Ex-FBI Director Posted Call To ASSASSINATE Trump Sparking Investigation, PROOF 86 Means UNLIFE
46:41 Share

Yesterday, former FBI Director James Comey posted an image of seashells aligned on a beach, which he said, what an interesting formation.

The formation spelled out, of course, 8647. And for those that aren't familiar, 86 has a variety of meanings. It means something's out of stock. It means to get rid of something from an order. It means to remove or eject a person. And most importantly, it means to many people and has for a long time, and I can prove it. It means to execute, murder or kill. Now,

Depending on who you ask, they'll tell you that 86 has a different origin. However, the origin that I find the most when I'm on the internet is eight miles out and six feet under. There's some weird explanations for where the term 86 comes from. Some say it was because there was an old burger joint and order number 86 was out one day. And so the guy said, uh, 86. Yeah, that's the stupidest thing I've ever heard. Now, I don't know for sure.

But eight miles out, six feet under or 80 feet out, six feet under. These are a couple of the urban legends as to the origin of the term. Mobsters in Vegas would say 86 the guy. And it meant eight miles out, six feet under. Bury him in the desert. Nobody will find him. That doesn't matter. What matters is the former FBI director posted this. And this could be construed as a direct call to action because 86 is a verb.

Telling someone to 86 is telling them to take an action. Now, let me ask you questions. Let me ask you guys questions. How could a random individual remove Trump from power? Honest question. If I was going to say something like everybody, you should go out and remove Trump from power. What would the implication of that be? Well, the average citizen can't do that.

You could be saying, I want Congress to get rid of Trump. And sure, there's a you could be vague about it. But if you were going to tell a group of individuals to take an action that they actually could make an attempt on, which definition of 86 makes the most sense? So, OK, fine. The liberals are trying to make this argument. Comey didn't like that. And Comey took the post down and he said, I didn't realize it was associated with violence. Yeah, right.

Former head of the FBI didn't know, did not know about a term used by the mafia. And I'll tell you this. I'll tell you this. You might say, Tim, that's not really true. The mafia does. I got it. I Googled it for years. OK, I pulled it up. It is extremely common, particularly in Vegas, that 86 means to whack. You whack them. Now, of course, in restaurants, people say things like 86, the fries guy doesn't want them.

And it's slang term because you could say, hey, remove the French fries from that order from table 26. And it's or you can say 86 fries on 26 and they get what you're saying. Shorthand, right? Let me show you a bit of the news. Former FBI Director Comey's bizarre excuse for post calling to assassinate the president. He posted it and then swiftly deleted it. He said, I posted a picture of some shells I saw on the beach walk. He's lying. Eighty six. Forty seven. That literally means to kill him.

Um, I don't know, man. I think you got to get criminal charges. I think you do. I don't know what else you do. You can't let people keep doing this. The Krasenstein libs started posting 86, 47. It just means nothing. They're doing this because they want to shield Comey. Here's the thing. 86 means to kill when you're referring to a person, okay?

You can say, like, let's say you're at a bar and some guy's acting up. They go to security. 86 the guy. That can be used lightly as slang to kick the guy out because they don't really think you're going to kill the guy. It's like if someone said, man, if somebody stole my cheeseburger, if I find out who did it, I'll kill that guy. You don't literally mean you're going to kill him. You're exaggerating. However, in a political context, telling people to do something, it's going to lean—

All that matters is this. If Comey came out and said, Trump makes me so mad, I just want to kill the guy. Yeah, they'd they'd be like, OK, we're going to we're going to come and investigate you right now. But that's him expressing an emotion. What if he said Trump makes me so mad you should go and do this thing? Like, I'm so mad at Trump. And then what if they wrote kill Trump? Like, what if they wrote that? No, no, no, no. He didn't literally mean it. The Krasenstein's and other libs.

are posting 8647 because they want to try and ham up this narrative that it just means to eject. And everybody says it. OK, it's stupid. But let me show you what we got here. This funny from leftism for you. It's quite amazing how James Comey just happens to find shells aligning with his political views. He did this in October. Vote Harris. What a weird guy. Shells. OK.

So here's what he posted, 8647. This dude actually collected a bunch of seashells, it appears. I'm assuming that's what it did. And then lined them up and then took a picture of it. Okay, sure.

He's being investigated. Tulsi Gabbard said that is a ridiculous and insane statement to make coming from a guy who's a former director of the FBI for coming to think that we, the American people, that he is a former FBI director, former prosecutor would believe his lie. They didn't know what he was calling for. The dangerousness of this cannot be understated.

Others agreed with Gabbard. Now, Molly Hemingway made a great point. She said, investigate him. And when you do, if he repeats the lie, he didn't know what 86 meant. Arrest him for lying to the FBI like they tried to do to many in the Trump administration. Let's play that game, baby. I'm just going to bring it up right from my Wikipedia for you. Because Wikipedia, that's a trusted source, right? 86 or 86. American English slang used primarily in the hospitality industry and sometimes the military.

In the hospitality industry, it's used to indicate that an item is no longer available, traditionally from a food or drinks establishment, or referring to a person or people who are not welcome on the premises. Its etymology is unknown. The term seems to have been coined in the 20s or 30s. Military personnel might use 86 informally to refer to scrapping equipment or ending a plan or mission. The op was 86 due to bad weather. It's not an official military term, doctrine, or manual, etc. Okay.

Etymology. There are numerous rumors and theories about the origins of the term. Rhyming slang for Knicks. You know, Knicks means get rid of 86. Part of the jargon used by soda jerks. Walter Mitchell. I'm sorry. Walter Winchell wrote about this in 1933 and is syndicated on Broadway column. In this, the code 13 meant that a boss was around. 81 was a glass of water and 86 meant all out of it.

Professor Harold Bentley of Columbia University studied so to jerk jargon and reported other numeric codes such as 95 for a customer leaving without paying. Perhaps that's it. I don't buy it. I don't. Author Jeff Klein theorized that the bar Chumley's at 86 Bedford Street in the West Village of Lower Manhattan was the source.

His book, The History and Stories of the Best Bars in New York, claims that police would call Chumlee's Bar during Prohibition before making a raid and tell the bartender to 86 his customers, meaning they should exit out 86 Bedford Street door while the police would come to the Pamela Court entrance. Nobody really knows. The term 86 get used quite a bit, but let's take a look. Merriam-Webster says it could be used to refer to refuse service to a customer or to get rid of or throw someone out.

As a noun in restaurants and bars, an expression indicating supply of an item was exhausted. Here's the best part. According to Castle's dictionary of slang, 286 also means to kill, to murder, to execute judicially, likely referring to the size of a standard grave being 2.5 feet wide by 8 feet long and 6 feet deep. 8 feet long, 6 feet deep. 86 to guy. Now, I don't believe that. I actually think what makes the most sense is 8 miles out and 6 feet under.

because soda jerks being like 86 is a code we came up with, meaning we're out of an item. What? Why? I guess maybe like soda jerks just started writing numbers down like the rules of the Internet. Sure. Maybe 86 Bedford Street. I guess maybe a cop said 86. The guests sent him out 86th Street and then other people heard the cop say this. No, I really don't buy that either.

But you know what happens? Let me show you this first source. Castle's Dictionary of Slang, 1970s. OK, to kill, to murder, to execute judicially. Where does this come from? Snopes 2009 confirming it means to kill. Here we go. Random House Dictionary of Slang, October 2020 to kill.

This is from the New Partridge Dictionary of Slang. This was published 2015, 86, to kill, 1991. And then we have, this is facts on file, 2008, 86, to murder someone or put an end to something. The expression derives from the restaurant waiter slang term 86, which among other things means to deny an unwelcome customer service to cancel an order. 86, the eggs. Here we go. From Reddit, eight years ago.

Today, I learned of the term 86, an American slang term for getting rid of something, ejecting someone or refusing service. The term is often used in restaurants. Top comment. The way I learned what 86, this is from eight years ago, mind you. The way I learned what 86 meant in the days of mobsters and all that, they would tell them to 86 a body. That would mean take it 80 feet out and six feet down and bury it.

Still getting rid of something, just different use. One person says, I learned this term was popular for many years and still spoken of old timers in Vegas. A deadbeat or card cheat, someone you want to dead would be 86 by being forcibly driven 80 miles out in the desert and then forced to dig his own grave six feet under. Urban dictionary seems to agree means to get rid of originally for killing someone 80 miles out six feet under.

It was reserved for someone who had to dig their own grave 80 miles from civilization and get shot execution style. I honestly think that makes the most sense. The only time I ever heard this was in SpongeBob. I never knew what it meant until now. I think they use deep six. Deep six the guy. Let me just say this right now. In the restaurant industry, they say 86 this, 86 that. And someone goes, perhaps it meant that soda jerks had a special code that meant the boss wasn't around or that food was out.

It's like, okay, that's a really, really, like, you got to make a lot of assumptions to get to that point. The phrase deep six, everybody knows what that means. It means to put him six feet under. Six feet under, another phrase. We know what that means. It means when you dig a grave, it goes six feet down. 86, the guy. When you, the fact that we've known, and it's been around since, like, you had that dictionary. Wikipedia's got a source from the 70s saying 86 means to kill a guy.

Let's keep playing that game. Is this you go to Google, you look at all these. What does it mean? Right. Wizards of Las Vegas 2013. We're going back 12 years on this one says was reading the ask the wizard archive tonight and came across quote. I work at a casino of actually 86 people for various reasons. Where does the term actually come from? I always thought it meant eight miles out and six feet under.

I thought it was because when saloons had intoxicated our rowdy customers, they would break out the 86 proof women's whiskey to serve the drunk man, thereby shaming him into leaving. A lot of assumptions on that one. Someone said, I always thought it was eight miles out, six feet under. Yep. They say Chumlee's famous old New York speakeasy at 86 Bedford Street during Prohibition. Again, I don't know. 86 dictionary.com 1936 originated lunch counter as a cook's word for none. But where does it come from?

This one also says, could mean Knicks. People really don't know. We got this one from Las Vegas Weekly, June 17th, 2015. Artist Miguel Rodriguez gets 86th in eight miles out, six feet under. They say, in eight miles out, six feet under, his focus is in murals, flat minimalist works covering interior walls of the Nevada Humanities Program.

The design, heavy exhibits, blah, blah, blah. Its role is a giver and taker of life. Its title is a riff on the term 86th, which in lore refers to mobsters burying their victims eight miles out and six feet under. Now I'm just going to say this. Tell me it means whatever you want to me. I don't care. The fact that I can Google in two seconds, a bunch of articles. This is Las Vegas weekly where they say people straight up are like it means to murder somebody.

You can claim it means whatever you want. But if you're using slang term that can be interpreted as removing or murdering somebody, don't be surprised when people are like James Comey, you just called for murdering the president because that's what it means. And the problem is, I'm going to throw this to all our good friends on the left, all of our good censorship buddies from big tech. When people were getting censored and it still happens, we had to explain to people every night on Timcast IRL,

YouTube and the algorithm and social media platforms do not draw a distinction between innuendo and an actual call to violence. Because the argument is the interpretation may not be innuendo. That means if someone were to say something like, dude, that gets me so mad, I want to kill him. If I ever see that guy, man, I'd kill him. YouTube goes, stop.

You you are saying something that most people understand. You're just saying you're mad and you don't really want to hurt the guy. It's an expression. Unfortunately, there are enough people out there that would take it literally that we are banning you for doing it. No joke. We had Alex Jones on the show and he said, I agree with Bill Gates. We need firing squads. And then he said something like line them up and give them the shots. He was talking about vaccines. He was saying.

People should, I agree with Bill Gates, firing squads, line them up. You give them the shots. He was using it as a metaphor. They said, no, no, that is too close to sounding like calling for murder. They took the episode down. They told us you can't do that. Now they didn't exactly tell us why they said we won't, we won't reveal why BS. Here's the point. If I go on Tim cast IRL, if I go on this channel right now and I were to say, somebody needs to go 86, that guy.

What do you think YouTube's going to do? They're going to take it down. They're going to be a strike. And they're going to say calls to violence, threatening harassment. Their argument is, if you got 300 million people, to be fair, a lot of them are babies. So let's say you got 250 million people, even children, and you say what Comey said, 86-47,

The concern that YouTube has is, sure, 99% of people may interpret that as impeach him, which is stupid because you would just say impeach Trump or remove Trump. Why use a slang term that literally means to kill or can be interpreted that way? The problem here is 86. Maybe it'll be interpreted by 1% of the population as a call to action because to 86 means to go do.

James Comey may as well have literally just said, go do this. Instagram should give him a strike or a warning saying, look, if 1% of people take that to mean execute because that's actually one of the definitions and they go do it. And then they're going to say, James Comey told me to. He's a former FBI director. Right. This idea that you can say these things that it's insanity to me. Now, look, I don't know what the penalty is for posting something like this.

Some are going to argue it's a tough spot because I'm going to I'm going to I'm going to play it straight. You guys. Eighty six does mean eject, cancel or remove. It does. The problem I have is he's dancing on the line at a time when there's already been two assassination assassination attempts and he shouldn't be doing it. So what's the penalty then? That's tough. We're going to adjudicate what this means. I say they investigate him. He claimed on social media he didn't know what it means. He didn't know what it means. Prove it. Prove it.

You can't. He knew what it meant. So when he lies and says, I don't know what I mean. I don't know what I mean. Lying to the FBI. Arrest him for that. You know, look, man, I really don't see the Republicans doing anything about this. We're going to, you know, Tulsi Gabbard, with all due respect, she's saying bad, like she's DNI. What's she going to do? Kash Patel says it's Secret Service. Secret Service ain't going to do nothing. They're not going to go after Comey. And you know what really pisses me off is they went after Trump's lawyers. I say they should go after Comey, but

What should happen? Slap on a wrist. You got to give him a slap on a wrist. Give him a penalty fine. Make him go to court and apologize. And then give him a fine of 500 bucks. Now, I know some people are saying, no, Tim, that's not enough. No, no, listen. The reason we want to make him go through the court system, we want to set the standard. If you do this, you will be penalized. But what we don't want is

is to create a narrative of, we don't want a dramatic escalation of conflict. If Trump has the ad, if Secret Service comes out,

arrests Comey for saying 86-47, you're going to get what you're already getting with the Krasensteins. Every lib's going to post it, and they're going to say you can't arrest us all, which is basically what they're doing right now. So what are you going to do? Arrest them all? You give them a fine. You can give each of them a ticket very easily. I say you do that. Make them cry about it. Free speech. I'm like, no, look, I can pull up numerous sources showing that it means to kill the president. So let me do this. Let me do it. Let me let me. I'm going to pull up the law on this one. Cornell.

Let's just go by the book. Whoever knowingly and willfully deposits for conveyance in the mail or for delivery from any post office or any letter carrier, paper, writing, print, missive document containing any threat to take the life of a kidnap or inflict bodily harm to the president, blah, blah, blah. It is fined under the title or in prisons not more than five years. So they within the law, they can fine him several hundred dollars and the Krasensteins too. And they say, listen, it is calling for the murder of a president and it was transmitted. So what?

We're going to go and issue a fine. It's not a free speech issue. You can't do that. That's what I say. That's what I say, my friends. But I don't know. I mean, the escalation is just going to keep going. Here's your challenge. It's the rock and the hard place right now is that if they do nothing, liberals are going to turn 86-47 into their rallying cry. They got to do something. Like I mentioned, libs are already posting it saying, so what? Doesn't mean anything. You can't do anything about it. They want the Trump admin to start going after all of them.

Guys, this was always going to happen. The left, if Comey said something like end Trump, they would post the same thing. They're playing this. I am Spartacus. You can't do anything to all of us. They want conflict. Bro, I didn't make up that 86 meant to kill. I didn't make that up. I showed you an article from 2015. Why are they saying this? You get the point.

So I don't know what you do. If you do nothing, they're going to start calling for murdering Trump more than they already are. If you arrest them, they're going to claim the SS is persecuting us. Secret service. Yeah. Welcome to conflict, I guess. We'll see. You know, I got to be honest. I'm pretty sure the Republicans are going to do nothing because that's what they do. They do nothing. Nothing.

Well, what can I say? Follow me on Instagram at Timcast. Stay tuned. We got several more clips popping up throughout the day. And don't miss YouTube.com slash Timcast. Rumble.com slash Tim Pool. The premiere of my conversation with Adam Conover coming up 11 a.m. this morning.

Thanks for everybody. And we will see you all in the next segment. It's the end of the world as we know it. And I feel fine, largely because I don't believe it. All the theories circulating online that the polls are going to shift is going to be a great earthquake. The Adam and Eve conspiracy theory. Not that I disregard any of it. Actually, I'm looking into it quite a bit. It is fascinating. And I do have concerns.

But the opening bit was just a joke. I largely am not super worried about an apocalyptic event happening. Perhaps it's normalcy bias or optimism bias, whichever one you want to believe. But there is mounting evidence, though still limited, that we may be facing some kind of cataclysm.

That's the extreme end. You've got a lot of people that are arguing that the magnetosphere is weakening. There are a lot of people that believe it's become quite popular online. In fact, for the past several years, people have circulated what's called the Adam and Eve conspiracy theory that every 6,500 years, there's a cataclysmic event. The poles shift, the floods, the water sweeps around the earth, wiping everybody out. And all that's left is a small handful of people scattered across the globe. It's really interesting if you think about it.

We have the story here from the Daily Mail. Massive solar storm causes worldwide blackouts. As experts warn, the worst is yet to come. They say just after 1130 a.m. Eastern, a massive X2.7 class solar flare erupted from a newly emerging from a newly emerging cold, dark region known as AR-4087.

X-class flares are the most intense in the solar storm scale, capable of disrupting communications, damaging satellites, and even threatening power grids on Earth. These flares are born from sunspots, dark, cooler areas on the sun's surface where intense magnetic activity builds up. Okay, maybe. I mean, this is science. This actually happens. Solar flares happen all the time. The question is, are we facing cataclysmic potentialities?

Here's a story from January from Ladbible, book classified by CIA for more than 50 years, explaining how the world was going to end. They say a book which has kept a U.S. state secret for more than five decades has now been declassified. The works of Chan Thomas, which describes a shocking conspiracy theory about the planet's supposedly impending demise, has now gone public nearly 60 years after he first penned it. The late engineer, UFO researcher and self-proclaimed polymath is the author behind the infamous book, The Adam and Eve Story.

The CIA put a stop to the book's publication in 1966 for reasons that remained unknown to this day. It is thought that the intelligence service might have been concerned that Thomas's theories might have sparked mass panic or that he may have spilled the details of a secret government research. The CIA declassified parts of the book back in 2013, but kept the rest of the literature under wraps until now. According to Thomas.

Cataclysmic events are brought on by the Earth's poles, the two points where the planet's axis of rotation meets the surface, switching places, which is known as a geomagnetic reversal. Scientists say this swap, which the author believed was responsible for earthquakes, tsunamis, and severe weather, which could wipe out the world, last occurred about 780,000 years ago.

Quote,

Thomas alleged that Earth's magnetic field, which is constantly shifting and occasionally reverses polarity, will be shunted, causing chaos for the Earth as we know it. Excuse me, fighting a sneeze. In one chilling passage, he wrote, in California, the mountains will shake like ferns in a breeze. The mighty Pacific rears back and piles up into a mountain of water more than two miles high.

Then starts its race eastward. In a fraction of a day, all vestiges of civilization are gone. And the great cities L.A., S.F., Chicago, Dallas, New York are nothing but legends. Barely a stone is left where millions walked just a few hours before. He goes on to describe apocalyptic scenes taking hold of America's tourist hotspots. With winds, the force of a thousand armies wreaking havoc with supersonic bombardment. Maybe, maybe.

They say Thomas believes the planet would be a lot different on the other side of things. He wrote the Bay of Bengal Basin, east of India, is now the North Pole, the Pacific Ocean, just west of Peru is the South Pole. Thomas said that Greenland and Antarctica were hurled toward the equator's only to find their ice caps dissolving madly in the tropical heat. Let's hope that he wasn't as nifty with numbers as he thought then. Here's what I was thinking. They talk about this out of Africa theory.

Humans started in Africa, migrated north, branched out to Asia and Europe, crossed the Bering Strait into North America, perhaps. I have no reason to doubt any of those stories. Who am I? But let's have fun. Let's say humanity was global. They expanded. They built civilizations. And then there was a great flood and it destroyed everything.

What you would then see is it seems people would just start popping up in certain areas. Why? If a great flood did happen, the people who survived would be in caves or high altitude and there would be limited population. Most civilization is wiped out and humans wouldn't recover for thousands of years. With lost knowledge, there'd be nothing but legend. Maybe we'd write a book to try and share information on how this happened and what to do and how to live. Maybe.

Maybe the Adam and Eve story is correct, but it wasn't just Adam and Eve. After the Great Flood, there were survivors in different pockets of the planet that then began to emerge and build civilizations. Or not. Or it's just a silly idea and people want to believe these things because, I don't know, people want grand stories. They don't want to believe that life is just mundane and we are here but fleeting moments and it'll be what we make of it. I certainly think there is always great potential for catastrophe.

And I think humans are stupid to believe that there won't be, I don't know, major earthquakes. Here's FEMA fact sheet on the New Madrid seismic zone. Okay. Here's the CUSCC, New Madrid seismic zone, catastrophic planning project. Maybe it's not going to be a pole shift. Who knows? Maybe it's New Madrid, which I believe this is what, in the middle of the United States? They say it's Alabama, Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Mississippi, Missouri, and Tennessee.

Most affected by the earthquake. According to the current scientific understanding, the New Madrid zone is capable of producing damaging earthquakes at any time. Range between 7 and 8.0. I believe that's what Richter scale. Were these earthquakes to occur today, the effects would be considered catastrophic. Directly affecting several million people across eight states. Indirectly affecting millions of others.

In an effort to prepare for this, FEMA provided funding to CUSIC to lead an effort to develop, improve, and integrate the earthquake response plan. Going way back. Earthquake can happen. Tornadoes can happen. But is it possible for a global seismic, and I don't mean literal seismic, but like a major catastrophe? You know, honestly, a lot of people wish it was, but we got no idea. They say Thomas believed the planet would be a lot different on the other side of things, which we did read.

According to Martin Malinczak, a senior researcher at NASA, we haven't got anything to worry about. It's just unfortunate these things are being put out there. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, and there's no proof and no science and no physics behind any of the claims about magnetic fields change being associated with climate change. He dubbed Thomas's theory that the Earth's magnetic field will make a 90-degree switch as totally bogus. If that's what happened every 6,500 years, we would certainly see it. It would be in all the records. I think he's right.

We can take a look. You can do this. People can do this. You can go to the Grand Canyon and see the sedimentary layers. When you're just driving through the Mojave, you can see all the sedimentary layers. Maybe it explains a lot of the weird rock formations. Maybe the issue is this. He says we certainly see it unless you've explained it away for other reasons. When you hear a hoof, you don't think zebras. You think horses. Mainstream science says these rock formations occurred over millions of years. They used to be great running water through these areas. The water levels were higher.

Maybe you've chosen to explain these things in that direction, but maybe you were wrong. Or maybe these people are wrong. Look, man, you want to talk to me about politics? I will tell you about politics all day and night. You want to talk to me about rock formations? I'm going to say, I don't know. I looked at rocks sometime. You know, I was out in the Mojave and I saw a bunch of rocks. Not much more I can say about that. What I can say is sometimes people think their observation is proof. You know, you had that what's-his-face. I can't remember who said this, but they were like, Earth is not round. I drive. I never go up and down. It's like, bro, you go up and down all the time. The Earth is still round.

But there are people who think because they can't see it with their own eyes, it must not be. But there are greater scales of things. Can't see radio waves either. When I go to the Mojave, when I go to the Grand Canyon, whatever these places, you can see all the sedimentary layer. You're thinking like, how is water that high? I mean, we're talking about a water level that's a thousand feet higher than where it is today. How? Unless something was different.

Earth shifted, or it could be tectonic plates. The plates move, they overlap on other ones, they emerge higher points, and then places that were once underwater are now above water to a great degree. You can explain it away any way you want. In the meantime, we know the solar storms are real, and there are concerns about these power outages we've been seeing. It's fun to think about.

Not much more to be said. So I'll wrap it up there. Smash the like button. Share the show with everyone you know. Stay tuned. We got more bits coming up for you throughout the day. And we'll see you all next time.

I'm going to read that for you again. Instagram suggested groomers connect with minors, the FTC says. Instagram's automated software systems recommended that child groomers connect with minors on the app, making it easier for them to find victims. According to a 2019 internal document presented in court by the FTC, the Meta Platforms Inc. report says,

noted that minors made up 27% of the follow recommendations that the social media app surfaced to groomers, a term the company used to refer to accounts they identified as exhibiting predatory behavior toward children. Over three months that year, the company had found that 2 million accounts held by minors had been recommended to groomers. I kid you not. They use those words.

The company found that 7% of Instagram follow recommendations made to all adults were minors. The report titled Inappropriate Interactions with Children on Instagram was shared among company executives in June of 2019. It was presented in federal court on Tuesday as part of FTC's antitrust lawsuit against Meta. You know, it's really messed up, man. There are accounts on Instagram where it's like 10 year old girls.

And they put them in bathing suits and have them stand and move around. And they make these videos as if these are adult influences. I'll put it that way. It is disgusting. And Facebook knew it was happening the whole time. The report also included an analysis of 3.7 million user reports flagging inappropriate comments to the company. Meta, which was called Facebook at the time, found that about one third of those reports came from minors.

Of the minors who reported inappropriate comment, 54% were reporting an adult. Earlier in the trial, the FTC offered evidence that Metta Chief Executive Officer Mark Zuckerberg, when presented with safety issues on Instagram, chose not to offer enough resources to the app to help it address the risk to users. After seeing the 2019 data, U.S. District Judge James Boasberg seriously asked the FTC's lawyers to speed things along.

I cannot believe this. Of all the judges, it's Boasberg. And he's saying, yeah, yeah, FTC, come on, move along. Amazing. Out of context and years old documents about acquisitions that were reviewed by the FTC more than a decade ago will not obscure the realities of the competition we face to overcome the FTC's weak case. A spokesperson said in a statement.

The company added that it is long invested in child safety efforts and in 2018 began to work to restrict recommendations for potentially suspicious adults and encourage the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children to expand its reporting process to include additional grooming situations it noticed. Zuckerberg was on Rogan recently and, you know, nobody cared. When Joe Rogan had Jack Dorsey on, this was, I think, in 2019, Joe got massively thumbs down.

And a lot of people were upset. They were upset because Joe was talking to Jack at a time when people were being censored in mass and Joe didn't know the story had happened. This is how I end up getting on his podcast. I made a video about it.

Um, it got auto flagged by, for copyright for using an image from his podcast. I DM them being like, can you get your guys to remove this? I guess Joe watched it and then hit me up and was like, bro, come on the show. Simple version of the story. We actually talked for a little bit. I said, Hey man, I'm never going to ask you to come on. Just, you know, you can invite me when you want to invite me. He calls me back and says, bro, can you come on in two days? And I was like, yes, you know, thank you. Like, that'd be amazing.

And after that interview, he invited me to come on with Jack to have that debate. It's incredible. The one thing that happens now, Joe had on Mark Zuckerberg and Zuckerberg said things like, oh, I made a mistake. But he largely didn't get flagged the same way he did with with Jack Dorsey. And I think for that reason, Joe is unaware of what actually Mark Zuckerberg has been doing and why he's a bad guy. He's a bad guy.

You know, I give him some leeway because he's done some good things, but I largely think he is doing harm and he's just trying to obfuscate. We invited Mark Zuckerberg to come on Timcast IRL. He declined. His people declined for him. And I think the reason is he knows we're going to hold him to the fire. Before we invited him on, I explicitly addressed his appearance on Joe Rogan saying,

Mark did not answer to the backdoors that Facebook had for the feds to go in and flag content. He did not answer for the Eric Charamella scandal where on YouTube. Yup. Maybe this video won't see the light of day and Facebook simply saying the name in any context resulted in your content being taken down. And I want those answers. I think any reasonable person would.

But it's different times, man. It's different times. For that reason, I think most people didn't care. Joe didn't get massive thumbs downs. He didn't get a hate campaign or anything. He should not. Right. When he had Jack Dorsey on, I was surprised people were attacking him the way we were. I'm like, dude, he's just a comedian. I'm in conversation with the guy. But without that cultural outrage, Joe is not going to address Zuckerberg.

Zuckerberg is not going to be held to these standards. No one's going to ask these questions. Sure, I can mention the, you know, censorship, feds, charm, L.A., CIA. Fine. But what about this question that Meta knew at the time it was Facebook? They knew they were suggesting groomers to minors. They were going to children and saying, hey, follow this guy, an adult who wants to abuse children.

You know, I will tell you this, based on the amount of users they have, I'm willing to bet there is a greater than zero chance, probably a decent one, that some of these groomers were able to exploit the minors, meaning the minors actually connected with them, were exploited by these adults, met up in person. When's someone going to ask that question to Mark Zuckerberg? They're going to mention that the FTC surfaced more emails and documents to that supported, well, I should go back.

Earlier in the trial, Systrom argued Zuckerberg starved Instagram of resources in part because he felt threatened by the app's success and worried it would cannibalize the social network he founded, Facebook. Zuckerberg is one of the, you know, I got to, guys, I got to say this. Smart guy. Myopic. Brother, you have destroyed Facebook. You did.

You did it. OK, Instagram is bigger than Facebook. It just is. Now, the boomers are not saying rag on boomers. I'm saying boomers largely use Facebook, Instagram, not so much. And it's because of the policies you put in place to destroy what people truly cared about. Cry more. They're going to mention the FTC surface more emails to that theory. In 2018, Adam Mosseri, senior metaproduct executive who would take the job to lead Instagram later that year, said,

Asked Rosen for an honest assessment of Instagram's integrity work. Rosen warned at the time that an Instagram was behind in terms of fighting harmful content, including child exploitation and terrorism. Rosen suggested that this posed a risk, particularly the platform's younger audiences, and that he was seeking to expand aggressively into addressing these issues.

The FTC painted a portrait of a company reluctant to do so over several years. In a different exchange from February 2019, Rosen wrote in an email that he related his concerns that Instagram was being underfunded to Zuckerberg during a planning meeting about increasing company headcount. After speaking with Zuckerberg, Rosen concluded the resource allocation was deliberate. Zuckerberg thought Instagram had another year or two to catch up to Facebook and didn't think the app needed as many resources.

I think we are not sure that's the case anymore. An internal presentation titled Instagram Wellbeing H1 2019, a planning document for the first half acknowledged that Instagram's integrity team was thin relative to the scope and importance of the work

Given resource limitations, we will not be doing major proactive work in areas like harassment, financial scams, credible threats of violence, impersonation, prostitution, sexual solicitation and forms of child exploitation. The presentation said this is disgusting. It is disgusting. And I don't think X is going to be any better, to be honest. But it is absolutely disgusting. Zuckerberg's not answered for these. Sure, they're in court.

He's not going to go on any podcast. He went on Theo Vaughn. Of course, he didn't get grilled on the evil things his company has done. I don't think the guy is like a sociopathic murder or anything like that. I think he is, to a certain degree, sociopathic. I don't want to say he's a sociopath. He's just callous. He doesn't care. He is building a machine and he's viewing this as numbers, not as the people being harmed.

I'd like to see someone challenge him and he won't do it on my platform because he knows we will hold him to those flames. I just hope that anybody in the future, Lex, Theo, Joe, they call him out on these things. I'll leave it there. Smash the like button. Share the show with everyone you know. Thanks for hanging out. We'll see you on the next segment.

We're going to move them over there. You're going to be hard pressed to get me to believe that the U.S. wanted launch sites in Greenland after one hiccup said we give up. They had 10,000 people in Greenland. They were building deep underground military bases. You think they just hit one snap, you know, one problem and said, no, man, I bet Trump knows something we do not. And that's why there's talk about a potential for taking this by force. Donald Trump saying we've got.

Resources in Greenland that we put there and we've lost control. Our troops have been removed. And now there's a question of who will gain control of what we left. I believe I'll just be I'll be I'll be light. I think there's a very strong probability that the U.S. is actual nuclear weapons stored in Greenland somewhere. And Trump is like, how do we send in troops to go and secure that site without people noticing? You can't.

So then what happens if we send in troops? They're going to know something's up. It's going to cause an international incident. Now, there is a treaty we have with Denmark where we can establish bases. Trump could say something like, we have old bases. We're going to send some troops to survey these sites. It's part of our treaty with Denmark. Fine. But what happens then when news breaks that they're going to review old military launch sites for nuclear weapons? Greenland's all of a sudden going to find itself worth a lot of money.

So I do think trade plays a big role, to be honest. Controlling the Northwest Passage is paramount. Panama, the U.S. has got a lot of influence already. Trump is trying to regain control. The Suez, we basically own. But the Northwest Passage, that is between Russia, like, I don't know if we have a map here. It's basically just around Greenland, north of Canada, around the North Pole. As ice melts and there's a path by which ships can go,

There's going to be a lot of money made in having these vessels move through this area, launching from Canada. It's cold for sure, but we're able to send ships through there, get them to Asia much more quickly. Trump says, we're going to police this. We're going to control this. That's the game plan. I don't know, man. I don't think that's the only reason. When you take a look at this map of Greenland, it is funny how like close Iceland and Svalbard and Canada are to Greenland. That may just be the map.

But I think there's something bigger at play, and I don't think they want us to know about it. So, my friends, I say unto you, what do you think? Comment below. Let me know. You think we got nuclear missiles in Greenland? I think we do. Greenland, what is it? It's a big ice block. So there's no qualms from the Greenlandians during the Cold War when the U.S. was doing this. They didn't even know what was happening. It's a big island, and there's not that many people. In fact, the population is probably bigger now than it was before. So I wonder, man.

There's a lot that we don't know about. We were discussing aliens last night on TimCast IRL. I don't know if aliens are real, but I think it's fair to say based on the evidence we've seen, at least anecdotally, there are technologies we are not aware of. I think any sane person would recognize the U.S. military is going to build weapons we're not aware of. They ain't going to tell you about it. So I suppose just another story, huh? A lost nuclear military facility. I don't know, man. I played Fallout, just a video game.

But I'm wondering if the other issue may be that at these sites that have been abandoned by the U.S., there's information about our military capabilities that Trump doesn't want falling into the wrong hands. Could be. Maybe. I don't know. But I guess I'll just throw it to you guys. It's Friday. I will not be here tonight at Timcast IRL, so I'm getting these recorded as fast as I can because I got a mission. I got a mission we're going on.

Smash that like button. Share the show with everyone you know. Thank you all so much for hanging out today. Phil Labonte will be handling TimCast IRL. Don't miss it. And if you didn't, go to youtube.com slash TimCast or rumble.com slash Tim Pool and watch Tim versus Adam Conover. Went up this morning. It was fun. Shout out to Adam Conover. We had a great conversation, debate. Check it out. Thanks for hanging out. We'll see you all then.