0:00 Oh, no, no, no, no. You're terrified.
0:01 You're a hypocrite.
0:03 I'm really baffled.
0:05 Um, I I'm terrified of this of this
0:08 subject. I'm not. No, I'm not. In the
0:10 UK, you can be jailed for making jokes
0:12 about Islam or the or even bring up the
0:14 grooming gangs. I'll bet you $1,000 you
0:16 will not go to the UK and make a joke
0:18 about any of that stuff because you will
0:20 not go to a foreign country and in
0:22 violation of their laws speak out
0:23 against what they've said not to speak
0:25 out against. Do it. I dare you. What's
0:27 going on everybody? Welcome back to the
0:29 channel. The culture war with Tim Pool
0:31 was a wild 3 hours yesterday where he
0:34 cooked again Adam Conover, the woke
0:39 comedian. I tried to compress it down to
0:42 the best parts for y'all. And as usual,
0:44 the timestamps are in the description.
0:47 Let's get it started with the Maryland
0:49 man hoax. Let's go.
0:52 $10,000 cash in your pocket if you go to
0:55 the UK and make a joke about Muhammad
0:57 having a 12-year-old wife. I Man, this
0:59 this we got here faster than I thought
1:01 we would in this conversation. It it
1:03 looks like a pretty clear uh fascist
1:06 authoritarian takeover of the US
1:08 government, you know. Um it's uh we got
1:10 people being thrown into unmarked vans.
1:13 We got like the destruction of the civil
1:14 service, which is like a pretty standard
1:15 authoritarian tactic like early on in a
1:18 uh administration of that type. Um and
1:21 uh yeah, it's like sort of remains to
1:23 see be seen how far they'll get uh and
1:25 if they'll actually be able to to
1:27 transform America in the ways that
1:29 they're trying to. But yeah, it's pretty
1:31 my side of America things are people are
1:33 people are a little uh people are a
1:35 little on edge. It's a little
1:36 frightening to folks. Yeah, my my take
1:38 on that would be largely because
1:41 corporate press is lying to them
1:43 largely. And so what corporate press?
1:45 There's no corporate press left hardly.
1:48 Well, I I would say their viewership is
1:49 rapidly diminished. Yeah. But still uh
1:52 when you look at there was a real clear
1:54 politics uh aggregate polling found that
1:57 they didn't they didn't necessarily by
1:58 demographic. They did it by uh decade
2:01 age bracket. So it was like 20 to 29 or
2:04 whatever. every age group except for 70
2:07 plus was proTrump was was uh was a few
2:11 points above uh uh Real Clear Politics
2:14 did a average and they said that every
2:16 every age group in America 70 plus every
2:20 every age group except for 70 plus is
2:23 proTrump. Yeah, let me see if I can try
2:25 and find it. And this is contrasting to
2:28 like all the approval rating stats I've
2:30 seen have him at like what like 40 47%
2:34 and dropping or something like that.
2:35 It's it's it's largely based on the uh
2:37 the older crowd
2:39 just old that's seems like the opposite
2:42 of uh every every stat I've seen in the
2:45 past. But I don't like follow this
2:46 really closely. Yeah. I don't know how
2:48 to find this image because it was a few
2:50 weeks ago. But let me see if I can I can
2:51 try and pull it up and talk at the same
2:52 time, which I probably can't. But um I
2:56 don't actually do you want to see if you
2:57 can try and find it while while we talk
2:59 otherwise I'm going to be sitting here
3:00 typing. No problem. Out of my mind. Um
3:02 yeah. So what I would say is like the
3:04 the obvious story we we uh we debated
3:06 this last week live is the Abrago Garcia
3:09 story. Yeah. And so the take that I've
3:12 typically seen from uh liberals is
3:16 actually I'll use a specific example. Uh
3:18 the David Pacman subreddit. Pacman of
3:21 course has millions of followers. He
3:23 gets 100 million views per month. And
3:25 his audience on Reddit was saying this
3:28 is just a family man who is trying to
3:31 escape harsh conditions in Central
3:33 America who has been effectively
3:35 disappeared by the Trump administration.
3:37 Mhm. Which is a gross
3:38 mischaracterization of what happened. If
3:41 we were to say that a judge granted Ario
3:43 Garcia withholding of deportation due to
3:45 barios 18 in Guatemala and threats
3:47 against his life in El Salvador, then
3:49 the question of due process is he needed
3:51 to get a hearing as pertaining to that
3:53 withholding of deportation. But he did
3:56 already have uh two two hearings in
3:58 which he was determined to be an MS-13
3:59 gang member. He was pulled over and uh
4:02 law enforcement believed to be uh
4:03 believed to be human trafficking. He has
4:05 two filings from his wife for beating
4:07 her. She was filing or orders of
4:09 protection. And so it's fine if you know
4:12 in my view the liberals the liberal side
4:14 of things or the you know podcasters
4:16 like Pacman and Brian Tyler Cohen and
4:18 others are going to say hey he was
4:20 supposed to get a hearing agreed but it
4:23 is a gross mischaracterization. So when
4:24 you mention that um you know people on
4:27 the left are on edge, I'm like yeah,
4:28 well they think that a guy who lives in
4:30 Maryland who was working like a regular
4:32 union job or whatever just disappeared
4:34 one day as opposed to a guy who had gone
4:36 through several hearings, was arrested
4:38 with MS-13, had symbols on his hand that
4:40 uh law enforcement believe were MS-13
4:43 gang tattoos. And so the real question
4:45 is what was the error in that
4:48 deportation? On the right, it's we it's
4:50 legally called harmless error in that he
4:53 didn't get a hearing as to the
4:54 withholding of deportation. However, he
4:57 would have he he he wouldn't have got it
4:59 approved anyway. So, the answer now is a
5:01 formality. It's a it's paperwork. It's a
5:03 Zoom call and then it's it's done. But
5:05 people on the left, the liberal side of
5:07 things, they think that this is a
5:09 working-class family guy who's vanished
5:10 one night, an American citizen. And I
5:12 think it was actually uh Hassan people
5:14 people don't think he's an American
5:15 citizen. I mean, they're they're up to
5:17 speed on like Assan [ __ ] thought he was
5:19 from Maryland
5:20 legit. And and so we're talking and I I
5:23 know it's not you, but this is um like
5:26 the seventh biggest live streamer in the
5:28 country. Almost every single day, Hassan
5:29 gets 50K. And he actually said on his
5:33 stream in response to the comments I
5:35 made at the White House, "What do you
5:36 mean he's not from Maryland? Are you
5:37 saying he's from DC? He's from
5:38 Maryland." No, he's from El Salvador. He
5:40 only lived in Maryland for a few years.
5:42 Okay. I mean, that guy talks for, you
5:44 know, eight hours a day. like you can
5:46 parse, you know, any particular Sure.
5:47 For sure. statement, but like I mean
5:50 that to me everything that you said,
5:52 first of all, half of it sounds
5:55 unrelated. Like, you know, he's had past
5:57 interaction was with law enforcement,
5:59 like domestic violence and stuff like
6:00 that. I I to me that's like neither here
6:02 nor there. It's like character stuff. Um
6:04 I I don't really give a [ __ ] about like
6:06 the character of the guy and I I didn't
6:09 think that was a big part of the story.
6:10 It was like the the fact that he did
6:12 not, you know, receive due process
6:15 before being, you know, rendered to a
6:18 prison, like this bizarre prison in El
6:20 Salvador. Like that's the that's the
6:22 strange part, right? That's El
6:23 Salvador's government with an El
6:24 Salvadoran citizen. That's not our
6:25 that's not our purview. I mean, he's
6:28 like sent directly to this like
6:31 gigantic, you know, complex. uh it's uh
6:34 in a in a like highly public way in a
6:37 way where like the
6:39 administration, you know, is making a
6:41 show of their refusal to uh you know,
6:45 follow the law. It's uh it's it's
6:48 bizarre to witness and like you know the
6:50 sort of narrow legalistic oh he had a
6:52 hearing he was d it it's irrelevant to
6:56 like the purposeful spectacle of the
6:58 Trump administration you know sending
7:01 this guy uh who they admit they should
7:04 not have done this but they're like we
7:05 don't give a [ __ ] we're doing it just
7:08 because we hate guys like this and we
7:11 want like even people who are in the
7:12 country legally to you know be afraid
7:15 and to what self- deepport. Like it's it
7:17 seems like uh uh the the only
7:20 justification is purposeful cruelty for
7:23 I don't think they call on any any legal
7:24 immigrants to self- deepport. They're
7:26 calling on illegal immigrants to self-
7:27 deepport, offering up $1,000 if they do.
7:29 The guy had illegal status to be in the
7:30 country.
7:32 Withholding of deportation isn't legal
7:34 status. Withholding of deportation means
7:37 he was he was ordered to leave the
7:38 country, but the US was barred from
7:40 sending him to El Salvador. uh
7:42 specifically because Barios 18 in
7:44 Guatemala had threatened his family. So
7:47 the question uh as to due process was is
7:51 that this is why I think the actual
7:53 legal standard is called harmless error.
7:55 If he actually got a either USCIS
7:58 interview as to the withholding of
7:59 deportation, it would have been voided
8:01 because El Salvador no longer has the
8:03 crime rate that it did uh 12 years ago
8:05 or 10 years ago. The issue is are you
8:09 still at threat from Barios 18? The
8:10 answer is no. And so then your
8:12 withholding of deportation is void. We
8:14 can deport you. The issue is that for
8:16 deportation of someone like Rego Garcia,
8:19 he has a home country, El Salvador. He
8:22 has a withholding to that uh to El
8:24 Salvador. Uh withholding of deportation
8:26 because of a gang in another country
8:28 neighboring El Salvador. We can't deport
8:30 him to Venezuela. We can't deport him to
8:32 Mexico. That requires treaties. The US
8:35 doesn't have those. Though we do have a
8:36 treaty with Venezuela with El Salvador
8:38 as it pertains to Trenaragua. So what
8:41 ends up happening is he's got he's got
8:44 an or he had two orders of deportation.
8:46 He conceded in 2019 through his lawyer
8:48 that yes, he was here illegally. Uh yes,
8:51 he had been found to be here uh to be
8:53 removable under the law. And he
8:55 requested three uh uh there there's
8:59 withholding of deportation, there was
9:01 asylum, and then there was um I forgot
9:03 what the uh uh the third one is. It's
9:05 it's it's you can't deport them because
9:07 of a fear of torture. It's a it's like a
9:08 UN thing. and they denied two of them.
9:10 Asylum was denied because he he he
9:12 didn't apply for it uh in a timely
9:14 manner. Deportation to El Salvador was
9:17 granted because of Barios 18 in
9:18 Guatemala. And then um the last one was
9:21 denied because there's no torture
9:23 provision. The remedy right now would be
9:25 a Zoom hearing where he gets on a
9:28 computer, talks to a uh uh these are
9:30 executive judges, by the way, and they
9:32 would just say withholding denied.
9:34 Welcome to El Salvador. You're an El
9:35 Salvador citizen. There's no doubt that
9:37 the Maryland man hoaxed their way. The
9:39 reason they were saying a Maryland
9:40 father, a Maryland man, they were trying
9:42 on the leftist media and the mainstream
9:45 media to scare Americans, the over 60
9:47 crowd were believing it and they thought
9:49 that they were even Joe Rogan, I made a
9:51 video, Joe Rogan was believing that this
9:52 was an actual American citizen, not
9:55 somebody who's been in the country
9:56 illegally for 14 years, which is what he
9:58 actually was. They were trying to scare
10:01 Americans, saying that, hey, if you're a
10:03 brown or black American, you could be
10:04 deported to an El Salvador prison as
10:06 well. Trump would never ever deport and
10:10 no one would ever support him deporting
10:12 actual American citizens, no matter how
10:14 bad they were. Like Tim P mentions here,
10:17 a 10-minute Zoom call would do it. That
10:20 would be his due process. Now, there was
10:22 a mistake done, and they've all admitted
10:24 that there was an error in sending him
10:27 abroad to El Salvador, but hell, he's
10:30 from there. But really, if they really
10:33 wanted to, they could just send a USCIS
10:35 guy down there, interview him, and that
10:37 could be his his little hearing, and
10:39 then they can come back. He can come
10:40 back to America. Not not ago Garcia, but
10:43 the USCIS guy, and it's all done. The
10:46 reason they're not doing that, and Tim
10:48 talks about it on this show, he talks
10:50 about a few reasons, but the reasons I
10:51 think they're not doing it is one, Trump
10:54 wouldn't want to look weak. He doesn't
10:55 want to look like he's been pushed
10:56 around by the judiciary.
10:58 actually universal injunctions are
11:02 unconstitutional. But I think Trump is
11:04 concerned that he's going to set a
11:05 precedent by doing this by Trump adering
11:08 to the universal injunctions pertaining
11:10 to the Alien Enemies Act or the Mass
11:14 deportations. And he's not going to
11:15 allow that to happen. He's not going to
11:17 allow that precedent to be set. He
11:19 doesn't want to set a president so that
11:21 in the future they don't have any of
11:23 these universal injunctions to go back
11:25 on in the Constitution. We've seen what
11:28 about 40% of all injunctions ever in
11:32 this way against Trump and his
11:35 administration. I believe he's got more
11:38 universal injunctions forced on him in
11:40 the first few months of his presidency
11:42 than any individual ever. Total totally
11:46 unconstitutional. So for Trump's point,
11:48 he's saying that what these judges are
11:50 doing violates their constitutional
11:52 authority and he's not playing that
11:54 game. He's not going to adhere to
11:56 something they can't do. And on top of
11:58 that, the guy was from
11:59 Venezuela. He's been caught in front of
12:01 the Home Depot with Coke cans full of
12:04 marijuana. The guy beat his wife.
12:06 Clearly a member of MS-13, had the
12:08 tattoos, gang affiliation tattoos, gang
12:11 affiliation clothing. The father of the
12:14 kids that his girlfriend had, he went to
12:17 the cops saying that he feared for his
12:18 kids because this guy was in a gang in
12:21 El Salvador. On top of that, he's not an
12:24 American citizen. So, yeah, get the f
12:27 out. It's funny that they never talk
12:29 about the Hillary Clinton and Obama due
12:32 processes when they deported everybody,
12:34 but that's beside the point. Now, let's
12:35 get to the next part of the video where
12:36 they talk
12:37 about Marco Rubio revoking student visas
12:41 for these protesters and pro- Hamas
12:43 students. Let's go. Marco Rubio
12:45 specifically revoking student visas,
12:48 saying that these individuals represent
12:49 a threat to our national security by
12:51 adhering to our enemies and and what
12:53 literally that's what they're claiming.
12:54 I think it's ridiculous to claim that a
12:56 student who's anti-Israel is working
12:58 with Hamas. That's silly. But that's the
13:00 argument he's making. And under the INA,
13:02 he has the authority to do it. So you
13:04 say, okay, well, when people come in
13:05 here on student visas, they do sign
13:06 agreements saying they won't do certain
13:08 things. They do it, they get kicked out.
13:09 This is okay with you cuz it's narrowly
13:11 legal under Marco Rubio's uh you know
13:14 purview. I would say it's what's fine
13:16 with me is the revocation of a visa for
13:18 someone who's not a citizen who's here
13:20 conditionally like Muhammad Khalil who
13:22 was on a conditional temporary visa gets
13:25 revoked. I just say like well that's a
13:26 conditional visa. I don't I don't go to
13:29 Singapore and spit on the ground. I'll
13:30 get I'll get caned. So So sorry. You
13:32 think what's what's happened to those
13:33 students is like that's okay with you
13:35 not legally. I'm talking about like as
13:37 an event that occurred in the country.
13:39 You're like, "Oh, it's good that that
13:40 happened. It's okay with me. You think
13:42 it's moral. You think it's right. You
13:43 think it's just I'm not talking about
13:45 legally. I'm talking about like, you
13:47 know, you you say you you don't 60%
13:49 60%." Yeah. like like nothing's so
13:51 easily black and Romea Our who you know
13:53 she wrote an op-ed the only thing that
13:55 anybody has even claimed that she's done
13:58 is she wrote an extremely mild op-ed in
14:00 her campus newspaper asking that the
14:03 camp you know the college like sort of
14:05 consider uh you know being supportive of
14:08 the Palestinian cause in some vaguely
14:11 defined way her visa's revoked she you
14:14 know you we've all seen the video right
14:16 people come and like grab her and
14:18 literally put her into a vehicle they're
14:20 wearing mask masks, right? Um I mean,
14:22 she's like she's stopped in an alarming
14:24 way on the street, right? It's not like
14:26 they filmed that and published that
14:27 footage, though. That was that was
14:28 security camera footage. Yeah. They they
14:31 did they did it in a there's Hey, if you
14:33 want to a a student, like a young woman,
14:36 you there's other ways to arrest them to
14:38 have than have six people show up
14:40 wearing masks, surround her in a pinser
14:43 formation. Like, it's it's designed to
14:45 create terror. So, like, what? You don't
14:48 have to do it that way. Okay, great.
14:50 They didn't have uh and and Biden's DOJ
14:52 didn't need to show up at Roger Stone's
14:53 house at 4 in the morning. Sure. And and
14:55 you know what? If you want to bring up
14:56 another example, I'll say I condemn that
14:58 as well. If that if that'll if that'll
14:59 keep us on the topic for a second. So,
15:01 you think that America should be a
15:04 country where if you come here on a
15:06 student visa, you're paying into our,
15:09 you know, university system. You're
15:10 coming here for the reasons that, you
15:12 know, completely legally we've invited
15:15 you to come, right? This is this is why
15:18 uh America is the country it is
15:19 partially because people like this have
15:21 come for for decades. If you express a
15:25 political opinion that is like mildly at
15:28 odds with a US interest in another
15:32 country of a canal that you should be
15:34 deported. You think America should be
15:36 the kind of country where if somebody
15:38 comes here they write an op-ed that says
15:41 uh literally anything about US foreign
15:44 policy they should be deported. So, so,
15:46 so going forward, so, so going forward,
15:48 literally everyone in the world should
15:50 know if you are on foot on US soil, you
15:54 should not say anything in public about
15:57 US national priorities of any kind or
15:59 else you could be deported. Do you think
16:00 it's good to have a country where that's
16:02 the understanding? All right. Right.
16:03 Right. So, you're saying that this is
16:04 what I'm trying to drill down to. The
16:06 individuals who come to this country and
16:08 apply for student visas have made that
16:09 agreement already.
16:11 So while I would argue the deportation
16:14 of Romesa is the thinnest of hairs,
16:18 Mahmud Khal makes more sense. I mean he
16:20 organized and helped lead protests that
16:22 resulted in damage, occupations of
16:23 buildings, several uh uh staff at the
16:26 Columbia. Let's stay on Romea because
16:28 then we don't have to split hairs,
16:29 right? The issue uh is do not come to
16:33 our country and tell us what to do.
16:35 That's it. If you're here as a guest of
16:36 this nation, you do not start rallying
16:39 its people in opposition to its to the
16:41 will of the voters and what the
16:42 government is doing. I I I
16:45 mean I really thought the point of
16:47 America was, you know, freedom of speech
16:50 was like a main value here that you that
16:52 I think that's why people come here.
16:54 It's why I like living here because I
16:56 always felt that hey, I can express an
16:59 opinion especially about US foreign
17:01 policy and not have anything happen to
17:03 me. So that's that's a right that only
17:06 citizens have and we you think you you
17:10 think America should be a country where
17:12 if you are not literally an American
17:14 citizen if you express any opinion about
17:18 US foreign policy I mean the and we both
17:20 agree the opinion she expressed was
17:21 pretty mild. It wasn't like a very
17:22 inflammatory opinion, right? It was like
17:24 it's pretty mainstream political opinion
17:25 to have it. It conflicts with US
17:28 interest about the Swiss can. I still
17:29 don't really understand that point, but
17:30 let's just say that it does. That should
17:32 be grounds for being forcibly removed
17:35 from the country and and like whether or
17:38 not it's legally the case that we could
17:40 do that. We we've had numerous instances
17:42 across administrations that have acted
17:43 similarly. Okay. So, so let so let's say
17:46 let's stay on Romea Our students coming
17:48 here and telling us to oppose our
17:49 support with Israel puts it puts us at
17:51 risk in terms of the sentiment of a
17:54 younger generation as to whether or not
17:55 we'll fund Israel and control the Suez
17:57 Canal.
17:59 Uh but but I asked you if you thought it
18:02 was good to deport her. I said
18:04 marginally, right? Because because we
18:06 have national interests in the Suez
18:08 Canal and she wrote an oped US's
18:10 interest. Okay. So what so what why do
18:12 you think it was good to deport her?
18:14 Asserting US sovereignty. Do not come to
18:16 our country and tell us what to do.
18:18 You've got a condition of your visa. You
18:20 are a guest in this country. I agree
18:22 with Tim here that what she did wasn't
18:24 egregious. And let's face it, if it
18:25 wasn't about Israel, she probably would
18:28 not be deported, but I'm okay with it.
18:30 When you come into a country, you are a
18:32 guest. Tim said you agreed to this when
18:35 you signed these papers to become to be
18:38 a student on a student visa in America.
18:42 Same that you do when you're on a work
18:43 visa. A lot of these people come into
18:45 our countries. You see it in Europe and
18:46 Canada and in America. They come into
18:49 our country. A lot of them Muslim
18:51 people. They undermine everything that
18:53 we do. They don't care for our way of
18:55 life, for our ethics, our morals. Why
18:57 should we have these people in our
18:58 country when all they do is undermine
19:01 what America wants to do? You are not a
19:04 citizen and it's in the Immigration and
19:07 Naturalization Act. There's multiple
19:09 provisions for this. For this girl, was
19:12 she a member of Hamas? No, I don't think
19:14 so. But you need to set an example with
19:16 someone if you don't want people to do
19:18 this. And granted, the same way if you
19:20 go to any country, if you went to a
19:22 Muslim country, you wouldn't be allowed
19:24 to preach Christianity and say something
19:26 against the country in a Muslim country.
19:28 One, they probably would kill you. But
19:29 yet, we allow people that come here that
19:32 are Muslim, which is their whole goal is
19:33 to spread Islam in America. So, if
19:36 you're not an American, why are we
19:38 allowing this? You can't go to Asia and
19:40 do this [ __ ] You can't go to Muslim
19:42 countries and and pull that stuff off.
19:45 You are a guest in a country and you
19:47 should adhere by the laws of said
19:50 country which you'll see in the next
19:52 segment when they talk about the UK that
19:54 that Adam is a hypocrite. If you violate
19:58 the conditions of your visa, we are
20:00 allowed to deport you. The people that
20:02 give you this visa are allowed to take
20:04 that away at any time. Again, you are a
20:06 guest in the country. And yes, in
20:08 America we have free speech, but said
20:12 person is not American. So if you come
20:15 in and you start undermining and writing
20:18 opeds against our foreign policies and
20:20 against our government, why wouldn't
20:22 they deport you? What are you bringing
20:24 to the country as a positive when you do
20:26 that? Again, I mentioned when you come
20:28 into a country as a guest and you spend
20:30 your time undermining everything that
20:32 that country does, why should they allow
20:35 you to stay? And that goes for any
20:36 country. Now, let's get to the part
20:38 where it's really, really juicy when Tim
20:40 loses it on hypocrite Adam Kono. But I
20:44 just did shows in the UK and Amsterdam,
20:46 and I made fun of UK politics. I made
20:48 fun of American politics. You wouldn't
20:50 dare make fun of Islam, though. Uh, go
20:52 to the UK and mock Islam. Do it. Well, I
20:56 don't have any jokes about Islam. Uh,
20:58 why not? They got they got Pakistani
20:59 grooming games for raping little girls.
21:01 Why won't you go to the UK? What?
21:04 Why won't you go to the UK and make
21:07 jokes about Islam? I I don't think it's
21:09 very funny. I don't have any jokes about
21:11 it. I'm so confused. Um, dude, let me
21:13 let me help. Unconfused. Can Are there
21:16 Are there jokes that can be made about
21:17 Islam? Yes or no? Wait, I I don't want I
21:19 I don't want to go to that rabbit. No,
21:21 no, no, no, no. You're terrified. You're
21:22 a hypocrite.
21:24 What? Are there jokes you can make about
21:26 Islam? Muhammad banged a little girl,
21:28 right?
21:30 I'm really baffled. Um,
21:33 No, I I'm terrified of this of the
21:35 subject. I'm not. No, I'm not. In the
21:37 UK, you can be jailed for making jokes
21:39 about Islam or or even bring up the
21:41 grooming gangs. There are people who go
21:43 online and point it out that a stabbing
21:44 was carried out by by a Muslim and they
21:47 got arrested for it. You I'll bet you
21:50 $1,000 you will not go to the UK and
21:52 make a joke about any of that stuff
21:53 because you will not go to a foreign
21:55 country and in violation of their laws
21:57 speak out against what they've said not
21:58 to speak out against. Do it. I dare you.
22:02 I
22:03 $10,000 cash in your pocket if you go to
22:06 the UK and make a joke about Muhammad
22:08 having a 12-year-old wife. I Man, this
22:10 this we got here faster than I thought
22:12 we would in this conversation. Um where
22:14 you're you're shouting at me about
22:15 something I don't understand. Uh I I I
22:18 don't really
22:19 understand how you would think it's
22:21 incumbent upon me. Do you think anybody
22:23 watching this right now thinks you are
22:25 confused by the notion that in the UK
22:27 you go to jail for mocking Islam?
22:29 I I I don't understand how we got on to
22:33 you shouting at me about Islam
22:35 specifically. I'd like to return to
22:38 because you said people should be
22:39 allowed to come to this country and
22:40 speak out against it and you said you're
22:42 a comedian and you're a comedian and you
22:43 go to other countries, right? And you
22:45 said you go to the UK and I said, "Okay,
22:47 if you go to the UK, speak out in
22:48 violation of their laws and see what
22:50 happens." And you said, "I'm confused. I
22:51 don't understand. What don't you
22:52 understand? Will you go to Turkey? Will
22:55 you go to Turkey and speak out against
22:56 Islam?"
22:58 I mean, if I have if I have a joke to
23:01 make sure I don't have a joke about
23:03 those particular topics, you you would I
23:07 I would You're saying you if you had a
23:09 joke about Oh, yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
23:11 Sure. I would I would try to do the best
23:12 I can. I always try to poke the bear as
23:14 much as I can. It's part of the job of a
23:16 comedian. Uh care about as it pertains
23:18 to one of the world's largest religions.
23:19 I mean, come on. I mean, I haven't I
23:22 have uh I haven't written a joke about
23:24 that recently. Um I All right. So, look,
23:29 hey, man, I'm a free speech guy, right?
23:32 I think that something that's nice about
23:33 America is that we're a country that has
23:36 that value. Um, and that we don't
23:41 generally think that you should be
23:43 tossed into a van and kicked out of the
23:44 country for expressing an opinion. Um, I
23:47 think that it is a change. I think it's
23:50 a change in America to most people
23:53 around the world to feel that oh wait if
23:56 I go to America and I express a mild
24:00 opinion about their foreign policy in my
24:04 own student paper or maybe on a stage or
24:07 maybe somewhere else I could be without
24:09 any warning to me accosted by six people
24:12 on the street thrown into a van and
24:14 taken out of the country. Well, let me
24:16 let me finish. I think that's a strange
24:18 I think I think that's I think that's a
24:20 new idea for a lot of people that
24:21 America is that type of country. I think
24:23 that Donald Trump's purpose is to turn
24:26 America into that type of country. Um I
24:29 think that that's bad. I think it makes
24:31 the country smaller. I think it makes
24:32 the country worse. I think it's a
24:33 violation of most of the values that I
24:35 grew up with as an American. And that's
24:37 my view of what's happening in the
24:39 country. Now, if you want to say, "Hey,
24:41 I don't like free speech for foreign
24:44 nationals who are in the country who
24:45 express mild opinions about other
24:47 countries, foreign wars, then that's
24:49 your prerogative. It's a big difference
24:50 between us that you don't like that you
24:53 don't like free speech in that way." I
24:54 mean, you're that's loaded language,
24:56 right? Yeah. All the language you're
24:58 using is pretty loaded. Well, you're you
24:59 you keep using adjectives to describe
25:01 things to diminish one thing while
25:02 exacerbate or or exaggerate something
25:05 else. I do use the English language to
25:06 express my thoughts and opinions. Yeah.
25:08 Yeah. But it's too un it's it's it's
25:09 straw manning. It's it's it's it's not
25:11 it's not a legitimate uh attack of the
25:13 ideas, right? So accosted on the street.
25:15 Come on. She was arrested. She was she
25:18 was arrested by a large group of by a
25:19 relatively large group of men compared
25:21 to what a normal arrest would require,
25:22 which I think they didn't need to do and
25:24 was silly. So we can say she was
25:26 arrested by several men un uh unmarked
25:30 plain clothes, which didn't need to
25:31 happen. But I don't need to say like she
25:33 was accosted by men on the street and
25:35 like it was about a mild opinion. It's
25:36 like, okay, listen, the facts of the
25:38 case. Uh, like I said, I don't like the
25:42 idea that people come to this country
25:43 and then try and tell us how to do uh
25:45 how to live our lives. You're not for
25:46 free speech. I understand. Uh, I think
25:48 American citizens have
25:49 self-determination and sovereignty. And
25:51 I will say this even of the Canadians
25:52 who keep coming here and they keep
25:54 getting involved in our politics. I'm
25:56 friends with some of them, but I think
25:57 it's fair to say that there is an issue
25:59 with Canadians, largely conservatives,
26:02 who come to this country and then start
26:03 advocating for conservative ve in a
26:05 country they're not from. So to be fair,
26:06 there are liberals Canadians who do it
26:08 too. I find it to be silly. That being
26:10 said, Canada as a bordering nation with
26:12 a largely overlapping culture is a
26:14 morally different question, but still
26:16 applies in much the same way
26:17 principally. So I do take issue with
26:19 foreigners coming to my is a nice white
26:21 country. So we like it. Canada's they
26:23 call it what the most multicultural
26:25 country in the in the in the world. I
26:27 think they they big on immigration. I
26:29 think Toronto is considered to be the
26:30 the the most multicultural city in the
26:33 world. Yeah. Yeah. So, Canada actually
26:34 is, you can call it a nice white
26:36 country, that's technically the truth,
26:37 but it also is very, very much in favor
26:39 of immigration and diversity and all
26:41 these things, largely what many of the
26:43 conservatives come here are speaking out
26:44 against. But without without I, you
26:46 know, so so this is a country where if
26:48 you're if you're from another country
26:50 and you're in America, don't say
26:52 anything about our politics or you could
26:53 be forcibly removed from the country.
26:55 You're comfortable with America being
26:56 that kind of country. That's something
26:58 that's like you're that that's a value
27:00 of your those are your values. See, see,
27:02 you're doing it again. No, no, I'm No,
27:05 I'm trying. I'm trying to understand
27:06 what you actually believe. Yeah, I would
27:08 say marginally it's a good because I
27:10 because I think that's a point of
27:11 distinction. Like it's it's useful in a
27:13 conversation like this to be like, okay,
27:14 I have my value, you have your value.
27:17 And you know, I my my value is like I
27:19 really like it when people say what the
27:20 [ __ ] they think about any country's
27:23 politics. We can simplify it. My my
27:25 value would just be to whatever
27:27 mathematical degree American sovereignty
27:29 supersedes the right of foreigners to
27:30 speak about our policies. You would
27:33 never go to the UK and and and do those
27:36 things. If I were Now look, I don't I
27:39 don't know of the policies of which you
27:40 speak. Okay? But if I were to be if I
27:44 were to be in England and I were to make
27:46 a joke on their stage and I were to be
27:49 put into a van and removed from a
27:50 country, I would say this is a bad thing
27:53 about England. And I would I think that
27:55 the country sucks and I think that they
27:57 should change it and I don't think
28:00 people should go there anymore and that
28:02 sucks for them and it sucks for us. You
28:03 wouldn't make a joke about Islam in the
28:04 United States.
28:08 [Laughter]
28:10 You wouldn't.
28:12 Okay. Uh, sure. What's What's that meant
28:14 to prove? You don't actually believe in
28:16 free speech. You fear the consequences.
28:19 Because I don't make a joke about the
28:20 topic that you demand me to. Because
28:22 this topic
28:24 result in people like a Charlie Hebdo
28:25 getting murdered. Uh-huh. Yeah, that's
28:28 bad. That they were murdered. South Park
28:30 tried making tried just showing Muhammad
28:32 and Comedy Central wouldn't let him do
28:33 it. Yeah, that's bad. So, let's see you
28:35 stand up for that value and come out and
28:36 make a joke about his I stood up about
28:38 free speech plenty of times. What are
28:39 you talking about? Take it take it to
28:42 the next level, brother. Okay, how about
28:44 how about we do this? This is You
28:46 believe in free speech, dude. This is
28:47 what you do when you've lost an argument
28:48 is that you just like jump to this. You
28:51 just jump to this. What? What you
28:53 brought it up? What did I Oh, oh, the
28:55 the Islam piece of it. Yeah. Yeah. No,
28:56 no, no. And now I'm continuing the
28:57 conversation and you're derailing it to
28:59 you must have lost the arguments. No.
29:00 No. Because you're No, because I stand
29:02 up for South Park for Edstone and Trey
29:03 Park. I stand up for them. So go on
29:05 stage and show a big picture of
29:06 Muhammad. I I'm sorry. What? The The
29:08 thing that you're doing? Stand up for
29:09 free speech, brother. Do it. So I'll do
29:12 it with you. So So So you're you're
29:14 demanding me to go on stage and do
29:16 something. Unless I do, I'm a coward.
29:19 I'm saying prove you this is this is a
29:21 bizarre rhetorical free speech. This is
29:23 a bizarre rhetorical move. I didn't call
29:24 you a coward. I said prove you care
29:26 about free speech. Do something that
29:28 creates real risk to your person for
29:29 free speech. Yeah. I I speak about [ __ ]
29:32 all the time, dude. I I'm I'm happy to
29:34 live in America where the things I say
29:37 don't create real risk to my person. In
29:39 fact, if I were to say the things that
29:40 you're saying, I would not be creating
29:42 real risk to my person. You don't think
29:44 so? I do not think so. Why not just do
29:47 it? Prove me wrong. because I don't have
29:48 anything in particular to say about
29:50 those. Just put a picture of Muhammad up
29:51 and say, "Praise
29:53 be. Prove I'm wrong." I I I'm really
29:56 glad we got here again because it's uh
29:59 it's just very fun to to sit in how
30:02 weird this part of the conversation is.
30:04 Remember Charlie Hubdo? Yeah. It was
30:06 Yeah. What happened? Yeah. The uh bunch
30:08 of people were uh shot because they uh a
30:11 picture of Muhammad. Yeah. That's bad.
30:12 You think if you did that they might
30:13 want to shoot you, too? Yeah. Maybe. So
30:16 you don't you shouldn't do it. I mean I
30:19 don't have it. Well, you know, the
30:21 particular images that they showed I
30:22 didn't think were like very funny. Like
30:24 it was their right to let South Park do
30:25 it either. Uh they censored the whole
30:27 thing. That's bad. Yeah, that's bad. And
30:30 I think that's contrary to American
30:31 values. Why won't the free speech people
30:33 who believe we should live in this
30:34 country stand up against that? I'm
30:36 sorry. It I'm not standing for standing
30:38 up for free speech unless I do what
30:40 exactly?
30:42 I didn't say the only way for you to
30:43 stand up for free speech is to do
30:44 something. said, "Why won't people who
30:46 are claiming?" You called me a
30:47 hypocrite, and I don't understand what's
30:48 hypocritical about me only doing jokes
30:51 about the topics that I'm interested.
30:53 You would not go to the UK and and speak
30:56 in violation of their speech laws.
30:59 I mean, I went there. I went there. I
31:01 made fun of their government. I talked
31:03 about uh you know uh the the fire at
31:06 Heathrow because that impacted my travel
31:07 when I was there. I talked about Uh-huh.
31:09 Yeah. You can make fun of white people,
31:11 but you can't make fun of non-white
31:12 people. You go to jail for that. Okay.
31:14 Yeah. I think that would uh if if it's
31:15 as you say that sounds like a if if it
31:18 applied to me as a comedian. I would not
31:20 I think it would say that's a bad law. I
31:21 would not go to Turkey and speak out
31:22 against Islam and I would not go to the
31:24 UK and violate their speech laws. Oh,
31:26 okay. So you're So are are you a coward?
31:29 What's what's your point? No, I actually
31:30 agree with the sovereignty of nations
31:32 and if they have laws, I'm not going to
31:33 violate them. You can say whatever you
31:34 want against Christians, right? You're
31:36 allowed to make fun of white people,
31:37 Christianity, Catholics, but god forbid
31:41 you would say anything about the
31:43 protected religion that is Islam. We do
31:47 have the first amendment. You have
31:48 freedom of speech, but in the UK, they
31:51 will not allow you to have that. You
31:53 have to abide by their speech laws. And
31:56 they have many. Even on Facebook right
31:59 now, people are going to jail because
32:00 they've said something that is
32:01 considered hateful against Muslim. And
32:04 keep in mind now the government in the
32:06 UK is largely run by Muslims. They have
32:09 enough Muslims there now to keep getting
32:12 the vote kind Democrats were trying to
32:14 do in America. Make it a one party
32:16 state. Bring in as many illegals as you
32:19 can so that they vote for you. They
32:22 mentioned the Charlie Epto thing that
32:24 happened in France. Islam in Europe and
32:26 everywhere in the world is associated
32:28 with violence. Right? Not all Muslims
32:31 are terrorists, but all terrorists are
32:33 Muslim. Okay? It wasn't Buddhists and
32:35 Christians who flew planes into the Twin
32:37 Towers or who blew up the London
32:39 Underground and who are blowing up cars
32:42 and buses all across Europe. But, God
32:44 forbid you say anything against them.
32:46 Even the government in Europe, the UK
32:48 government was protecting these grooming
32:50 gangs for years because they didn't want
32:53 to say anything that would make them
32:54 sound racist. Adam Conover is a damn
32:58 hypocrite.
32:59 like most people on the left these days
33:01 or or or I shouldn't say that, I should
33:02 say the far progressives on the left.
33:04 Let's get to the last part where they
33:06 discuss a little bit of DEI. So Charlie
33:08 Kirk got a lot of flack for this cuz he
33:10 said, you know, I go on a plane, I see a
33:12 black pilot and I think, am I supposed
33:14 to be worried? Yeah, that's racist. But
33:16 the point he was making was he was
33:18 calling you racist, dude. And you guys
33:20 didn't get that. He he said, "You have
33:23 created a situation where average people
33:26 think you are hiring people who can't do
33:28 the job based on race, and we don't want
33:29 to live that way." I mean, he's the one
33:31 getting on the plane and seeing a black
33:33 person and and saying that person's not
33:34 qualified. I don't get it. That's not
33:36 what he's saying. He says Democrats are
33:37 intentionally hiring unqualified people
33:38 based on race. Why are they putting us
33:40 in a situation like this? He's saying
33:42 that if a black person is in the seat,
33:44 it means they're unqualified. That's his
33:45 assertion. No, he's saying he doesn't
33:47 know because he knows you are advocating
33:49 for it. I'm just listening to the words
33:51 that he's saying. It seems pretty
33:52 straightforward. I would I would I would
33:53 I would say that when the left and the
33:57 right only listen to the surface level
33:58 clips and arguments, they don't actually
34:00 understand what the person is conveying.
34:02 And so the argument then is Charlie Kirk
34:03 is a racist, which is not true. Charlie
34:05 Kirk's point on that plane was, let's
34:07 just map it out one, two, three.
34:09 Democrats have created policies by which
34:11 they will put people in positions of
34:12 authority who don't have the same uh
34:15 caliber degree or have passed certain
34:17 tests because of race. We've seen
34:20 policies where they will actually go
34:21 down the list of top candidates until
34:23 they get to a race. This creates a
34:25 concern among people that an in that
34:28 individuals are being hired without the
34:29 capability based on race. That's the
34:31 idea he's trying to convey. Not that he
34:33 doesn't want to fly with the black. You
34:34 think that when uh you think that in the
34:36 time when uh you know we only had white
34:39 pilots or white executives or white
34:40 whatever all those people were hired on
34:43 merit none of them uh floated through
34:44 for some other reason like nepatism.
34:47 Yeah. Exactly. Like there's the the I
34:50 bet some people gave PJs. Yeah. Exactly.
34:52 This the systems are like the they
34:55 already do that for everybody. So, so
34:58 for him to go in and say, "Uh, oh, when
35:01 I see a black person, that's when I
35:03 think that, not when I see a white
35:06 person." And that's racist on his part
35:08 because he's only focusing on when that
35:10 black people because the policy is
35:12 racebased.
35:15 The policy The policy is race and gender
35:17 based. And so, the issue is not Charlie
35:19 Kirk saying he doesn't like black
35:20 people. He's saying Democrats are hiring
35:22 people who are less qualified based on
35:24 race. this is creating a concern for
35:26 people which we don't want to
35:28 experience. So the counterargument would
35:30 be if you have a system that has no
35:33 black people in it, right? You have you
35:35 have a you have a a a a pool of people
35:38 doing the job that has no black people
35:40 in it that clearly is not based on merit
35:44 because you know black people are x% of
35:46 the population and surely some would
35:48 have gotten through if it was really
35:49 based on nothing but merit. So, some of
35:51 the existing white people must actually
35:53 not have gotten there via merit. It must
35:55 be because of a race-based system. So,
35:57 instead, let's adjust the system so that
36:00 we give everybody an equal opportunity.
36:03 That is going to mean that there going
36:05 to be more black people in the system.
36:07 Now, that that happens. He now gets on
36:09 the plane, he sees a black person, he
36:10 says, "Oh, now it seems they they seem
36:12 unqualified to me." That's pretty
36:13 straightforwardly racist. I actually
36:15 think that it was racist systems that
36:19 kept out qualified candidates. What I
36:21 would say to your argument is the only
36:23 distinction between what you said and
36:26 white nationalists is that you want a
36:28 system to bring those people in and
36:30 white nationalists don't. So you you
36:33 both the left and the right agree that
36:36 there is some kind of phenomenon where
36:38 black people should be qualified and
36:39 aren't aren't
36:41 qualifying. I disagree with that. Um, I
36:44 think that there were institutions
36:46 throughout history that have put that
36:48 hampered the process by which minorities
36:50 were able to go to schools to
36:52 effectively get those uh degrees. It's
36:55 very difficult. The liberal argument
36:57 floats dangerously close, I think, to
36:59 what white nationalists are hoping for.
37:00 It's not to say you're wrong or
37:01 anything, but it's a com it's a similar
37:03 argument. That is the implication. The
37:07 solution would be color-blind hiring
37:09 processes and uh educational benefits
37:13 that target class and not race because
37:15 then you remove the racial component
37:16 from the argument completely instead of
37:18 creating a racial argument for the white
37:20 national. But if you admit that people
37:21 in America are racist, you can't if you
37:24 want to you can't build systems that are
37:27 completely blind to race or you have
37:29 race you have then you have individual
37:32 racists continuing to have power over
37:34 the system. So what you do is accept
37:36 racism, you're just like, "Okay, yeah,
37:37 racism will continue to affect every
37:39 part of the system and and we can
37:40 mitigate it." Right? So, for instance,
37:42 for hiring practices, when it comes to
37:44 hiring managers, they should have no
37:45 access to the name or the race of the
37:47 individual. It should literally be
37:49 here's the resume, here's their
37:51 qualifications. Is it a yes or a no?
37:53 Yeah. What Charlie Kirk was mentioning
37:54 and what Tim P is trying to tell Adam is
37:56 that DEI pretty much does no favors for
38:00 these minorities. one, if you do get
38:02 accepted because you are a minority, you
38:05 might be in a position, say it's a
38:07 university, you might be put in a
38:09 position to fail. You might not be
38:11 qualified enough to be there and
38:13 therefore you probably shouldn't be
38:14 there because it's just going to hurt
38:16 you in the long run. Also, if you're a
38:18 black person that deserve to be there or
38:19 minority that deserve to be there,
38:21 people are going to look at you like a
38:22 DEI hire. You're trying to tell me that
38:25 in 2025 you don't have all the same
38:28 opportunities as everybody else if
38:31 you're a black person. You can't say the
38:32 the system is systemically racist when
38:34 we had a black president for 8 years.
38:35 That's ludicrous. You should never be
38:38 accepted based on race. Now based on
38:40 gender, we can make a case for that. I
38:42 don't want to go into a kindergarten and
38:44 see a male teacher. I much prefer having
38:46 a woman there. I think there's a lot of
38:48 cases for law enforcement, for firemen
38:52 that men should be there. That's a
38:53 biological issue. That's that has
38:54 nothing to do with intelligence. It's
38:56 just a biological thing. Men and women
38:58 are not the same. We have different
39:00 characteristics that define us. Now, I
39:02 don't think it's right what Tim says at
39:03 the end that there should be we
39:06 shouldn't see the people we're hiring.
39:07 We shouldn't know their name. We should
39:08 just look at their resume. I think that
39:10 should be a great first step into the
39:12 hiring process. But depending on the job
39:14 you're hiring somebody for, you're going
39:15 to want to have to talk to them. Like,
39:17 if you're moving somebody up within the
39:19 same company, sure. But if you're hiring
39:20 a new person, you want to have a
39:21 dialogue with them. You want to know
39:22 that they're going to their vibe is
39:24 going to
39:25 match what your company's about, how
39:27 they're going to get in along with
39:28 everybody. That's a big important part.
39:30 They're going to be spending five, six,
39:31 seven, eight hours a day there, how
39:34 they're going to interact with
39:35 clients, what their physical appearance
39:37 is. And I don't mean skin color. I just
39:40 mean, are you presentable? Do you have a
39:41 big tattoo across your forehead? I don't
39:43 care if you're white, black, or Asian,
39:44 but I'm not going to hire you if you
39:46 have a big skull neck tattoo on your
39:47 neck. So, it's important to see the
39:49 person in some
39:50 cases before you give them a job. But
39:52 yes, everything as much as possible
39:55 should be merit-based. You should never
39:57 get a job because of your race or
39:59 gender. Again, there's going to be some
40:01 exceptions when it comes to gender, but
40:03 not for race. We know based on all the
40:06 empirical data that a black kid and a
40:08 white kid from the same social economic
40:11 class, from the same neighborhood, if
40:12 the black kid has two parents at home
40:14 who put on a large focus on his
40:15 education and the white kid is in a
40:17 single mother household, that the black
40:19 kid is statistically more likely to
40:21 succeed, to go to university, to not get
40:23 arrested if it's a girl to not have
40:25 pregnancy when she's a teen, to not end
40:27 up incarcerated, to not spend years in
40:29 jail. There's lots of stuff that comes
40:31 with having two parents at home, which
40:33 is what we should be focused on in this
40:35 country, and not stupid stuff like DEI.
40:37 Hope you enjoyed this video. Tim Pool
40:38 killed it. Catch you in the next one.
40:40 Peace out, everybody.
Chrome Extension