Peasants Perspective
Peasants Perspective: A Voice from the Edge of Freedom
Join Taylor Johnatakis, a self-proclaimed “peasant” turned podcaster, on an unfiltered journey through family, faith, and the fight for American ideals. From the depths of DC Jail—where he recorded during a 14-month sentence tied to January 6—to his triumphant return home after a Trump clemency in 2025, Taylor delivers raw, heartfelt commentary for the common man. Expect a mix of gritty storytelling, reflections on liberty lost and reclaimed, and timeless lessons drawn from his life as a septic designer, father, and reluctant rebel. Whether he’s reading Dr. Seuss to his kids or dissecting the state of the republic, Peasants Perspective is a bold, unpolished call to stay grounded amidst chaos. Subscribe for a front-row seat to a story that’s as real as it gets—no filter, no apologies.
Peasants Perspective
Raid My House, I'll Raid Yours: America's New Political Reality
The wheels of justice are turning in unexpected directions as federal agents raid the Maryland home of former National Security Advisor John Bolton, searching for classified documents. This stunning development arrives with a heavy dose of irony—Bolton previously criticized Trump for allegedly mishandling classified information, and now finds himself under similar scrutiny.
We dive deep into what this raid signifies about the changing power dynamics in Washington. Is this selective prosecution or the beginning of equal application of the law? The evidence points to a seismic shift as figures across the political spectrum face accountability for actions that previously went unchallenged.
The show explores multiple examples of this new reality: IRS officials who targeted conservative groups during the Obama era have been placed on administrative leave; Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook faces mortgage fraud allegations; and Letitia James' $500 million judgment against Trump has been overturned by an appeals court that found no actual victims existed.
Meanwhile, Washington DC is experiencing unprecedented crime reduction thanks to a coordinated effort between law enforcement agencies. We examine this success while questioning the implications of military personnel being involved in domestic law enforcement. Does this represent a necessary response to lawlessness or a concerning expansion of government power?
Throughout the episode, we challenge listeners to consider how we measure justice. When people in power weaponize government against their opponents, should we celebrate when that same standard is applied to them? Or should we strive for a system where such weaponization doesn't happen at all? The conversation balances righteous satisfaction at seeing accountability with thoughtful concerns about preserving constitutional principles.
Join us for this thought-provoking discussion that transcends partisan politics and asks what kind of society we want to build. Whether you're concerned about government overreach or desperate for accountability from powerful figures, this episode offers perspectives that will challenge and enlighten you.
https://1776live.us/peasants_perspective
www.PeasantsPerspective.com
www.LeftBehindandWithout.org
www.givesendgo.com/GEJWJ
www.DollarsVoteLouder.com
buymeacoffee.com/peasant
And when they went to the queen to tell her Ruth Bunchik had no bread, do you know what she said? Let them eat cake here. You take the bomb. We're getting screwed, man.
Speaker 4:Every time we turn around we're getting screwed. Oh, the revolution's going to be through podcasting for sure. That's the only way we talk. It's the little guys, the little guys that take the brunt of everything. It's got to stop.
Speaker 4:Peasants, man, we're just peasants, every one of us. You watch those old movies. You see the peasants in the background with the kings and queens walking around. We're those people. We're those people. Good morning, peasants. Welcome to another episode of the Peasant's Perspective. Hold on, oh no, of course. Every morning without Phil, there's always something. Man. Peasants, welcome to another episode of the peasants perspective. Hold on, oh no, of course. Every morning without phil, there's always something. Man, there's always something I I'm glad you guys are joining us sharp, bright and early at 6 30. Don't forget to set your clocks back nine minutes so you can be on. Peasant time. Rod got it. Ron and I grew up in a church that is chronic, full of chronically late people. They used to call it mormon standard time, which was 15 minutes late yeah, well, with my family it's about an hour you got one family member who shows up when they're setting breaking down the chairs exactly.
Speaker 4:Anyways, all right guys. Big news this morning, can you believe? It. Remember who shows up when they're breaking down the chairs? Yeah, exactly. Anyways, all right guys, big news this morning. Can you believe it? What we have breaking news, ron, it has started. Oh, hold on, before we get the anticipation, let's change the sound over. Definitely not AI. This is not an AI-generated show.
Speaker 7:This is how you drop breaking news.
Speaker 9:Yes, like this Breaking news that just crossed just moments ago. Government sources just confirming to Fox News that federal agents raided the Maryland home of Ambassador John Bolton this morning. One source says that agents are looking for potential classified documents they believe are in his possession. Fbi Director Kash Patel tweeting earlier this morning no one is above the law FBI agents on mission. The FBI is not commenting right now on the raid itself. We can confirm Bolton is not under arrest right now. The target this morning was the home. We're going to bring you the latest details as soon as we get those into.
Speaker 4:The target was Melania's panty drawer in Miralago, but don't worry, trump's not under arrest. So, wow, we got a raid on John Bolton. So let's check into Fox News here, because this is literally kind of just breaking and developing this morning.
Speaker 10:The FBI agents have raided the Maryland home of former Trump National Security Advisor, john Bolton. It happened at 7 am this morning.
Speaker 11:Shortly after the raid began, fbi Director Kash Patel posting on X quote no one is above the law. Fbi agents on a mission.
Speaker 12:David Spunt joins us now with more on this breaking news.
Speaker 13:Hey David, hey guys, not much we can say at this point, but information will continue to develop. As you mentioned, about seven o'clock this morning, fbi agents raided Ambassador Bolton's home. Notable were being told by two government sources that they are looking for classified documents as part of a potential leak investigation. We're told that Ambassador Bolton is not in custody, he's not under arrest, but it is notable they are at his Maryland home right now. We don't know how many agents are there.
Speaker 13:We're waiting to get a picture of the scene coming in right now, but we're told how many agents are there. We're waiting to get a picture of the scene coming in right now, but we're told Ambassador Bolton, who was just on TV on another network a couple of days ago talking about the Russia Putin Trump summit, is now under FBI investigation. Now I want to be clear. These are long and we're looking at some live photographs right now in Bethesda. That's clearly the road where Ambassador Bolton lives and you can see some police cars outside there. But you know this is going to be a long process. We saw the raid of former Trump adviser Roger Stone's home down in Florida several years ago. Eventually he went to trial.
Speaker 13:We saw famously in August of 2022. Exactly. Three years ago ago, a little bit more than three years ago, the raid on mar-a-lago.
Speaker 4:Uh, that still has.
Speaker 13:The whole world can't even keep his fence a little bit of a different situation as it was a former president, but it deals with classified documents imagine being able to build an app with your name on it.
Speaker 4:You do that we got our own ads. Now john attack is good morning, pony boy good morning. And weed and boys same person. Good morning sapphire patriot. Good morning. John attack has said rated at 7 am friday morning, yes, it was, and he frere asia says cnn is walking all over themselves this morning. I know, listen to this. This is hilarious.
Speaker 6:This is now msnbc's official line with fbi weaponization my suspicion is this looks performative and that is highly concerning.
Speaker 4:The fbi should not be used I know, I know, when they performatively threw me in solitary confinement I was like, all right, great, where's the? Is it, is it?
Speaker 7:that was right after the judge sent me my response to my letter of support, You're like oh, this is performative. Yeah, where he was like well, we do need to make an example out of him, Like, oh, is that what we're doing?
Speaker 4:Yeah. So you know, yeah, this is probably just performative.
Speaker 6:As a tool to go after political enemies. I just want to repeat that.
Speaker 4:What's your position? Political enemies? Wait, hold on Again. Be used as a tool. I got to get the full sentence.
Speaker 6:The FBI should not be used as a tool to go after political enemies, and if that's I'm glad we can agree.
Speaker 4:You're a little late to the party, though, so pendulum is going to swing back and pop you in the forehead at least once we're moving.
Speaker 6:It should alarm all Americans because the FBI has incredible capabilities and powers and you would not want to see the FBI transformed into a special police. You know the type of thing we've seen in the past in Soviet bloc countries or know dictatorships across the middle east and other places. We don't want it to be a mohawk or something like that, so it's really concerning. Hopefully that's not the case.
Speaker 4:My suspicion is this looks, you know, like we basically have kind of like a mystery science theater, okay that little thing at the end.
Speaker 7:That's just like confirmed. This guy's a total douchebag.
Speaker 4:You know what I mean this is like mystery science theater where we sit. We just like take fun of these, like I wonder if this guy doing this hit who's totally serious. We don't want the fbi to become some kind of gestapo kgb like nusa fafa or whatever we don't want him to be and we're like kgb got its lessons from the fbi are you?
Speaker 4:kidding cia trained us on. Yeah, we don't want, we don't want our police to be part of, like some kind of political thing. Martin luther king jr. Hello, we have credible information that the cia killed a cynic president. We don't want, we don't want intelligence services weaponized. That's theized. That's the whole point. That's the whole point. Like, we want to set up a Steven Crowder like, prove me wrong, right Again, one of the things that I'm I constantly keep in mind as a theme is we don't want to become the things we hate. So here's I'm clapping, you know, bolton getting raided, like yeah, go get Bolton, finally, somebody part of. That's a little hurt feelings for me and my friends all kind of happen to deal with this for the last four years, right, but at the same time, we don't want to become the things we hate, right.
Speaker 7:It's also not even the same thing.
Speaker 4:They're not the same, just like these two people here don't think that they're the same thing. So, in fairness to the peasants, because we're going to see this today remember, when you empower the government with awesome, powerful tools, you can't always control how they use that power in the end. Okay, the greatest trick the democrats ever pulled was convincing black people to self segregate, and we've. We are now seeing in our society the full circle of racist to woke and woke to racist.
Speaker 15:When me and Brad first met I didn't think we'd get along. But it turns out we kind of agree on everything, your racial identity is the most important thing Everything should be looked at through the lens of race.
Speaker 4:Thanks, you owe me a Coke. Okay, so for the audio listeners here, what you're looking at is you've got one gentleman with a shirt that says woke and another gentleman with a shirt that says racist gentleman with a shirt that says woke and another gentleman with a shirt that says racist, and they just happen to agree on everything.
Speaker 15:I have a lot of opinions about people of color, even though we barely know any. I say colored people, but as long as we're classifying them, we both think minorities are a united group. We think the same and act the same, and both the same. You don't want to lose your black card sorry, I don't know.
Speaker 16:I just think we should roll back discrimination law. So we can hire based on race again now.
Speaker 15:Now you owe me a Coke. Hey, tell them what you told me yesterday White actors should only do voices for white cartoon characters.
Speaker 15:I've been saying that for years. Stick to your own Us white people. We have so much privilege. I agree it is a privilege to be white. Ask him about interracial dating. All I said is that black men who date white women have internalized racism and white men that date ethnic women Staticizing them. Guys against interracial dating. Now, Like, am I being pranked? Did Boomer put you up to this? Ugh, you know that taco place is white-owned. White people should be making white foods like crab, macaroni and cheese. No seasoning, not even salt. It's like he's a mind reader. I mean, I've been pushing for segregation forever and my man does what. I created an improv comedy show exclusively for ethnic people.
Speaker 15:Guy segreg, white people need to stop wearing dreadlocks and stop appropriating black people's music Shaved heads and country music the way God intended. You know all white people are racist. I'm listening. Even if you have a black wife or a black friend group, you're still really racist. You know we just kicked a guy out of the organization for having a black girlfriend, but if you can promise me he's still really racist, we'll consider letting him back in.
Speaker 15:Black people should only shop at black businesses. I guess the only thing we really disagree about is I think white people are the root of all evil. But what did I tell you, though? If we can narrow that down to a certain group of tiny-headed white people, I think we can come to an understanding. Technically, I don't consider jewish people white, neither do I okay, so that's that was pretty.
Speaker 4:I remember when there was a university that had like a petition from black students that wanted their own spaces and I'm like, hold on, I feel like they just like slowly convince you to self segregate. You know what I mean? All this fighting over desegregation and all of a sudden you're like we want our own space. It's like you had that. You had your own drinking fountains, for sake. I'm just kidding. Everybody knows I'm not racist, okay, but the hypocrisy in it all is hilarious and we are seeing some of that now and we are seeing there's going to be the accusations on oh now you're weaponizing government, your weapon, look. This is why we have to look at each individual situation and look at the evidence and decide for ourselves. Right, fair enough, yeah, so we're going to go through some pretty fun stuff today.
Speaker 7:Now you're going to be like here's one of the worst examples possible.
Speaker 4:Well, it's kind of one of those things where it's just the measuring stick by which you measure is the one by which you'll be judged, ok, so a lot of these people, where we're going to be clapping as peasants, where we're going to clap the loudest for justice is when a hypocrite gets brought to justice.
Speaker 15:For example.
Speaker 4:John Bolton's getting his house raided right now, right, and he's this is the woke racist thing, right? He's like oh, that guy's racist. Yeah, well, you're doing the thing that you're claiming the racist is doing. Mr Woke man, you know what I'm saying. Yeah, so John Bolton here, who's like, oh Trump, he's taking classified documents. That's interesting. Seems to be maybe the reason your house is being raided this morning.
Speaker 3:But I don't think he cared about the classification system. I don't think he appreciated the sensitivity of this information and he didn't appreciate the sensitivity of how it was often acquired the so-called sources and methods. So this had been briefed to him before I arrived. It was repeated frequently. I think it simply had no impact on him whatever.
Speaker 8:There's a couple of different ways that people think about this, and people who are not friendly to the president who think about what's happened here, and one of them is, you know, donald Trump, master thief, you know, criminal, running some kind of elaborate conspiracy to bring things out of the White House and keep them secret for, potentially for political or financial gain. There are other people who had. Its attitude is Trump is chaotic, he's careless, he's not that smart, he just he wants. He took these things almost by mistake and now he's basically stamping his feet and saying they're mine. I don't want to give them up. Give me a sense of where you think the truth lies with respect to Trump's intelligence, carelessness and the degree to which he might've brought motive to bear on taking these documents out of the White House and keeping them for this long at Mar-a-Lago.
Speaker 3:Well, I don't I. It's very hard to speculate on motive other than that he liked cool things. He saw things that he so he wanted to take them, and he was pretty much able to take them, and not just on classified information matters, on all kinds of things that crossed his desk. Some days he liked to eat a lot of French fries. Some days he took classified documents. He wanted them. Why did he want them? Because he could get them.
Speaker 4:I love how he acts like Bolton's, like these classified documents are just shiny things and he just likes to collect shiny things. Why do I have a feeling that's John Bolton's problem? It's like, hey, here's a classified document of you know, uh, something that happened overseas, and I got a rack, a rack above my rack, the yellow cake.
Speaker 4:I got the yellow cake. I'm gonna keep that for for luck. You know, like I have a feeling that was a moment of projection where he's like I just like these fancy cardstock documents with classified stamped all over, makes me feel important.
Speaker 4:He's probably got him in his house he's probably got paperweights and the hilarious thing about the whole donald trump mar-a-lago rage, which we learned yesterday definitively out of cash patel's mouth, is there was no predicate for that raid. Now, oddly enough, the fbi is having a real problem with staff because the guy who actually led the mar-a-lago raid was flying Kash Patel around in the FBI jet. So you know he's.
Speaker 7:Don't forget that part.
Speaker 4:Yeah, so you know he's there for all the private conversations. He's got to take his little pilot break and go sits in the back with Kash Patel. Here's about what they're doing. Kash Patel apparently was completely oblivious to the fact that his pilot and his FBI jet just did a little stint as a field agent raiding Donald Trump's house. Now they did fire him when this came to light, but you know, only after six months of being in on all the secrets. Yeah, Like the FBI is an intelligence organization. The FBI is clearly weaponized and the FBI, it doesn't work for the left, it doesn't work for the right, it works for the FBI, it doesn't work for the left.
Speaker 7:It doesn't work for the right, it works for the FBI. It makes me wonder how many other people surrounding you know the president's men are FBI. You know, like the waiter.
Speaker 4:So here's the thing with this. Laura Loomer is out there on a mission trying to find all these old Biden admin and Obama admin and find him in the staff.
Speaker 4:They're everywhere, she's the one and Kyle Serafin shout out to him too I think it was a combination of him and there's a handful of these outside actors that are looking at personnel decisions in the White House and kind of raising the flag, and it has led to a lot of firings, people randomly getting let go. But there's also been a couple of moments of entrenchment. For example, there was a guy I can't remember, it was Jenkins Jennings. There was an FBI agent that was totally involved in all the J6 things. A lot of J6ers who dealt with him directly felt like he was, you know, animanistic and very, you know, mean about it.
Speaker 4:Well, somehow he kept his job and Dan Bongino and Cash both gave the excuse. Well, you know, he knows where the bodies are buried and he was just doing his job and he pushed back up into a limit. Well, now he's fired because turns out, you know, we probably didn't show him where the bodies were buried and he probably wasn't really just, you know, doing his job for the j6 thing, he was really into it. So they did end up ultimately firing him, but this isn't until they made him like third in charge of the fbi, while they're trying to clean up the fbi, by the way which you know. If we know anything about how that goes down, it doesn't really.
Speaker 18:Let's get a little grace.
Speaker 5:So yeah, give a little grace yeah.
Speaker 4:You can have 14 months of grace in federal prison while we figure things out how about that.
Speaker 7:I'm OK with that.
Speaker 4:All right. So this is John Solomon, breaking again the cascade of things that are being declassified, little tidbits of information we're getting here and there.
Speaker 17:it's filling in the picture all right, three fbi offices look at the foundation for corruption, they get shut down. In fact, the actual line in the fbi notes about this is the deputy attorney general told us to quote shut it down. Then, uh, three years later, uh, the irs criminal agents start to develop a tax criminal case against the foundation and the same thing happens Shut it down. And then the excuses are we don't have any resources at the IRS to look at whether a foundation was violating its tax obligations.
Speaker 4:Did you hear that the IRS's reason for shutting down the investigation in the Clinton Foundation was we don't have the resources to investigate? It Shut up. Yeah, they wrote that down down. Oh, they're too big. They're too big to be investigated. If we pull the plug on that one, the whole bathtub might drain what if we hired, say, 80,000? You think we could take on?
Speaker 4:the clinton foundation maybe, I know, and it's just one foundation, you know they went after like 1,600 January 6th defendants, you know, and you figure every raid takes times, 10, times 20 agents involved in those cases.
Speaker 7:Oh, sorry, we're busy. That's one of the stupidest things I've ever heard, ever heard, I know Again.
Speaker 4:we're just going to measure by the standard by which they measure. Okay is that possible?
Speaker 17:that the irs didn't have resources?
Speaker 14:man, I wish it was because we got audited after sheldon, whitehouse from rhode island sent a letter to the, the irs, to say audit conservative group. So I don't know.
Speaker 17:I can personally tell you they've got resources to to audit non-profits because we were on the fuzzy end of that lollipop a couple years ago so look, this is just nonsense.
Speaker 16:The internal revenue service and the deep state that runs the place is just rotten to the core. It's staffed by left-wing ideologues, whether it's in the in the c-suite within the agency or within the bowels of the agency the folks that do the work day in, day out. It is just a rotten agency staffed by rotten people, and until someone kind of grabs these folks by the lapel, shakes them and runs them out the door, we're not going to get any change there. It's, unfortunately, an agency that thrives off of the process of punishing activists, people who are engaged in political speech, and using the tools that they have at the IRS of audits and lawsuits to kind of beat these folks into submission, and it's shameful. It's been going on for decades and it doesn't seem to be changing.
Speaker 4:Yeah, I know. One of the things that you know we talked about on the show a couple of days ago is it was officially revealed by Ed Martin. Yeah, so the IRS in fact was auditing gentler censors at a disproportionate rate. I know I've been including that in my elevator speech for four years now. Yeah, thank you for the cognition. Sometimes I felt like a few of us were the crazy ones, like did you get IRS issues? Yeah, I did. Did you get IRS? I did. Did you get your letter from the IRS Seems thematic, your weekly letter. Did you get your bank account?
Speaker 5:closed down.
Speaker 4:Yeah, I did Okay. So Laura Loomer, speaking of the IRS, Hold on. Hold on.
Speaker 7:What's the fuzzy end of a lollipop?
Speaker 4:I don't know. I've never heard that before. I heard that just like okay fuzzy end of that lollipop.
Speaker 4:Laura Loomer has a scoop here. She says the three IRS officials identified as Lois Lerner's henchmen who participated in the weaponization of the IRS but are still somehow working inside the Trump administration. You guys, this is going back to the Obama administration. We've gone we was the second time Trump's been in charge and hasn't cleaned out. The people that went after the Tea Party associations have all been placed on administrative leave. So finally they've been placed on administrative leave by Scott Besson.
Speaker 4:Irs sources tell me three officials placed on administrative leave came as a direct result of my investigative reporting. They also told me the Trump administration appreciates my efforts in helping to dismantle the weaponization of the federal government. The three officials placed on administrative leave are Holly Paz, robert Coy and Elizabeth Kastenberg. I can also confirm that the fourth IRS official, radical leftist, anthony Sacco, an attorney at the IRS's Office of Chief Counsel, has also been placed on administrative leave as of last night. Holly Paz is an Obama donor who helped run Lewis Lerner's targeting operation of conservative nonprofits and GOP donors and now oversees auditing pass-through businesses. Robert Coy, the Democrat helped, which, by the way. What's significant about that? Auditing pass-through businesses? The Bidens had 27 of them. Began about that. Auditing pastor businesses uh, the biden's had 27 of them. So how do you get past the people like this?
Speaker 7:who are like oh, this pass-through entity, grandma property.
Speaker 4:This one's getting audited, but hunter biden and his 24 shell agencies let it go. We don't have the resources to look at all that yeah rob uh.
Speaker 4:Robert coy helped down the original crackdown on conservative nonprofits and now runs the entire division where it all happened and live in. Elizabeth kassenberg, an acting director of the irs, who admitted tag targeting was purely political. I have a feeling these names right here are going to be like robert coy. Being in charge of that division probably had my file run through it. Sources at the ir IRS have also confirmed to me that at least three more high level IRS officials have also been placed on administrative leave. Those officials are Karen Howard, executive director of the office of online services at IRS, bridget Roberts, chief director direct file at IRS, and Elizabeth Askey, chief of IRS independent office of appeals.
Speaker 4:I can also exclusively report that Scott Besson, who is at the current acting commissioner of the current acting commissioner of the IRS, was at the IRS headquarters today when he had a meeting with IRS leadership. The meeting focused on implementation of OBBB and the de-weaponization of the IRS, which is being led by Joe Ziegler and Gary Shapley. Those are the two investigators that went after Hunter Biden and then were basically fired or, you know, tortured by the IRS For doing that. One is a gay man and the other is a Democrat. I think they're both Democrats and one happens to be gay. This is Besson's second visit to the IRS this week alone. Hopefully the administration Turns into full-blown terminations. We can't afford to play games. So interesting thing about this Is Laura Lu Loomer's not too happy with Scott Besson before this, but week before this she said despite what the fake news keeps peddling, I had nothing to do with Billy Long's firing from the IRS. That was the handiwork of Soros disciple Scott Besson, likely done to shield his old boss and the Democrat machine he's been serving his entire career. I have it on good authority that Billy Long was ready to implement massive personnel changes in the IRS in the coming weeks by removing Obama andiden operatives who weaponized the irs.
Speaker 4:On the lowest learnal, laurice learner, if secretary besant actually respected the will of the voters, he'd be. He'd be cleaning the house of the irs, not protecting the same obama biden loyalists who weaponize it against them. So, anyways, she's not too big fan of of scott besant, but scott besant did come in and ended up putting those people on administrative leave. And laura loomer's like why put them on administrative leave and why not just fire them outright? Fuzzy end of the lollipop, a saying that is right up there with when I was in prison when I got the fuzzy end of that lollipop. I think that's like. It just reminds me of like an old lollipop that's been in your pocket without the wrapper and it's like here okay, okay, I get that so that's good news, okay.
Speaker 4:So then we had other breaking news yesterday, which was a huge deal. Cnn was super excited to report on this one well, I'm not wolf.
Speaker 12:I have been skeptical of the attorney general's case for a long time. I'm on record saying that this is a huge win for donald trump, any way you cut it, and this is a stinging rebuke to the attorney general.
Speaker 4:Letitia James. So what happened yesterday was the New York appeals court overturned the five hundred million dollar judgment against Donald Trump based on overvaluing his mortgages, and you know where the banks came in, they're like no, we didn't lose a dollar, we did great business with them and we'd love to do more. And they're like you're a victim, so he just beat that case.
Speaker 12:Finding here is the financial fine part of it, a long, complicated ruling, but the bottom line is, while the finding of liability against Donald Trump can stand, for now at least, the damages award, which started at $350 million with interest, gets up close to $500 million.
Speaker 12:That is thrown out, and the core reason for that ruling, according to the judges, is essentially that there was not enough of a showing here that there were actual victims.
Speaker 12:And just to refresh people's memories, this is the civil fraud lawsuit brought by the attorney general. The core allegation is that Donald Trump habitually overvalued his own assets when he was trying to get bank loans from banks and other lenders, and essentially the argument that Donald Trump made below that has now had resonance in the appeals court is you're talking about very sophisticated quote unquote victims. These are billion dollar banks that made the loans, got repaid on the loans by Donald Trump with interest and actually profited to the tune of millions of dollars. So it's not the typical type of fraud case where you have somebody stealing money from other people or ripping off unknowing consumers. So this ruling by the appeals court is monumental. It was also very unusual in that it took them nearly a year to reach this decision. As Caitlin Polanski just said, the next step is going to be to go up to the highest court in the state, the court of appeals in new york state is wolf gonna say anything?
Speaker 4:shit so I got a little something to say about this because, you know, wolf, like a year or two ago was like breaking news trump is guilty. And now he's like go ahead.
Speaker 7:So this story kind of highlights something to me. You know you have a year long whatever, and then you have these, this case that gets overturned. Well, there was so much, so much noise and so many people making so much noise about this case that it had to go before the court, right. So much noise about this case that it had to go before the court, right? And then when it gets thrown out, it gets thrown up because they can't find anybody who's injured, no victim, no victim anywhere anywhere.
Speaker 4:This is why I believe my transcripts were altered. Did I hurt, harm, injure, threaten you? No, okay, well, can we strike the assault?
Speaker 7:It just points to me how much of this is just Kabuki theater. Yeah, it's just so much kabuki theater.
Speaker 4:My wife and I were having this discussion yesterday. She was in court and she was like it's like they're just reading a script. I'm like I know, and Atlas Shrugged and Ayn Rand, right, this is written in the 1940s and 50s and so there's no, there's no, no fault divorce. So divorce is a big deal and two of the characters get a divorce in this book and you know, the wealthy magnate, howard Hank Reardon ends up paying his lawyer to pay the judge and to pay off the other council to basically get this divorce granted, right. And so they show up into court and these lawyers got their suits and the judges take it very serious and they read the script and they say their magic words and their incantations and their spells and they all look at each other like we good did, we get all the things needed on the record, and then the judge grants the divorce and they all walk out and they look like we just did something official and legal.
Speaker 4:He's like I paid you, I bribed you, you guys act like. And then they want me like I'm complicit because you know, oh, we did it legally Right, nobody did this, I'm lawful. And he's like no, I bribed you. He's like you guys want me to like, like, vindicate this behavior, and I'm like I only did this because you're disgusting. You know what I mean. Like, so that's kind of how it feels. It's like, yeah, they went through the motions and they got their conviction with no evidence. Well then, what were we doing? Why did we even need the trial? Why don't you just declare him guilty on day one? It's the same thing with the Mackey case for posting a meme no victims, no victims.
Speaker 7:You know, and sometimes this Kabuki theater it's, it's played by both parties.
Speaker 4:Oh yeah.
Speaker 7:So why I put the woke race and I didn't just mean, uh, both r and d parties, I mean just both parties to the suit or the whatever's going on in the, in the uh, in the courtroom. And you know, sometimes trump will lean into these things, you know to, in order to have, um, his side of the story come out better, you know.
Speaker 4:Yeah no, he plays the game. Oh yeah, my my, that's what I'm trying to say. My tack was I wasn't playing the game, I wasn't given an inch. I'm just. I'm not even going to participate by filing motions. I'm not even going to participate by defending myself.
Speaker 7:Right. So when I, when I call this Kabuki theater, I'm not trying to exonerate any, any party of it, like everybody's guilty in this thing oh yeah, everybody who touched it.
Speaker 4:So mike davis has this little warning for leticia james, because this is from before, okay, but you know she was threatening that oh, trump's coming in, but we're still gonna prosecute and persecute him, of course.
Speaker 20:Now she's in the hot seat let me just say this to big tish james, the new york attorney general I, you, I dare you to try to continue your lawfare against President Trump in his second term, because listen here, sweetheart, we're not messing around this time and we will put your fat ass in prison for conspiracy against rights, and I promise you that. So think long and hard before you want to violate President Trump's. So think long and hard before you want to violate President Trump's constitutional rights, or any other Americans constitutional rights. We, it's not going to happen again.
Speaker 15:We've been warning people on the show Mike, this isn't the same Trump administration. Stop messing around. Don't rig elections, don't illegally vote, don't try the funny business, because we know the team this time and they are not effing around.
Speaker 4:Let me just say this I hope they're not. I mean, we're seven months in and we're just getting around to John Bolton as the starter. I mean really.
Speaker 7:And some other staff.
Speaker 4:I was kind of hoping. Maybe you'd like go for low hanging fruit like Hillary Clinton first, you know like I thought maybe opening raid Hillary Clinton.
Speaker 4:Yes, we're off to the races. Instead it was john bolton. It's like you took out the rhino republican kind of guy like I mean. I know he's not like colonel sanders. Yeah, he's kind of persona non grata in the republican and democrat party, but seriously, like we went for john bolton first.
Speaker 4:Meanwhile, the lawfare in what really truly is a coordinated effort is still continue against Trump and his admin and the people to help facilitate his return to government, including Alina Abba, who is Trump's attorney up in New Jersey. So the drama with that was she gets appointed as the attorney. 120 days runs up and for some reason, the mechanism means now the court can either confirm her to continue going on or replace her. They chose to not confirm her and replace her with the first assistant, who's some Democrat. So then Babadi came in and fired the Democrat and then reinstated Alina Abba, as now in a recess appointment or interim appointment. Well, now a court in New Jersey some appeals court, which has 17 judges on on it, 15 of whom were appointed by obama and biden then has just confirmed that she has no authority. She's not the us attorney and anybody prosecuting under her has potentially no authority, which would then potentially overturn all the cases in new jersey now hold on.
Speaker 7:I'm a little bit confused. So the first, the first bit that she was in, it was like a temporary status, right, right.
Speaker 4:Yes, acting.
Speaker 7:Okay, and then if they have 120 days that she can be in that status, and then they either have to confirm or kick her out.
Speaker 4:Yeah, or extend it through some type of recess appointment. But the court apparently has some say in it and they booed her and the Democrats tried to pull like a quote-unquote fast one, yes and slip in a Democrat. Well, pamp Bondi just fired the Democrat and then put, and put Alina Abbott as the first seat and then, when they fired the Democrat, alina Abbott went right back to the top.
Speaker 7:So she's like ha ha, so I think she's there legitimately then, isn't she?
Speaker 4:Well, she was, but now this court yesterday came out and ruled that she's not there legitimately and it violates some you know hook stipulation and some statue somewhere and so now she's kind of out.
Speaker 4:Well, elena abba was on tv last night because the whole problem centers around this blue slip thing. New jersey has got corey booker and I can't remember the other one, the other senator and typically you know, when you do the us attorneys and judges, they have to be you know, even if it's from the other party like if you're a Republican and president you're appointing Republicans, you get the New Jersey senators who are Democrats to give what's called the blue slip, which is like, okay, there's a Republican, but they're moderate enough, we'll let it through. So it's like you always have the home senators get the veto vote, a single veto vote. It's a tradition, it's a Senate thing. It's a tradition, it's a Senate thing, it's not a law.
Speaker 4:And Trump is like get rid of that nonsense. That's how we end up never being able to change. These blue states is because the senators have this like pocket veto and that's what they're doing with Alina Abba. Corey Booker and the other New Jersey senator will not meet with her, honoring the totally treasonous, traitorous this is my spartacus moment cory booker and not allowing alina abba to go to the floor for a confirmation vote.
Speaker 11:Sean, it's been real in new jersey. Uh, I will tell you this. Number one I was the nominee to become the us attorney, and cory booker and andy kim, who I have never to this day spoken to in my life, despite my attempts to meet them, have truly, truly done us a disservice and, frankly, same with Senator Grassley by holding up a traditional blue slip, not a law, and not allowing a lot of the president's picks to go through and be voted on by Senate. I didn't even get to that point. Then, fast forward. It goes to the judges 17 federal judges in the state of New Jersey, 15 of which are Obama and Biden appointed, that, just like, frankly, we saw with Tish James, tried to use their seat for political motivation.
Speaker 11:I am the pick of the president, I am the pick of Pam Bondi, our attorney general, and I will serve this country like I have for the last several years in any capacity. This country like I have for the last several years in any capacity. You might try and change my title, you might try and fight me, but, just like today with New York, we will win. We always do. It just takes time. But it's disturbing what we're seeing. It's not surprising, but it's disturbing. They think they have a voice for five minutes. They try and be activists and Pam Bondi called it like it is. The attorney general said it today today we will not fall to rogue judges. We will not fall to people trying to be political when they should just be doing their job respecting the president. And you can't get rid of the president. Almost 100 million people voted for him and he is still and will be forever the 45th and 47th president of the united states wait what?
Speaker 4:what did she just say? Did you catch the last sentence?
Speaker 7:No, how many people voted for Donald Trump? I don't know. Replay it.
Speaker 4:All right, we're going to grok on this one. Grok. How many um jeez when I capitalize it. People in the us voted for donald. Was that a shooting star? Oh yeah donald trump in the 2024 election. I don't think it was 100 million no but I'm wondering if maybe they know the vote totals now. Like wouldn't that be crazy that would be crazy, like yeah, we thought we were squabbling 77 million.
Speaker 4:So you know she's only 23 million shy. I feel like we don't call three, four, we don't say when you have three quarters, we don't say you have a hole, you know like right it's 77 million. It's not a hundred million, or did she say over a hundred million people voted?
Speaker 7:I don't know let's just.
Speaker 4:Let's just put that on the. We're gonna wait to see as the election stuff comes out. If we start to find out, these algorithms might have switched more votes than we think yeah the man on the street interviews jimmy phala.
Speaker 4:One of the things that gave me a lot of confidence when I was in prison, the show that I enjoyed listening to the most, that gave me the most sense of relief and sense that some form of sanity might return to us. Believe it or not, it was Jimmy Fela's show, fox Across America. It would come on at nine o'clock at night. So nine o'clock at night, so nine o'clock at night was basically when was it nine or eight, didn't matter, it was basically we had count. Was this jimmy fallon? Jimmy fela I don't know who that is.
Speaker 4:I know nobody does. He's the funniest man on tv. I'm telling you he's hilarious. So, jimmy fela, he does like one saturday show for fox and then he does a radio show, but he's a comedian. He's a standup comedian and he's a taxi driver from New York. So he's hilarious. He is a peasant, so he's got a lot of material. He's got a lot of material. He's a peasant though, like his whole thing is. He's like I'm giving you the inside scoop Like they took me out of a taxi cab and gave me a radio show Now and gave me a radio show, and now I get to go to the bar where CNN and MSNBC. They're totally fake and disingenuous you know, and he's just got a really funny show Cause it's a comedy show.
Speaker 4:So I'd listened to Jimmy Phelan. He's the one who's like listen, the media is trying to tell you this, but that's not the truth. And he'd go out and do his cab driving Okay, times Square or whatever. And he interviewed 87 people. And he's like I interviewed 87 people and there were two Biden supporters. He's like where in New York, where are the Biden supporters? Like they don't walk on the streets, they only stay in the high rise. You know, he's like there's something going on.
Speaker 4:So when I would listen to his show, it always gave me a big respite because I felt like he was cutting through the noise. When I listen to Sean Hannity, I'm like OK, what is his deep state handler telling him to say Right and trying to pick through it with Jimmy Fela? I was like the handlers hadn't quite gotten to him yet. You know, if you watch Black Mirror, there's an episode where some guy gets all upset at the system and he ends up like lashing out and what the system? And he ends up like lashing out and what the system does is it takes it and they gives them an hour long show where he can lash out and that gets other people riled up, but then when the show ends, they just keep doing their little. You know nine to five thing, oh, that sounds like real life. It's like Alex Jones, it's a pressure outlet, like if a trucker can just listen to a couple hours of Alex Jones every day, he can get through the day, right. But if you don't have an Alex Jones outlet, then eventually the trucker himself is going to start, right, right. So that's the thing with Jimmy Fallon. I was like, well, maybe he's just the outlet, right, the rage sink.
Speaker 4:Yes, so John Solomon was on, but I loved listening to a show. It came on at night night. We would do count. And that's when, you know, I'd already called my wife and it was time to wrap it up and go to bed. And, you know, avoid the nighttime shenanigans that happen in a prison. So get to your nice safe place and I'd put my headphone in and I'd, you know, go to sleep and I'd listen to jimmy faila and it was. It was very relaxing. So I have a special spot in my heart for him because I'd look forward to his show every day. I hated the weekends when his show wasn't on. You know what?
Speaker 4:I had to listen to on the weekends in the same time slot law enforcement radio. Do you know how depressing it is to be in prison and listen to a bunch of cops complain about putting people in prison their whole lives? It was so messed up. We have ptsd, so do why that was frustrating.
Speaker 7:It helps you identify with the guards like oh they have it so rough I've always thought they should.
Speaker 4:They have to watch us. They should really have like a prison broadcast radio. Like I, I really think they should run uh prisons more like a university campus, right, and you should have like the paper editor and all this stuff. Like I think there's a lot I don't know how, what he's doing down there. I think he's just holding them okay, but like I could see the prison where I was at, where if you had like a couple guys that were good writers, that would have like a newspaper editorial staff, yeah, that'd be cool, that would be like real world thing.
Speaker 7:They had had like workshops where you could go work and learn life skills. I'm 100% sure that place is a sweatshop.
Speaker 4:Oh, dude, in prison it's called Unicor. So Unicor is the private company that comes in and the prisoners make all the military uniforms. Prisoners make all the. All the cots that are in prison are made by prisoners and they do. There's tons of stuff that they do. They do food packaging and like it's something like some unbelievably ridiculous amount of food in the grocery store is packaged by federal prisoners. Wow, yeah, people don't know this. So companies like ramen will pay the prisoners to package ramen noodles okay they don't make the ramen noodles, they just package them or whatever.
Speaker 4:I don't know if ramen is one of those brands, but there's stuff like that. I know that there was a Chinese. There's a Chinese inmate who sued the United States of America because he was forced to make Milwaukee gloves work gloves like Milwaukee, the brand that competes with DeWalt.
Speaker 7:Yeah.
Speaker 4:When he was in prison in China, they were making Milwaukee gloves, which is funny because American inmates were making some other glove brand that was being shipped to china. So we were trading each other prisoner inmates with a name brand. Okay, so he was suing america and milwaukee for essentially engaging in slave labor in china to make the gloves that we're buying here. And it was like I got news for you, buddy, we're doing the same thing. You know, our shinto gloves are getting shipped to you Same patterns. I'm being dead serious about this. But you go into Unicorn, it's these huge warehouses.
Speaker 7:Well, when you call it slave labor, I'm not sure what you can call it anything else.
Speaker 4:It's 13th Amendment. It literally says slavery is outlawed unless you're convicted of a crime. I would tell the guard when I show up at the woodshop slavery is outlawed unless you're convicted of a crime. What? Here we are. I would tell the guard when I show up at the woodshop. I'm here to start my 13th Amendment assignment.
Speaker 7:It's so funny.
Speaker 4:It's not I know, but the way that you approach it is so funny oh yeah, dude, if you don't look at it with humor, you can only look at it with tears. You know, I mean. Tragedy and comedy are like kissing cousins, you know, take your pick which one you're gonna look at but if I was the guard and you came in and said that I couldn't help but smile?
Speaker 4:oh dude, this guard was fun. In fact I don't know if he's allowed to have contact with me because I don't know, but someday I'm gonna try to reach out to him. But he was a huge supporter, okay, huge MAGA guy, and the election happened. So you know they call the election at night, so he's always asking you know, do you think you guys will get pardons? So at this point I was now orderly over all the facilities. So I'm like the inmate that's in charge of all of the facilities carpentry, hvac, welding, plumbing uh, I don't know, there's probably some other, you know, general maintenance, like.
Speaker 7:So this is so funny, taylor you're like in charge of the freaking I was I was the inmate that was in charge of all the facilities. You sound like a character from some hollywood movie.
Speaker 4:No, I'm just taylor, I know I just he dropped me into prison.
Speaker 4:I'm gonna run the place I was like I was one step away from basically replacing the Aryan brotherhood in there, just kidding so. But I was in charge of facilities, I was the orderly, and so I I could walk into the director's office Like I'm the one who had to go change his garbage, I'm the one who had to make his copies, I'm the one who had to do data entry for him, and so I was constantly. Actually they didn't really let me touch the computers very much, but I was the one who was constantly like in their business, like does that?
Speaker 4:make sense, like I made coffee for the director, the, the guy who's like in charge of the entire building and answers only to the warden.
Speaker 4:I was his b word yeah so, but that did, yeah, so anyway. So I was running facilities. So the election happens and I come into the wood shop, which is part of facilities and it's where I had started working. And I come into the wood shops and the guard that I really liked is in his office with three or four other guards and, like all these other people, and I'm walking pretty hot because I'm like I'm just one so I walked down into into the wood shop and he's sitting there. He's got this red hair, he's sitting there with these other guards and I just like poke my like I I walk into his door frame and I poke my head in, like this with a huge smile and he just looks up at me and just starts giggling and laughing in front of all these other guards.
Speaker 4:And then I just retreat and walk back and go do my job totally unspoken, like I'm going home, buddy, okay. So anyways, this is john solomon talking about a smoking gun that they had released yesterday.
Speaker 12:Is this the smoking gun?
Speaker 17:Well it is. It's something pretty hot. I'll say that, Listen, you have now the former general counsel, the former chief lawyer, to James Comey saying I leaked classified information. He tells a federal agents and prosecutors. He tells federal agents and prosecutors and I did so at the instruction of James Comey's chief of staff who told me James Comey authorized me to go do this no-transcript, which makes this october 2016 leak that the fbi was able to, that the investigators and prosecutors able to confirm still prosecutable until next October of 2026.
Speaker 17:Pam Bondi said I just heard what she said. She said, in the short say no one should be allowed to jeopardize national security. There will be accountability. Kash Patel saying that this was a stain on the FBI and one that now has to be fully transposed. When you look at the investigation, Sean which, by the way, occurred a lot of it occurred during Trump's first term in office really weak work by prosecutors and people working on this. They had a chance to go get emails that would show what Comey and his people were talking about. They didn't go, secure them. They didn't bring a lot of people before the grand jury. There is room for Pam Bondi and Kash Patel right now to open a criminal investigation, get new evidence and help the American people see just how bad this might have been.
Speaker 11:Is this part two, because there was the issue of the Columbia professor. Was that classified material as well?
Speaker 17:Sure, yeah, listen, I want to credit Attorney General Bondi and Director Kash Patel, because I made a request to have this information unredacted. It was redacted in the first production. We saw the stuff about Mr Richmond. We saw the stuff about Adam Schiff. We know that's the other person who was identified as likely authorizing illegal national security leaks, but this was originally redacted and the attorney general went to the mat for us to go get this information so we can see it. And when you see it now, you see its significance.
Speaker 17:Remember james comey was questioned astutely by senator chuck grassy and the judiciary committee, may 3rd 2017. Did you ever, were you ever, anonymous source? No, did you ever ask someone to be anonymous source? No. Did you ever, uh, authorize a leak, a classified information or declassify something so it could go to a reporter? Never know. Those words are now going to potentially be looked at as a potential obstruction of Congress and this statute of limitations and the possibility of a conspiracy case. James Comey faces a potentially very serious matter right now, faces a potentially very serious matter right now Congress.
Speaker 4:The obstruction of Congress charge that he would be charged with in this case is USC 181512. The charge I was charged with obstructing an investigation of Congress by destroying a document, tapering with a witness or withholding information. Hello, these people are going to be measured with the stick by which they measured. They threw that charge around while they themselves were guilty of it over and over again. Man, now he mentioned James Baker. James Baker was the conduit for the leaking and James Baker was like well, I did the illegal leaking because I was told to by James Comey. So who's James Baker? He's a key figure in all of this.
Speaker 4:James Baker is often referred to as Jim Baker has an extensive career, primarily in law enforcement, national security, intelligence policy and related fields, spanning government, private sector, academia and media roles. Below is a comprehensive chronological list of all of his professional provisions. He started out as a federal prosecutor, fraud section, criminal division, us Department of Justice, 1990 to 96. Attorney staff member Office of Intelligence Policy and Review 96 to 2001. Counsel for Intelligence Policy and the head of Office of Intelligence Policy and Review 2001 to 2007. Then he became a fellow at the Institute of Politics John Kennedy School of Government at Harvard. Then he became a lecturer at the Institute of Politics, john Kennedy School of Government at Harvard. Then he became a lecturer at Harvard same time in 2007. Then he became assistant general counsel for national security at Verizon Business 2008 to 2009. Then he became the associate deputy attorney general focusing on national cybersecurity in the US from 2009 to 2011. Then the associate general counsel at bridgewater associates 2012 to 2013. Then he became the associate counsel at the fbi from 2014 to 2018. Then, when he was fired from the fbi, he became a visiting fellow at governance studies at the brookings institute. Now some of these names harvard, brookings, um, some of these other agencies these are all agencies that deal with censorship, that deal with gathering up your information, and you know this is this guy is a free speech, something anti or pro, hard to know. So he became general counsel of the federal bureau of investigations 2014 to 2018.
Speaker 4:Uh, fellow at brookings, distinguished visiting fellow at the Lawfare Institute, projection much Lecturer of law at Harvard again. Then national director of national security and cybersecurity at the R Street Institute. Then a legal analyst at CNN. Then deputy general counsel for vice president of policy at Twitter, but he was fired from that position amid controversies related to content moderation and internal document releases. So basically, what you're saying here is from the time he left being a criminal prosecutor for the fraud section of criminal division. He then immediately went into intelligence and it took 20 years for it to catch up to him. You think when he was at Twitter that's the first time he didn't release information. You think when he was at Twitter that was the first time that he asked for certain voices to be silenced on social media. You think that was the first time he did that? I have a feeling he was hired at Twitter because he was well-equipped for that job. You know what I mean. But don't worry, he's no longer working for major corporations now, he's just a contributing editor at lawfare.
Speaker 7:Okay, when you say jim baker, I can't help but think about jim and tammy faye it's james baker.
Speaker 4:Jim baker, I'll never forget it was Matt Taibbi, and I can't remember who the female. I might have been Molly Hemingway, I could be wrong on that, but it was the two of them that were getting documents and neither one of them are huge Trump fans. Like, in fact, they're really not considered Republicans at all. These, you know Matt Taibbi is kind of more in the Edward Snowden camp side of political politics, but they were getting these documents and they're like, well, it's mentioning other documents, but we're not seeing the other documents and there's like some black holes, like just missing whole tranches of what they thought they needed to put the dots together. So they're like everything still feels really circumstantial. Like you know, the tree fell in the woods, but did anybody cut it down or did it just naturally fall? You know what I mean. Like we know the tree fell. Like we know millions of people got taken off of twitter that all seem to have some type of conservative leaning, but who initiated that? You know? Like it just happened what, what?
Speaker 4:well, jim baker was sitting on those docks and so she's looking at it and she's like james baker. James baker, is that jim looks it up? Oh my gosh, the leaker for comey is working at twitter, and that's when they let elon know. Hey, the guy that's sending us all this information that you say is going to be so revelatory is literally the guy that did the things with facebook that now he's covering up. He's the one who told twitter to censor and cover up when he was general counsel at the fbi. And now he's general counsel here and he's like oh, you can't know who at the FBI told Twitter to do the censoring.
Speaker 4:Do you see what I'm saying? I don't want to. I exercise my right to not self-incriminate. So totally wild Again. This cabal of people. And you look at that resume. He's just hopping from one intelligence spot to another. He's an apparatchik, he's a useful piece in their game that they're playing, and he's been doing it for years and years, and years it's a good soldier I refuse to look at a situation like that, looking at his resume, and say, oh, he was probably like a completely clean whistle till 2016.
Speaker 4:You know what I mean? Like no way. I don't believe it for one second. Here's pam bondy talking about cleaning up the streets of dc, because this is, you know, like in a week they haven't had a murder. It's pretty incredible. I'm telling you, when I was in dc, every single morning we would wake up in jail. That tv would be on onto their local news channel and it was drive-bys, it was carjackings, it was murders. It was some club had some incident. Now, it was nonstop. It was nonstop.
Speaker 7:Nonstop gunfire.
Speaker 4:Nonstop.
Speaker 14:And last night we seized 10 guns. There were 77 arrests. But you're right, homicide's not been a homicide in a week because of the presence of law enforcement. President Trump being out there today was an incredible inspiration to all of those men and women state, local and federal working hand in hand. It was remarkable. They were so happy to see the president. They are working so hard. I know so many of them now on a first name basis because I've been out there almost every night with them. The president was giving them burgers and pizzas and they loved it, thanking them because no one in this country will love our law enforcement more than Donald Trump. They see that they respect it, they appreciate it.
Speaker 4:And nothing says love like burgers and pizza. Well, yeah.
Speaker 7:I mean hot dog and pizza party is pretty popular.
Speaker 4:No, I could be wrong when I said this, but the way I understood he said he's, you know, he's feeding all the cops and taking pictures. And I I had to. I had the white house make the burgers, the burgers, they're great. But then I said we got to have some pizza, but not pizza from the white house. We have to have the best pizza. So we ordered it from genos or whatever, and some pizza there anyways. So he, he fed the uh, the first responders being mostly cops, marshals dei, fbi, atf, all the personnel national guard.
Speaker 4:You know all the guys that are in there preventing crime in dc right now, which is, oh listen, man, it's pretty impressive. When I was in prison, when I got to dc, the topic always came up because of course we're speculating, are we ever going to get out of this place? And and it was like, well, trump's going to get elected, and what if he doesn't get elected? And can he get elected? And we all were very schooled on voter fraud and how that worked and some people were blackmailed. They're like they're never going to let him win again. They've already got the fight. People got to fight. We got to continue to raise awareness. So there was kind of this constant tug and pull on what is the right path for January Sixers and I was often in there. I'm like, listen, as far as I'm concerned, the elections are totally rigged.
Speaker 4:There's one solution to this Donald Trump has to have a Julius Caesar moment. He's got to cross the Rubicon. He's got to assume and take that authority, just like Biden basically did. And then he's got a clean house. He's got an absolutely clean house, but he's got to pay off the plebs. He's got to pay off the peasants.
Speaker 4:How do you do that you come into a city like DC and you make the streets clean. That's going to make the black people in that community like him. That's going to take away the instant ability to bring people to protest. Every little thing Right. You're going to have people that are simpatico with Donald Trump because he got rid of the crime on the streets, like he's doing the things that a dictator would need to do to get the buy-in of the people, while at the same time trying to show the people that he's all about justice and he's not just going to be more cronyism from before, but he's going to use all the same tools that they used to previously persecute. So I was like a big advocate that Donald Trump has to have this Julius Caesar moment. That is what I'm seeing.
Speaker 7:Yeah, he got rid of the paid protests and he's making sure that they don't create a vacuum for real protests. Yes, exactly.
Speaker 4:He's upping services, he's dropping crime, he's taken riffraff off the streets and he's doing it in this grandiose way that nobody can stop. In fact it's so grandiose that they're having to bring in extra prosecutors to go after the misdemeanor charges.
Speaker 13:And we also found out, jillian, just recently that US Attorney Jeanine Pirro has authorized 20 JAG officers, military prosecutors, to prosecute misdemeanors here on the streets of DC as part of this surge. So you're seeing a lot of cooperation between the Pentagon with the National Guard, the FBI, which is under the Department of Justice, but that's notable, 20 JAG officials, which are military lawyers prosecuting, being able to prosecute misdemeanors as part of this operation. Jillian.
Speaker 4:Okay.
Speaker 7:What.
Speaker 4:The Q folks will tell you the military is the way. The military is the only way you got to bring the military into the civil courts or get people into military tribunals. Did I just hear that right? 20 JAG officers are going to come do misdemeanor charges. I wonder if the good civil attorneys and criminal attorneys are maybe going to be busy with I don't know, the clinton foundation. Let the jag guys do the misdemeanors. I thought it would be the other way around. I thought they'd be bringing 20 jag officers in to look at the clinton foundation, right, but you're bringing them in either way. This is a julius caesar moment. This is using every ounce of authority you can to exercise law and order to have that happen. I'm left giggly, smiley, happy to see hypocrisy starting to come to an end.
Speaker 4:I can't tell you the emotions I have knowing that John Bolton's house right now is a whole bunch of papers thrown around the front room.
Speaker 7:The fuzzy end of a lollipop. The fuzzy end of a lollipop.
Speaker 4:Yeah, I can't tell you I'm struggling with certain emotions of sympathy and empathy but at the same time I'm super happy and giddy because you're getting what you've been dishing out there's. You're getting what you've been dishing out right.
Speaker 7:There's a certain element of all of that, so I have to kind of check myself here. But how do I feel about the military coming in and prosecuting misdemeanors? Well, I think it's a better look than having them come in to prosecute the you know, the prime offenders, because then it looks more like a military just just process them in and out.
Speaker 4:These are just misdemeanors, no big deal, nobody cares. Maybe, rather than bring in the jag crew for the big dogs or something you know I don't know, but it definitely is is interesting, are they being deputized like there's some mechanisms there that makes you kind of curious now it might work in dc, because dc is a federal property and so there's like better overlap than verse. You know, jag officers coming to the streets of seattle to prosecute things like I mean I think that there is something to that.
Speaker 7:Because of dc status.
Speaker 4:There must be something there now I'm always the one who brings this up and sometimes what happens is I get painted in the quarter because I'm kind of a contrary. You know, when it's when it's law and order time, I'm like, oh, let off the gloves. And then when it's, you know, relax the gloves time, I'm like, nah, bring the law and order. Like. I'm always trying to find the balance of the nuance. Here's what I'm worried about.
Speaker 4:Okay, I have a low level of trust for law enforcement. I've been at the fuzzy end of that, that lollipop. Okay, I've been at the fuzzy end of the lollipop. I've been the guy that was sitting in prison, that didn't think he belonged there, that thought he was totally innocent. I've been the guy. I've been this guy standing on the side of the road. I have been this guy where they're like you're drunk and I'm like, no, I'm not, no, I'm not. And you know they arrest me anyways. No, I'm not. See, this is proof. Sometimes I just misspeak. So this gentleman right here apparently has a hard time talking, and look at what happens to this officer. This is why I worry about the expansion of law enforcement without some checks on that how much had to drink today?
Speaker 6:how much is not very much you right now.
Speaker 5:How much did you have?
Speaker 6:to drink today, not enough. Well, you're unsteady on your feet getting out of the vehicle. Are you going to consent to field sobriety exercises? Absolutely not. I'll do a breathalyzer.
Speaker 11:He's a hundred percent disabled.
Speaker 6:We don't drink, talking like you have a thick tongue, slurring words, because I'm old, you're not going to consent to doing any field sobriety field.
Speaker 4:Sobriety is a trap. By the way, this this officer's already determined he's not filled sober right, there's no point in doing any of this. So this guy's like I'm not doing any of that. Look, I'm already old, I'm shaky, I'm throwing my speed I've had a stroke. Right right, he's not doing it, but he goes. I'll take a breathalyzer, put it in my mouth, I'll blow. Right, take a breathalyzer, cop doesn't care, my mouth, I'll blow, I'll take a breathalyzer.
Speaker 1:Cop doesn't care.
Speaker 6:He said he didn't have anything to drink, or anything like that Chance to find a backer under arrest for DUI. What did you give me? A breathalyzer we're going to. When you get to the hospital she's saying you never drink, you don't drink. So what did you drink to?
Speaker 5:A cup. I have water. No, give me a damn breath of leisure. You're going to jail anyway. How much?
Speaker 6:had to drink for that. That's what I'm worried about. How much is not very much? That's what I'm worried about.
Speaker 4:Jag officers coming in to prosecute misdemeanors. Yeah, this happens every day. I want our streets to be safe. I don't know how to bridge the gap. You know what I mean, like I. You know what I mean, like I. I don't know what's happening here. There are millions of people that interact with law enforcement and most of it is just normally totally fine, but that cop decided to arrest that guy who, by the way, the story continues on no alcohol in his blood, no alcohol on his breast.
Speaker 7:He slurs his speech yeah, so what the jag officers? Aren't they just going to be? You know, work in courtrooms.
Speaker 4:I hope, but my point is this when you give people power, how do you check it Right? How do you check it? We're just good, we're destroying your day. We're taking you into prison. You're going to post a bond. You'll probably have to interact with an attorney, you're going to come have to do the judge thing. The whole thing is like because why? So? I just point this out. Okay, I don't want to be a racist that's cloaked as someone that's woke okay I don't want to look at this.
Speaker 4:I'm a peasant. I want to look at fairness, every instance we want to look at fairness. Did john bolton keep classified information? Let's get that information out fast. Let's not drag out his trial very long. You've got 70 days. Get an indictment, get that thing going, do it the right way, right. When you drag it out for years and years and years and then you know three, four years after trump gets a judgment, we find out oh, they had no evidence well, when you drag it out for years, all you do is you feed the kabuki theater machine feed the kabuki theater exactly so.
Speaker 7:It's my understanding you know hearing the story about the the jag guys is that they just have a high workload now in dc because they are prosecuting these misdemeanors and so they're bringing any extra help. That's all, that's how I read it that's how I read it too okay but I'm saying you've now cracked the seal okay
Speaker 4:you see what I'm saying. You've cracked the seal and my assumption is jag attorneys are going to follow directions better than a prosecutor. That's, you know, kind of still thinks he's an independent person. You know what I mean. So it becomes a little more chain of commandy and I'm just expressing, like I'm raising my flag of concern, because there's also this simultaneously going on yes, they're doing it in DC. Yes, dc is one of the highest crime rates in the world. Yes, dc is going to require extraordinary measures to clean it up.
Speaker 11:But President Trump also indicated that federal action might be coming to other parts of the country.
Speaker 10:We're not playing games. We're going to make it safe and we're going to then go on to other places and more of this may be coming to a city near you.
Speaker 18:We have focused on Washington DC because it's a federal city under our jurisdiction, but we certainly hope that whether it's Atlanta or anywhere else, people are going to look around and say we don't have to live like this.
Speaker 4:I agree also 100. We don't have to live like this. I really want us, the people, to be the solution. I don't want to always be relying on some high office elected savior to come in and do the saving. I would like to see the atlanta police chief have a little find jesus moment and do some of this themselves. You know what I mean. I'd rather it work through the normal republic mechanisms instead of through a julius caesar dictator that, yes, he's getting the job done, but julius caesar kind of enabled the empire of rome that eventually gave us nero and caligula.
Speaker 4:Do you know? Know what I mean? And I'm like ah, I know that the United States is probably in this transition from Republic to empire. Are we seeing the same thing? And again, we write our own history? But just knowing the patterns, it's like I don't know how I feel about federal law enforcement on domestic streets. Brown shirts coming to a town near you. Brown shirts coming to a town near you. Brown shirts coming to a town near you. Now, I'm not giving into the left's narrative that ISIS, gestapo, blah. No, I'm like the best thing is when all the rules make sense and they're enforced equally on everybody. Yeah, we all have.
Speaker 4:We're all playing on the same set of rules. I don't see that. I don't see that.
Speaker 7:Well, I don't see that in cities that have a sanctuary status either.
Speaker 4:I have a broken part of my brain where I'm like we're either equal or we're not. So if it's a rule, it has to be a rule for everybody. If even one person breaks it, I'll break it too. I'll break it second. I won't break it first. I will not be the first person to break rule. It's not in my nature.
Speaker 4:But if somebody else breaks a rule and it goes unpunished or enforced, that's not a rule anymore. Yeah, it's to me. That's how my brain works. I'm hardwired that way. You know, if, if we're in a fenced area and someone breaks out the fence and they're immediately punished, I never leave in the fence. If they broke out, came back, then they go out again, I'm going out too. You know, like, if a rule is not enforceable, it's not a rule and it has to be enforceable on everyone, or it shouldn't be enforced on anyone. That is how I believe it. Eric smith, senator from missouri, used to be the attorney general and he's the one who went out and discovered the missouri v biden case, which got to the kind of exposed through discovery how the federal government was utilizing the social media companies to do the censoring everybody saw in 2021 and 2022.
Speaker 18:This was called a conspiracy theory, that that conservatives were being, you know, throttled or deplatformed. And we had seen enough that jen saki's at the podium talking about flagging things for facebook. They floated this ridiculous idea of a disinformation governance board Remember what that? Uh, uh, the Mary Poppins like figure who was going to be the head of it. And so we said you know what? There is something here, Like there's, there's something here.
Speaker 18:So we filed a lawsuit in May of 2022, Missouri versus Biden. And we named not the big tech companies, we named the government agencies, we named Biden, we named the FBI. We named all these agencies we thought were a part of it, and we did something kind of strategic we talk about it in the book, Steve. We didn't seek the injunction, which is to get the government to stop the bad behavior right away. We sought discovery first, and that ended up being a key decision. So what did that mean? We got thousands and thousands and thousands of pages of emails, text messages. We found out there were secret portals between high-ranking government officials and high-ranking executives at Twitter and Facebook coordinating their efforts. The collusion that was happening, the coercion that was happening.
Speaker 18:We took the deposition of Anthony Fauci and you can read about that in the book which was wild. We took the deposition, interestingly, of Elvis Chan, who was the FBI agent in Northern California who was pre-bunking the Hunter Biden laptop story. Turns out he was having weekly meetings, monthly meetings, then weekly meetings, telling them to look out for a Russian hack and leak operation in October. And Yul Roth, who's like this integrity guy at Twitter, who's left-leaning, even had an affidavit saying he was talking specifically about Hunter Biden. So the Roth that existed. Cisa, which is an agency most people have never really heard of. We took the deposition of Brian Scully, who was talking about yeah, they turned that against the American people to flag they were outsourcing to Stanford, into the University of Washington.
Speaker 18:So the punchline here is we uncovered this leviathan of agencies that were set against the American people to censor their speech. The First Amendment doesn't allow the government to do it and you shouldn't be able to outsource that either to these big tech behemoths, which is exactly what they were doing, and I think it's the most important free speech case in the history of our country. We talk about it in the book and we can't let this stuff ever happen again and I think the lesson here is. The playbook is, if you got the guts and you fight back and you got a hunch, we ought to use the court system to expose this corruption. And that's what we were able to do.
Speaker 4:Yeah, to the extent that the court system functions. Debbie B on YouTube says know the patterns. If you don't know history, you may, may well, repeat it. Yes, yes, I am not against. There's nothing that Trump's done that I'm like. I'm anti that. I just am recognizing these are tools. We're empowering our government with certain tools. They have certain tools that they were empowered with previously, like the Patriot Act and stuff like that. Are they going to repeal them? Are they going to continue using those tools? You've got clearly the government had an ability to censor speech and coordinate with the social media companies. Are they still doing it or are they not? Did Trump look at that and go, oh, that's a nice pretty tool, I think I'll do it Right. Or did he go, no, I that I reject that in principle, on its face. Do you?
Speaker 4:see what. I'm saying I don't know, I don't know, but I do know that my kids have to live here and I do know that I've got a lot of life left. So I've been on that fuzzy end of the lollipop I just want to see with clear eyes. Here's tulsi gabbard confirming again. So not only in missouri biden, he said, with thousands of pages. This collusion wasn't like a couple times. Anthony fauci reached out to twitter and was like hey, rfk jr said something about vaccines. Do?
Speaker 7:you know, it sounds like they had like a team's portal set up exactly and they were down to.
Speaker 4:In fact, there was one email that I remember, back when these were all being dumped. It was like some high-ranking fbi official was like I need you to take out mj truth q now, and it was like he had 300 followers, right, and it was like what? You're deleting a retweet account of some obscure, no name.
Speaker 4:We must go, you know it's like they were that peculiar high-ranking people. They weren't just looking at accounts with hundreds of thousands of followers in. In fact, there's a lot of people that say if you get over a hundred thousand followers, you're almost guaranteed to be an asset of some sort, right? A lot of people believe that I'm not. I wouldn't say otherwise. You know kind of the come out of nowhere guys. We're out here broadcasting an hour and a half to two hours almost every day. Think about this for a second, ron. I'm'm gonna feed your conspiracy theory. Okay, we broadcast five days a week, an hour and a half plus every single day. Yep, we cross post on multiple platforms. Oh, yeah we're consistent.
Speaker 4:We do it between eight and eight or, excuse me, six and 639. Every morning, typically closer to 630, today, 638 639. We're consistent in how we go out and yet our audience, while it's growing, is relatively flat. Yes, if I would say this, if you took all of our episodes, started a ghost channel that had no association with my laptop or your IP address or our personal names, and you posted all these videos, I think our audience would be much, much larger I think it would be in the algorithm at a much more normal rate we would be in the algorithm, we would be in it.
Speaker 4:There is, there are channels out there that produce a fraction of the volume of content we do now 10, 10 episodes, 20 episodes, 50 episodes. You can kind of forgive the show being smaller, but at this point it's like we're not even in the algorithm. You know we're picking off listeners, one at a time at the coffee shop and you know what I mean. Like half the listeners of the show know us. Personally, I love it. I invite all of you guys here, but I am fairly confident, and you're extremely confident, that we are limited in our reach because of this. Yes, right, that we are not being pushed. So again it comes upon you, the listener. You share the show. We're peasants. I recognize that they don't want our voice heard. Why?
Speaker 7:Because potentially we might, you know judge hypocrisy and we're trying to break through that algorithm just based on volume and just consistency and really isn't working well, and you know we can tweak this and tweak that and do this.
Speaker 4:And you know, if anybody wants to volunteer to help the show, make clips, whatever, just contact us. We need help. Like we're, we're a two man show here and we're trying to do the best we can. We're ai, clearly, but that's what's going on. Like they've been puppeting these social media companies for years and years and you know, oh, now elon's in charge at x and now trump said that there's no more censorship.
Speaker 4:And well, really, was it that quick? Or you just flip a switch? Or are these people embedded? Because, you know, james baker went from the fbi to the to twitter and we thought, oh great that elon, that Elon bought Twitter. He's still got James Baker hanging around. How many more people like that that? We don't know their names? Tulsi just pulled the security clearances of 37 people that are involved in the grand conspiracy. I'd never heard of a one of them, right, and I've been reading this stuff daily for 10 years. I'd never heard of a one of them. Yeah, imagine how many people are involved in these companies that are still censoring and still just know whether anybody tells me or not. Conservatives, ghost, you know, or shadow ban.
Speaker 2:So this is Tulsi Gabbard confirming more of kind of what we know, but also adding a little bit more to it. First and important to tell the truth. First and important to tell the truth. We see in too many cases, not only in ODNI but across the intelligence community that that is not the case, what?
Speaker 2:Let's go back to the beginning. This is the first and important step that we took yesterday in announcing what I've called ODNI 2.0. Announcing what I've called odni 2.0. This organization that I lead was created in the wake of the egregious intelligence failures around the islamist terrorist attack on 9-11. It was created around recognize new the islamist terrorist attack on 9-11.
Speaker 4:That's a new phrase yeah, it is that's coming right at the religion of peace. Yeah, do you know the scandal around that whole? Islam is a religion of peace. Do you know when bush said that it is? It was a huge scandal. Okay, so bush, in order to placate the islamic world after 9-11, goes islam is a religion of peace, and they're like we are literally at war with islam. You should call it not the war on terror, but the war on islam. Like the hawks were like this isn't a war on terror, this is the war on Islam. Like the Hawks were like this isn't a war on terror, this is a war on Islam itself.
Speaker 4:Yeah, right, so, it's interesting that they've done this little change. I mean, this is kind of an important thing.
Speaker 2:The Islamic radical attack on nine, 11 in hindsight, what happened with that manufacturing, by the way good authority.
Speaker 4:Many people have said it John Brennan converted to islam when he was based over in uh, qatar, like full-on became islamic. Like has been to mecca, which they don't allow foreigners to go to. He was taken there by the house of sod to go visit it. So john brennan, yes, now whoa, yeah, okay, yeah, we, you know we don't always mention someone's religion because we kind of think that that's your personal, private business and it is. But I'm not the only one saying that about john brennan. Like it's kind of like this well-known thing that mike ben's to many others have said john brennan's like really into islam, like converted kind of.
Speaker 2:Like Obama, the left hand is talking to the right hand and, ultimately, that the president of the United States is getting intelligence products that are timely, that are relevant and that are apolitical and objective, were very entrenched and were politicizing their centers or their positions either against the American people, using their authorities to force censorship on Americans, for example under the Biden administration, who dissented with Biden's policies, or those who essentially were in positions where they're creating intelligence products and inserting their own partisan political opinions and views in the intelligence documents. It's very simple the mandate the intelligence community has is to find the truth and to tell the truth. We see in too many cases, not only in ODNI but across the intelligence community, that that is not the case.
Speaker 4:So they're lying to us. Did you know the intelligence agencies lie.
Speaker 7:Confirmed.
Speaker 4:I think it's in the mission statement of the CIA. You're professional lying liars. Ok, that checks. So this is a little bit of a different topic. But Judge Gorsuch joined a majority opinion yesterday.
Speaker 4:There was a Supreme Court decision that allowed Trump to continue to terminate grants and employees and blah, blah, blah. It's another one of these injunctions to prevent Trump from doing what he's clearly allowed to do under his Article 2 authorities. So Gorsuch jumped in on this decision to write a additional decision here. Before we say that John Attacks had a wonderful visit with Taylor, with Tiny Taylor this week raced F1 cars open and closed water park, state fair and ice cream every night. Too bad, we can't do the same with our favorite politicians. When he says tiny Taylor, that's my dad, he has my son, he's got my son on an eight year old trips, what they're doing anyways, ok. So Justice Gorsuch says this and he joined this majority decision rather than just, you know, make his vote, because he's really slapping down the lower court for the reasons. For these reasons, I concur in the court's decision to stay the district court's judgment vacating the grant terminations.
Speaker 4:If the district court's failure to abide by California, which is the name of another case, were a one off, perhaps it would not be worth writing to address it. But two months ago another district court tried to compel compliance with a different order that this court had stayed Department of Homeland Security versus DVD. Still, another district court recently diverged from one of this court's decisions, even though the case at hand did not differ in any pertinent respect from one this court had decided. So this is now the third time in a matter of weeks this court, the Supreme Court, has had to intercede in a case squarely controlled by one of its precedents. All these interventions should have been unnecessary, but together they underscore a basic tenet of our judicial system. Unnecessary, but together they underscore a basic tenet of our judicial system. Whatever their own views, judges are duty bound to respect the hierarchy of the federal court system created by the constitution.
Speaker 4:In congress, he's basically telling the, the lower courts stop injecting your politics. We've clearly decided these matters. The article 2 is extremely clear and we're not going to deviate from our decision because, oh, this time it's about immigrants, or this time it's about usaid employees, or this time it's about friends of the court not doing it. That's a slap down right there. I don't care what your politics are, get in line. Follow the precedent. You don't have discretion. These are not novel issues here. I thought that's pretty good. Yeah Right. The other thing too with that is I looked at that and I immediately thought do you know how many times lower courts go against precedent? I've talked to at this point probably close to 100 people involved in serious criminal matters that have Supreme Court or even appeals court precedent that clearly sides with them.
Speaker 7:And in some case, would exonerate the person completely.
Speaker 4:Yeah, habeas corpus decisions, all litigated. Okay, if your habeas corpus is violated, you get out for jail free court. You know you've got time frames on how long certain things should take. Those have all been decided by the supreme court your right to privacy, your right to not to have compelled search and seizure. Fruit of of the poisonous tree.
Speaker 4:There's a January Sixer that's sitting in prison right now, named Dan Wilson. I call on anybody and everybody to raise your voice heard. He needs to be let out. Here's what happened. He lived in Chicago in 2020, allegedly because of the violence in the streets, because of the lack of law and order. He armed himself. He had felons from the. He's a felon from the 1990s. He's now much older than that. Okay, he armed himself in 2020 and inside of his home there were some guns. Okay, I'll be completely honest with you.
Speaker 4:There's multiple cases working their way from the courts to decide if felons are even actually able to be barred from owning guns. Amy Coney Barrett herself wrote a dissent one time, essentially saying that there is no world in which a felon can be prevented from self-defense, including owning a gun. Right, so this is not like this novel thing. So he has a gun in his home. He gets raided for January 6th. They find the guns, goes to prison for January 6th, but then he gets this extra gun charge, felon, in possession of a gun.
Speaker 4:There were many other J Sixers who got this, by the way many I know a couple of them personally. They had guns in their homes and they had prior convictions and they shouldn't have had guns. They all got pardoned. They're all sitting at home today. But Dan Wilson because the judge that decided it was not one of the DC judges that finally let everybody out Some other judge they're calling him the wicked judge of the West or whatever decided Dan had to go back to prison on the gun charge. So Dan sitting in prison on the gun charge. That only existed.
Speaker 4:Now. Whether you think it's right or wrong that he owned or didn't own a gun, that's for you to decide, but I'll tell you this they entered his home under false pretenses that he was an insurrectionist and he was trying to overthrow the government. It broke down his door, they raided his house and they found those guns. That whole thing has been quashed. It was pardoned. It was lawfare, it was an inappropriate use of authority and power, and so, therefore, everything downstream of that should be fruit of the poisonous tree. It's that simple. Your warrant's not accurate Doesn't matter what you found Now. You're even more screwed you can't use it.
Speaker 4:He should be let go immediately. Fruit of the poisonous tree. Nobody cares that he had guns in his house. Do you know how many other people get caught on the street with guns that are felons and just get let go because you know too much paperwork or just because it's DC and everybody's got a gun? I mean.
Speaker 7:I think the felon with the gun stuff. We got to take a look at that as a society. So you know, I will say one thing about this the argument that you're proposing and you put forward it's the same argument that I think democrats and and left-leaning people would say that is being used for ice right now to round up illegals. Okay, explain that. Uh, well, you go to home depot to arrest somebody there and in that roundup gets caught up a bunch of other people that end up being having illegal status and then they get deported.
Speaker 4:But they weren't the targets but they were illegal right correct, so they were the target correct.
Speaker 7:But but they weren't there to round up illegals. They were there because of, you know, some shoplifting or whatever, but they end up, you know, deporting some guys that get rounded up because of they were looking for something else, but they are guilty though right, sure, sure, sure, sure. But so is this guy. He's guilty of having guns when he's not supposed to have them.
Speaker 4:I look at it this way If it's a properly executed warrant and everything's fair, then yeah, it's not proof of the poison's tree. A properly executed warrant and everything's fair, then yeah, it's not proof of the poisonous tree. It came into your house and then they saw guns and that's a problem, that's. I don't have any problem with that, and I talked to a couple guys.
Speaker 7:I'm like, dude, you knew there's there are a lot of people that are saying that these these roundups where they're going to arrest the guy or look for the guy at the, at the costco or the hub depot, they're saying that that's a trumped up charge, just so they can get in there, so that they can find the illegals, so that they can deport them well, yeah, that's what I'm saying.
Speaker 4:I'm saying the same thing, okay I know that's what I'm saying.
Speaker 7:You're saying the same thing.
Speaker 4:I'm saying the same thing, right, like I don't have a problem with how the how the law is supposed to function okay but the thing is is you can't cherry pick.
Speaker 4:So okay, you're arrested, you're a terrorist, you've got guns, you've got prior charges, you stack all the charges, you go through the process, but then we find out we get pardoned. So for one thing, that quashes all of it anyways. The second thing is then we find out all the information we're finding out about targeting and dot it out of that. It's like this is all clearly an incorrect warrant in the first place. It's all fruit of the poisonous tree. And here's the crazy thing the precedent has been set. I could rattle off, but simply not to make their cases a highlight. I could rattle off a minimum of three people I know personally who were not allowed to possess guns, that had guns on the day their houses were raided and they are at home right now with their families, and dan is not okay. So the precedent was already set. Why is dan being treated differently?
Speaker 4:I don't know if they were all in, then it'd be like oh man, that sucks, right. But in this case dan is being treated separately, so I don't have any reason for that. But all right, I think that if you're going to enforce rules, you enforce them uniformly. That's my idea, and we should have the least amount of rules possible. That's the other thing too. It's not like we want to make a bunch of rules and live in a totalitarian state, but whatever. So Bill Pulte was on with Laura Ingraham and he's talking about the Adam Schiff scandal along with these other Letitia James and all this Cook lady on the Federal Reserve Board.
Speaker 4:I love how we're learning all these new people's names right and how they've been involved in mortgage fraud and hypocrisy.
Speaker 21:It seems like this is a contagious disease. Ok, because now the Federal Reserve Governor, lisa Cook, is under pressure to resign due to allegations that she may have engaged in mortgage fraud. Bill, tell us about this. I mean someone who has a say in the Fed rate and what that's doing to mortgages across the country. I mean this is crazy stuff she could be potentially abusing no one's guilty until proven.
Speaker 10:I'll tell you she has a very big problem. She has a situation where she claimed primary residency on a condo that she bought in Atlanta. I mean, this is supposed to be somebody who's entrusted with the public good, who's supposed to be looking after interest rates. And I believe it's. I believe it's blatant and massive mortgage fraud. I believe that there will be a criminal investigation. I'll leave that to the DOJ whether they do that or not, but I would anticipate Singer be prosecuted and criminally charged for mortgage fraud, just based on what I've seen. You know I refer people every day to the Department of Justice and the Department of Justice prosecutes cases like this all the time. Laura, and whether it's the Schiff case or the Letitia James case or this case or all the other cases that we refer, this Cook one is not going away and she can laugh all she wants, but the law will catch up with her.
Speaker 21:Yeah, she responded to this today saying she doesn't have any intention of being quote bullied to step down from her position because of some questions raised in a tweet. I do intend, she said, to take any questions about my financial history seriously and I'm gathering accurate info to provide the facts. She also mentioned that this all occurred before she was a member of the Board of Governors at the Federal Reserve. Would the timing matter?
Speaker 10:No, it wouldn't matter. First of all, she's within the statute of limitations. Second of all, she received a benefit while she's been on the Federal Reserve Board and I would actually argue that her statement tonight, you know, I think that that's going to be a big problem for her criminally. This is just my view. She lied in my view in her statement this tonight because she said that the first time she heard about it was through my tweet. She didn't hear about it from my tweet. There's no way she doesn't follow me on Twitter. And last night Bloomberg contacted, according to their story, her and me for comment. So I think this lady is a professional liar. She shouldn't be at the Federal Reserve. She's going to resign, in my view, and if she doesn't resign, I do believe that the president has caused a fire her, and that will be up to the president whether he decides to do that or not.
Speaker 21:Now the president has the authority to fire anyone he wants to in the executive branch. Unelected officials shouldn't have this much say and power over the lives of the american people. I think it's so amen.
Speaker 4:So she's in charge of setting rates for mortgages, but she lied on mortgage applications twice to get a lower rate. Leticia, james, is doing the same thing. She prosecuted donald trump for uh, overvaluing his real estate I didn't know who lisa cook was, but I was.
Speaker 7:When we had her picture I thought it was leticia james.
Speaker 4:No, no, I was like you're gonna have a side by side here, then you've got adam shift doing the same thing so you know mortgage, listen, I was in prison with some people that had were had mortgage fraud checked off on their list of accomplishments. So yeah, I think that the mortgage fraud thing it's kind of like al capone with taxes, like I think it's gonna be what takes them down, I think in a lot of other areas it's gonna be a hook for there's no prosecutorial immunity for leticia james on your personal mortgage.
Speaker 4:You can't go well. I was trying to act in the best interest of the state of new york. You can't do that right. I think adam schiff can't be like it's classified, it's in a skit. He can't hide behind his immunity as a legislature for free speech to lie and say what he wants. When you lied on a mortgage application like and I have a feeling this is probably a little more prevalent than you think this guy right here is the uh, the kansas city fed press schmidt. So this is kansas city federal reserve president and he was asked to comment on this cook situation.
Speaker 19:Kind of had an interesting response we have responsibilities responsibilities as, as, uh, professionals inside the federal. I'm sure she'll handle matters as she needs to handle them. Is that a serious thing to do to write primary residence on two different mortgages? Let me say this it's definitely part of the application. But I also would say, if you think about how huge that application is, maybe we could start thinking about how do we make it less paperwork intensive? Uh, as we go forward, do you worry?
Speaker 4:so pulte tweets out. What a weird response yeah oh, she was overwhelmed with all the boxes to check and she had to write her name like eight or nine times oh man you realize like everyday americans have to navigate through fha mortgages and via these freaking complicated forms oh overwhelming if we could just real id we could use. We could use ai to scan yourself. Just use my eye scan. Come in pre-approved, like you don't have to fill out anything. We'll just know what kind of loan you qualify for, like. Why complicate things before?
Speaker 7:they send you the money oh yeah, you'll find the funds in your account these people are dirty.
Speaker 4:Check his mortgages right now. Check his mortgages he needs. These forms are complicated. What check his mortgages?
Speaker 7:what a weird response. Oh, I'm sure I checked a box.
Speaker 4:I shouldn't have dude these people are in trouble. Well, if, if the forms are so complicated, maybe we should get rid of them. You sound like Taylor John attack us. Don't make rules you can enforce. Don't put a box on there unless it's important to do now by operating. My mode of operation now is I don't fill out forms. I don't fill out government forms. I mean 1776 live. I talk about this. It's almost humors. I don't fill out forms. Can I talk to the person who's going to receive this form? They're free to fill it out with my verbal things. I don't put information in boxes if I don't feel like I want to disclose that information like this is. The hilarious thing is this is because there's a spot for you to put your social doesn't mean you have to write it in there. Did you know it's? It's against the law for anyone to request your social from you. Did you know that?
Speaker 4:No, I did not, it is a felony offense for me to ask you for your social and for me to put anything contingent upon you giving me your social in order to render services. It's a felony offense. So when I put it on an application and I'm like, oh, I can't let you into the doctor's office, or I can't let you do this, or I can't do anything with you without your social, it's a felony offense for you to demand it. But yet people do it all the time. No stop.
Speaker 4:Now there are certain instances where a social is required for those services, but they can't demand it of you. In fact, there's this whole thing with in mortgages where the mortgage broker who's asking for your social isn't actually entitled to it. You're supposed to be able to go through the whole application process and then only voluntarily provide the social security number to the underwriter, who's essentially working directly with the lender, since they're the ones you're in contract with. You can avoid giving your mortgage broker your social security completely and force them to process the application to underwriting without it, and then you can call and secretly give it to underwriting. Right, that's how it's supposed to be. Good luck getting your mortgage broker broker to buy off on that, because, well, the software won't even. I can't even hit enter and calculate until you give it. It's a required field.
Speaker 4:It's a required field, yeah, in your software, not by law, right? All right, it's time for us to jump over to private. We've got two more videos. We're going to be talking about Biden and his mental health cover up, the auto pens and the pardons. Some information broke yesterday on that and we're going to be sharing that. There's a big day. Yesterday, trump won a lawsuit Trump. This morning, john Bolton was getting raided. We've already moved on because John Bolton's like that little of importance, like who cares, by 10 am today, like no one's going to care about John Bolton anymore. All right, so with that, we'll talk to you guys again tomorrow. And Ponyboy, you said, yeah, we had viewers, no ads. Yes, today was brought to you ad, free, by left behind and withoutorg, so don't forget to go and visit them. All right, and we're going to jump over to private. Talk to our great rumble listeners there for a few more minutes and then we'll talk to everybody again tomorrow. Bye, okay, are we in private now?
Speaker 4:yes okay, so we just got a couple videos we're going to play here. This one right here is I think this is ben howell, is it ben howell? Yes, howell, and he's talking about the auto pin and just some of the stuff that they've discovered and and I'm curious if they're going to end up canceling all these pardons and stuff that biden did I actually know people that he muted sentences that were in prison and I'm like do you round them back up?
Speaker 5:that'd be tragic and we put out some bombshell documents and they were produced to us by ed martin quickly on him. You know, I know a lot of the posse have been frustrated at the pace and the lack of accountability in this administration, but so long as Ed Martin is there there is a fighting chance, whether it's Letitia, james, adam Schiff and now the auto pen. And so basically the auto pen has been at a little bit of a standstill. There's been these announcements of government investigations but no real progress. But then walks in Ed Martin, who is the pardon officer and has access to these documents and produces to the Oversight Project an email from one of Merrick Garland's top, if not the tippy-toppest career official in the Department of Justice, who the day after Joe Biden issued these sweeping pardons to what he was saying were nonviolent criminals. This lawyer on a Saturday morning.
Speaker 4:All right, I want to look at this here. Whoa. So the highlighted I think the language offense is described to the Department of Justice in the warrant is highly problematic. In order to resolve its meaning appropriately and consistent with the president's intent, we will need a statement or direction from the president as to how to interpret the language. I can think of four possibilities, only the last of which is satisfying one. The commutation applies to all federal offenses for which the inmate is under sentence. It is our practice not to look beyond the four corners of the warrant, but there is nothing in the warrant to give meaning to that language. I understand bop is likely to use this interpretation, absent other direction, and is going to to do now as they work to process the commutations. This is unsatisfying because it renders the language superfluous, which couldn't be the intent. It is also likely to result in commutations and circumstances, including for crimes of violence. That was not intended. It did happen.
Speaker 4:By the way the offense is described in the department refers to the US Sentencing Commission spreadsheet. I have not seen the spreadsheet so I do not know if this is a reasonable interpretation, nor do I know if it is a limiting factor. Did the spreadsheets only include drug offenses, for example. A significant problem with this interpretation is that it is a guess as to what is meant by the warrant language and goes beyond the four corners of the warrant, something we do not normally do. Because no offenses have been described to the department, to the department from the president, the commutations do not take effect. In essence, describing offenses to the department is a condition precedent to the commutations being effective, and without a description they do not take effect. I have no idea what interpretation the incoming administration will give to the warrant, but they may find this interpretation attractive, as it gives effect to the language but does not go beyond the four corners of the warrant.
Speaker 4:Four there is yet to come clear direction from the president giving meaning to the language for the offenses described to the department of justice. Ideally, this would be a list of each inmate listing the offenses that are covered by the commutation by far is the clearest and least problematic offensive. Given the above, I think it is best we receive a statement or direction from the president as to the meaning of the warrant language. This will allow us to give the full effect of the commutation warrant in the matter intended by the president. In the absence of such such statement or direction, I am concerned option three above will be the only interpretation that is given to the warrant. While this is logical construction, legally I can't possibly what the president intended. Basically, we're going to pardon a bunch of people but nobody gets pardoned.
Speaker 5:Hold the fire alarm, Issue this lengthy email saying this whole thing is bogus. It can't work for all these different legal reasons. The president, not an auto pen needs to actually weigh in and answer these things. And oh, by the way, you should stop saying that these are nonviolent criminals, because, guess what? They're some of the worst violent criminals that you're actually releasing. So that's a document we put up. This breaks the thing wide open again, and I think the Trump administration is poised for action now because they have guess what? The Biden administration agreeing with them in their own DOJ.
Speaker 4:Biden didn't pardon any of those people and, by the way, they were violent. They were violent, they were not just gun charges or drug charges, it was gun charges or drug charges and everything else that came with it. So it wasn't in any way a clean process and a lot of those people are out on the street now. James Comer also mentions this. So, in regards to Biden's health, every time Biden's health was brought up his press secretary would come out not Saki and not John Pierre, but his one of the other you know communication press secretaries would come out and be like, oh, he's doing great. My last conversation with him, he was sharp as a tack, blah, blah, blah. Turns out he maybe shouldn't have been saying that.
Speaker 22:I mean I can't say this enough. I want to say this one more time. I mean I can't say this enough. I want to say this one more time so everyone understands. Ian Sams, who was the White House spokesperson for a significant amount of Joe Biden's time as president, interacted with him two times, two times. So you know we're going to continue to bring people in. And again this, this person, Ian Sams, is the one that would would counter everything Robert Herr or anytime anyone would suggest that Joe Biden wasn't mentally fit, he would say no, he's at the top of his game. Every time he tweeted out several times he gave interviews on MSNBC. Every time I've interacted with the president, he was sharp. He asked great questions in there under oath. He interacted with president two times, the entire time, the entire time he worked in the white house. That's astonishing. Any questions? That's how you keep. I mean I can't he's doing great when I saw him back in 98,.
Speaker 4:Awesome Sharp as a tack Sharp as a tack. He was at the top of his game.
Speaker 7:They won't let him see me anymore. I might have to say something else about his status if I saw him once.
Speaker 4:These people are hypocrites. I feel bad. I'm saying this to the private listeners. I say it to the public listeners too, but I don't want to pick a side in anything. I'm clearly in trump's camp. I'm clearly aligned with him ideologically and politically.
Speaker 4:Clearly today thank you for the pardon. You know I don't have any criticism to say about what he's doing. I recognize the behemoth he's taking on. There's lots of moving pieces, lots of people, all kinds of stuff. Um, I am very happy with what's going on and just little things like this right covering biden's dementia, that plays into the auto and it plays into the entire war on domestic terrorists. Like who was leading the show here? Somebody was pulling the levers. This, this, absolutely you know. These, these things happen for a reason and the best thing that can happen is the measure by which these people measured is the standard they have to be held against. You want to come after Trump for some bookkeeping errors? Let's look at your mortgages. You want to use your, you know, you want to use your power and do prosecutorial misconduct and overcharging, et cetera, et cetera. Well, we're just going to find something in your life and take it to the max, like it. To me, it feels like balance.
Speaker 7:We've got some JAG officers that want to talk to you. Yeah, I've got some.
Speaker 4:JAG officers that want to talk to you Exactly. There is, however, an element here where things can ramp up pretty aggressively and should we lose Donald Trump in the white house or get someone in there with maybe not the same principles, we're watching our government arm up. You know, when you're bringing in jag officers to prosecute misdemeanors, gone are the days of you know no more officers on domestic soil, like when you're bringing in the attorneys and you've had troops marching in la and troops marching in dc doing law enforcement activities. You know we're on the precipice of something Hopefully greatness and a golden age as we clean up the neighborhood. Right, hopefully, that's where we're headed. But you know, power is power and it does things to people. So all right, guys. That's it for the show today. Thank you so much for sticking around with us for a few minutes on private chat and we will talk to you again on Monday. Don't forget to share the show. Thanks, guys. Bye, old woman, man, man, sorry, what knight lives in that castle over there.
Speaker 1:I'm 37. What I'm 37. I'm not old. Well, I can't just call you man. You could say Dennis. I didn't know you were called Dennis. Well, you didn't bother to find out, did you? I did say sorry about the old woman, but from behind you looked. What I object to is that you automatically treat me like an inferior. Well, I am king, oh king. Eh, very nice. And how do you get that? Eh, by exploiting the workers, by hanging on to outdated imperialist dogma which perpetuates the economic and social differences in our society, if there's ever going to be any progress.
Speaker 1:There is, there's some lovely filth down here. Oh, how do you do? How do you do? Good lady, I'm Arthur, king of the Britons. Whose castle is that? King of the? Who, the Britons? Who are the Britons? Well, we all are. We are all Britons and I am your king.
Speaker 1:I didn't know we had a king. I thought we were an autonomous collective. You're fooling yourself. We're living in a dictatorship, a self-perpetuating autocracy, in which the working class is oh, there you go, bringing class into the gang. That's what it's all about. If only people would, please, please, good people. I am in haste. Who lives in that castle? No one lives there. Then, in that castle, no one lives there. Then? Who is your lord? We don't have a lord. What I told you? We're an anarcho-syndicalist commune. We take it in turns to act as a sort of executive officer for the week. Yes, but all the decisions of that officer have to be ratified at a special bi-weekly meeting. Yes, I see, by a simple majority in the case of purely internal affair, be quiet. But by a two-thirds majority in the case of more major, be quiet.
Speaker 1:I order you to be quiet. Order. Who does he think he is? I'm your king. Well, I didn't vote for you. You don't vote for kings. Well, I can become king. Then. The lady of the lake, her arm clad in the purest, shimmering samite, held aloft Excalibur from the bosom of the water, signifying by divine providence that I, arthur, was to carry Excalibur. That is why I'm your king.
Speaker 1:Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony. Be quiet. You can't expect to wield supreme executive power just because some watery tart threw a sword at you. Shut up. If I went round saying I was an emperor just because some moistened bint had lobbed a scimitar at me, they'd put me away. Shut up, will you Shut up Now? We see the violence inherent in the system. Shut up. Come and see the violence inherent in the system. Shut up. Come and see the violence inherent in the system. Help, help. I'm being repressed, bloody peasant. Oh, what a giveaway. Did you hear that? Did you hear that? Eh, that's what I'm on about. Did you see him repressing me? You saw it, didn't you you?
