On 11 August, Tim had Rafael Mangual, a fellow focused on criminal justice from the conservative Manhattan Institute think tank; & recurring guest petroleum lobbyist Daniel Turner, as the guests.
Phil was the sole co-host.
Clip Collection:
-Tim continues to trot out his experiences from nearly two decades ago as relevant to the current situation. In this case, when Rafael tries to argue there are true believers pushing leftism, Tim retorts that those people are like "orcs, or Uruk-Hai. They're not the Nazgul", which were the people he met back at Occupy: Wall Street organising things:
-If there is one thing that shall connect with young people facing a revolution in the economy, & seemingly insurmountable challenges, it is Tim lecturing them that no one actually had it easier than they did before. Mind you, he has
brow-beaten his co-hosts, on several occasions over
the last two weeks, to the contrary. The beanie boy lists out the Great Depression, the World Wars, the Cold War, etc., as examples of challenges faced by prior generations, which people ignore due to recency bias. But considering the absolute dire predictions the beanie boy made about AI, I cannot take seriously his claims, here:
-Tim continues to argue that no one in the United States, or the seceding states, in 1860-1, could have thought there was an active civil war, "
before (his emphasis) there was conscription, conflict, & suspension of
habeas corpus", which were actions Pres. Abraham Lincoln took which made it into one. The beanie boy tries to claim that "there was no fight" on the part of the Southern states, & only Lincoln was raising troops, to enforce the Union.
Even a cursory review of the history shows that was not the case. But this mangling of history was in an effort to question "what the left would say" if Pres. Donald Trump did suspend
habeas corpus, in the wake of anti-ICE actions:
-As with the last episode, we are subjected to Tim explaining his masterful posts, because he is so impressed by his own wit. The beanie boy goes over his latest salvoes pretending to be moderating the Andrew Wilson v. Candace Owens debate, but actually posting about nonsense. Tim sees Candace Owens' cohort as "in conspiracy land" & never trust whomever is in power. Whereas Tim & his coterie are "in fact land". The beanie boy repeats his well-known dislike of the nutty negress:
-The subject of Flock cameras comes up, with Tim going on & on about how the system makes mistakes, with no human oversight to catch the error, which results in "4th & 5th Amendment violations". He tries to use a case of an automatic license plate reader (ALPR) misidentifying a number, leading to a wrongful detention. Rafael says it was due to human input error, but the beanie boy pigheadedly says that it was the machinery that failed. Guess who was correct? If you said Tim,
you would be wrong. Tim accuses Rafael of being willing to tolerate an unacceptable number of people being wrongfully arrested, which is more than zero, before opposing the new ALPR installations. But the guest responds that already happens under the current one, which Tim is not calling to take down:
Tim tries to shift it "to scale", but Rafael points out how
license plate reader technology has already been adopted quite widely & used for more than a decade. Phil steps in to pose a more relevant critique, which is the addition of AI. This change being the sticking point for the new versions, compared with prior iterations. The guest talks for a bit, but Tim decides to butt in & try and demand a one word answer for "Should parents have the final say in the healthcare of their children, yes or no". Rafael rightly point out that it depends on what healthcare is being offered (vaccines vs trooning out). But the beanie boy tries to make this a point about one's "moral world view" dictating what you are willing to trade off. He enters a
spiel about not wanting his license plate, or face, being recorded by the government when he is out & about, because you have a right to privacy which is being eroded by new technology. Though it rings a bit hollow when you recall how Tim's career was built on
cell phones, &
drones, two technologies used to surveil people. Knowing the risks of them, at the time, the beanie boy had no issue accepting that trade off. But now that he disagrees with an abusable technology, Tim says it must go no further:
Tim continues his hectoring style, demanding no ALPRs, but it appears one motivating factor is that a driver for the Branch Timidians was given a ticket by one. Rafael argues for regulations to limit what the cameras can be used for, but the beanie boy says legislatures have surrendered their duties, already. The guest replies that
local, &
state,
legislators have been acting to pause, or even ban, ALPRs:
This sees the two argue over the existence of a theoretical all-encompassing surveillance state preventing people from re-legalising something banned. Tim argues that only due to people violating the law to do these prohibited things can the public make an informed decision. But with ALPRs recording them, all the time, that becomes impossible. Except when that is not Tim's argument, & he changes what it is. Or when sensational single cases can justify his argument, but not Rafael's. Or not providing specific numbers is an issue in the guest's arguments, but not the beanie boy's. It boils down to Tim having a desire for a society of strong men, with guns, handling crimes, outside of government interference. Because unlike mass surveillance, vigilante justice has never been used to
undercut exposing the truth,
be exploited for profit, or
get out of hand, ever:
This goes on for a bit longer, before transitioning to super-chats, but the clips show the lion's share of the argument. Despite my antipathy to additional surveillance, I rate Tim's persuasiveness poor, at best.
-& the beanie boy returns to talking about Candace Owens, & her fans, again: