Biden Demands Gun Control For Christian School Attack, IGNORES CEO Assassination
01:46:21 Share

Yesterday, there was a tragic incident at a Christian school, Abundant Life. A student and a teacher lost their lives. Several others were critically injured. And we're still awaiting updates and more information on exactly how and why this happened. But we do have some information. A deranged young woman who appears to have been idolizing school shooters perpetrated the incident. And in the wake of this, Joe Biden and Democrats have demanded gun control.

Now, we briefly talked about this on Timcast IRL. How come when a CEO is gunned down in cold blood, I mean, nothing changes, but they still celebrate it. There are leftists selling merchandise, cheering, donating thousands of dollars to the murderer. When it comes to a school, they say we can't let people have guns. You see, the message that's being sent by Democrats is hypocritical.

And it brings me to the main point. These shootings happen because we as a nation are culturally sick. This is a component of the culture war and why it matters so much. Now, a lot of this, I do believe, is parents letting their kids go on the Internet with unfettered access. I believe based on the preliminary information that's come out so far, it looks like this young girl had a troubled family life and entrenched herself in politics.

Let's just say a dark culture on the Internet. She began reading about Columbine and other school shooters watching people die. And that became her reality. There's a lot to talk about in this regard, how we end up in the culture war, why the left advocates for and is exacerbating the problem of violence. Why won't Democrats condemn the shooting of the CEO? Because they don't actually have an ideology.

There is no straightforward worldview. There is only culture. And I believe largely that the population of this country and most countries are driven not by what is moral and what makes sense, but by what culture dictates. Some people are, as we would describe them, NPCs or non-player characters. Hence, when you see this incongruence between

You have to wonder, as a thinking, moral, rational person, how these two incidents could occur. And I mean quite literally the position of the Democrats. That a man walks up to another man and shoots him in the back. A cowardly and disgusting move that changes nothing and solves no problems. And they're selling merchandise and he's raised $100,000 plus, the alleged shooter. And then when this deranged young woman, much radicalized by comparable cultural elements...

Not completely. I'm not saying she's a leftist. The Democrats are like, oh, me, oh, my. Oh, we can't allow guns to exist. But you have no problem when it's the CEO getting gunned down. It's disgusting, isn't it? Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and several others came out and gave statements in the wake of the CEO's assassination. And they all played this game of, look, murder is wrong. You know, Bernie said it's an atrocity. But he said, but and what does that mean?

And they said, it's wrong. Nobody should do it. But, you know, people can only push so far. And you know what they were saying? They were saying there's a direct correlation between the murder of a CEO and the function of health care in this country. That is, this individual, an individual, a father had done something personally in the past three years that warranted his death. No, no, no, don't get me wrong. They did say, you know, nobody should be killing anybody.

But when they say people can only be pushed so far, they are saying the actions of this man drove these people to kill him. It's not true. It's ridiculous. You can't blame the single individual in this regard for a massive monolithic system to the point of death, I would say. Certainly, the CEO deserves some blame for facilitating the machine. Don't get me wrong. You don't get to run the machine for all its problems and then act like you're not a part of it.

But to the point where this person is responsible for all of the death is an absurdity. You see, these Democrats and these leftists, I believe largely in the culture war and what we see from this story are driven by a vapid and shallow cultural drive to what I refer as wokeness, cult like adherence to liberal social orthodoxy. Now, I've heard all the arguments from the right about I'm sorry, from the classical liberal, the woke right. That's what they are. I call them woke right.

I've heard other arguments that actually it's this other element on the right. I guess they're calling Tucker Carlson woke, right? Or whatever. No limit. Let me explain to you what this is and how this all comes together. When you look at what woke is, if you're an academic who doesn't really pay attention to the culture of this country and you live in your own entrenched academic world, you're largely just saying to yourself, wokeness is cancel culture, Marxism, critical race theory. Thank you. And have a nice day. When you actually look at what people are saying,

No, there are things that don't necessarily necessarily line up in the world of the woke left and how they cancel and what they cancel people for. My point is in the culture war, the liberal faction is a cult. They don't have a moral ideology or framework, and they are willing to celebrate death when it benefits their cult. And then they will lament it if it doesn't.

When it comes to the May 29th insurrection in front of the White House, where they firebombed the White House grounds and set fire to St. John's Church, the president being forced into an emergency bunker, the corporate press, Democrats and leftists celebrated this and insulted Donald Trump. The 100 plus police officers who were injured didn't matter. And then you take a look at January 6th. And what do you see? Oh, heavens, it was the worst day in this country. How could this have happened? Now, you may be saying, well,

Well, hold on. It's not like not every leftist supported this. No, but the cult-like adherence to liberal social orthodoxy envelops everybody. CNN's highest day of ratings. Richie McGinnis was telling us this last night. Richie McGinnis said CNN's biggest day of ratings ever, January 6th. The average viewer of CNN is entrenched in the cult. They march in lockstep with whatever the narrative machine says. And that narrative machine is breaking.

The question is, what do we do moving forward to maintain that this system? And there are deep questions. I want to read this story for you. And I want to talk more about Internet radicalization and how the left lied and was driven psychotic and to this day remain psychotic. Take a look at this from Newsweek.

They say President Joe Biden has issued a statement following the shooting at the abundant life Christian school, saying Congress must act to prevent more gun violence. On Monday, a shooter opened fire at the Wisconsin school, killing two people and injuring six others. The suspect was found dead from self-inflicted gunshot wounds at the scene. He said today, families in Madison, Wisconsin, are grieving the loss of those who were killed and wounded at abundant life Christian school. It's shocking and unconscionable. Well, I'm going to tell you.

When Joe Biden does not come out and say the same thing relating to the CEO's assassination, I will just argue, I believe it's because largely they support it. Or at the very least, they know the cult does. When you've got a dude making playing cards that feature CEOs, he says he got a visit from the cops. They're selling out. People are buying up the jacket of the alleged murderer, donating thousands of dollars. People like Joe Biden are going to say, no, no, we're not going to defy our base.

And the leftist base is stupid, low IQ, violent individuals. I'm sorry. That's reality. They're going to say Biden did not release a similar statement following the killing of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson. Well, Thompson's killing was front page news. 125 people are killed with a gun every day in the U.S., according to Everytown for Gun Safety. Now I'll pause there on how much of that is suicide, which is tragic. But still, there's a difference between murder and suicide.

Biden has spoken about gun violence as a whole many times, including a threat posed by 3D printed guns. Discussing these guns, Biden said in September, the impact of these devices is devastating. But no statement on Brian Thompson. I think you guys get the point. The point being that this is their culture. The culture war right now is more than just Trump versus Biden, Democrats versus Trump, Trump versus deep state, authoritarian, libertarian. It's much more.

The way I viewed it for a long time with what woke is that we had this principal culture that most people followed and there were subcultures within it. Some were wackier than others. Over time, there began to be this coalescing around a fringe core of ideas that were algorithmically supported, thus creating an unhinged and fractured worldview.

A good example of this would be Elsagate, which I've referenced quite a bit. But for those that don't know, Elsagate was a series of videos, was it was a phenomenon on YouTube where people started making videos where Elsa, Spider-Man and Joker would be running around in the slapstick Kyle slapstick style comedy that had no dialogue, often with the Joker injecting a giant syringe into Elsa and

And they were quite unhinged, but they were getting millions of views and making lots of money. The YouTube algorithm was broken and it was promoting unhinged nonsense. Well, much in the same way, the algorithms promoted unhinged nonsense as it relates to politics to a lot of weak willed and stupid people creating woke culture as we know it today. Now, those of us that are reasonable, rationally minded and willing to to do a little bit of the work.

We're more resilient to these things, not impervious, but more resilient. We've challenged the corporate press, the mainstream narratives, and ultimately we won. Trump won the popular vote because of this. The culture has shifted. But for those people that are entrenched in the psychotic world, this is what you get. Socialist clothing company founder creating disturbing most wanted CEO playing cards in wake of United Health Care shooting. They like death. Or I should say, it doesn't matter what they like or dislike or what their ideology really is.

So long as they see a swarm circling this, they'll adhere to it, whether it makes sense or not. Now to the school shooting and where this correlates. We have this thread from Slotsism on X. Pagliacci the Hated, she calls herself. She is a writer for Redux magazine.

She says, I have made contact with the alleged boyfriend of the Wisconsin shooter. He has very graciously provided me with a full manifesto, which I verified by having him screen record himself opening it from a direct link the shooter sent to him via WhatsApp. I told him I would do my best to dispel some of the misinformation and present things as truthfully as I was given them. And I will hold myself to that. Her boyfriend knew her as Samantha Rupnow. I don't believe that was the real name. She also went by a different name, one which is also feminine, but adopted the name Samantha.

She was a student at Abundant Life, born in 2009, not transgender, nor was the boyfriend transgender. Her manifesto was titled War Against Humanity, six pages long. She spoke about having extremely difficult relationships with her parents, who she referred to as scum. She also claims her family didn't love her or want her and expressed feeling like the wrong child of her family. She said she had planned to take her own life a long time ago, but felt that what she ended up doing was better. Jeez.

I'm not going to keep she said it was it was less boring. We'll put it that way. She expressed deep admiration for, let's just say, several individuals, Turkish neo-Nazi, for instance. She expressed that she got weapons through lies, manipulation and her father's stupidity. And her boyfriend says the photo was taken. There's another photo. I don't really care to show too much of it. Pogoladze says, here's some of the screenshots. I'm not going to read them in detail.

So I'm very hesitant to post the whole thing, not because the content is graphic in any way, because I'm worried it will violate terms of service. And I'm not intending to do that. This is one and page page one and two in full. So more info. Her boyfriend and owner for two years. They were in a long distance relationship, never met in person. So not really dating, are they? He says she never expressed any desire to do this. Only sent him her manifesto the day of the shooting. He did not see her message until 1 12 p.m.

He describes her as being kind, generous towards him and cheerful and describes her as always making him gifts and expecting nothing in return. On page four, she says that she acquired the guns. Her boyfriend says he was aware that there was a gun safe in her house. Some sources are incorrectly stating she's 17. That's not correct. Police have corrected the record. And now she says that she's gotten some assurances she won't be suspended. She had been bullied in school.

something her boyfriend emphasized as being a big factor in her pessimism. Court records show she is telling the truth about the divorces in her family. And let me just get to the point, I suppose. She goes on to mention that the name and everything, it's not been verified. Here's what it looks like. This young girl comes from a troubled family life. She seems to have been emotionally abused, but I don't know if there's any actual abuse. But regardless, this 15-year-old ends up with deep emotional trauma.

She's bullied in school and this is social isolation. But how does it come to be this individual could ultimately make the decision to commit these attacks? Access to the information. Yeah, I know. I know. I am not for hardcore censorship, but I am also not a free speech absolutist. I believe the solution here largely is cultural. We need parents who are going to, I don't know, watch their kids. But ultimately, I think kids should not be on the Internet before a certain age.

There's a lot of interest in banning the internet for kids under 16. I agree with this. I'll tell you why. Where I grew up, we had a video store, Archer Avenue, and the video store had an adult section. You couldn't go into it. It's illegal. So when we would walk, like we're 13, 14, or we walk into the video store to get a video game. I know it's funny, right? Back in the day, you had video stores.

And we'd see the curtain and it would say 18 and up only. And we knew it was back there, but we weren't allowed. The store wouldn't let us go back there because it was a crime. They'd get in trouble. And so we didn't. Now, as kids, the Internet still existed and people would still share things. There were there was the rare faces of death VHS that was being copied and shared among my friends. Oh, you have a copy of it. Hard to find this stuff. Nonetheless, it's disturbing things that children shouldn't get their hands on.

Right now on the Internet, a 15 year old girl can go on the Internet, start Googling things in her depression and isolation. And instead of finding something positive and a support group, a church, perhaps a community center, she finds blogs dedicated to evil people who do evil things and revels in it. You know, the the one quote that I really love that exemplifies so much of this is from

Harriet Tubman, I freed many slaves. I would have freed many more if only they knew they were slaves. It says a lot about ideology. People don't seem to understand this. We take for granted the philosophical constructs or discoveries that came before us. That is the idea of independence as a nation. The idea of self-governance of the people had to be developed or discovered, however you describe it.

That is, before the American Revolution, largely the world was composed of rule by decree from those of divine providence. God wills it. And the founding fathers said, no, we can do this ourselves as individuals amongst ourselves. You don't need the system. The ideologies or should say you had the period of the Enlightenment when humans began to understand logic better.

or started to think about these things and develop these ideas that we so cherish today. These things didn't exist before. Ideas are invented or discovered, same as technologies. That means if you go back in time, I mean, just think about how amazing this is really, what the internet has given us and what it has done to us at the same time. How many of you have a general understanding of smelting?

Right now, let's be real. Like, I don't know how many of you could actually smelt or or find iron or figure out how to do it. But, you know, a tiny morsel, you know, that somewhere people are melting down rocks and then they're getting metal. Now, imagine thousands upon thousands of the Bronze Age.

When they're when they're, you know, smelting bronze and things like this, humans had to discover how to do this. There is so much information that changed our lives as human beings that we take for granted that we don't realize. There was a point in human history where it was possible for one human to know everything that humans knew. Now, how about that today? That's certainly not possible. So what I mean to say is this young girl isolated from these ideas and from the Internet and from this cult like culture.

would not have done this. If you don't know guns exist, how could you seek them out to utilize them in this way? I'm certainly not saying ban guns or anything like that. I'm saying a young girl getting access to the Internet to learn of the deranged ideology of these individuals certainly does become radicalized and entrenched in it, which brings me to the bigger picture of radicalization and the lies of the left. These leftists and Democrats for a long time tried claiming that people were being radicalized to the right.

I tried claiming that people like me, for instance, were radicalizing people to the right. The reality was they were the radical ones and they're the cult. They were radicalized in the late 2000s when we saw in the LexisNexis data across the board and every social media platform and newspaper, the rise of far left cult like ideology and those who are willing to adhere to it to an extreme degree.

The reason why I say those willing to adhere to it is that many of us did not. And that's how you get the movement of leaving the left. People like Dave Rubin, me, Elon Musk, RFK Jr., Tulsi Gabbard, etc. The list goes on. Many people left the left because they say the left went too far and went insane. What was happening is that these people were becoming entrenched in a media culture that was radicalizing them.

Now, my concern about Internet radicalization for adults is not so much. I'm not going to say ban these ideas or don't allow them to speak. No, I think we need to have a larger presence in media. We need to work harder. But as you can see, these people were radicalized over racial issues and gender issues, and they went insane legitimately. I mean, take a look at sterilize the sterilizing of children. These ideologies are are insane. They they lead to the death and destruction of humanity.

An individual that follows the perverse culture of the left ultimately will find themselves ceasing to exist. Their family line evaporates. They become overweight, sickly and die. It's horrifying. It is a dead end. That's radicalization. Now, on the right, you certainly have more extreme elements, but they don't lead to the destruction of humanity. They just don't. The most extreme certainly do. Don't get me wrong. But the bulk of what the right talks about with Donald Trump, it's just I don't know.

I it's it's ideas on how we should or should not run things that ultimately won't lead to the great destruction of anything. Deporting immigrants at the end of the world, sending them home is not the end of the world. Securing the borders at the end of the world, lowering taxes isn't either. Your policy disputes and is a question of efficiency. On the left, however, their ideology ultimately does lead to the end of the world. So what we have here with this young girl, I think it's important to point out.

Kids should not be given unfettered access to the Internet. We have a cultural sickness, but largely what Joe Biden has shown us exemplifies all of it. And that's largely my point here. They don't care that a CEO is gunned down in cold blood. Charlemagne, the God made a great point. Nothing changed. The system is moving on like normal. All that happened was a father of two is dead. There's a new CEO. The company will keep on keeping on. Nothing will change.

So why are they celebrating? Because they're unhinged, because there is nothing behind this. Much like this young girl, it's just a fractured ideology or lack thereof and anger and the willingness to be violent. But when you have people cheering on the death of what they feel is justified, don't be surprised when you get more shootings like this, because you're telling everybody if you can see the villains, then you are justified, which is just not correct.

It's not correct at all. I think these people are dangerous and evil, but they need help and we need control. I'll wrap it up there. Smash the like button. Share the show with everyone you know. Follow me on X and Instagram at Timcast. Become a member at Timcast dot com and we'll see you all in the next segment. There's a million plus registered drones. Some of them are manned aircraft. Some of them are doing standard professional work. They're all legally registered and nothing to see here. Everybody carry on. The ramifications are still clear.

There are calls for new legislation over drones, drone response systems, and perhaps it is all one big psychological operation. But the conspiracy theories abound, my friends. They say that there is nuclear material missing.

Perhaps a nuclear warhead. That's what people want to know. I can tell you this. It is a slow news period, which is rather surprising considering Donald Trump won the election. But I got to tell you, people are tuned out. They're bored. It's the holidays and we chill in y'all.

So a lot of people, I think, are making something out of nothing. But in this still, there is a new conspiracy theory, I guess, because some people need media and they're bored. Ladies and gentlemen, a viral Twitter post, X post. Sorry. Sorry, Elon. With over two million views from 2020 is a screenshot from 2022.

of a 4chan post saying the next PSYOP will be nuclear material used to justify lockdowns. Now, the concern people have, I would describe it more so as PTSD or trauma, not just from COVID lockdowns, but from just, you know, kind of everything the government has done in the past that people just don't trust. The fear is that they're not going to just let Donald Trump walk into the White House. So something must be happening.

I don't know that I agree that something must be happening. I think maybe it's as simple as Trump just won. And the reason why people are coming up with these theories is because there is a void of news. You know, I don't know if you guys have ever done sensory deprivation or heard about it, but I think Joe Rogan's talked about it quite a bit. He had their the float tanks, they call them. You go in, you lay down, you close it and you float in the salty water and you feel nothing.

You see nothing, you hear nothing, you smell nothing. And in this sensory deprivation, your mind creates images desperately trying to fill the void. And I think that's partly what we're seeing. The truth is, guys, we're a week away from Christmas. Who wants to be focused on this? We're engaging in our travel plans, our holiday plans. And as much as I am no fan, we're going to be taking two weeks off at the end of the year. No, no, don't get me wrong. I love Christmas.

But Christmas is Wednesday. New Year's is Wednesday. There ain't no way we're going to get anything done. But we will be back after the break on January 6th. And things should be kicking off once again.

We've got a lot of interesting developments, but I do think the theories are interesting and I love talking about it. And I'm here to do the work for you when no one else is. So let's talk about it. I rightly do not care what the White House says on this one. John Kirby basically is like, look, look, we've done a bunch of analysis. Everything's fine. Go home. Nothing to see here.

Yeah, I don't buy it because in the drone story came out clearly there are drones flying and the government acting like they don't know what they are is a lie. Even Trump came out the press conference saying they know exactly what this is. They're just not telling you. Perhaps the psychological operation was to see, as some have suggested, what the public would do with the unknown. How will they respond? Will they panic? How will the economy be affected? I honestly don't know.

In my personal opinion, I think there's probably some drone operations going on, government, military and private sector. But a lot of this is mass hysteria. So it's hard to know for sure. One thing I can tell you is it is likely not. From Mirror.co.uk, mystery New Jersey drones are hunting a nuclear bomb. As veteran warns, it's out there. You know,

Part of my insane, excitable mind is like, yeah, I wish I literally don't. Let's not have a nuclear bomb go off. But it's like, yeah, sure. Like something like that would ever happen. Right. I'm sorry, guys. Optimism bias, normalcy bias, whatever you call it. I think it is extremely and exceedingly unlikely that a nuclear warhead went missing from Ukraine and is now somewhere in New Jersey. And the government doesn't know how to find it. So they've deployed all of these drones.

I watched a video of one of the drones once again, and it was clearly an airplane. Dude, these have FAA lights on them, red and green, and they're blinking properly and all that. It's you're just looking at a registered aircraft. Y'all can chill. But I do have this viral conspiracy theory I want to talk about before. Let me give you a gist of what people are saying as it pertains to this nuclear weapon, because that's relevant context for the greater conspiracy theory about the next lockdown.

The Mirror says a military veteran whose company supplies drone tech to the U.S. military has given a chilling explanation. John Ferguson, the founder of Saxon Unmanned, has claimed drones are part of a search for a rogue nuclear warhead believed to have been smuggled into the U.S. The only reason why you would ever fly an aircraft, an unmanned aircraft at night is if you're looking for something. I know we talked about yesterday, but the context is important. I just want to stress like, no, that's not true. I flew drones at night to film things. Maybe you want to get a picture of a lake or a house. It's not that big a deal.

Telling the stories that back in the 1980s, Ronald Reagan had dismantled the nuclear program. There were countless nuclear missiles that were disarmed and disposed of.

However, he raised concern about the missing armaments, adding, but there were over 80 nuclear warheads that were in Ukraine that came up missing and we don't know where they are. Perhaps then they have been smuggled in. Now, this is a story from a few days ago pertaining to the drone stuff. New Jersey's largest utility firm begs feds to shut down airspace over nuclear plant as mystery drones are spotted. The reason I'm re-highlanding this, I know we did talk about it in the past couple of days, is because of this viral tweet from...

What is it? What is the username? Do it plot. Do it. Q plus. There you go. Twenty thousand followers. Let's see here for Q. They say, OK, well, you know, look right away. I'm going to say this is not real. I am going to go ahead and make the assertion not real. But we'll we'll break down this conspiracy theory and what people are saying. I still find it interesting.

This has got 2.6 million views. I don't highlight this. I'm not simply pulling up a random post and trying to make a segment about it. I'm seeing a lot of people share this. It's got 6,300 retweets, 24,000 likes and 2.6 million views. And the general idea is the government is staging a false flag around nuclear energy in an effort to terrify people and force them to undergo more government restrictions, lockdowns, et cetera. And this is going viral.

I am going to say outright, not necessarily debunking it, but providing some counterpoints as to why I don't believe this stuff. But how about I just read for you what they wrote? We have this post. It's from Paranormal on 4chan. It's been archived. It is from August 22nd, 2022. Picture of Jupiter. And it says, the next false flag.

It says the next false flag will be centered on the premise of malicious interdiction of nuclear source materials. It will not involve a nuclear device or nuclear detonation, but rather a radiological threat. Nuclear source materials will be deliberately leaked to target areas to inflict severe injuries through radiation exposure. The real number of casualties as a result of these attacks will remain very low. The purpose is to create a new method of restricting freedom of movement and new policies that will enable the government to continue its expansion of power. The media will display images of attack survivors,

Let's go back to the tweet in question because it is a different image, strangely, but it's the same post. And this one's actually, you know what? This post is actually from May 23rd, so it predates that one. Let's just pull this one up.

It says they'll remain very low. The purpose is to create a new method of restricting freedoms, expansion of power. The media will display images of attack survivors who have burns and lesions across their skin. Videos depicting overwhelmed triage centers with victims vomiting or otherwise unresponsive will be shared on social media. The threat of radiation exposure, an invisible enemy, will be used as a primary vector. An application modeled for COVID contact tracing will be installed on every mobile device that uses iOS or Android. The application

The application will serve to notify the user about potential hazardous exposure and recommend actions they take, which include voluntary exposure testing. Additionally, cellular carriers will roll out automated SMS alerts that will have similar functionality. This application will interface directly with the UICC on mobile devices. If the user does not have this application installed, network connectivity will be prohibited. New policy will grant governmental agencies further access to metadata and geolocation data on every platform.

Included in these policies will be a backdoor legislation that bans the use of end-to-end encryption. This legislation will be identical in nature to the recently introduced S3538 Earn It Act.

These attacks will be localized to a specific region. Trash centers will be set up in the affected areas through the deployment of the National Guard and coordinating members such as FEMA. These trash centers will see moderate traffic. The narrative will continue longer than any possible threat. Despite offering no protection or even relevancy against a radiological threat, you will see another wave of people wearing cotton surgical masks in not just the target areas, but the entire U.S.,

There will be severe disruptions to the Internet through the use of addition rather than negation. Alternative sources of information will become overwhelmed with content generated by convoluted neural networks that support the narrative or use a carefully crafted opposition. Platforms that are incompatible with the system will be suppressed entirely on the infrastructure level. There will be organic service disruptions as a result of excess traffic. Videos will surface showing these triage centers empty with personnel staffing them idle.

This will threaten the narrative. The control of information is required for the campaign to be successful. The perpetrator will not be the Islamic affiliated group or evil incel domestic terrorists. It will have no relevancy to the ongoing Ukraine conflict, but the blame will fall on all of these groups. The fog of war will surround information relating to the origin, and this will be intentional. The real attacks will be psychological. Fear will be exploited, just like with manufactured response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

It goes on to say, and an essay working with federal, state and local partners to hold major radiological incident exercise in Austin, May 16th to the 20th. Well, there you go. That's the general theory that people are sharing far and wide. And I'm going to go ahead and say, yeah, not likely. Sorry, guys, not likely. First of all, the narrative that we're getting right now is likely it's likely inverted. This was posted in 2022.

People have known about these theories, and this is just a broken clock being seemingly right. I don't want to say right, but when people are like, holy F, this was true. No, no, no, no, no, no.

If someone writes, there's going to be an incident. And then later on, someone points to that incident and says, hey, look, here's incident. And then someone looks at the past and goes, whoa, they predicted this. No, that's circular. The existing conspiracy theory today about the drones is likely influenced by posts like this. Not only that, but there are many posts like this that never see the light of day. So, of course, many people want to play that game because, guys, you know, life is substantially more boring than anyone realizes. Now, to be fair,

Fine. No one saw COVID coming. And it's been let's just say we have been spattered by historical unprecedented events of the past year. And so, sure, I'm willing to suspend disbelief a little bit and say the probability of things like this happening are probably higher than we actually expect. I mean, nobody saw the COVID lockdowns coming. In fact, if you went three months before the lockdowns and explained what they would turn into, nobody would have believed you.

If you said, guys, let's say it's October or November, you said in a few months, they're going to lock the whole country down. There's going to be a mass pandemic. They'd be like, no way. That would never happen. So unfortunately for us, you don't see it coming until it comes. And then by then, everyone wants to act like hindsight is 2020. But we could have never. I mean, you couldn't predict this stuff. You really can't. I do think I got to say, my friends.

I just I'm not a conspiracy person because I have seen beyond the veil, not like between life or death. I mean, I've been on the ground in so many countries. I have personally witnessed so many historical moments throughout my life that, you know, the reality is they're largely mundane. When you get a news report, I guess I can put it this way. When you get a news report about like these drones and all this stuff or riots, it's all romanticized.

You hear the stories. It's fascinating to me because I talk about Occupy having, you know, obviously been down there and I see these books getting written and they just omit everything. They romanticize it. They make it seem like this tremendous moment because they have to sell you a product. Tall tales, as it were.

There's going to be some 17 or 18 year old who was much too young at the time of Occupy to have been cognizant of those kind of politics. And they're going to read about and go, whoa, like you were there. What was it like? And I'm going to tell them, guy, it was boring. Nothing was happening. Now, don't get me wrong. Like, it's certainly not nothing. It's not there was a park full of people walking around like their camps and there was politics going.

But it's really fascinating when you're on the ground at these moments and you realize just how normal everything really does seem. We expect so much more because of tall tales and because of movies. I know I could tell you all the stories of the places I've been to, but I'll just simplify it instead of getting into the specifics. You know, it really is. Let me put it this way. Witnessing a revolution right in front of your eyes, I would consider it to be interesting. And that's it.

Watching these movies and being raised in these ways to see these stories, you think that the revolution is crazy, that it's organized and people are hurrah. And then they drag out the president. No, largely it was like everybody was standing around being like, oh, the president left. Well, he just said he did. That's it. Don't get me wrong. Like in Egypt, APCs did roll across the bridges and they were shutting the city down. But I got to tell you guys,

Like I went to Heliopolis. I was at the shopping mall eating kebab. And they're like, there's a revolution currently underway. I remember being in and I guess, you know, I guess the grass is always greener or everything's romanticized. But my point is, when we look at these stories like this with the drones, when you look at what's going on with these conspiracy theories, people want to believe there's an international cabal of extreme authority and power. And these things are all planned. There's a nefarious plot. And it's like Mission Impossible, where a guy in a suit lights a cigar and he says, I'm

Well, you don't inhale. I say we puff it and blow it up. And he says, we're going to take over the world. Deploy X three nine drones. And then it goes. None of that happens. Not in my experience. I've been in the meetings with these media companies. They're boring. People are stupid. And more often than not, things are accidents.

I think the government certainly knows more than they let on. But I think it's important to understand that the dude working intelligence at the CIA or the NSA or the FBI is no different than your buddy talking about plumbing. Like, you know, so you're sitting around with your buddies talking work, right? Imagine that. And you know that sometimes they say things that are stupid or wrong and you guys disagree.

It's no different. It's the same people working intelligence. There's no grand conspiracies. There's just milquetoast conspiracies. I mean, are there powerful, wealthy people hiding behind the scenes who are enacting secret plots? Yeah, kind of. But it's not like that. It's lame, actually. I'll tell you this. I went to Davos in what year would have been? It's must have been 2017. And I filmed three videos and then I left because it was boring.

I had been invited by some friends to come to the outskirts. I didn't actually, it's the World Economic Forum. I didn't actually get into the main event. But outside in Davos, Switzerland, I think it's Switzerland, right? There's a bunch of secondary events and people are hanging out.

I went to a bunch of parties and I met the children of politicians and high ranking government officials who were hanging out and drinking. And cryptocurrency was a big topic of conversation. And they had no idea what they were talking about. And nothing really got done. And ultimately, I see like one guy says and the other guy like, oh, yeah, give me a call and maybe we'll do something. And next thing you know, there's a company being formed and there was no real substance behind it. It's just it's all rather mundane. I will say this. The videos I filmed there are gone.

They just disappeared off my channel and I don't know why. Three videos from Davos because I was doing daily vlogs. Gone. Gone. I didn't delete them. Whatever, I guess. They're just gone.

And so there are things like that that exist. And there was the impeachment of Donald Trump. There are bad people doing bad things. I just don't think it's as grandiose in this regard. I'd be much, much more willing to bet the government is completely incompetent than there's a secret psyop. And, you know, they're trying to control the world with this big campaign. I think covid I don't believe a lot of people believe that covid lockdowns and all of that was part of a nefarious plot.

that Fauci had manufactured this virus intentionally to shut the world down all to stop Trump. I don't think so. I don't. I think what likely happened is that Fauci was funding gain of research for some time. There was a breach from the lab. They panicked and didn't want responsibility. And it's what you get.

There was political exploitation, but it's all largely on the surface. There are people planning bad things, but I don't think it was something like Fauci went to, you know, some other Democrat and said, we're going to stage a pandemic and then we will stop trouble. I don't think so. I think the dude is largely focused on his own plans, was engaged in nefarious behaviors, and then things went bad and everybody's trying to lie to cover their own asses. Though it is possible there is dark, nefarious plots.

With all that in mind, I do agree conspiracies happen, but everybody wants the drones to be a bigger story than it really is. And I just I'm sorry, guys. There's a few things that I think we need to see here.

drones have become ubiquitous. You can go to Best Buy and you can buy them for a thousand bucks. They're getting easier to buy. They're getting cheaper, smaller. They've been had for a while now. There's a there's like phone size drones where you turn on and it floats up and takes a picture of you. It's just it's become really easy to make a little thing fly with four propellers, rotors.

So a lot of people are flying these things. And the reason why the government's not giving us any good answers is because it's probably just 37 different people flying drones for the most part. Some people say, but Tim, what about the six foot wide ones? Yeah, government may be doing something. But the implication that all of the drone sightings of the ones that actually are drones are part of a coordinated government effort ignores the fact that there really are just a lot of people who own and fly drones.

And I guess they were saying the FAA changed the rules recently, allowing night flights and the technology has improved. Guys, I wish the conspiracy theories were real. Not like literally, but life would certainly be more interesting were that the case. I don't think it's important that we remain vigilant and reject things like this.

But there's a reason why it's got 2.6 million views. Can I just stress, this post has more views than I got on my entire show yesterday. I guess to be fair, not for all, just the morning show. What did we get on the morning? The morning show got like 1 point something million views, right? If I combine all the segments and the podcast and that stuff. And this post, it got way more because I think people are bored.

That's what I'm talking about, man. In my experience, having traveled the world, I find that things are much more mundane than people realize. And it is kind of scary. You know, I've been thinking about this for let me just throw this in the mix. I grew up in the south side of Chicago. I was not wealthy. And I had visions and dreams of a grandiose world that I strived for. I thought about what it must be like to be behind the scenes, to be backstage at the event, to be to be there with the organizer, these big parties. And it's nothing special.

The stories are always more powerful than the reality. And when you are there watching these things happen, certainly it is somewhat entertaining, but it's not like the movies and it's not like the stories. That's why it's funny. I think, you know, we hear these legends of giant monsters and they write stories about the gigantic demon beast of glowing red eyes. The truth is what likely happened is

Some dude was walking down a forest path at night, traveling from one city to the next in a time before electricity. And there was a bear and he saw a giant hulking beast lurking in the shadows. And he came back to the next town, terrified and, you know, frantic and dirty. So what happened? It's like a giant beast must have been 10 feet tall, attacked me with demon glowing eyes. And then everyone's like, wow. And they draw a picture of it and they look actually a really good example of this is the first drawing of an elephant.

So basically, let me let me show you this. What happens is this this basically explains everything. Here you go. Here's your conspiracy theories. When explorers went down and wrote letters about elephants and then sent the letters back, they read it and then drew a picture of what they were reading. And that's what they thought it was. Clearly, that's incorrect. It is not at all what an elephant looks like. So that's the point. You know, stories are always bigger.

Now I'm going to get a bunch of people saying, Tim, you're wrong, blah, blah, blah, whatever. But I don't know. I will add I will add that it is a slow news day because we are nearing Christmas. That's obvious. And a lot of people are tuned out. Yeah, I have no interest in entertaining people.

doing what a lot of other people do. Let's just say this. There's someone who's being accused right now of taking, a liberal, taking a video of a mundane, boring thing and chopping it out of context to grossly exaggerate the political ramifications. I'm unwilling to do that, man. I'm going to talk about what I think is the more relevant things. A viral post about the drones and the conspiracy theories with a couple million views I think is relevant. Probably not something I would choose to put at the top of the roster if we had a normal news day, if I could talk about the actions of the Speaker of the House, but

I'll just be honest with you guys. This is the top of the news cycle right now. Thanks for hanging out. We do have more segments coming up because we have some cultural stuff to talk about. So smash the like button, share the show, and we'll see you all in the next segment.

The first episode of the smash hit show, the comment section has aired with its new host, Reagan Conrad, and it has the audience rather divided with a large portion unsubscribing for the channel. For those that aren't familiar, Brett Cooper was a star personality for the Daily Wire, hosting a channel with about 4.5 million subscribers, giving cultural commentary a show much bigger than this one. So I assume most of you know all about this.

Now, in response to the launch of this first episode with Reagan, it has once again reignited the conversation about what happened with Brett, why she left The Daily Wire, was she forced to leave and what's really going on. With rumors abound across the Internet over her next move, I am going to get into the nitty gritty of what the industry is talking about and probably piss off a lot of people. But it's a slow news day. And here I am talking about drama. But to be fair,

A big component of my fears moving into the next couple of years is the media war. My friends, we have won the political battle, but it is just a battle in the culture war. That is Donald Trump winning is a is a big boon for populists in general with RFK Jr., Tulsi Gabbard, Elon Musk, etc. You have moderate leaning individuals left liberal types who have come to the populist side to join Donald Trump.

That was our doing. I have no problem taking partial credit along with all of you, the viewers, and granting majority credit to all the other shows substantially bigger than mine and smaller even, but just everybody. What I mean to say is we all deserve a little bit of credit for being active in the space, spreading the word, sharing these videos and telling people the truth. But now that that battle is over, we are moving into a new battle.

The big corporate players are absolutely about to enter the space and they are going to try to crush us. I think it is entirely reasonable that in six months you are going to hear about lucrative contracts being launched with big liberal podcasters. This is the game they play and they have the infrastructure to do it. Now, my friends, I'm hoping that we see an inverse. I'm hoping that powerful players on the right are also willing to fund a communication ecosystem. We're lucky.

This is a channel that I built up entirely on my own from the beginning. All of the shows that I've created, it's just me running this company and then gradually bringing people on. I've long said that I feel like, you know, I have hit my head in terms of what more can we do? There's only so much I can do hosting two big shows. This is why this story matters.

If there is, first of all, I'll just say this. Brett Cooper leaving, it sucks. Everybody liked the show and she was the principal host. So leaving, it does kind of suck. But Reagan's great. And if you're going to get two shows now, it's good for the space, though I do get people being upset.

But I think it's important to state that I don't understand why we're going to have this conflict on this side. It shouldn't exist. We can certainly share ideas, disagree where we disagree. But if we, regardless of your politics even, the liberal personalities are begging for corporate intervention. And that's terrifying. And I don't mean just corporations. I mean the big machine state players.

These people are going on X, these liberals, and they're saying, why won't the Democratic mega donors give me money? And I'm like, oh, boy.

There's a lot of independent creators. A lot of moves are being made with Rumble, The Daily Wire, and a few other big podcast networks. I can give a shout out to all of them. You've got Westwood. You've got, I think, Live One, Podcast One. You've got Libsyn. Who am I forgetting? Did I say Red Seat, Westwood? All of these big networks are trying to make moves because we can see exactly where the media landscape is going. If you and I screw this one up, if the right moves are not made,

It's going to be right back to the corporate uniparty narrative. And so that's why I think these stories are really important. And that being said, let me utilize this opportunity talking about Reagan and the drama around Brett Cooper to actually talk about the nitty gritty of contracts in media and the reality of what media is. There's this great movie with Rodney Dangerfield. What was it called? Back to School. I think it was. Let me make sure it was Back to School. Do you guys know that one?

Is that, uh, yep. Back to school. 1986. The movie came out the year I was born. Let me, let me see when, uh, what month did this come out? Cause I wonder if it was before I was born. No. Okay. A couple of months after I was born. So anyway, in this movie, Rodney Dangerfield is a very successful businessman, uh,

And he wants to finish college. So he goes there and this is a great scene where he's sitting there and the professor is telling all of the students about how to run a business and widgets. And he's like, we're talking about how it works. He's like, you're gonna have to, you know, look, you're gonna have the tax guy show up and he's gonna tell you this, that or otherwise. And then you got to grease this guy's fingers. Otherwise, he's going to cause you problems. All the students start listening to him.

I love that scene. Basically, what we have right now is there's a lot of people who work in big companies who are never going to tell you the truth for a variety of reasons. I think a lot of these people are rather plastic. They work at the agencies. They don't know. They don't care. They want their paycheck. And what matter is it to you?

Then you've got a lot of people who are outside the system who think everything is evil and nefarious. And then you get me, not just me, but here I am. I run a company. I have no bosses. We have clients and contracts, but I am going to express to you the inner workings to the best of my ability, as I've been doing for some time now. So let's start here with this video from Reagan, the new host of the comment section. And she basically lays out, uh,

Brett Cooper leaving and all of this stuff. Now, my response to this was it all just seems like obvious contract stuff to me. I assume Brett wanted more money. Daily Wire don't want to pay more money. Impasse. I don't get why anyone be mad. It's not like Brett can't keep doing videos. Now you get another show in the cultural space. I'm going to I'm going to I'm going to tell you the truth and I'm going to piss everybody off as I do it. So everybody working in the media going, oh, crap. Tim's it. Oh, here we go. Yeah. Sorry, guys.

Let me play a little bit of this video for you. And so you can understand the gist of what we're seeing right now. And Reagan intros the show. Welcome to a new chapter of the comment section. And I am your new host, Reagan Conrad. Now, some of you are probably asking, who is this chick? Where is Brett? What is going on? And those are all very valid questions. So before we get into today's episode, I want to just recap a few things with you all.

Now, many of you have known me as Producer Regan. I've been working on this show for almost three years now. I started with Daily Wire fresh out of college with a journalism degree and a resume full of social media work. And prior to applying here, I was listening to Ben Shapiro and Matt Walsh and Michael Knowles literally every day because they were the voices online echoing my thoughts and my values and my beliefs. So I decided to apply to the Daily Wire and I got a job and I moved across the country from Pennsylvania to Nashville. And I've been here ever since.

Funnily enough, my first job at this company was actually posting the Facebook videos for this brand new show called The Comment Section. And from there, I fell in love with the show and with this team. And I basically became an associate producer for a time, and then I became the producer. And even recently, you've probably seen me guest hosting on Fridays. So while I may feel like a stranger to most of you watching this video, I've been behind the scenes for years getting to know all of you. Now, over the last few weeks, the internet, as we so often cover on the show,

has been the internet. And the comment sections have certainly been comment sectioning away. I mean, it's literally part of my job to read your comments. And so I know what's being said. And the one thing that is rightfully concerning many of you is the thought that Brett may have been forced out. I can assure you that that is not the case. And it is simply untrue. I mean, as Brett said herself in her final episode, and I would highly encourage every single one of you who has not yet seen that video to go watch that video and also go watch and support and love on anything that Brett does coming up in the future.

because I know that it will be amazing. It was Brett's decision to leave the show and move on to a new adventure, which she is very excited about, and all of you should be very excited for what's to come. And in saying all of that, it is an enormous honor for me. Truly beyond my- So there you go. There's a few things in that I think are interesting, and we can talk about the interworkings. It is very much- I don't see a reality where it was not Brett's decision to leave.

So she says that she was not forced out of the company. I'll tell you my thoughts.

In a contract negotiation, likely what happens is the Daily Wire says, we've invested a lot of money in this show. Here's how much the host position will pay. We want these ads to be read. Ah, but you may have noticed that Reagan said you can see her guest hosting on Fridays. I wonder for what reason Brett Cooper may not have been there on Fridays. Honestly, I have no idea. And I'm probably not correct in assessing what actually did happen. I can only tell you about the generalities of media.

So outside of the context of Brett, I can say in a normal circumstance where you get a guest host on Fridays, that usually implies that the talent is requesting time off for one reason or another or being given other duties. Thus, you bring in a guest host. Usually when it comes down to contract negotiations, which I believe is what was happening here. The simple thing is, if the company says, here's the position and here's the offer and you say no, that's your choice to leave. No one's forcing you out.

No one's forcing you to accept an agreement you don't want. It is not forcing someone out to offer them a different deal. Now, that being said, if there was an instance where the Daily Wire told Brett Cooper they would be reducing her pay and saying, we're actually going to pay you less now, take it or leave it. And then she's like, well, I can't afford that. I have no choice but to go. That would make sense. But that is usually never the case. And I've never actually seen a circumstance of this. It's not something that happens.

usually they'll just say, look, we're going to keep you where you are. And that's pretty bad for someone who's hosting a show that's massively successful in contract negotiations. So I'm not convinced that that's actually the case. What seems to be more likely is that Brett asked for more money than they were willing to give her, and she didn't want to do it. There's probably some interpersonal drama related to other individuals as well. But I don't know. These things usually happen. When I worked for Fusion,

I actually tried breaking the contract early. Nobody knew anything. Why? It wasn't because I was under NDA. So let me show you a some comments. Candace Owens is chiming in. Sailor not Jerry says, I think the anger largely comes from the fallout with Candace on top of the fact that they replaced her with her maid of honor could have been given Brett's blessing, too, though. We'll never know due to NDAs. Wrong. Wrong, I say.

So let's let's let's talk about this. NDAs are not the issue. Not at all. NDAs may as well be nothing but formalities. And anybody who works in media claims otherwise, I just think is being silly. Now, what I would say is the reporting going around is that Brett Cooper unfollowed the Daily Wire crew and Reagan. So seems like they're not too much friends anymore. Here's my assessment. Brett Cooper wanted more money. The Daily Wire said we're not going to give you more money.

Brett Cooper says, then who's going to host the show? Is it Reagan will host the show? And she goes, what? Reagan basically undermining Brett's negotiating position. But the Daily Wire maintaining theirs. It is a show we launched that we spent the money on and we're willing to have a new host for the show. The show, you know, you may be the host of the show, but shows can change.

Now, on the Internet, it's a bold move, really, because, like, come on, if I stopped hosting this show, are you going to watch whoever's hosting it? Tim Cass starring John Smith. You'd be like, no, just go watch Tim somewhere else. Well, that being said, the Daily Wire is spending the money on hosting and building this show. You're not losing Brett Cooper. That's why I'm like, so what?

What's what's the anger about? Brett says, OK, guys, I'm not going to host your show anymore. I'm going to host mine launches her own YouTube channel has two hundred and seventy thousand subs or whatever by now. So you are not losing Brett Cooper. The Daily Wire literally promoted this personality and helped build up their show. And you will get that forever. People are mad, I guess, because people want to be. I don't know.

I understand that if you don't know what's going on, you may be like, hey, I love this show. Why is Brett leaving? But Brett's going to keep doing it. It's not over. Now you're getting two shows. And those are like Reagan. Watch Reagan. If those are like Brett can watch Brett. So my response to this was NDAs are mutual and you won't know because neither party wants to say because neither party wants to go to war publicly. NDAs are an excuse drama people use to create mystery. At any time, Brett could say anything she wants. Fact. Sorry.

Candace says, respectfully, I feel like you shouldn't speak for Brett or what she can and can't do unless you've spoken to her. Oh, me. Oh, my. Oh, Candace, I'm not speaking for Brett. I'm speaking on NDAs in general. Brett could say anything she wants. I'm saying that generally speaking, because she is physically capable of doing it. The question is, is the damage from fallout in this in this situation worth worth it?

Now, I would I would ask what what is the political damage? What is the financial damage and the legal risk to breaking an NDA? These are the questions you have to ask yourself. And the point, the reason why I say NDAs are mutual and usually they're just used by people for drama. If I refuse to violate an NDA, it's because I'm respecting the privacy of the other individual. And we have a formality of an agreement.

Rest assured, anybody sufficiently knifed in the back would say, I don't care about an NDA because the damage you will receive from the press is substantial. And that's going to put the weaker party in a crisis point. This is PR 101, maybe not 101, but maybe 104 or something. If if I do a deal with somebody and I say, I'm going to give you this year delicious grapefruit spin drift in exchange for five dollars and I give it to you and then at some point you refuse to pay me.

And you say, can't tell anybody because you got an NDA. I'm going to be like, oh, yeah, buddy, you want to go to war with me and put a knife in my back. Let's see how you handle the fire. And the Daily Wire does not have the same kind of PR ammunition as a scorned host, meaning Candace as respects to her NDA and Brett in respects to her NDA and any of the existing talent at Daily Wire. It's it it's simply ridiculous.

It is not worth going to war over this. That's it. If the people really needed to know and deserve to know and the crisis was such a point, rest assured, anybody would just be like, let's go, baby. And I'll give an example. The famous story about these about corporate lawsuits has to do with a couple that was protesting outside of a McDonald's. McDonald's sued them for defamation and won and then lost like millions of dollars in stock value because it looked really bad to do this.

The idea that someone could publicly come out and defame you, violating their NDA, and then you would sue them only exacerbates the problem if you're in a weak position. So, again, my my response is there's more to law than just what is written down. There is the court of public opinion where the conflict is worth escalating. And basically the gist of it is it's not worth escalating. Common sense custodian responded. Once you send an NDA, you cannot just go around breaking it. It's an agreement contract. I thought maybe I'm wrong.

What? So let me tell you a story, my friends, about when I was a wee young lad and I was at my friend's house and I went to my friends at night, the door I said, hey, let's go skateboard. It's like, I can't. I'm grounded. Now it's like, OK, well, let's go skateboard. And he was like, I can't. I'm grounded. And I'm like, your parents aren't even home. And it's like, yeah, but they told me I'm grounded. And I'm like,

What would happen if you went outside to skate right now? In fact, I'd get in more trouble. I'd get grounded longer. And I was like, so they would ground you longer. Yeah, okay. What would happen if they grounded you longer and then you went out and skateboarded again? And he was like, I don't know. They'd ground me longer. And I was like, I don't know that you're following my logic here. Just grounding you is not... It's an invisible wall. When you sign an NDA, you are not supposed to break it. There's legal ramifications. However...

What I'm hearing from the rumor mill is that there's an arbitration clause putting her into arbitration instead of court. And it's under NDA since you can't speak. Okay.

I'm going to say it again. The reality here is it's not for Brett specifically, but I will say of Candace and Brett, if they wanted to tell you and they thought it was worth doing, they would. I think the issue is the public opinion backlash is substantial. It would be too great for anyone to want to be involved in. If Brett Cooper was really screwed over by this move to to a large degree, she'd tell you.

Now, I'm going to get into the nitty gritty of the media industry in a way that's probably going to piss a lot of people off, especially big fans of Brett Cooper. Brett Cooper. Let me pull up her ex. I'm sorry. I'm going to pull up her new YouTube channel. And, you know, I mention it because I think you guys, if you want to follow her, you definitely should. She has 281,000 subscribers on her new channel. And I hope this advice is well taken and could benefit Brett in the future. But I know that a lot of people are going to be unhappy to hear.

We call this algorithmic death in the industry. I've had a conversation with a ton of people who work ad sales. We've been obviously in contract negotiations with like a ton of different companies as we do sales. I know a lot of people who work in the industry. I know a lot of people who work at these social media companies themselves. When you launch a new channel and you have no content on it and you instantly get a massive influx of subscribers and you don't put any content on it, this usually locks you out.

It's not a guarantee, but it creates a serious crisis point. I'm trying to be nice as I say this, but it's bad. It is a bad move. The way the YouTube algorithm works, it's pretty rough. And for a long, and it changes all the time. But a lot of creators, YouTubers have talked about something like this for quite a bit, where the challenge of YouTube, let's take the animation community, for example.

Animators work for months to make a single video. Well, the YouTube algorithm prioritizes consistency, watch time, viewership, retention, like these things. What percentage of the video are you watching? How many minutes are you watching? How frequently are you watching? And if you're not producing videos, that drops dramatically and you disappear from the algorithm. How did I get started?

Well, a lot of people say, Tim, you are so talented. You talk, you just talk and you don't need a script and it's all off the top of your head and all that stuff. Yeah, but sure, there's an upper limit to what I can do. I mean, there are channels that grow way faster than mine. Brett Cooper's got a way bigger channel than me. Maybe a team would do me well. But in the early days of YouTube, what greatly benefited me was that I was producing six clips on this channel every single day, as I largely do now. But every day, no weekends, no days off. What does that mean?

Only so many videos can appear on the front page of YouTube at one time. I believe it's around 15 on average. That means if I'm producing six per day and you watch one with a decent amount of watch time, when you go to your front page with...

how many am I pulling off? 42 videos per week. You are likely going to see one of my videos in your top feed and it's going to shut everyone else out. Consider each video a lottery ticket and YouTube will display a handful of videos saying who gets the best watch time, who has the highest retention and, and, and what, and who gets the more views than anybody else. So me producing all this content and mass is nuts.

Somebody who produces one video per day is buying one lotto ticket, one raffle ticket, and I'm buying six. My chance of displaying on the front page is six times higher than yours, meaning that when everyone starts clicking, you start disappearing.

It's not just that me making more videos makes me appear more often, but because I'm making more videos and because I'm appearing more often, I'm getting clicked more often. YouTube then says of these channels that don't produce to the same degree. Sorry, you don't cut it. You are not working as hard. It's the ever spinning. It's the ever speeding up treadmill. This this phenomenon has been was described over 10 years ago, 13 years ago by prominent YouTubers in the early days of YouTube. So what I will say right now is.

And then I hope this helps Brett and her team and whatever she ends up doing, because I want to see her succeed. Absolutely. You need to get videos up ASAP and you and you need to utilize this PR bump to the maximum degree. Otherwise, what happens is the subscribers that have subscribed to this channel right now are going to turn into dead subs, which create a barrier for you.

So everybody thinks they know how the algorithm works, and I'm probably skimming through this, and there's probably a lot of areas where I'm incorrect. The general idea that's largely accepted by the industry is if you have 100 subscribers and 100 of them watch every single video, your videos will get promoted more to new viewers in the algorithm, especially as a new channel. So your view count will be higher than your subscriber count for a period of time.

However, when you have subscribers who do not watch the videos, either because you don't make them or because they're bad, YouTube will not show any new videos to these individuals. An example of this is my channel, youtube.com slash Timcast. The original channel that I started with all of my original content, vlogs or otherwise, and I produced one video every day at 4 p.m. was averaging around, it varied by the year, but I was getting upwards of 500,000 in 2020. 500,000 views on one video on that channel.

Well, we converted the channel to the culture wars. I thought it would make more sense to consolidate all of my views onto one channel, all of my videos, because it was a bit redundant with the Timcast and Timcast news. And I said, I'll just go to this one. Now this channel is actually bigger. When we do the culture war, the content is different. And there are a lot of people who aren't getting the daily content the way they used to. What happens? Despite having 1.4 million subscribers, the

The videos, the live shows may end up averaging only 100 to 200,000 views, depending.

But what happened? I used to get four or five hundred thousand. Well, a variety of things. The content style is different. So a subscriber who used to watch a video that was like this now seeing a conversation show says, I'm tuning out. Many people weren't getting the content for some period of time because we had a license agreement for a while and only clips were going up. This creates what's called dead subscribers. Dead subscribers are subscribed to your channel, but YouTube will never show them the video. So there's no way to pull out of a death spiral because it's percentage based. YouTube was a long time ago.

Reverse engineered the algorithm, and they came to believe, again, may not be true, but this is largely what the industry believes, that you need to get around 9% of your subscriber base to watch your videos. Otherwise, YouTube will stop recommending your videos in large. If YouTube doesn't show your video to an existing subscriber anymore and they don't watch, then your percentage gap is huge, meaning you're

With 281,000 subscribers, Brett's going to need to get every single one of them to watch the first few videos she does. Otherwise, if the video count is low, YouTube will say out of 300,000 subscribers, only X amount watched. Oof. Algorithm says in the gutter you go. There is a bonus you get to being a new channel.

That gains a bunch of video views and subscribers, but it has to be done in concert. So Brett would need to have launched a video alongside these new subs immediately to make sure they don't go dormant. I'm not saying she, I know what's going to happen. I wish her the best. And I think with the right team behind her, she will be largely successful. I will also add that I'm pretty sure everyone in the, in these, in the, in it, in the industry already knows exactly what she's going to do. It's not my place to say, but, uh,

Pretty sure everybody in the industry already knows because these people pay lots of money to know exactly what's going on. And information is easy to come by. Look, let me wrap it up by saying this. The contract stuff is an excuse that I largely believe there are people who want to generate attention. They want to generate attention. So they say, oh, it's an NDA, an arbitration. So they can't really say, look, man, if how what game what game of chicken do you want to play?

I don't think the issue behind the scenes is that bad. I think it's acrimonious, but I think both parties have decided to make this move. The Daily Wire knew what they wanted to do, and Brett Cooper wanted something different, and they were at an impasse. They're not going to work together.

I hope Brett finds the best of success with her channel. And assuming I'm correct on how the algorithm works, it's largely what the industry believes, but maybe I'm wrong. I hope that it's taken to heart and she launches her videos as soon as she can to get things going and find success. I think her first video will be massive when she's back. And I hope it happens soon to avoid any dead subscribers or algorithmic death scenarios. Or I'm wrong. Ignore me. Whatever. I won't tell you what to do. But I do really believe that...

If there was such a catastrophe behind the scenes where Brett was forced out, was knifed in the back or anything like that, she'd say it. Let's let's put it this way. Company A offers a deal to podcast host. Host gets betrayed. Salary dropped, unkept promises, forced to do things they don't want to do. Severs.

Yeah, that person losing that lucrative show and contract $5 million access is not just going to be like, I guess I lose. They're going to say, wait till everyone finds out what you did. And they'll say, you can't do that. You have an NDA. And they'll be like, let me know when you want to go to court over me breaking the NDA. Yeah, I just don't believe it. You can speak physically. It's a question of, is the war worth it? Now, you may say, as people are saying, Daily Wire is on limited funds and they can do all of these things. Look,

Look at Alex Jones. It's not good to be in that situation, but who's he up against? Democrats? A scenario where the Daily Wire pulls an Alex Jones-style lawsuit against any of its talent would be the end of the Daily Wire. So a lot of people are saying it's fishy, and I'm like, guys, it's not fishy. It's not. This is one of the challenges that we have behind the scenes. And, you know, I talk to people all the time about contracts and NDAs and stuff, and when people say...

When people say like, oh, because of NDAs, they can't do anything. I'm like, dude, I have been knifed in the back way too many times by people violating their NDAs. And then the judge says, I'm going to tell you this right now. I have had people break NDAs and the judge goes, well, who cares? And I'm just sitting here with all this money and these lawyers and they go, sorry, Tim, you can't do anything about it. And I'm like, stop saying NDAs are anything. But anyway,

Slow news day, huh? Welcome to the internet drama. I love the media industry and I love talking shop and I hope this has been informative. I'll wrap it up there. We got more segments coming up, I guess. I gotta be honest, like maybe not. Some of this news is just too light. We might save it for TimCast IRL. I'm just not the kind of person who's gonna try and squeeze out things I'm not interested in talking about. I'm not gonna do a segment on something I find uninteresting. This I find genuinely interesting. I'd probably talk for two more hours on it, but I'll wrap it up there. Thanks for hanging out, everybody. Smash the like button. Follow me on Instagram at TimCast and we'll see you all in the next segment.

And so it begins. Democrats now calling for more cultural dominance, praising Hassan Piker, saying we must support individuals like this. Now, Fox News ain't pulling any punches. They say top Harris aide hypes radical activist who said America deserved 9-11 while plotting future for Dems. House Democrat called Hassan Piker a poster child for the post-October 7th outbreak of anti-Semitism in America earlier this year.

Me, oh, my. Well, basically, what we're seeing right now is Democrats recognizing that they've lost cultural control. The corporate press is no longer what it used to be. And as I've been warning, especially in the previous video, the big players, Disney, Comcast, you name it, they are going to dump money in this space and they will make sure that these voices rise to the top. Now, I don't believe Assange Piker is in the path of that trampling that is underway because

He's too, I don't know, anti-Israel, I guess. Now, I think if you are going to play up, like look at Twitch in the adpocalypse where he is. Many people are blaming him for this. Advertisers don't want to touch things where they're going to get accused of any isms. Let's roll, baby. The left is going to say they're defending Israel. The right, well, a lot of people on the right are going to say they're defending Israel too. Let me put it this way. Corporations don't care if it's Israel or black people or gay people or otherwise.

Corporations don't want shock and defense regardless of where it comes from. The people who are very Israel centric, be it for or against, are going to claim that they are the perceived victim, whatever it may be. The reason why I think Hassan Piker is not going to be chosen in this regard is because corporations are going to say he evokes too much negative attention as it pertains to offense.

Now, if you're a channel that's critical of some things, maybe gay marriage, all that, you'll probably still get some advertisers, but it's a sliding scale. You can be critical of Israel and there's no problem. Some people certainly exaggerate and say that, no, you can't. They'll come for you. It depends on what you're saying in your criticism. Like, you know, the things that Sandpiker has said about October 7th and his stances, they go a little far. The and I'm not saying he's extreme. I'm saying they go far in one direction.

And for a lot of people, as it pertains to Israel, they make it their whole identity. Advertisers don't want to be associated with something that's going to cost them money. So if you are talking about race issues and you're hyper focused on crime rates of the black community, you can talk about it. Nobody cares. But if it's all you talk about, advertisers are going to say no. Democrats probably won't go this direction. That's probably why Fox News is criticizing them. But they are going to go for many of these other liberal creators who I'm not going to mention because I don't want to give them any airtime on that regard.

Fox News says Harris's former deputy campaign manager, Rob Flaherty, said in a recent interview that Democrats are losing hold of culture and laid out a strategy for them to develop a whole thriving system ahead of future elections. We need a whole thriving ecosystem. It's not just pods of America, though. I think we should have more of them. It's not just a sound piker. We should have more Hassan Pikers. It's also the cultural creators, the folks who are one rung out, who influence the nonpartisan audience. Those things all need to happen together.

The reality is it's not going to be big media organizations. It's going to be a network and constellation of individual personalities because that's how people get their information. Now, he added Flaherty, who previously served as the director of digital strategy for the Biden White House, is likely to face backlash for calling for more Hassan Piker's into Piker's past controversial comments. He had previously raised more than a million dollars for Palestinian aid, used his platforms with millions of followers to downplay and justify attacks. Just October 7th, the 9-11 is acts of resistance in recent years.

Yeah, he said something nasty about 9-11. He said nasty stuff about Dan Crenshaw's eye. I mean, a little crass. During a 2019 livestream, Piker praised the brave effing soldier who wounded Dan Crenshaw while he was deployed in Afghanistan as a Navy SEAL. Asking, didn't he go to war and like literally lose his eye because some Mujahideen, a brave effing soldier, effed his eye hole with their D? Yikes, man. Is that what Democrats are going for? Holy smokes. Look,

This is what they're going for. They're praising the murder of that CEO. This is what they're going for. You want to say that America deserve 9-11 saying before later walking it back, saying it was inappropriate. Harvard, another stream this year, he joked about 9-11 again, saying, oh, my God, 9-11, too, is going to be so sick and give Saudi Arabia a nuke so they can do 9-11, too. Wow, that's cheese, dude.

In another stream, Piker broadcasts propaganda from the Houthis, an Iranian-backed group in Yemen. So we get it. We get it. Okay, guys, I'm not here to rag on Hassan Piker. I know people don't like him. They're going to mention that Hassan said Hamas was the lesser evil next to Israel. His Twitch streams regularly hit more than a million views and often have as many as 30,000 viewers at a time. You know, we here at SimGast are rather proud of flying under the radar over and over again for some reason.

We rarely ever get mentioned. I think I'm good at hiding in this cave and not doing external press, though I do think, you know, our media strategy is largely that has to change. I want to talk to you about where we're currently at and why this story is big. This is the war, my friends. The media is coming. They're praising Hassan Piker. It's exactly what I predicted. We are going to see more of this moving forward.

I got a response on the comment section from Candace Owens about what I said. And I think this is there's a lot to bring on this. I definitely want to get into more of Candace's argument and the point she's making, because I'm not saying she's wrong at all. I largely agree with her and the issues at play and where we go media wise with the Democrats calling for more Hassan Pikers. I'm going to reiterate Brett Cooper launching her own channel is a good thing.

Certainly you wanted her to retain the massive marketing efforts of the Daily Wire. She's not going to, but I think she'll be all right. Brett Reagan replacing Brett is going to get the massive infrastructure, the Daily Wire. Is that what people are mad like? Honest question for those in the comments is the issue that the Daily Wire spends a ton of money promoting and building up this channel. And you want Brett to have that capability. I think she's going to find a way. Having another Reagan is is is really good.

It's really annoying how people just want Daily Wire to be evil. I really just don't like the people who make their whole identity Israel. Guys, you can criticize Daily Wire. You criticize Israel. I'm not saying that. I'm saying the people who are obsessed with nothing but Israel and criticize Daily Wire in that vein. OK, if you're critical of the wire, you're allowed to be not not saying that. But we need more people in the space. We need more investment. We need they're outright saying they want more Hassan Pikers. Well, we want more Brett Cooper's.

We want more people who are going to be calling out the lies, the cheating and the stealing. And if we don't focus on what like Reagan and Brett are of comparable cultural worldview, despite any personal drama or beef that people may perceive. I don't know. I don't care. What we don't want is more Hassan Pikers. Hassan's welcome to come on the show and debate any time he's going to stand by his ideas. But if Democrats start reinforcing that space, we get crushed. They're going to pull in. Disney's going to have a billion dollars in revenue and they're going to say, let's allocate five hundred million.

Five hundred million towards owning the podcast space. They already largely control a lot of it. And while they come out and say conservatives are well-funded and organized, that's just not true. The majority of these these people who are, quote, unquote, conservative, independent, the biggest names in the space, largely independent, no big networks.

Then you look at these other popular podcasts, and they're more likely to have networks and be produced serialized shows coming from the corporate press and legacy media. It's changing. Rumble's doing a great job. Daily Wire's doing a great job. The Blaze, they're there as well. But everyone's saying, what, you don't think they're doing a great job? The Blaze is doing all right, but they need to do more. You've got these networks. They could do better. So in response to what we're seeing here as it pertains to NDAs,

I want to cover this and highlight this because Candace did respond based on my last post. For those that aren't familiar, I basically said that Brett leaving the Daily Wire is likely a contract dispute. They didn't come to terms, so she went to do her own channel. So long as she gets good advice and she knows what she's doing, she should be totally fine. I do have concerns about the launching of her channel as of yet. Without any content on it, that could be a big risk as it creates dead subs. I want to stress that because I hope people around her are telling her this.

But a lot of people are saying that Daily Wire is this bad. Otherwise, they're saying, oh, it's all your friends. Yeah, I consider them to be friends. I think they're doing a great job and I want to see them succeed. They're building culture. Rumble's doing the same thing. Where's anybody coming out telling me that I'm shilling for Rumble when I praise Rumble over and over again? And this is the funny thing. TimGast.com is Rumble infrastructure. It's all our back end. So here's what I want to say. As per NDAs, there's something important to know.

Candace responded when I said there's more to law than just what is written down. There's the court of public opinion. She said, maybe I misunderstood your intention when you wrote at any time Brett can say anything she wants. Maybe you meant NDAs can technically be violated. They can literally be violated at any time with consequences commensurate with your willingness to engage in such consequences. Candace said,

Parking that aside and speaking more broadly, I find that the purpose of NDAs should be simply to protect important company information. I make my employees sign one pages to protect information about addresses, contacts, information about my kids, etc.,

I've never put an employee under NDA contract because I was worried about them telling the truth about how I treated them. I think that is the core of the current NDA debate, disclosure versus disparagement. And at the heart of what Kanye was hitting at two years ago, putting people under contract so you can treat them like ish and then threaten them financially if they speak about it, as similarly alluded to by the Crowder-Jared controversy, is an entirely different conversation. I just want to point out the paradoxical or insular, whatever you want, insular

Crowder, Jared controversy, but Crowder daily wire controversy. And I'm like, guys, we don't need the drama. Okay. Everybody. It's just seemingly whatever. She says, I also take issue with your, their mutual point. Oftentimes they are not reciprocal. I know plenty of people who are in non-reciprocal clauses. They sign them because they need the job and don't imagine relationships souring. They're all mutual. And I'm not speaking from a legal sense. I'm speaking from a court of public opinion. That's the point.

Not NDAs. When you say you're not going to speak about certain things, the mutual nature of it I'm referring to. And again, I'm not saying this is wrong. I think the way she interpreted what I was saying, I will own up to. Let me clarify in that regard. When you go to war is what really matters. Too many people live in this world of boxes and lines. The contract says it therefore doesn't matter.

If I if if you came to me and said, Tim, I want a job and I made you sign a contract where I said I get to own your dog and you were like, I never agreed to give my dog. Why just sign it? A judge is going to tell me to shut up. They're going to be like, you can't slip in weird provisions to trick people in contracts. The contract is dissolved. Nothing you can do to enforce it. Not only that, but how am I going to get your dog? Like you could literally be like, nice try, dude. Not going to happen.

The point of mutual, what I mean by mutual is that going to war is a crisis largely of both parties. Often NDAs are literally mutual, saying parties agree not to disparage or disclose information about either party as it pertains to certain contracts. That is true. But many people are not in a legally mutual, meaning only you can't disparage them. They can disparage you. However, usually doesn't happen that way. And the war would be mutual. So I'll own up to that and say I just I mean to clarify.

Candace says, like I said, Ye was making a lot of important points about predatory contracts and industries where you have young artists and talent coming up that enter into contractual agreements. These artists usually are not repped by lawyers when they sign them and then are made to understand the severity of what they signed later. I believe Cardi B is an example of this. It's a major issue with Hollywood type contracts. Personally speaking, every contract I've signed in my career has been different from the one before. It simply depends on the employer and how they view and treat talent. My response.

I said, yes, what I mean is NDAs are extremely difficult to enforce and resolution, especially with arbitration clauses, can still favor the person who violated the NDA disclosure or disparagement.

In the event Brett or anyone of these agreements decides to go to war and violate them, the sanctions can be nothing compared to blowback on the corporation. Thus, for most parties, it's easier to not go to war and just abide by it and keep things private. If ever a backstabbing was so egregious, people would and famously have violated these agreements. When politics are involved, people can see a lot of money in attacking perceived enemies. I highlight this summary of the McLibel case, which I made reference to in the previous segment.

The McLibel case backfired on McDonald's primarily because it attracted massive negative publicity and scrutiny worldwide, undermining the company's reputation rather than protecting it. The simple version is Helen Steele and Dave Morris were distributing leaflets, which were libelous, and McDonald's got mad that they were lying. So they sued them, Streisand affecting them, resulting in everybody hearing about the claims. It caused reputational damage because McDonald's labor practices, environmental impact, and food health concerns were publicly examined and criticized.

David versus Goliath was one scenario, one component, when McDonald's, a massive corporation, was perceived as bullying two individuals with limited resources. It's literally what we're seeing happening now, and no one's even gone to war. The narrative for many people is that Daily Wire has been bullying people, and quite literally no one's even disparaged each other.

The length and cost was the largest in British history, lasting over 10 years. McDonald's won the lawsuit, but the reputational damage outweighed their legal victory. So a lot of people are making points and blah, blah, blah, and whatever. Don't care. The moral is never signed an NDA. Okay. Somebody responded with, oh yeah, but Tim makes people sign NDAs. Yeah, for the same reason Candace said. Look, if I want to do a movie and I tell one party in all contracts, I've brought this up a lot.

In in contracts, you assert rights over everything you claim and you are responsible if you lie. So if I go to someone and say I have the right to this story about a young up and coming skateboarder who wants to take over the world of skateboarding, whatever, I don't know. A company says you have full legal rights to this story and we can produce it. We enter into a contract.

Let's say that I have an employee who is not under an NDA and they're allowed to communicate all of these ideas. So they go to another company and then say, here's the idea. And that company says, we're going to make that. That could put me in breach of the other contract where they say you had all legal rights over this. But it turns out that guy had a legal right to bring the story to anybody else. So you have to have non-competes. I think non-compete like ownership rights is not non-competes, not the way to describe it.

You have a you're not going to produce content when you work here. You're not going to write for anybody else without approval. You're not going to take any of our ideas elsewhere. You're not going to explain core functions of the business and you're not going to smack talk us. OK, otherwise, you would not be able to enter into these other contracts. Nobody would want to even for non disparagements. Don't get me wrong. There are corrupt entities out there. And Candace is completely right about that. And people under the bad contracts, however.

The issue largely is not at play today in many ways. Ye is correct in this industry because you need these labels. But right now, you don't need the Daily Wire. Brett Cooper leaves. And what happens? She launches her own channel. Now she's not going to get the marketing apparatus of the Daily Wire, but she doesn't deserve it. She deserves everything she built. She deserves your support. But she doesn't deserve anyone else's money other than the money she makes. That's what I'm trying to say.

The Daily Wire doesn't want to spend money on her. That's fine. Okay. No one else is. She is free to go and on her own terms, build her own thing. And she can. Now with Hollywood and these agreements...

Where would you go if you get booted off your label? What do you do? A lot of these bands have no means of starting a new channel. And so they end up nowhere. But Brett was able to use the comment section platform to announce her new her new show. And with her Instagram that was built up by Daily Wire and her Twitter and the work she did, don't get me wrong. I'm saying that she did nothing. I'm saying it's a it's a total corporate combined effort. She is going to walk away with a big opportunity. So it's not all bad. Here's what I want to say.

The David and Goliath thing is already happening. We've got Democrats basically coming out saying they want to start funding more Hassan Pikers. And people are like, oh, the Daily Wire, they're so bad. Come on, guys. Criticize them when it makes sense. But this is a company that challenged the vaccine mandates and made a video saying outright we will sue the government and we will not do this. While the Democrat establishment media fired people who refused and forced everyone to do it. They lied. They cheated and they stole from us. And y'all think the Daily Wire is the bad guy?

We use rumble infrastructure. OK, at Tim Kess, I praise rumble every single day. I think they're doing a great job. OK, we if this is all we've got, by all means, I'm not saying don't criticize things that you think are bad, but this is the bottom of the barrel. And the bigger play is against what they are doing now with the Democratic Party and building up these personalities. So I find it silly to see.

Crowder being people attacking louder with Crowder over the Jared scenario. I look at that. I'm like, guys, we need Crowder. Then I see the Crowder Daily Wire. And I'm like, guys, we need you both. People are tweeting at me and Candace like, please don't fight. I like both of your shows. I got to be with Candace. I don't know. She's commenting. She's giving her thoughts on the NDA situation. Granted, she was under NDA at the Daily Wire. So I understand her position on this. She's not wrong. I'm just trying to explain how I feel about it. I don't know why people are mad. People just want drama.

They're like, not a good look for you, Tim. And I'm like, dude, I'm not even saying Candace is wrong. I'm just pointing out that warfare, like if you want to go to war, you can. And it can be detrimental to the company, even if you're in the wrong. Let me wrap up by saying this. I've had people violate NDAs on me. I couldn't do anything about it. So what can you, like the lawyers and the judges are just like, we don't care. It's the world does not work this way. Nobody wants to go to war because we don't need the war. Brett is taking the honorable path.

because she's honorable. The Daily Wire also said the same thing, like we're sad to see her go. We wish her the best. They're letting her launch this channel off the comment section. And I think it may be slightly acrimonious, but what I see here is no need for drama. Both parties may be upset, but they've both taken the honorable approach. That's basically my point. And I'm glad to see it. I hope all of you just recognize.

You don't like Ben Shapiro. That's fine. It's better that he is there. And I think y'all will agree. A lot of people are like, I don't even like watching Ben. Yeah, well, at least he's fighting against the gender ideology stuff. So give him that much. I will tell you this. In any world, I would much rather have a prominent Ben Shapiro, Brett Cooper and Candace Owens than a Hassan Piker and whoever else. And so by all means, let there be drama, whatever. Who am I, dude? Some guy complaining on the Internet. Fine. I'm just saying,

We definitely want to be critical of people we view largely on our side. It's a big umbrella, conservative or post-liberal, disaffected liberal, whatever. But we want to make sure that we are still networking and railing up and supporting each other against what I perceive to be serious threats to the culture in this country.

I'm going to wrap it up there. Smash that like button. Share the show with everyone you know. Become a member over at TimCast.com to support our work. And shout out to everybody. Look, I'm not here to rag on anybody. Candace is doing swimmingly. She's a massive show. I help Brett Cooper launches and does really, really well. And same for The Daily Wire. Same to Rubble. Same to everybody else. I revel in Hassan's failures.

Look, man, I don't hate the guy, but he's wrong. And I think he's dangerously wrong. So I'll argue against him. I don't want to see their I don't want to see them rally the troops and build up big networks. So I don't care to directly criticize Hassan in this regard. I'm saying think positive. Let's build. Let's win. See on the next segment.