Tim Pool - 'journalist' who claims to be a sensible centrist & sucks Sargon of Akkad's wiener; Afraid of the Milkshake ANTIFAs

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
Stab You in the Back said:
The grift is demanding $250k to fund what should be a fairly routine lawsuit. The value of the suit is probably around $25k, so he should be spending substantially less than that on legal fees. I don't know where he got the $250k figure from, but its fucking insane.

As for whether the theater is the "correct" target: of course it is. Tim and the theater entered into the contract. The theater breached the contract. The theater's breach cost Tim [X] amount of dollars in lost revenue and higher and additional costs. Tim is legally able to seek recovery of what the breach cost him. This is all routine business stuff.
Click to expand...
I just checked and apparently breach of contract is a crime. It might still be possible (if Tim knew exactly who the Antifa people behind this were) to have a TI suit, but you are technically correct. I'm was trying to apply what I saw on Racket's show here and that might not be wise.

As for the $250k number. I've never had to pay a lawyer before, so I didn't say anything about it. Now that I think about it, the numbers we saw with Meyer v Waid and Weeb Wars were really high, but they involved lawsuits against wealthy (and in the case of Weeb Wars multiple) defendants. If the theater was willing to accept Tim then they probably aren't very wealthy, so maybe it's fair to call bullshit on him asking for $250k.
 
Stab You in the Back said:
The grift is demanding $250k to fund what should be a fairly routine lawsuit. The value of the suit is probably around $25k, so he should be spending substantially less than that on legal fees. I don't know where he got the $250k figure from, but its fucking insane.

As for whether the theater is the "correct" target: of course it is. Tim and the theater entered into the contract. The theater breached the contract. The theater's breach cost Tim [X] amount of dollars in lost revenue and higher and additional costs. Tim is legally able to seek recovery of what the breach cost him. This is all routine business stuff.
Click to expand...
Plus theaters settle to avoid court costs. They run on razor-thin margins as it is and don't have the reserves to deal with judgements.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Stab You in the Back
This thread is a mess, so I'm gonna make it more of a mess by defending Tim Pool, despite having several problems with him.

First off, the event wasn't exclusively or even mainly Tim. It was a Minds.com event. Granted, Tim has publicly disclosed that he owns stock in Minds, but Tim was one of a lot of speakers and it was organized by a bunch of other people. So I doubt Tim is doing any of the leg work with the lawsuit. Minds' (which is a company and not just Tim and one other guy) legal team is probably doing that. So it wouldn't be "Tim Pool v Theater" it'd be "Minds.com v Theater". Everyone here autistically thinks he's a one man show and is actually filing this by himself. He has already hired people for Subverse and as mentioned before is hiring an editor (which some autist here expects to be unpaid but he said it'd be paid).

Second, no one is talking about the gun pic. The crazy loony guy, did he mention having a gun? How was he able to find the address? Was the gun pic ever explained? [EDIT: Upon reflection that tweet and pic are obviously fake]

Last, a lot of you seem upset at him and think he's a lolcow merely because he's successful. Yeah, he's super duper repetitive (I wince every time George Carlin, Tulsi Gabbard, and "I won't vote for Trump" are mentioned) and relies on a lot of verbal crutches when speaking. But he's making an hour plus of content every single day for like more than a year. For someone like me, an American living abroad, his vids are a good way to more casually see what the "outrage of the day" is in the political world. I think he does a good job curating news articles relevant to the topic and he definitely is trustworthy when picking out sources, so I appreciate him reading and summarizing the articles. It's a valuable service you guys may not like but it obviously is a market that is giving him success. As mentioned before, why does someone so milquetoast and unoffensive cause so much derision here? Also, you have to admit that his take down of Jack Dorsey and that Indian lady on Joe Rogan was something someone should have done YEARS ago, and he did it. They even have him on live mic despite not knowing it was still being recorded sticking to his journalistic ethics.
 
Last edited:
  • Winner
  • Like
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Gaius Cumulus, Drag-on Knight 91873, NoSpiceLife and 16 others
WendyWheelchair said:
This thread is a mess, so I'm gonna make it more of a mess by defending Tim Pool, despite having several problems with him.

First off, the event wasn't exclusively or even mainly Tim. It was a Minds.com event. Granted, Tim has publicly disclosed that he owns stock in Minds, but Tim was one of a lot of speakers and it was organized by a bunch of other people. So I doubt Tim is doing any of the leg work with the lawsuit. Minds' legal team is doing that. So it wouldn't be "Tim Pool v Theater" it'd be "Minds.com v Theater".

Second, no one is talking about the gun pic. The crazy loony guy, did he mention having a gun? How was he able to find the address? Was the gun pic ever explained?

Last, a lot of you seem upset at him and think he's a lolcow merely because he's successful. Yeah, he's super duper repetitive (I wince every time George Carlin, Tulsi Gabbard, and "I won't vote for Trump" are mentioned) and relies on a lot of verbal crutches when speaking. But he's making an hour plus of content every single day for like more than a year. For someone like me, an American living abroad, his vids are a good way to more casually see what the "outrage of the day" is in the political world. I think he does a good job curating news articles relevant to the topic and he definitely is trustworthy when picking out sources, so I appreciate him reading and summarizing the articles. It's a valuable service you guys may not like but it obviously is a market that is giving him success. As mentioned before, why does someone so milquetoast and unoffensive cause so much derision here? Also, you have to admit that his take down of Jack Dorsey and that Indian lady on Joe Rogan was something someone should have done YEARS ago, and he did it. They even have him on live mic despite not knowing it was still being recorded sticking to his journalistic ethics.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I listen to him most days and believe his skepticism of progressive politics is well-founded. But there's a difference between Tim the journalist and Tim the guy who's issuing a call to arms.

He wants to accept donations for his show, great. He wants to do something about ANTIFA, great. He wants to fundraise around a legal fund, great.

Does the legal fund overlap with business interests? If so, I want to know more before I give money. This isn't VicKicksBack, YBZ or EVS, I'm not sure I have a clear sense of what it is. I'm not opposed, in fact I'm inclined to give. I just need more details and don't have them yet.

Is the plan realistic and is he going after the right target? Maybe. I question what example this is going to set. Maybe theaters just stop booking events for any group that ANTIFA doesn't like. That helps ANTIFA and hurts their targets.

At the end of the day, Tim talks a lot about the downsides of activists in the media. I want to be clear he's not headed that way himself.
 
  • Feels
Reactions: IAmNotAlpharius and Angry Shoes
Ivan Shatov said:
Yeah, I listen to him most days and believe his skepticism of progressive politics is well-founded. But there's a difference between Tim the journalist and Tim the guy who's issuing a call to arms.

He wants to accept donations for his show, great. He wants to do something about ANTIFA, great. He wants to fundraise around a legal fund, great.

Does the legal fund overlap with business interests? If so, I want to know more before I give money. This isn't VicKicksBack, YBZ or EVS, I'm not sure I have a clear sense of what it is. I'm not opposed, in fact I'm inclined to give. I just need more details and don't have them yet.

Is the plan realistic and is he going after the right target? Maybe. I question what example this is going to set. Maybe theaters just stop booking events for any group that ANTIFA doesn't like. That helps ANTIFA and hurts their targets.

At the end of the day, Tim talks a lot about the downsides of activists in the media. I want to be clear he's not headed that way himself.
Click to expand...
I can't speak to whether anyone should or shouldn't give money to the legal costs or whatever, but the whole reason he's suing them is BECAUSE they bailed after AntiFa's threats. Venues have insurance for a reason. If AntiFa DID do anything, they'd be covered. To kowtow to their idiotic threats sets a terrible precedent. Tim/Minds suing the venue will show other venues that they can't just back out of contracts because some babies are upset that something legal is taking place.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Agree
  • Winner
Reactions: Angry Shoes, Shady Attorney, Particle Bored and 1 other person
WendyWheelchair said:
I can't speak to whether anyone should or shouldn't give money to the legal costs or whatever, but the whole reason he's suing them is BECAUSE they bailed because of AntiFa threats. Venues have insurance for a reason. If AntiFa DID do anything, they'd be covered. To kowtow to their idiotic threats sets a terrible precedent. Tim/Minds suing the venue will show other venues that they can't just back out of contracts because some babies are upset that something legal is taking place.
Click to expand...
Yeah, good point and I think I'm clear on the reasons behind the lawsuit.

So for theater owners, it's a choice of whether to use property insurance or legal insurance because everyone's mad at you?

Sure seems like this gives theaters an incentive to avoid booking events with groups ANTIFA doesn't like.
 
Girl with a fake name said:
Is it me or is Tim getting fatter?
Click to expand...
That's what happens when you hang out with the Rational Skeptic™ crowd. He's just trying to fit in.

tsundereaddict said:
I just checked and apparently breach of contract is a crime. It might still be possible (if Tim knew exactly who the Antifa people behind this were) to have a TI suit, but you are technically correct. I'm was trying to apply what I saw on Racket's show here and that might not be wise.

As for the $250k number. I've never had to pay a lawyer before, so I didn't say anything about it. Now that I think about it, the numbers we saw with Meyer v Waid and Weeb Wars were really high, but they involved lawsuits against wealthy (and in the case of Weeb Wars multiple) defendants. If the theater was willing to accept Tim then they probably aren't very wealthy, so maybe it's fair to call bullshit on him asking for $250k.
Click to expand...
Plaintiffs' attorneys will often work on a commission if the case is a rather routine one as this appears to be. I can't believe for a second Tim Pool with all his connections couldn't manage to find a lawyer competent enough for at least this willing to do it for 30-40% plus costs.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: ⠠⠠⠅⠑⠋⠋⠁⠇⠎ ⠠⠠⠊⠎ ⠠⠠⠁ ⠠⠠⠋⠁⠛
Watching that "war" video it feels like he puts the emphASIS on the wrong sylLABle when he says ANTIFA at least half the time.
 
Doctor Placebo said:
That doesn't really seem fair if they refunded his fee and gave him enough advance notice to find a new location. The theater didn't want to get burned to the ground or bombed. Surely it's Antifa's fault for sending threats, not the theater owners for being concerned about safety?
Click to expand...
As @Ivan Shatov pointed out, he only had a little over a week to find a replacement venue.

"Why the short notice for such a large event? Oh, funny story, our previous venue broke the contract because they were getting threats of murder and property damage. No big deal. As I was saying.. John? John? Are you still on the line?"

This is obviously just stupid bullshit, this kind of deplatforming has been happening for decades if Reds take offense to your views in any way. It's funny that it's happening to milquetoast dumbshits like Tim Pool, but he isn't hitting the actual culprits. Whether he wins or loses or gives up it will make no difference, it will set no precedents. He's just doing this to boost his image.

A serious legal attack would require finding a way to pull the culprits behind Antifa, the National Lawyers Guild, ADL, SPLC, ZOA etc into a suit.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Ivan Shatov, Wendy Wheelchair, Ellesse_warrior and 1 other person
tuscangarder said:
Anyone that donates to Tim is a dumb dumb. A basic ass contract lawsuit does not cost 250k. Learn 2 code Tim.
Click to expand...
Dumb is the wrong word.

Fundraising around political activism follows a set of predictable stages. You have initial donors (aka true believers) who will donate to anything that agrees with their world view. Campaigns will raise money to cover initial costs from this group, the money really goes to getting to the next level.

Next you have early donors, who see the campaign getting attention and give money to help it get real traction. They might need to be convinced this is the right cause and are usually persuaded by arguments involving facts and figures. Fundamentally, they agree with the message and want help getting over their initial reservations. They want to look smart by being involved.

Next you have late donors, who respond to well-articulated messages and are heavily influenced by friends and family. These are the people who show up to fundraising dinners, opportunities to meet VIPs and surrogates, etc. For them, it's less about the campaign and more about how their support makes them look.

Fundraising efforts peak sometime between early and late donor stages before eventually trailing off.

As of today, the campaign stands at $23k raised. Anyone who has given is an initial donor who agrees with the cause if not the remedy.

The question is whether the campaign can transition into an early donor stage. As far as I can tell, there's been no effort to engage a broader audience. Tim gets lots of traffic to his videos and could be using them as a platform to draw more attention to the campaign. Thus far, I haven't heard much from him outside the original announcement.

So I'd guess people who have given are angry about deplatforming. There are people like me who are waiting for more details. The fact Tim hasn't been doing more outreach tells you something about the campaign.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IAmNotAlpharius, Ellesse_warrior and Man vs persistent rat
My only real complaints are as follows: he calls himself a centrist which is obviously not true and he's bald way to fucking early and his "brand" is that stupid hat, I think it was like bearing he ran with it, got popular and forgot to give himself some kind of distinguishable self owned unique visual brand like most other people with a YT following. I agree with most of what he says but, he clearly targets a right wing viewership or classical liberal? IDK... not a centrist but hardly the first person in journalism to falsely declare themselves "fair and balanced" . When I think exceptional journalism I think that faggot from rebel media who called yaniv they both sperged and acted like it was it was journalism worth uploading.

250k in legal fees sounds excessive to me.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: IAmNotAlpharius, Memento Malum and Doctor Placebo
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back