because we don't know what gender they are. And she goes, but look at their names. And he goes, you said nothing is a boy or a girl. And she was like, but their names. And then she went, well, I guess I have to give you an A because I did say it. It's like, she's confused that when she tells a little boy, these names are not boy or girl. So he goes, I guess I'll use they because he doesn't know the difference between a male and a female name. I i mean the ideological underpinnings of the left that have been forced on this country have actually mandated adults to become dumber than children is the moral of that story because

they want to throw out rationalization and reasoning they don't want you to think my fear is that it hasn't even been forced on people that they've acquiesced to a chosen it because they feel so dissolved over the future no No, I think kids are pressured. The kids are forced into it. The adults, however, are disenfranchised. They have no hope, so they revert to insanity. No, no, no. You're missing the big picture here.

We used to grow up in the real world. We used to have animals. We used to watch animals. We used to watch each other. We used to be on farms. We used to work hard. We used to recognize that if you didn't wake up at 6 a.m. until the field, you didn't eat. Now we have everything.

We have good times making soft people. They don't see livestock. They don't know how animals work. They don't know where their food comes from. So they're growing up completely detached from reality. That's what's happening. That parent who's like, why is my son doing these things? It's because she grew up in a bubble world with no requirements.

So it's just this confused state of i should have things for free nothing is real blank slate all of that stuff you look at people who grow up in rural areas and they're like better farm or that's it no food yeah we had a guest on a couple weeks ago that said that they'd never even had to do i think it was um oh gosh it was uh the cowboy. Oh, Braxton. Yeah, Braxton McCoy. Philosophical cowboy, someone called him or something like that. He said that he never really had to have sex ed talks with his kids because they grew up on a farm.

So they already knew. Check this out. You didn't even need to give the chicken sex ed. We have Chicken City. They just know. We have Chicken City on in the basement. And I can't remember who it was the other day said, uh-oh, a fight's breaking out. And the chickens were doing it.

And I was like, bro, the male jumped on the back of the female and then started thrusting, and you thought it was a fight. Another thing that happened is I had someone say to me, so why would you want to have roosters? Do they lay different kinds of eggs? Yes. No. They do, yeah.

And I was like, roosters are... Deport them.ing deport them immediately i don't blame people i blame civil i blame our society but it's like it's it's a natural process we've come to the point where we are so pampered where we have we have factory farms i know a lot of people dispute the idea but listen i'm talking about the pink slime that is chicken nuggets you used to have to go and you'd raise the chickens and you're throwing grains or whatever or you're turning over the wood for the bugs.

And then eventually you're like, time to eat this chicken. Time to eat these eggs. You know what was really crazy to me? And I mean, craziest experience. Growing up in a city, the first time I ate my own chicken's egg, I was like, do I have to do anything to it?

Do I have to clean it? Can I just eat it? Sterilize it? Should I put hand clean it? Can I just sterilize it? Should I put hand sanitizer over it? Tim got the dish soap and a sponge out. He was scrubbing that thing off. The only reason I haven't been eating them is because I'm afraid they're fertilized. They are all fertilized.

Does it matter? No, it doesn't. You just get a little half-grown chicken fetus in there when you crack it? No, it's like a little white dot. Which is the chicken fetus, basically? Well, it's the spunk from the rooster. Is it okay to eat? Yes. Yeah, I imagine. See, that's like a little white dot. Which is the chicken fetus, basically? Well, it's the spunk from the rooster. Is it okay to eat? Yes. Yeah, my man.

See, that's the crazy thing. Throughout human history, since the chickens were like, what, 100 AD, that question was not asked. Is it better for you to have a fertilized part? No, no, no. Like, imagine being a kid growing up in the year 200 AD. Actually, did you guys see The Northmen? They mentioned something about being a slave. Because they were Nordic slaves.

And he's like, you'll go out working with the silkies. Silkies are kind of chicken. They've been around for a long time. They're so fuzzy. Yeah, they're fluffy. And they're funny. And they're goofy. And they make funny sounds.

Little blue eggs. Listen, listen. People would walk into the forest and grab chives right off the ground and go, food. And they would walk back. And they'd put it down. They'd go, hey. And they'd all just eat it. It's like, that's food. You can't do that.

I get anxiety going to the grocery store because I'm like, what's in this? I'm like, is this real chicken? Is this pumped full of saline? Probably is. We're better off with cleaner foods, but to a limit, right? I watched some documentary about how they mixed beef with ammonia to get rid of the bacteria from it and then

mix it back into other meat. Well, even the chickens we have now are like mutants. They're mutant chickens that we have now. They're nothing like... I mean, the difference between chickens now and 100 years ago, they're flavorless. They're giant. They're mutants. Exactly. Good times create soft chickens.

That's right. Good times create mutant chickens. That's right. Good times create mutant chickens. That's right. Mutant chickens create hard times. It's true. Hard times create normal chickens. But so here's my point. Here's my point.

We, I remember it was like 2014. I got first chickens ever. They laid eggs. And then I was like, okay, I've never done this before. And I'm, how old was I like then? This is, what is this? Eight years ago. So I'm like, okay, I've never done this before. How old was I then? This is, what is this, eight years ago. I'm like 26, 27.

I'm like, I have never eaten an egg from a chicken before. What do I do? I'm looking up online. Do I have to wash it? Do I have to cook it to a certain temperature? It basically said, if you keep your chicken safe and healthy, you can eat it raw. I was like, what? No, you could sell manila. It's like, no, that's because of modern poultry conditions and stuff and i was like really so timmy's like i'm going

rocky crack that egg put in a cup threw it back yeah do you eat them raw at all saying i the tiger no i use them to make um i've been making like a nut bread it's amazing you just mix some nut powder like walnut powder and some almond flour with the egg and then you microwave it you get a little bun and then i put cheese and egg and bacon i love i do bird's nest so you make a let you cut out a little circle in the middle and then you crack the egg and you can dip it in it you make it nice and runny but the other thing too is uh we have chives in the yard all over the place because chives grow early season and i just went out we grabbed a whole bunch and chopped them up and threw it in our beef it was so good we have wine berry got more flavor than anything you buy at the store too.

Yeah, refrigerating it can destroy the flavor. Especially with tomatoes. Wine berries. You see these? They got Appalachia all over the place. They're little Chinese raspberries that are everywhere. During wine berry season, you walk outside and you get like two pounds in like 20 minutes. You just shuffle them into bowls. But people who live in cities

don't know anything about this. So they're just they are they are like children so you know i'm not trying to be overly disrespectful i am saying quite literally 200 300 years ago people had to mature they had to survive hardship today it's so good that these people are confused about whether or not they can eat an egg yeah no and the food we are getting is just so bad. I think you can fact check me on it. I think you have to eat like eight peaches now

to get the same nutritional value as a peach like 50 years ago. Yeah. Everything, even fruit, veggies. It's just, I don't know what it is. That would be a question for you. I bet people would eat the eggshells back in the day. Yeah, probably. I bet people would eat orange rind.

They'd be like, don't waste it. Of course, yeah. You know what I bet's good is putting the eggshells in your bathtub when you're taking a bath and soaking in that water. I bet that's really good for your skin. Just a thought came to me, yeah.

I was thinking about this. Skin tougher? It's so good. It just goes right through porous. I had a friend in Arizona who lived by what she called a citrus tree. And it was because she was like, all the different citrus-like crossbreeds

or whatever. Yeah, they're kind of hoes. Weird fruit. But I'm looking at this tree or whatever weird fruit but i'm looking at this tree it's true i'm looking at this tree and it's just got like 500 oranges or whatever in it and then i'm like man imagine being some just you know like nomadic tribal person and you're looking for food and you come across this one tree with all of these fruits and you're like and you just take it all and you're like look what i found and everyone's like oh food because like food's hard to come by and they're like eating it like crazy and they're just eating whatever they can get and not just food oh sorry liz you go no you go i was gonna say you can get these citrus like fruits that have like horns like a devil

because they're so weird and kind of incestuous. And they like mix with all different kinds of citrus. You can get like grapefruit crossbreeds with lemons, crossbreeds with limes. You get these weird, funky things that are really good. They're great for humans. But anyway, shame is. Yeah, no, I was just going to say, if you came across that, it's not just that you found food. It's that you found a very rare and very sweet and very delicious food.

Nowadays, we've sort of been spoiled by these foods that have very intense flavors that would not occur naturally in nature right well that was redundant but you'll come across like historically if someone found an orange or a strawberry or an apple i mean that was really a treat for them like this is delicious and nowadays people like fruit gross i want a kit kat yeah let's uh let's let's like let's circle back we're going to circle back to this uh political story we have this from the daily mail you guys want to talk about civil war let's talk about civil war louisiana advances bill classifying abortion as homicide republican representative behind the bill says the state cannot wait on the supreme court the move on wednesday came two days

after the leaked draft about roe v wade louisiana state rep danny mccormick a republican introduced the abolition of abortion act in march the legislation approved in a 7-2 committee vote Louisiana state rep Danny McCormick, a Republican, introduced the Abolition of Abortion Act in March. The legislation approved in a 7-2 committee vote now moves to the state's full house. The Louisiana bill is one of a raft of proposals by lawmakers in conservative states. Such restrictions could go further than the so-called trigger laws, bans, and other regulations that will take effect in some 26 states should Roe be overturned. So let's talk about what this means. If abortion is homicide, that means a lot in terms of what happens to abortion providers.

Can I ask you something? Is there a difference between the legal classification of homicide and the legal classification of murder? If you're to write a law that says X is homicide, does that mean it's open to being considered murder, but not necessarily considered murder in every case? Or is it a different degree? Homicide means a human killed a human. Yeah, exactly.

So homicide could be involuntary manslaughter. It could be first-degree murder, second-degree murder. I'm curious if this is specified in any way. Did they mention the degree? They're saying it's homicide, which means they're granting life rights to the fetus. Yeah.

Which means what? Are they part of the census? I asked this before the show. It's a silly question, but are they going to classify these now humans as part of the census when they're taking a census? Come on. I mean, they're not human. They're not people yet. They're not giraffes, man. They're not people, though. They're developing fetus humans.

They're not people until they get a birth certificate legally. No, that's the logic they use to keep slaves in. Well, that's the law. That's the law. If you want to change the law and say that they're people and give them a birth certificate on conception. No, no, no. The law isn't that you gain personhood with a birth certificate. There's no law that says that.

I mean, there's no person until there's a personality no that's not true or until it's legally called a person let's look up what a person is actually that's a good idea let's get semantic I mean it's a philosophical distinction right but I would actually make the argument that the distinction between

you know so I guess you can make an argument that there are persons who aren't human right but every human is a person you can make an argument that there are persons who aren't human, right? But every human is a person. You can't not grant rights to a living human being. A person is the body of a human being. That's been the worst civil rights violations in our country's history is when we've tried to define personhood and who is or who is not worthy enough to be a person. So this is where I think the abortion issue is very much our second Civil War catalyst. They had actually argued in pre-Civil War

that slaves didn't have personhood, that they didn't have the same rights. The Constitution didn't apply to them. They had no personhood. You cannot allow someone to arbitrarily decide when a human being is a person. Or women weren't even granted the same rights just a couple decades before roe was was uh passed yeah well the argument i would make and part of why i'm saying that there are persons who aren't human is like so for example it is a

little tricky definitely it's a little tricky definition wise and i appreciate asking the question because my my first thought was well maybe it's a false distinction but also i know that like as catholics we will use the the phrase person to sometimes apply to the the members of the trinity but that said when you're talking about human beings specifically and people try to create this distinction between a human and a person to me that sort of smacks of the arbitrary distinction between gender and sex i think it's just a false distinction created so that you can do depraved things you have right now ian what you're saying is these human beings are not people because we haven't written the paperwork for them basically yeah legally so but that but that's not there's seven definitions of

the word person which is annoying but i'll pick the sixth one because i think that's the one this is from miriam webster uh one such as a human being a partnership or a corporation that is recognized by law as the subject of rights and duties. So if they change the law, they become people, I guess, by that definition. The point is, you asking for paperwork, I reject outright. That means you would assert the right of the state to say, we've decided that Ashley's not a person for these arbitrary reasons. So do they count towards the census?

That's a question for the census. For this governor guy. Not for personhood. Ian, can I ask you something? Because the birth certificate also mentions the sex of the child. Are they ambiguous with respect to their sex prior to getting a birth certificate because of that? If you don't know what the sex is, yeah.

But there was tort law for years and decades in this country that recognized the unborn as persons as regards to you know inheritance and different things like that i mean we had those laws when the 14th amendment was ratified identifying tort laws identifying the unborn as persons and it can also be because i mean there are people who have also been punished and uh you know for for killing a woman who was pregnant and yeah there's enhanced penalties if you kill a baby in the womb but you were about to explain i'm sorry i cut you off i think ian asked you a question yeah he said what were those tort laws yeah so tort laws i mean there

there are laws that from what i understand and i'm not you know a legal scholar but they were laws that were like kind of not laws but they were recognized for the most part as like common law in the united states but tort laws mostly refer to property um but there were tort laws in terms of inheritance for the unborn in the United States. And what's interesting is the Roe v. Wade decision, they hinged it so strongly on the 14th Amendment and this, you know, right to privacy. But when the 14th Amendment was ratified, we had these tort laws recognizing the unborn as persons and, you know, having rights to certain things. So it was just the mental gymnastics that was done in this in the road decision in general just as an abuse

of discretion and constitutionality is insane and also when someone uses a phrase like we found this in the penumbra of the shadow you can say there's there could be a chance that this is mental gymnastics we saw this was like they said it was enumerated rights followed by enumerated problems right and they just first of all there's not a right to privacy at all there's no right to privacy in the constitution you have some right to privacy as it refers to the fourth amendment and you know unwarranted searches and seizures but you don't have a right to privacy at all oh this is interesting what is this interesting i mean i have to think about that i have to so concerning the tort law you mentioned, is it so like if a woman is pregnant and the father dies, his inheritance, say the mother and the father dies.

You'd have to look it up because I don't want to say the wrong thing, but there was tort laws that recognize them as persons. I'm on PubMed. It says prenatal tort law on the personhood of the unborn child, a separate legal existence, but I can't find it. I'm looking for documents. So I have a docket from the Supreme Court. I just pulled it up.

I've got to look into it a little bit more. There's a fantastic book, too, called Abuse of Discretion. It says the corpus of the Supreme Court opinions from 1850 to 1880 suggests that an unborn child is a person within the meaning of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Fascinating. That is fascinating. So I have to look up what this is. Yeah, I want to read so many people think that the argument is just oh you know i think abortion is moral but no there was serious abuse of discretion as it comes to the way they decided this there was

populationist theory in the clerk's memos um there was incredible influence from populationists when they decided row it is incredible when you look into it you look from the clerk memos and everything like that. There were so many more things that influenced even Ruth Bader Ginsburg said it wasn't about women at all. It wasn't about women. No, abortion is not about women. It's about the abortion. I mean, it's about the abortion industry profiting off of slaughtering unborn children. It's about allowing men consequence free access to women's bodies, like consequence free sexual access. It really is about keeping people that are poor from having 50 kids. Yep.

It's sad, but that's a big part of it. It's very sad. I agree. Because human life is only valuable if that person is born into a middle class or upper class family. Yeah, that's the only way it matters. It's very sad. I mean, that seems to be the dominant modern view.

The challenge here with not recognizing personhood for the unborn is like a baby at eight and a half months who's not yet been born inside the womb next to a baby that is eight and a half months from the point of conception that was emergency delivered via C-section. That baby that's out of the womb can't be touched. But the baby that's still in the womb of the exact same development could be executed.

That is the way to go. I agree with you. That is so weird. You had Northam talking about not resuscitating babies after they're born. No, no, no. No, no, no. Resuscitating them and then having a conversation about what to do next is what he said.

Insanity. This is the question I have. Look. Evil. I can understand an argument from the point of first trimester, nothing second or nothing third in terms of abortion. But when you're talking about a viable baby that outside the womb of its own independent life

could not be harmed under penalty of law and a baby exactly the same, but in the womb can be, something doesn't make sense. It seems like all these laws were written way back in the day before modern technology where you could do an ultrasound or like see the baby struggling

during an abortion process, trying to avoid the forceps or whatever. Like before you you knew the gender before it was born because the 14th amendment specifically says after they're born and their no their standard was much different so their standard was quickening back then for abortion when they did have abortions even back in the day the standard was quickening which was when you felt the baby and then when they felt they found out that oh this dude's actually alive a little sooner than that, they amended it to, hey, we should not be doing these as soon as we know that they're there. They thought that was conception. They didn't know that quickening was not, okay, I'm pregnant.

This is when the baby, like it's just. What is quickening? Quickening is when you can feel the baby moving. And so they had no idea that that was not conception. Yeah, exactly. you can feel the baby moving. And so they had no idea that that was not conception. Yeah, exactly. And so the development of embryological science has made it so much more clear that it is a living person.

I mean, I've mentioned this before on the show, 95% of biologists surveyed say life begins at fertilization. And so the science is very much settled on this issue. I would say it makes it very clear that it's a living organism. Whether or not it's a person is a legal discussion makes it very clear that it's a living organism. Whether or not it's a person is a legal discussion. Well, what do you call a living human? Is a living human not a person?

It depends on what stage they're in. If it's the two days after conception, you could argue it's about to be a human living, and then it develops into a human, but it's not really a person. I mean, the whole idea of a person is that it's got a personality, that it can communicate, that it's a person. I don't want to be on the wrong side of that argument, right? Because like I said, the worst civil rights violations in our country's history and the world have been when we've tried to decide who is or who is not a person. And I just don't want to touch that.

I don't want to be on the wrong side of history. And that's just where I'm at. Well, we're kind of creating history right now. And I don't want to be on the wrong side of it. There was. There's no right or wrong here. We just got to do the best we can. Who cares?

Well, Ian, so here's why I would push back on that. So I think there are arguments that I could make against your definition of personhood and in favor of the idea that the unborn child is a person at all stages. But I believe that the burden of proof is actually strongly on the one who says it isn't a person. I think you actually have to prove that because, for example, if I'm going to detonate a building, I need to know that there is no person inside of it. I can't say, well, there might be, we don't know. It's a complex philosophical discussion about whether there's a person in there. We're just going to detonate it. And if someone dies, someone dies. I think we all recognize you need to be 100% perfectly clear that the activity you're partaking in is not the

killing of a person before it's permissible at all. And that hasn't been proven. And it hasn't been proven because it is a person. But I don't even hear left-wingers, I don't even hear people in favor of abortion try to advance an argument that it's not a person. They just say it isn't or they say you haven't proven it is a person. It's like the burden of proof is on them. They say it's a lump of cells. I mean, I don't want it to make it emotional.

You had a baby. You had one inside of you. So you understand, I guess, I would think that it to make it emotional. You had a baby. You had one inside of you. So you understand. I would think that it starts to develop a personality before it leaves the female body at some point. Whether or not you can interact with it or not. What does personality have to do with someone? A personality is derived from the person. It's just these vague terms. No.

If there is a mute deaf child, we don't say they have no rights. So I would say it has a personality. It might react different to different stimuli in the womb. So that's a type of personality you could argue. Be a person. This one doesn't like loud noise. Get rid of all people with no personality. So what about when a person is unconscious, they're not displaying any traits of personality?

No, but they've already been established it's a person that's unconscious. Let's say someone finds a naked person in a hospital, like a naked person in the forest who is completely unconscious and not responsive but has a heartbeat do you just be like that's not a person I can do whatever I want to it do they have personhood if they have no mind

if you find bro if you find an unconscious woman and you do anything to that woman you're going to prison for a while so if you find a body

someone like you said I don't think I don't know if vegetable is probably an insensitive way to talk about it but if someone has basically zero brain activity and there's just a heartbeat and a body then is it a person so yes yes but also you will go to prison for doing something to that body like

physically harming it and then even then there isn't really a perfect comparison there right because in the case of an unborn child we know that we are what 99 sure that they will end up developing all of the cognitive faculties that you're mentioning a person in a coma lacking yeah this is why i brought up birth control at the beginning if that's also like plan b i just want to say the person the definition of personhood given by google is the least helpful thing the least helpful definition the quality or condition of being an individual person. Thank you so much.

What about conjoined twins? Are they not people? The other definition they give personhood or personality is the status of being a person. Oh, thank you. Thank you so much. This is the first thing they teach you in an etymology class. You can't use the word in the definition. In or as if in a play.

That's the definition of person. Come on. If you look at the Supreme Court docket, it says according to Webster's Dictionary, a child is a, quote, person not yet of the age of majority. So we are using the word person in the definition, but the understanding is that someone who is small is just a person who hasn't reached, for

example, the age of consent. This is why we understand that children cannot consent to sex, although this has gone somewhat by the wayside in the age of trans children but this is something that they were mulling even back when they were looking at abortion in the first place i just think it's kind of simple can you kill a human unprovoked for no reason no only if they can't only if you're in the military only if they can't make noise well that's that i said no reason in the military... In the military, if you see a kid walk...

Well, yeah, you're supposed to have a reason. You're supposed to have a reason. You definitely can't just go kill a kid. You can. They have the power to, and they have done it in the past, for sure. Look at the My Lai Massacre in Vietnam. You can physically do a lot of things. The point is, under the law, as you so...

Yeah, but they'll get protected. Look at the My Lai Massacre. All those guys got protected except for the captain that initiated that massacre. The point is, is there a reason? But did the children have personality? Is there a reason? Yes. War was the reason.

Can you walk up to a random person and just end their life? The answer is no. Is a fetus a human being? The answer is yes. Therein lies the major conundrum. The left has to define a way when life begins, otherwise abortion. If you were to operate under the pretext of the 14th amendment as per roe v wade the actual ruling should be that you can't perform an abortion

because it would violate the equal rights under the law of the of the fetus which is a human being now they'll try and use the argument that it says person's born but then you run to the conundrum which i mentioned earlier a baby who is born at eight months and a baby who is still in the woman eight months are identical in every way one doesn't have rights because of the layer of flesh around it yeah that's modern technology is has is forcing us to change the law no no that's not modern technology there were many circumstances in which a baby was born at eight eight months and survived eight months is viable without you know i mean you might need some medical intervention but let's say eight let's say let's say nine months and one

baby went a little bit longer than nine months the law right now is a baby at nine months fully delivered and healthy and crying and a baby that hasn't been delivered one can legally be killed because they haven't been given and they're the same thing i know when i got a 40 ultrasound it was this he looked just the same when he came out and he'd go in the same little position i'm like you're the same little kid that i saw oh gosh I just saw a picture somebody on Twitter showed who was it they showed the ultrasound and the baby with his arms up yeah

and I want to mention I mean yes it is the case that in 1973 our prenatal science was not as developed as it is today we didn't know enough but that's no excuse it's horrifically irresponsible to say well we don't know a whole lot about the circumstances in the womb. So we're just going to err on the side of go ahead and kill it.

Well, and even then, you know, they said it should be rare. Right. And that was the big thing. Even Joe Biden was saying it should be rare. And we've gone so far that not only is it legal and acceptable, but they're shouting their abortions. It's constant. They make it like it's removing a wart. And it's a simple, easy procedure that has

no consequences. I just want to mention one thing. I know I'm sort of talking about the science here. I think it's straightforward. I think it's common sense that it is a person the entire time it is a human being because that's the only reason anyone wants to kill it. You wouldn't be killing it if it wasn't a human person who you would be responsible for.

I just don't want to conflate the word person with human at this point because of their legal definitions. What would happen if you took a newborn puppy and just put it outside and walked away? Not much. Cassandra would come kill you. Cassandra, fair question. No, I mean, yeah, I'm not sure what the animal protection laws are,

but I assume you would get in trouble for something like that. Aren't there laws on the books that prevent you from abusing animals or neglecting them? No, but I think you can have puppies outside. Well, yeah. I mean, if you leave a dog outside, right, that's an animal. But I think Tim is saying

if a dog died through negligence, is that the point? No, no, no. If you take a newborn puppy and put it in your backyard, just walk away. Oh, like a newborn puppy that needs to be with its mother?

I didn't say anything. I just said, what would happen if you did it? I don't know. Nobody would care. Like, if you took a baby and walked outside, put it in the grass

and watched everybody. Oh, I hear you. I hear you. Even helplessness they are helpless for so long my kid has no idea what he's doing like he rolls over

on his stomach and he starts crying he's like I don't know let's jump over to this next story real quick and I'm going to start with a meme oh yeah let's do it

the meme is there's an NPC guy saying who radicalized you and then the Chad gamer guy says no one I'm just a normal person from 10 years ago the reason I start with this

for this segment is that I posted this because it's funny. And then all the progressives are like, you're showing your true colors. We have 10 years of progress. The people in the 1950s said the same thing about interracial marriage. And then I was like, and you know what I'm saying the same thing about? HHS Secretary Becerra argues transgender surgeries for minors should be aided by the government. Yeah, I'm the kind of guy who's going to be like, we should expand civil rights for people and leave kids alone. And you're telling me it's progress that the government should be funding surgeries for minor sex changes?

Yeah, okay. Well, dude, I'm okay with saying no to that. The fall of the Roman Empire. Notice that time can pass and you can regress. Yeah, exactly. Well, this is what I want to point out. I don't know how to explain this to people, but let me try to put it succinctly. The fact that people in the past at some point opposed a good thing that ended up happening does not mean that opposing change is a bad thing in all instances.

That is the dumbest possible argument you can make for your position. Oh, you're against things changing? Well, people were against civil rights. Gotcha. People were also in favor of eugenics. Yep, the progressives. Not just people, the progressive movement, the left. They still are.

Yep. But now it is not socially acceptable. So when I say I'm but a humble, normal person from 2012 2012 and they say, ha, that means you're a conservative. Does that mean you're still in favor of eugenics? Does that mean if you're not, you're a conservative? Any anyone on the left who opposes eugenics must be a conservative along with every other person on the right. What they are saying is you need to mindlessly accept every every single social change that is pushed on you by everyone above you. And if you don't do so, you are far right.

That is their entire argument. Be a sheep. Go with the crowd, do what you're told. If you stand up against the modern orthodoxy, which is going to be different five years from now, then you are worthy of contempt. You should be excluded from public life. You're not truly a human being. You don't have rights. We're not going to listen to you speak. You are a far right psychopathic bigot. It's part of why I don't like calling people leftist because then they just turn it around and start yelling right right right they can tell me i'm on the right that doesn't bother me and they are left they are the ones who do it and created it but they

it's all this identity crap it like for real we just got to use common sense i think but then even that that term common sense gets abused it's funny because like that i feel like no amount of evidence will will show you why you're wrong, Ian. About what? You always say this all the time. We can't say left. We can't say right. You compared me to Mao for saying left and right. Yeah, he talked about rightists a lot. And then no matter how many times I tell you

the left, being an umbrella term, describes a kind of person that are authoritarian, that believe fake news, and then no matter how many times we invite them on the show, they react the exact same way, like screaming lunatics who don't actually want to have their ideas challenged.

And I keep showing you the evidence of these things we try to do. There's definitely examples, yeah, but to generalize is where it becomes dangerous. Yeah, like at a certain point, you know, you have a pattern. But you generalize that unborn children aren't persons. Okay, okay. Well, I'm debating it. You have a pattern of behavior.

We've exhibited this pattern of behavior in like nine out of ten times when we've invited the so-called left onto this show. Nine out of ten times, they behave the exact same way. They create nonsense statements, try to use the invite as some kind of own, or try to in some way attack the show. So it's like, what do we do at this point? When I'm like, hey, you're a person who's pro-choice and you're very angry. try to in some way attack the show because so it's like what do we do at this point when i'm like hey you're a person who's pro-choice and you're very angry would you like to come on the show and then they say something ridiculous like i want to punch you in the face then you're already playing identity politics if you're like i'm going to go after someone that's pro-choice you're like play it they put the label they have distanced themselves

from people who believe the way that we it's not us who's putting them in the bubble and this is i mean there's there's studies that showed that conservatives will follow left-leaning people and the left will not. And they're able to quantify that because there is a difference and the people that are more on the left do not consume different opinions,

whereas people on the right do. They're also significantly more likely to cut someone out of their life for having different political opinions. You're talking about like radical ideologues. I mean, there are people that are like that. Well, this is the difference between the left and the right, okay? So left-wing people will go, you don't agree with every single part of my niche left-wing ideology that I discovered online two weeks ago.

Therefore, you're anti-human and I can never talk to you again. And then people on the right are like, someone told me that they're okay with infanticide. Should I still be friends with them? Let me show you this from Ground.News. It's called Blindspotter. I pulled up myself. 56% of the news Tim Kess interacts with on Twitter leans left. 20% is center.

24% is right leaning. Michael Malice, fairly balanced. If you look at Michael Malice's profile, you can see that it's about 45% left-leaning, maybe about 20-25% centrist, and then 20% right. Jack Posobiec, a conservative, gets most of his news, two-thirds, from conservative sources. Yeah, 60%. Center.

Vosch has no right-wing sources. So why is it that I, who have rather left-leaning policy positions, am considered on the right? Because I consume news across the board, even though I do kind of consume most news from the left. Vosch gets none of his news from the right at all. Because they're creating that.

They're creating the tribe. They're the ones doing this. They're putting the boxes. If I'm on the left, then anyone to the right of me is on the right. You got to understand that. Okay, so it's all relative. Well, so here to the right of me is on the right. You got to understand that. Okay, so it's all relative. Well, so here's the thing. I wouldn't argue that it's all relative, but you're right that there's an element of subjectivity that comes in there. We see a lot of left-wing people who

will say things like, oh, our political leaders on the left are actually right-wing by European standards. But even that isn't completely honest because the stance that most of them have on abortion is far far left compared to anything that's enshrined legally in europe but we need to strive for some objective standard and say like okay if if you support like you know perverting children if you support like forcing perversions onto children and killing unborn children and you know even other things that aren't so uh necessarily intrinsically bad in that way like just left-wing economic policy some of those are horrible some of those there's a discussion to have like you are on the left but they will try to argue that person's actually a moderate because from my stance they're on the left it's like well you actually have to look at the political

structure a lot of assumptions to assume what they who even they are i don't even know what that means that they would that they would think this i'll explain it to you so i've actually um over the past four or five years repeatedly referenced these um tribal uh data maps showing the left and the right they completely exist if you look at twitter's data maps i've done extensive the right. They completely exist. If you look at Twitter's data maps, I've done extensive reporting on the different tribal spaces, the digital, they call them digital countries or digital national nations. You have like the progressives, then you have the staunch Democrats, you have the conservatives, then you have the Republicans. There's like even

a difference. Then you have like marketing, which is on the border of progressive. It's really weird. Twitter marketing brands border the Democrat voter. I've actually done so many segments talking about all of these things. Now, I think for you, Ian, you need to look at those data maps and see they exist. It's the picture I drew of the two umbrellas pushing up against each other, where you have the right sphere of influence and the left sphere of influence. Here's Blindspotter again. Take a look at Luke We Are Change, our good friend Luke Rutkowski. His news is perfectly split between conservative, left, and center.

That's pretty balanced. I love Luke. Sour Patch Lids gets most of her news from liberal left-wing sources. Look me up. Seamus Conner. I know, I know. I don't want to know mine. Ian Crossland. Thatamus Connors. I know. I know. I know. Ian Crossland.

That's a crown on my head, by the way. Ian Crossland gets almost none of his news from the right. That's interesting. Tell me where I get most of my news. From the middle, because that is what it's all about. The left and the right combined form one large center. I think that's actually very interesting, Ian, because most of the people I'm looking at on this don't really have a wide spread in the middle. And you seem to have a very wide spread in the middle.

That was interesting. Yeah. Yeah. I don't know who's deciding. Oh, that's not Seamus. So that is not me. Seamus underscore Coghlan. That's hilarious.

Not underscore. Seamus underscore Coghlan. Yeah. Other Seamus. Underscore. C-O-U-G-H-O-N-N. Guess. What do you think?

Yeah. See? 68% left. Look at this. This far, right-wing conservative bigot mostly interacts with left-wing news sources because we know what they think. But you're right, it could just be me making fun of them. It's doing research, right?

You want to know what your enemy, I mean, obviously any good warrior wants to understand what their enemy thinks. And if this is really a social war or a culture war, you've got to go pull from all sources. And that doesn't mean you're on the left. If I go hang out with a bunch of people that want to kill babies and transgender their six-year-olds,

it doesn't mean that I'm a leftist. And if you put me in a box, if you say that, if I hear you say that out loud that I'm a leftist, it's going to mess with my mind. Isn't it hilarious, though, that everyone instantly knows that murdering babies and transgendering children is like the left? How much more do you have to do to convince people

that a group is evil? I think that liberal radicalism can become a dangerous ideology. And the liberal radicals in the French Revolution sat on the left side of the aisle, so that term gets applied to them. But it doesn't mean that people are in some box somewhere. This is, you've even acknowledged this multiple times. They're meaningless phrases.

They just kind of identify a source of some sort of tribe. But there's so many, like many like miniature intricate tribes within tribes that to coagulate them for to get a point across feels destructive. I feel like you, you know, take a look at how we classify animals,

right? Do you know how we classify animals? Yeah, like phenotype, genotype, stuff like that. Like Cordata or whatever. I'm not, I'm not into biology. I'm not a genie.

Yeah, I think you under, you don't understand the concept of a parent tree. Right? Yeah, I understand that concept. Okay, so when we say the left, we're talking about a parent tree of a sphere of influence. You're talking about a cultural idea, not like an animal species.

Understanding science... We're not being scientific when we say left and right. This is just a cultural idea kind of thing. It refers to tribe. That's why the left calls me right wing because I'm not in their tribe. And the right calls you left wing because it's all relative. Because the right knows the political arguments. And so they look at me as my political arguments, not which tribe we're in. So the way I've described it is at some point we had this American sphere of influence, which had a left and a right that mostly agreed on American values and a constitutional republic.

At some point, a multicultural democracy emerged to our left with crazy ideas. And they think everyone in the original sphere of influence is right wing. In that sphere of influence, the right and the left still call each other right and left. That's very dangerous too. Because they're tribal signifiers. Tribes is a

very dangerous way to go. But that's the reality. It exists. It's human nature too. Tribalism's human nature. Yeah, and using those words left and right like fortify that nature, that dangerous nature of tribalism.

It's just a way to explain an idea, dude. But it is a way to do it. I just don't think it's an effective way. I'd rather be distinguished. And as a journalist, it's not an accurate way

to portray reality. No, it is. I want nothing to do with them. But who are them? What is them? The left. what does that mean who who the people who want to teach my my child about sex in third grade that's who i so let's let's let's let's talk about it very very simply when i come out and say kids should

not be getting sex change surgery that is overtly supported by prominent left wing individuals. Not all of them. However, the other left wing individuals who aren't advocating for it, call me a transphobe, bigot or a liar for calling it out. Yep. When I say Joe Biden did illicit dealings in Ukraine, and that's a fact, there are people who don't care that he did like that he did or will will just tell me i'm a liar but every person on that side will say well i don't know if that's true but you must be right wing then

yeah exactly if it goes against their tribe you're the other so when we talk about the left we talk about a collection of policies and ideas that are not intrinsic among every person on the left, but they all defend it. Progressives hate neolibs. Neolibs hate progressives. These are massive generalizations. All of them, all of them hate all of them. It's like, come on, dude, you're a journalist.

That's not a way to get specific about things. Ian, just because I make a general point that is true does not mean I said every single progressive hates every single... You just said it. You said they all hate them

and they all hate them. Progressives hate neolibs. That's a generalization. It's a fact. I am progressive as hell, man. I don't hate people. It is a fact that if you go into...

I don't think you understand nuance is the problem. If you go into a room full of progressives and say, how many of you like Neolibs? They'll go, boo, boo. And one person might be like, they're not that bad. What about this?

Split this room into boys and girls. You think we're really going to get along if that's how we think about things in here? Yeah, I think if this is boys and girls... They are actually girls. If I'm like, no, no, no, only boys get to speak now. Okay, now it's the girls' turn.

Here's my point. Nancy Pelosi does not like AOC. AOC does not like Nancy Pelosi. They both routinely go at each other and rag on each other, and then they vote together. Yeah, but they're catty, man. I don't care. I'm not creating a political party. That's irrelevant. I think that's a generalization

about women. And that is a catty thing for people to do. You're ignoring the point. Answer the argument. They both don't like each other. They both publicly express disdain for each other. They vote together against their collective enemies. That's the problem with politics. We quantify these by saying there are two parent tribes that are opposed to each other, the left and the right. Libertarians do not get along with conservatives on a lot of issues. Conservatives don't get along with libertarians on a lot of issues.

They don't hate each other, though. But they will vote together on most issues. Like the pro-life issue right now, you see Dave Smith, you see Michael Malice, very much against the establishment, the cathedral. Progressives lined up to vote for Joe Biden, even though they say they hate him. That's why we say they are the left, because there are certain things they would support even if they don't like them, but they wouldn't support Mike Pence.

Mike Pence is the other tribe. There's a parent sphere of influence called the left and a right. They're not absolute. There are some overlap, but it's overwhelmingly two different spheres of influence. They are unified in a way. I was not allowed into a mom's group using my name because of my right-leaning politics in a very liberal city.

I have problems when people use past actions to define future. I think that's the best. That is actually the best indicator. You've got to be careful because, okay, in the past, I think it was black violence statistics. There was a bunch in the past, a lot of like, it was like some random number. 20% of all these crimes were committed by this kind of person, black people. So therefore,

black people are 20% or five times more likely to do this than white people. But you're assuming the future based on what they did in the past. But they were just taking it out of context because it was black on black crime. They were projecting. But I don't think this argument works because you're saying that there have been

unfair generalizations in the past, therefore we should dispense with the idea of generalizing altogether. No, I'm saying if someone made some decisions in the past it doesn't mean that in the future they're a part of a tribe. Sure, but if there has been a consistent thread throughout the entire history of a group, such as the left, where basically any time they've come to power they have oppressed people every time they've majorly seized power

on the extreme left they've slaughtered people come on no i'm not saying that the right hasn't but when we talk about the left there are certain threads that we can see through so they they are there's authoritarianism of all i never said there was i never said there wasn't i'm saying when you look at the common threads on the left it's fair to say that this is what the left is about. There's a reason we use that term to label ideologues in our country. It's not fair. So then you're making his argument. It's not fair to define the left and right differently.

There are common threads. Are there not common threads on the left? You saying that the common thread of the left is authoritarianism and oppression? Yeah. That's a common thread for humanity. Okay, that's fair, but I think that when you look at left-wing ideology, it breaks down social structures in a way that you need the imposition of authoritarian rules with their specific ideology to shift the social structure. We saw that in revolutionary France when the left was incepted, when they first came to be. We saw it everywhere that there was a

revolution where the left took power afterwards. We see it in Germany. We see it in Chile. Sure. No, I'm not saying the right doesn't become authoritarian or violent either. That's not my point. I don't think authoritarianism is the right way to define what the tribes are necessarily. Today, certainly, the left is overwhelmingly authoritarian. I would say that the left's tendency is always towards becoming authoritarian. And I would also say that when we look at the common threads, they're basically always against the Catholic Church. They're always against the family. They're always against the traditional order. Basically, everywhere you see the left. They're always against the traditional order. Yes. The right is typically for tradition.

Yes. But the issue right now is the right has a spattering of moderates within it who have rejected the authoritarianism of the current left. And thus, you end up with a more libertarian right and a more authoritarian left. And part of me wonders if that's just a consequence of the fact that one group happens to not be ascendant. So when the right is not in power, it's going to attract more moderates and people who feel they're being persecuted by the left. Yeah. And vice versa. Look at Gab, for instance. Gab has banned discussion of porn.

You know, they're not okay with it. And so – but they're also not institutionally powerful. So no one's threatened by that. If the law of the land was that certain political advocacy was not allowed, moderates would start moving away saying, we don't like the idea of the government imposing its ideology on us. Let's go to Super Chats. It is time.

If you haven't already smashed that like button, subscribe to this channel, share the show with your friends, and remember, if at any point you don't agree with anyone on this show, you put a one in the chat

and smash the like button. And Super Chat. And Super Chat. And explain to us what you disagree with and we'll do our best to read those. Yeah.

All right. Vasht says, YouTube brought to you by Pfizer. When can we chat on timcast again so um shout out to the splc who wrote a hit piece on timcast irl and their smear was that uh their smear was that people super chatted us naughty things and i'm like i have no power over that it's like i didn't read those it's a good thing that uh the super chats come from tim directly

he's writing them all himself we have like one guy it's like all the money and they were like chimcast irl makes an average of two thousand dollars per night but some of them are bad and it's like tell youtube i guess i don't know like what am i supposed to do about that there are words like youtube auto restricts words and people get mad about it i don't know it's not us it is what it is all right i see a lot of people are smashing that like button seriously thank you so much all right let's see we got the core saga says inspired by your call to create culture i'm now 900 plus pages into the all-new naval voyage into the unknown you said we need a naval voyage novel the most epic historical fiction saga since hom saga since Homer's Odyssey with a sci-fi twist. Let's talk.

Interesting. The core saga. A little self-aggrandizing to describe it that way, but you know what? I'm very proud of you, and I'm very happy for you for creating culture because a lot of people are not doing that. And so I very much want to encourage what you're doing. There's a big difference between putting the pen to paper and just thinking about putting the pen to paper. That's so true. It's so true.

So many people have it. We've talked about this on the show before. So many people have it. We've talked about this on the show before. So many people have ideas. It's like, okay, are you going to do something with it? Please do something with it. And it doesn't take much.

You just do it. Keep going. Amen. And you know what? If you're watching this right now and you have an idea, you want to build culture, do it.

Do it. Please do it. We need it. All right. Lee Fagan says, you guys hear human events bought the post-millennial today? Wonder what this entails. They announced it a couple days ago. I don't know what the purchase was today.

But you work for the post-millennial, right? I do. I do. I'm their senior culture contributor. Oh, yeah. Did you know that they were, was this before or after they got bought? This was like during the buyout. But we announced it at the same time as the buyout.

But I'm so excited. The team is just awesome, everyone we have on there. Great crew. More power, you know? Yeah. Joining forces. Yeah.

Unite. The Chronicles of Chris says, I'm still not inclined to believe Musk is pro-free speech when he's on good terms with Chinese communists.

It's an interesting point. Fair point. Yep. That's what I said and you all yelled at me. No. Okay. Shame.

Roberto Lara. John Paul Mack Isaac is suing Adam Schiff, CNN, The Daily Beast, and Politico. He's the guy who Hunter Biden left his laptop at his shop. I heard that. That's crazy. Yeah, I did hear about that. I wonder what's going to come of that. Can you believe it?

A crackhead left his laptop somewhere? I can't believe it. That's funny. Fake news. The crackhead did not leave the laptop. Come on, man. Yeah, that's an interesting one. And if they settle out of court, they're going to go, it was nuisance money.

It was just nuisance money. Michael Brogan says, I've never seen as much from my 2A bros on Twitter until two weeks ago. Meanwhile, AKGuy was banned and unbanned from Instagram in the last 48 hours. The top levels are definitely panicking. Happy to see it. MimaType says, open source code can be just as secure, if not more, than closed source.

Security is from good code, not secret code. Internet sites and government agencies use Linux all over, which is 100% open source, and it's plenty secure. Linux rocks, I'm told. Ah, here we are. Alex says, happy Cinco de Mayo, TimCast crew, Seamus, and Miss St. Clair. Drink the expensive tequila tonight. We do have. We do have nice tequila over there.

I can't believe I was expressly excluded as a member of the TimCast crew on Cinco de Mayo. Cinco de Mayo. It's the worst Cinco de Mayo of my life. And do you all know what today celebrates? I know it's not the Mexican Independence Day. He's going to do it. He's going to do it. He does it every year.

What are you doing? Go ahead and tell us, Tim. What, Tim? It's the celebration of the victory of He's going to do it. He's going to do it. He does it every year. What are you doing? Go ahead and tell us, Tim. What, Tim? It's the celebration of the victory of the Battle of Puebla. That's right. Every year he tells us. That's true. The Battle of Puebla.

That's right. That's right. Took place on May 5th, Cinco de Mayo, 1862. I thought he was going to tell the mayo story again. Also, there was mayo involved. That is a Cinco de Mayo story. Oh, Cinco de Mayo. That's a different story.

Yeah, that is different. Cinco de Mayo. That's when there were five mayos on the table, and he took one of them. That's true. George Washington. The joke is that it was a shipment of Spanish mayonnaise coming to the New World when it sank. Oh, my gosh. Yes, so good.

That was the lesser-known Boston Tea Party when they sank the ships with the mayonnaise on it, and we called it the Cinco de Mayo. Sank the ships with the mayonnaise. I would have believed it. I said you could tell me that. I don't know if they shipped mayonnaise. Well, how else do you think they got it, Tim? Where are you going to get your mayonnaise?

They made it. Here's the question. Is the mayonnaise a person? Probably. Do you ever make mayonnaise? I've never. Fertilized or unfertilized mayonnaise? I won't survive post-apocalypse, man.

I can't make mayonnaise. And then you mix it up and it just turns to... It's crazy. It's like aioli. Similar. It's like watching an emulsified... Don't talk about food. Don... It's crazy. It's like aioli. Similar. It's like watching an emulsified... Don't talk about food. Food.

Let's eat. Oil. Oil, egg, lemon juice or something like that. Simple. All right. Let's grab some super chats. Connor O'Brien says, Elon's just trying to convince us to trust him

so we can jab a computer into our central nervous system. Love his current moves, though. It is important to never trust. Don't say that, Ian. It's important when you're using technology, have no trust with it. Have a trustless system where you don't have to trust or not trust.

It's built in where it's all transparent. There's no one person. That's why he only consumes the center, rejects both sides, and substitute a healthy middle. That's right. Trustless. I told you I trusted you

a couple days ago or yesterday and I don't normally say that to people. I appreciate that. It opened up to you, Shane. You know the Times of India is talking about India's giving personhood status to elephants. Have you guys heard this?

It's about time. Yeah. Yeah, well, that's not what the definition says. Yeah, we're going to have to change the definition. Yeah, change it. Yeah.

James Moaning says, is Elon playing both sides in order to further humanity and technology appease china try to keep america together since they are big powers and shame is big fan of freedom tunes got my dad to laugh to the world war ii soldiers coming to the future episode i am so glad thank you i'm glad you enjoy that can i actually give an answer to the elon question yeah so again i've mentioned I'm somewhat skeptical. I do consider myself cautiously optimistic. I will say this. There is a question that is asked by many left-wingers.

Is it the case that the corporations that forward our causes actually care about left-wing causes, or are they just obeying us because they're scared? And the answer to that question is, kind of doesn't matter. They're still forwarding their causes and they won't forward their causes when it's not popular for them. But I would say the fact that Elon wants to make Twitter a space which is more open and friendly to conservative thought is a very good thing, even if he isn't necessarily doing it for the right reasons. Though, as I said, cautiously optimistic, caution is the key word. All right. W Falcon says, speaking of stars starships what is the story behind the spinning ufo and what it has to do with your email

also like the mexican flag behind shim it all started excuse me excuse me it all began on one summer night well i actually things spun the ufo i actually have the uh the story it's kind of a crazy story, actually. A lot of people might be surprised to hear how this UFO thing came to happen. So I was taking a dump one day, and I was scrolling through Instagram. And as I was scrolling through Instagram,

I got an ad for a floating UFO lamp. And I clicked buy now, and it auto-filled, and then I forgot about it. And then a couple weeks later, a UFO appeared, and I was like, oh, yeah, that thing. And then we had a keyboard cleaner, and I was like, oh, I then I forgot about it. And then a couple weeks later, a UFO appeared and I was like, oh yeah, that thing. And then we had a keyboard cleaner and I was like, oh, I bet I could spin it. Hold on, what's especially creepy is that

Tim was muttering to himself on the toilet about how bad he wanted a UFO spinning lamp and then immediately the ad came up on Instagram. They heard him talking about the space slingshot. Yep, yep. Just Instagram advertised. One day, Instagram started advertising electric bikes to me. And then I was just like, okay.

Great ads. I'll buy some electric bikes. Deadly. You're giving them what they want. It's working. Do you remember what brand this is, by the way? People ask from time to time. I'm in the world.

Is it just a magnet? It's a Bluetooth speaker. It's an electromagnet? Yeah. So it's floating magnetically, and then it's a Bluetooth speaker, which we haven't really utilized. Yeah, we haven't used that. We've got to turn that on.

Tim, I didn't realize that you took the flag of my people down from behind. Oh, I'm sorry. I did that. I'm sorry. The buck stops with you, Tim. He's hugging it. Sir Timothy Cass, it's your show. Seamus, the guest last night wasn't as Irish as you are, so I had to swap the flags out.

So they needed it more. Oh, yeah, you're right. I'm sorry. I didn't even think about that. All right, let's read some more. Lori MC says, it's 8.40 p.m. Timcast IRL is not showing up via the YouTube search. What's going on?

You know what's going on. So head over to timcast.com to become a member. That's right. Because, you know, I regret not setting up the website sooner, but you can only learn when you learn. And we set it up over a year ago, and we should have done it in 2020 because it was an election year. But we are building up our fortification.

So in the event we get booted from YouTube or whatever, the company still exists. The show still exists. We're on multiple platforms. We actually get tons of views on other platforms. So I think we're good. I think we are good. We're going to be implementing a lot more infrastructure changes moving forward. We're starting with this one.

I can't wait until we get our TV app because then you're going to be able to go on your TV, download the app, and then it's going to have a bunch of shows. Now, of course, the app stores have their rules too, so we're doing what we can with what we can. I want to point out Adam Criggler because people in the chat are pointing out Adam Criggler may have been the inventor of the Let's Spin

the UFO. I'm not sure. Was he the first one to spin the UFO? He may have been for the show. Adam Criggler, you wild psychonaut. I'm not sure. Was he the first one to spin the UFO? He may have been for the show. Adam Krigler, you wild psychonaut. I think what happened was I posted on Instagram spinning the UFO with the blower thing and then I think Adam decided to make it a show.

Such a good element. But I could be wrong. It may have been Adam. Adam's a superstar. He was the man who spun the UFO. It was not me. He was the UFO spinner. And he actually he has the original UFO. the ufo it was not me he was the ufo spinner and he actually he has the original ufo he does this is this is a cheap knockoff spins it yep ours is ours but ours but as a humble knockoff adam's been very cool to me gave me free shoes when he was moving he didn't have enough shoes or he had too many shoes to take with him he's like do you want some

i was like i guess i could use some shoes let me sample some of his crickler coffee which i would highly recommend he said i said can i have some of your coffee saidler coffee, which I would highly recommend. He said, I said, can I have some of your coffee? He said, no, no, buy it. Absolutely not. He was screaming. I was like, all right, dude, I'm sorry.

That's not what he said. He said, yeah, for money. I was like, I don't have that. I'm a cartoonist. Duh.

All right, let's see what we got. David C. Cook Sr. says, Ian, the earthquake Tesla caused was because he hooked up a Tesla coil to a power supply

and cycled the output back into the coil. He stopped it by smashing it with a sledgehammer. Whoa. Is that real? What a great story. I love that guy. Don't you hate when that happens?

The super chatter and Nikola. They accidentally make an earthquake. That's so rough. Or a death row. Super chats. It's wild. Omega says, when they say no uterus, no say, I say no gun, no control. My point to them is I keep my hands off your uterus as you keep yours

off my guns very libertarian approach but i don't think that answers the conservative um perspective yeah i mean like people have uh people have a responsibility to behave in ways that don't harm other human beings and even if you don't have this specific body part that they need to be responsible with does not mean you can't comment on it. It's such a ridiculous argument. I was talking to my brother, and he was mentioning how some people were like, abortions need to be legal because what if I'm in a bad relationship and need to get out of it? And it's like, that's actually the arguments put forward by a lot of people, especially liberals.

And it's kind of a crazy thought. It's like, you're in a bad relationship. Quick, kill my son. Yeah. I don't understand that argument. It makes zero sense. Well, there's the threat that she would leave you and take the kid, and then you have to pay money to her for the rest of your life.

Well, you probably should have thought about that before you were having unprotected sex with them. They couldn't have been that bad. Imagine having a five-year-old kid and being like, son, I ran out of money. Turn around. Like, that's insane. Well, Tim, Tim, that's a deeply personal decision. That's right. i ran out of money

quick kill the kids no no no no no all right all right mega tamer ernie says about the radioactive boy scout he didn't try to build a death ray he tried to build his own nuclear reactor as a boy scout he succeeded to a point really interesting story you can hear on youtube what badge was that for is that why he's called Radioactive Boy Scout? Yeah. Oh, my goodness. It's the nuclear reactor badge. You got to build a nuclear reactor that can power your house.

You'll get your badge. Dude, we were just like making fire. That's wild. Texas Best Mobile Notary says you need to invite Kirk Cameron. He runs Save the Storks, an organization whose purpose is to support pregnant moms considering abortion. You have to see their mobile facility. Didn't he do this really awful banana argument? I don't know.

He argued that the banana was evidence of God because it's perfect. It's easy to say when he's not here, Tim. I remember watching this video, so you can correct me if I'm wrong. I think I might have seen that. He was mentioning how the banana has its own wrapper. It's biodegradable. The food is inside it. It fits our hand perfectly.

And everyone's response is like, yo, we cultivated the banana. Like over thousands of years, the actual wild bananas are starchy and hard to eat. Yeah, it's not necessarily the argument. Yeah, the banana argument is made by Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron sometime in the 2000s. And then there was another thing where he was arguing against evolution. And he showed a picture of like a duck with an alligator head or something. See if you can look that up. It's been a long time.

What were the movies he did? He did a good series of movies. Kirk Cameron, right? Well, Growing Pains was one of the best shows in the 80s. But I think the argument was, if evolution was real, where is the species-to-species cross? He showed a duck, alligator head, Kirk Cameron. Something like that. I could be wrong.

Look it up with me. It's been like 20 years. I just think there's a much stronger argument. Like Crocoduck. The Crocoduck. It's got its own Wikipedia. So here's my point. The platypus.

That's where it is. That thing's venomous. It secretes. Are they venomous? Yes. I thought they were cute. No, they're venomous. Wait, hold on.

How does cute preclude venomous? That's right. They can't hurt people. Is it not cute anymore? You ever seen Paris? You have to be dangerous to truly be cute. That's right. They can't hurt people. Is it not cute anymore? You ever seen Paris? You have to be dangerous to truly be cute. That's right. Thank you, Jordan.

The crocodile duck was an argument you made? Yeah, I think so. Let's see. The crocodile duck is a fictitious hybrid animal. There's not a lot of cute animals that are dangerous, though. Proposed by 2007 by Earth creationists. This is what they call them, but whatever. Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron.

Same guys. Also, I think the existence of the universe in general is a much stronger argument for god than bananas specifically i have to agree yeah that was a terrible like why is there everything instead of nothing it's a really big question look at this banana it's proof of god i'm like i mean not in the way you think like the existence of life in the universe perhaps but the fact the banana fits in your hand it's like it's like peter griffin watching the plastic bag circling in the wind. And God's like, what are you looking at? Look at all this cool stuff over here.

And he's like, this is amazing. Whatever. All right. What do we got here? DD says, Timcast, you guys always talk about factory farms. I suggest you have someone on from one. I live on a dairy farm that many people call the factory farm. And it's a business that is so misunderstood.

If you need someone, I can send some your way to hear their perspective. I got a better idea. Why don't we send documentary filmmakers to go to misrepresented spaces and film them? Ian, you want to do it? No. Well, no, I've got some documentary filmmakers. Well, wait, what are these misrepresented spaces? If you're talking about, like, Bali or, like, under the water off the coast of Indonesia,

I'm down to go rectify the perception of that area. I think we should send people to – Would you do it? Everywhere. Everywhere. Luke Rutkowski went to Somalia, and I think he did a really great video on what it was. It was like very honest. It was like there's crime, but it's also not so bad in certain areas.

And, you know, there's a lot of – like I think it was great when he went there and he just made videos about it. I want to do documentaries with Lauren Southern off the coast, literally off the coast of Indonesia. There's all these temples under the water since the last flood, and she was like, yo, we should do it. That's fascinating. Yeah, that'd be really fun. Cool. Yeah, that'd be super cool.

Yeah, dude, you'd be perfect for that. Yeah, what's that called? The Bimini Road, I think. Is that there? I'm going to look that up. Now that you can fly without a mask on, the world is your oyster. Oh, yes. I'm going to go to St. Michelle in France.

By the way, we're going to be shameless over here. We did a Freedom Tunes cartoon about the masks being lifted. Y'all need to check it out. Fans really loved it. I think you guys will love it. I was sending Seamus a message, and I used voice to text, and then I said something like, hey, Seamus, we need to record the voiceover for the chicken thing.

And then it said, Seamus, we need to record the voiceover. And then when I clicked finish, Seamus turned into Shameless. If that isn't big tech trying to malign me, I don't know what is. But it was weird because it got Seamus right, but then turned it into Shameless. You know when you're doing voice attacks that real time translates? Yeah. So you know what happened?

At the beginning of the sentence, it was like he could be talking about any Seamus. But then by the time he got to the end, it knew it was me. So it had to change it. I got a correction on the Bimini Road. It's off the coast of the Bahamas, and it's underwater, like rectangular, sub-rectangular limestone blocks that stretch for 0.8 kilometers.

And you need to remove yourself from this documentary immediately. Let's read some more of these superchats. Richard Knight says, quote, If the Civil War was the price the United States paid for slavery, then God help us when it comes to paying the price for legalized abortion. It's going to be fun.

Ann Coulter. I'm concerned with factory farming, what God's going to do to us for that. So good. You know what I was thinking? Can you name points in history in which people were stripped of their personhood? Can I? Like, in American history, specifically, since

the inception of this country, I'm not saying that there isn't one. I'm saying can you bring up an example of when something went to the courts and they said this person no longer has any constitutional rights? That's a really good question. So I think an argument that would be made would be just slavery in general um no so when you're talking you're saying like the court

actually saying you're not a person see uh so personhood was revoked is what you're trying to say had it and it was taken away and amassed like a supreme court ruling the reason i push back on the on the slavery thing is that actually slavery existed before the inception of this country and then it started with this country and then eventually the courts ruled to grant personhood has there been a circumstance where they're like this group of people hereby is revoked of their constitutional rights in the U.S. I don't know I don't think so criminal I'm not saying it's not true I think I'm wondering I think you could argue process also I think you could argue that the three-fifths compromise was a revoking of personhood.

Because they actually ruled that this is not a full person. Well, that's interesting because the South argued slaves had full personhood for voting, but not other rights. So they didn't actually have personhood. Really? Yeah, it was the North that wanted them to have no rights. The North argued that slaves without personhood should not be granted the right to vote. And the South, of course, this makes sense. The South the south was like we want more votes we have people here and they're

a lot in the north was like no you can't have slaves and then say they can vote as well because then the slave owner is telling them who to vote for yeah that's fast i've never heard that before yeah yeah it it makes no sense the south would take away their own votes so the issue is i don't think the slaves ever had personhood it was only that they were granted some. The reason I bring this up is because I was thinking about the abortion argument and I wondered, what's the right side of history? Will unborn babies be granted personhood or be denied their personhood? And here's what I ultimately came up with. And again, could be wrong. I'm not a historian. Plessy versus Ferguson was an instance where they were like, hey, we're not going to enshrine absolute rights because, you know, it's basically like separate but equal.

But eventually that gets done away with. So there was a ruling where it was like we will enshrine the existing infrastructure, but eventually it gets dissolved. I wonder then if the only possible outcome in the abortion argument is that personhood will be granted to unborn babies. And I'll layer one on top of that. India is going to grant elephants personhood. If we are, but it's kind of funny, but if we as a civilization, as a species are coming to the point where we're recognizing the personhood of animals, then certainly unborn

humans will likely be granted the same personhood rights. When they start neural netting babies in the womb and the mom wants to communicate with the kid when it's four months developing and they're going to have like mind melds with it, then for sure they'll have personhood. And the program will default that all babies have Patrick Stewart's voice. That would be awesome. You can ask them what they want to eat. Make it so, number one.

Are you comfortable? Make it so, mother. I enjoy it when you eat fudgicles. I am craving pickles and peanut butter right now, mother. I have to admit, I am ripping off a Family Guy joke because they have the little baby girl. Or is that American? Oh, no, yeah, that is Family Guy. Yeah, the baby girl is voiced by Patrick Stewart.

But to your point, I would say that they did almost revoke personhood in a way. Like, if you go back and look at tort laws, it refers to the unborn. And then all of a sudden Roe passes and, you know, abortions come back. I wouldn't say that they did. That's interesting. I did pull up that amicus brief that said in the 1850 to 1880s, they viewed the unborn.

So, I'm just i wonder i don't know i don't know for sure let's read a couple more super chats all right let's see free men die free says legal abortion is state sanctioned murder yep the government giving women authority to be the arbiters of life or death it's a mockery of the classical liberal idea of equality and equality under the law there are interesting arguments about the right of the government to mandate a woman provide her body to another being, though. I understand the arguments about responsibility. And then it becomes it's completely unique.

I was talking to somebody earlier about this. If you invite someone in your home and say you can live here, you can't kick them out. Like after a certain amount of time, there's like you can't just kick them out. Yeah. If someone sneaks into your house and sleeps there for a certain amount of time, you can't kick them out. Like after a certain amount of time, there's like, you can't just kick them out. Yeah. If someone sneaks into your house and sleeps there for a certain amount of time, you can't legally kick them out. Squatters rights. Yep.

Yeah, but that's not everywhere, is it though? I think probably most places I could be wrong. If someone kicks your door in and comes in your house, I'm living here now. You call the police, they'll remove that person. Now, that's not a good, a perfect analogy for, you know, a baby in a womb. But I understand the argument that if a woman invites a life into her womb, you can't then be like, I'm going to kill it. Yeah, well, I mean, the problem is none of the analogies really work because ultimately we're looking at the relationship between a parent and a child. And parents do owe children the means to support them.

Not even that. We're looking at something that is unique. There's no circumstance in which someone runs up to you and then bites you and then their veins go into your veins and it's like, oh no,

now I'm attached by blood. What do I do? It doesn't happen. Well, and even that wouldn't be a right analogy, right? Because the child is not the initiator.

The child exists because of you. Right. So there's a question about the right to evict in the instance of rape where the woman did not choose

to allow someone to use her body. It's not the kid's fault. But then it's not the woman's fault. The state is going to mandate she has to give her body to somebody else. I would never allow the government to say I had to give my blood to somebody by force. Never going to happen. I'm looking up different. I'm looking up squatters' rights.

And most states are 10 years or more. There's six states where it's seven years or less. Arkansas, California, Florida, Montana, Tennessee, and Utah. But you're looking at something I think that's kind of different. This is from Anderson Advisors.com. If someone is living in a house

for 30 days, they can make a legal argument and not be a victim. So there's an issue of whether or not they gain rights over the property to own under squatters' rights or are they tenants?

Is it how long you've known that they're in the house or how long they've been in the house? Because if the mom doesn't know she's pregnant until 20 or 30 days, what's plan B, that birth control? Would it actually – it causes a fertilized egg to get passed out of the body? Like is that murder? No, I believe plan B stops the fertilization from happening. That's debated.

It's debated. I'm just saying, dude, if I was responsible in every single way and someone forced something into me and then the state said, and now you have to provide your body to it, I'd be like, no. I don't think that's an apt analogy. So, for example, you cannot be forced to just provide food to a random stranger, right? But if you have a baby, you can't just stop feeding them and allow them to starve to death because that's your child it's a different relationship we're talking about we're talking about someone child that's in the womb developing fully putting something into your body to consume your blood yeah but i don't think that's an analogy that can really i don't think that that

works as an analogy to pregnancy bro i gotta tell you man i don't know if it matters what you think in terms of the analogy what matters is women would kill themselves before allowing the state to do that that's actually one of the issues we have like i understand the argument about elective abortion for no reason but there is a serious problem when a woman gets raped and then the state says and now you have no choice and then they slit their throats i don't i mean do you have any statistics to verify that that is an occurrence in places where abortion is illegal? And I understand what you're saying, but I know you're saying that if we don't allow people to kill their babies, they're going to slit their throats. I'm saying I understand what you're saying.

Absolutely. People who if they were forced to have another life form attached to their body and they did everything responsibly, abided by the law, and someone else pins them down and puts a baby in them, and they say, I did not choose this, and I will not give my body. I was responsible. And the state says, you have no choice. There are,

if it was me, I'd be like, either no, the state has no right to force this position on me because this crazy person did this to me, or I'd probably just say,

off with my own. He pointed at me when he said the crazy person. It's me, or I'd probably just say off with my own... He pointed at me when he said the crazy person. It's such an extreme example, though, because it's such a small percentage of abortions that I feel like it's exaggerated to be this, well, you know, what are you going to do if they're raped? To mask all of these other abortions that are for no reason. I completely agree.

Elective abortion, I think, is people just being like, oh, time for birth control. But I'm saying there is an issue there in how you deal with it. And if people – look, maybe it's one in a million. I'm just saying I am the kind of person that will not tolerate the state coming to me and stripping me of my rights. We're on the verge of nanobots. But you don't have a right to kill a baby. So you're not being stripped of your rights.

No, no, no. If somebody commits a crime against me and puts me in a negative position and then the state seeks to impose something on me because i was victimized you ain't playing that but then what are your what are your limitations on that do you have no no no no they can they can give the baby everything it needs to live but it's not getting my blood what are your trimester limitations on that then like you know do they have to get it taken care of right away can they think about it for a minute after the first trimester i say my personal opinion is no like but about it for a minute? After the first trimester, I say my personal opinion is no. But is it not an imposition at the third trimester?

You're giving it your blood. It is an imposition, but it's called compromise. It's called like if someone kicks your door and lives in your house for 30 days, the government's like, well, you could have kicked him out. But what if they're raped and they don't know they're pregnant until second or third trimester of that house? That is a very serious challenge. It is. And there's a problem of, if you want to make the argument

that someone made a choice to have a baby in them, if you want to make the argument that the baby should not be killed, agreed. But if you want to make the argument that a person who was forced into a position by a criminal now has to provide their body to someone else, I won't do it. That someone else is their child.

Doesn't matter. People should have someone else is their child doesn't matter people should have to provide for their children if someone victimizes me that would be horrible and the state tries to victimize me further trust me that game will not be played by me you're not a lot of people by not being able to kill your baby but i don't know that i mean that's assuming that having a child is you know traumatizing or victimizing i mean for somebody who like i'm look i i think you guys are are not being you know like i don't think you're listening to the what i'm saying i hear what you're saying i think you're making it about a matter of personal choice what i'm saying is you can't kill babies even if the circumstances are really difficult

i think it's a tragedy when a woman's raped. I think it's unbelievably horrific. And I think- I think abortion is also a crime against women as well. I don't think it heals them. I think they have to carry around the burden of the fact that their child is now dead. I don't think it's a good thing for the victim either. And ultimately you are killing a child. That just can't be justified.

I don't fault the baby. I think we need to develop better technologies for saving the life of the unborn child. But I also think the state saying your blood, your body to someone else is a line too far. But it's your child. But where does it stop, though? I mean, you could go into reproductive coercion. You could say, oh, you know, maybe I was in this relationship and I didn't really want to have a baby.

I mean, where is the line, though? It stops when you're like, if it's only only forcible violent rape from someone you don't know because rape still happens with people you know or you don't know the issue is if we're talking about someone being personally responsible i do not agree the state has a right to um impose responsibility on you in terms of your bodily autonomy i don't think the the like let's say you have a son right and that son has a kidney problem i don't think the state can be like you need to give your kidney to this kid but your kidney does not exist for you to give it to your child the uterus literally exists for a child to grow in it but it's a question of the purpose of the organ the organs being used properly but a gun exists to stop a rapist. It's a question of personal

responsibility. If a person does everything and they're personally responsible, then it's unfortunate, but you can't force someone to give up their body to someone else. So if you're raped and you go to the hospital, they will give you emergency contraceptives. Great.

Hold on, but I think you're conflating fault and responsibility. You're right that if someone is raped, it's not their fault that they're pregnant. It's still their responsibility to not kill their child, though. I just think I look, I get it. I completely get it. But for someone like me, I'll tell you right now, I would not allow it to happen. If you go to the police and they take you to the hospital you're given plan b or an emergency contraceptive and i'm glad that we're doing things like that and i'm glad that we have restrictions i think the left's position is psychotic but i think there's there's there's there's there's got to be personal um liberties but if that solution exists and plan b you can take up to i believe it liberties. But if that solution exists, and Plan B you can take up to, I believe it's 72 hours,

if that solution exists, why allow abortion? Because there is a solution that's not abortion. Well, but that's debatable. There's an argument to me that Plan B is actually an abortifacient. Let's read one more superchats because people are saying read more superchats. But we'll talk more about this stuff with the Pfizer data too in the members segment. All right. Let's see.

We'll read one more here. What is it? Dorktanian. The state isn't victimizing you. It's preventing you from victim victimizing innocent life. Aside, rap is such a small percentage of abortion. Rape is such a small percentage of abortions. It's disingenuous to make a policy off of it.

I don't disagree with that. That's why I mostly disagree with abortion but you know we've i think we've talked about it to a bit ad nauseum so instead of just dragging on let's do the member segment if you haven't already smash that like button subscribe to this channel share the show with your friends head over to timcast.com become a member because we're talking about pfizer's data and um i don't think youtube would allow it i don't know for sure. Maybe they would, but it's just crazy stuff. So we'll have that over at TimCast.com.

You can follow the show at TimCastIRL. You can follow me at TimCast. Ashley, you want to shout anything out? ThePostMillennial.com. Check it out. We're going to have a lot of really cool stuff coming up. You have a Twitter account? I do.

At St. Clair Ashley. Follow me on there if you're brave. Right on. I've got a YouTube channel called Freedom Tunes. We make cartoons and animations. I think you guys will really enjoy them. We just uploaded one this week about Elon Musk getting his clutches on Twitter and how the left is reacting.

And I think you guys will enjoy it. So go check it out. Love you. I'm getting the vibe that a lot of YouTube admins tonight really wanted us to talk about the Pfizer dump. So sorry. I know we're treading lightly. I would love to get more raw.

Let's do it in the future, but we need to know that it's going to be okay beforehand because Tim is cautious in these regards, and that is why he's successful in many ways. Also, Bear Kennedy in the comments yesterday said that every time I roll the 100-sided die, he checks the wild magic surge table

in Dungeons & Dragons. When you're a wild mage, sometimes things go wrong when you're trying to cast spells and some random thing happens, so I'm going to do that for you tonight. Bear Kennedy with the idea. What happens is you roll the 100-sided die. I got a 22. Then you go to your wild magic, and something crazy happens when you get a 22. For the next day, you

have advantage on the next 2d6 rolls you make where you don't already have advantage. That means he wins all the arguments. That's very good for me. So if I didn't succeed first, I get to try again for free. Great. For the next 24 hours, and we'll do it on the after show. Awesome.

I'm looking forward to that. I was going to say, too, that we don't talk about it on YouTube so that we can continue to talk to you guys here, although I'm very excited to get over onto Rumble. Hopefully, maybe someday we could livestream from Rumble in the future. We'll see what shakes out. Very excited for that branch. You guys can follow me on Twitter and Minds.com

at Sour Patch Lids as well as Sour Patch Lids.me. We will see you all over at TimCast.com. Thanks for hanging out. Bye, guys.