Why “Trust The Experts” Fails In A Democracy

What if the biggest problem in our public life isn’t disagreement, but the demand that we “trust the experts” without ever seeing the work? We follow that thread across elections, media, courts, and culture—where complexity becomes a feature, not a bug, and where simple verification gets replaced by press releases and posture.

We start with a jolt: a halftime performance that hemorrhages viewers and a local patchwork of school walkouts where teens get drafted into adult optics while safety slips. Those are signals. When institutions make bold choices, the duty to protect and explain grows, not shrinks. From there, we widen the lens to the core theme: trust is earned by legibility. Science is a process, not a priesthood; democracy is a counting exercise, not a vibe. If a result is truly settled, you can show it—paper trails, open audits, reconciled totals, plain-English answers.

That demand for daylight sharpens around the Epstein files. We unpack the eyebrow-raising timing of official statements, missing video, and a redaction regime that blurs the line between victim and perpetrator. When those who called for transparency pivot to resealing, the public is right to ask who’s being protected and why. Add in name games on Capitol Hill and you see the pattern: accountability with stage directions isn’t accountability.

We also zoom in on how power rebrands. Candidates wear the other party’s jersey to capture inattentive primary voters, betting the letter beats the platform. Meanwhile, the debate over central bank digital currencies collides with first principles: convenience vs control. Digital cash can be a tool against crime—and a lever against dissent. The only safeguard is writing hard limits before the code becomes the policy.

Not every detour confirms priors. A 44-year cohort study suggesting no accelerated cognitive decline among cannabis users challenges an easy storyline. Good: it’s a reminder to update models when data changes. The standard never shifts—show the mechanism, expose the confounders, make the evidence audit-friendly.

If you’re tired of being told “it’s settled,” this conversation is for you. We lay out the receipts, the contradictions, and the simple reforms that restore confidence: transparent counts, preserved evidence, named co-conspirators, and guardrails on programmable money. Hit play, then tell us what you’d audit first. And if you find value here, subscribe, share with a friend, and leave a quick review—it helps more people find the show and keeps this conversation honest.

Chapters

• 0:00 Cold Open: Peasants’ Perspective
• 2:40 Show Setup & Simultaneous Sip
• 4:55 Clarifying The Epstein Cellmate Rumor
• 6:55 Halftime Ratings And FCC Questions
• 10:50 Milo, Goyim, And Community Notes
• 14:45 School Walkouts And “Weaponized” Students
• 22:15 Tacoma Shooting And Local Crime Snapshot
• 24:20 Theme Shift: Don’t Trust The Experts
• 28:30 Science, Democracy, And Bad Incentives
• 33:40 Elections, Audits, And Adjudication
• 41:30 Fulton, Arizona, And Counting Battles
• 47:10 Simple Elections Vs Machine Mystique
• 52:20 Royals, Epstein, And Public Backlash
• 56:50 Prewritten DOJ Release And Camera Wipes
• 1:05:40 Body Doubles, Missing Video, And FOIA Notes
• 1:12:30 Trump As Tipster And Dershowitz Angles
• 1:20:10 Redactions, Victims, And Co‑Conspirators
• 1:28:00 Massey, DOJ, And Name Games
• 1:34:20 Bannon, Intelligence, And Overturned Case
• 1:41:40 J6 Tabletop Plans And Informants
• 1:47:20 Rumble Premium CTA And Podcast Push
• 1:50:20 Canada Bridge Leverage And Trade

Transcript

Cold Open: Peasants’ Perspective

SPEAKER_08 0:43

Peasants, ma'am. We're just peasants. Every one of us. You watch those little movies, you see the peasants in the background with the kings and kings walking around. We're those people. We're those people. Sorry, guys. I put my hat on. I'm ready to go here. Sorry. Just a minute late, just a second later, there was some broken stuff I was still prepping. This show happens almost spontaneously. Someone yesterday sent me a message and they were like, What were you reading? I stripped out the show. There's no script. There's no script. I'm standing at my screen getting ready to play the next clip while I'm talking. I prepped this thing like 20 minutes before I gave it. Anyways, as you can see, it's still going there. Ron's like, you got about 30 seconds, and in my head, I heard 30 minutes.

SPEAKER_17 1:39

And then I said, check your volume, and then he just forgot.

SPEAKER_08 1:43

I was like, whoa, whoa, whoa, what's going on? Where am I? Okay. Yesterday I did I did watch a playback of the show, and I noticed if I have the mic a certain way, you can see the sticker. And if I actually keep it close to my face, you can hear me better. So I will do my best. Oh, let's see. Peasants Perspective. Good morning. That's you, Ron. Good morning, Plumbing Boy. Douglas Wyatt, good morning. And uh, yeah, everybody, welcome. Glad you guys are here today. And I know you guys are here. It's for the simultaneous sip. All you need is a cup or a mug or a glass, a tankered Stein, a canteen, a jug, or flask, a vessel of any kind. I like coffee. Fill it with your favorite liquid. I like coffee. And join me now for the unparalleled dopamine hit of the day, the thing that makes everything better, the simultaneous sip. Now.

Show Setup & Simultaneous Sip

SPEAKER_18 2:27

Hi, that coffee smells good. And it's funny how coffee never tastes as good as it smells. As you grow older, you'll discover that life is very much like coffee. The aroma is always better than the actuality. May that be your thought for the day.

SPEAKER_15 2:41

That's great.

SPEAKER_08 2:43

Oh, I have to bring this thermos here because you know I left my house like two hours ago, two hours ago before we went to the gym. So I got my coffee thermos. It's perfect. I love it. Okay, so Ron, you had something that you wanted to bring up. Oh. Yesterday there was a little confusion on the show. My the guy I know, the inmate that was on Jeffrey Epstein's cell block, he's alive. Okay. He's not killed. You were saying, well, did they kill him? I think you were referring to him. I was referring to Jeffrey Epstein.

SPEAKER_17 3:10

We were kind of having two separate conversations. That is what I was worried about. I was worried that he would be a target because what did he say? Was it really the truth? Or, you know, is there a different story? We don't really know, you know, and we just know what he's told us, and that could change if he's not alive.

SPEAKER_08 3:29

Yeah, exactly. So, but as far as I know, he's alive. He's rolling around somewhere, literally rolling around. Yeah, I was just worried about him. Yeah, no, me too. Which is kind of why I I've hesitated all this time to share that story. It's the same thing with I don't really want to come out and go hard against the sheriff in my county. Because, you know, the sheriff could become the sheriff of Nottingham pretty fast. So it's like, you know, I'll pick our battles to a certain degree. Anyways, um, another another little tidbit, we got some official information on the preliminary rating numbers from the viewership for the bad bunny halftime performance. Oh, it tanked 39% from last year. That's pretty bad. Only 26.5 million households watched, 48.6 million tuned into the game, meaning nearly half of Americans turned off the TV at halftime. A total cultural victory. Because you got to assume a lot of people just left it on because it was playing, right? Because you didn't take the time to go over, no switch over to YouTube, but a lot of people did. I could imagine that a bunch of people with kids were like, no, yeah, not doing that. Not doing that. And those lyrics that they played, Don Jr. posted those lyrics, and he's like, How is it possible that we're doing this here?

SPEAKER_17 4:37

Yeah.

Clarifying The Epstein Cellmate Rumor

Halftime Ratings And FCC Questions

SPEAKER_08 4:37

You know, and the and how's it not an FCC violation? I don't know. Because they because the FCC doesn't speak English, or English? I don't, I don't know. I have no idea. It makes no sense to me either. Carlitz, good morning, glad you made it. Faradazer, good morning as to you as well. Glad you made it. So uh Milo, Milo Guyannopoulos, who's someone that I I admire, not because of any particular reason, just because of his gusto and his flair. Okay. And I admire someone who says, you know, has the humility to say I lived a lifestyle that wasn't appropriate and and sincerely changes. Okay. Okay. So he posted this thing. He says, if you're not playing at at Kim.com's level, ask yourself why. Now, at Kim.com is just someone that's got a kind of slightly influential account on uh X, but we've had this conversation with the Jeffrey Epstein release, you know, this idea of the Goyim. Now, those of us who've known this phrase forever, this is the this is the Jew supremacist phrase for the other, right? And uh, so non-Jews were born to serve us. Without that, they have no place in the world, only to serve the people of Israel. And then he puts Jeffrey Epstein. Now, anytime you put something that gets a context, yes, when you get community notes, the community notes gets a lot more traction than your original post because every single person who interacted with your post gets notified. This is this quote is not from Epstein, it's from Rabbi Ovidia Yosef, Sephari chief rabbi of Tel Aviv and influential spiritual leader in the Shoss Party, which is part of Prime Minister Benjamin Yatanyahu's Polish government in 2009 to 2012. So you understand the significance of Milo's hilarious comment. If you're not playing at his level, ask yourself why. Kim.com tricked the system into amplifying his message into the fact that it's not just Jeffrey Epstein, it's the entire Jewish religion. Anyways, uh, Brett Weinstein posted, or uh yeah, Brett Weinstein posted yesterday. He grew up a Jew. Apparently, he never heard of the Talmud till he was an adult, and he'd never heard the phrase goem. I'm like, yeah, fair enough. I mean, okay, you know, not everybody is fully active in whatever faith tradition they have. So yesterday in Issaquah, and this is happening all around Washington State, and I really don't understand it. For whatever reason, you've got these teachers who want to take their students out of classrooms and go participate in ICE protests. Yeah, they're marching. This happened in Bremerton, this happens in Tacoma, this has happened all over the Washington State, western Washington State area. Parent teachers are taking, you should ask your son if anybody's been offered to go stand on the corner for one of these protests for their for their civic engagement, right? So schools, this is happening. Like this is actually happening.

SPEAKER_17 7:24

I believe you.

SPEAKER_08 7:25

Yeah, and administrators are looking the other way because entire classes are walking out. Now, there's been some men on the street people who, why are you skipping class? Because I don't want to go to class, I get to go outside. All right, but you realize you're now like a participant in volume of these protests to make it look like it's legitimate. Well, someone, one of the parents out in Issaquah, Washington, went to confront the group and start asking questions, and these teenagers got a little out of hand.

SPEAKER_02 7:54

All of a sudden, we stumble upon a whole bunch of kids. And I'm like, Do your I turn, do your parents know that you guys are out of school? Somebody bumps into me. I don't know. Somebody says, like, thank you to me. I get my hair, it just turns violent. So fast, I get my hair pulled. I don't know which way is up. I knew that there were police officers there. I saw them just before. I'm waiting on them to come and rescue me from being assaulted. Like, I'm like, how much longer is this going to be? I finally come to I see a man. I was moved so far away from my friend. I see a man here, and I'm like, you have to help me. Pushes me into almost like a police officer. And I was like, What are what are you doing? I just got assaulted. What are you doing here? Why were you not helping me over there? He's like, come this way, come this way. We can I can't get involved right now. It's just too unsafe. We have backup coming to come and you know shut this down. And I'm like, I'm just my head is spinning. I cannot believe what just happened. I still continue to feel unsafe because the police officer was telling me he can't do anything. He's waiting for backup, but he did not do anything. He was just supervising.

SPEAKER_17 9:16

So we're weaponizing our kids.

SPEAKER_08 9:18

Yeah, we're weaponizing our kids. It seems like the school board could just fire the principal and solve all of this.

SPEAKER_17 9:23

Yeah.

SPEAKER_08 9:23

If you let one of your teachers let one kid step out of the classroom during school hours, we're gonna call it kidnapping. We're gonna call what else could it be? You've taken the kids away from the parents have authorized them to be. Yeah. Do you have permission slips from all the kids to go on this wonderful field trip? I'd like to know. Because that's what it looks like to me is a field trip. So I'm assuming you have some type of permission slips.

SPEAKER_17 9:42

Yeah.

SPEAKER_08 9:42

Yeah, this is happening. Like this is our neighborhoods, Ron. Issaqua.

SPEAKER_17 9:46

Yeah.

SPEAKER_08 9:46

This is just there's no difference from Issaqua to Silverdale.

SPEAKER_17 9:49

This is like 40 miles away from Seattle. Yeah.

SPEAKER_08 9:52

I mean, I'm just letting people know that don't know where Issaqua is. Yeah, Issaqua is yeah, it's part of King County. It's in the same county as Seattle. It's it's it's uh a suburb of Bellevue, basically. Correct, yeah. Lots of people in Issaquah work in Seattle. It's just take the I-90 bridge, boom. Yep. So that's the kind of stuff where it's like, uh, first of all, you know, you got one cop there and you've got all these people. Should have called for backup a little earlier. But yeah, yeah, we're weaponizing our kids. You cannot outrun indoctrination. You're we're not gonna outrun it. We're not gonna outvote it. If all those kids actually feel that way, that's your next generation. Yeah, so you know, when the boomers die and the zoomers take their place, that's it.

SPEAKER_17 10:35

But there's a reason if they feel that way, that they feel that way, isn't there? I don't know. I mean I mean, didn't they where did they get all of these ideas? That's you know what I'm okay.

Milo, Goyim, And Community Notes

SPEAKER_08 10:49

I struggle with my kids from time to time having as you know, this woke mindset, like, oh dad, I can't believe you said that. I'm like, who's teaching you that it's bad to say, X-Y?

SPEAKER_17 11:03

Exactly.

SPEAKER_08 11:03

Yes, exactly. It's the teachers, right? It's the teachers that are have an incredible amount of influence over our kids, and every totalitarian state, every government ever has to be able to do that.

SPEAKER_17 11:16

But the teachers in this in this uh little protest are just not standing over on the side, just the kids. That's nothing to do with me.

SPEAKER_08 11:24

I mean, I've been telling what to do for the last three years, but yeah, and that woman doesn't look, I mean, she doesn't have a nose ring, she doesn't have purple or pink hair, she's not fat and overweight with weird skin issues. So she's clearly probably like conservative, right? So I'm sure the teachers who are fat and overweight with those women of color and air are like let her get beat up. It's pretty sad. Uh there was another little incident in Tacoma, Washington yesterday where uh and there's a hella cops where I need to go right there.

SPEAKER_16 12:00

Look at this.

SPEAKER_08 12:08

Look, he's got a gun. This is the suspect that's gonna be taken off. He's he's armed. Trying to get into someone's van. They took him out. So they shot him. Top shot him right there in Tacoma. So up in Insequa, they're letting pedestrians get beat up by students, and down in Tacoma, they're chasing guys with cuts down on the street, and she's on her way to the spa. Hey, we live in a big city, I don't know, man. RFK, RFK was um on with Heritage Foundation, and he gave this interview, and I I want to use this interview to kind of set the stage. So that other stuff was just a little bit of local information and some local flair. This is really where I want to take the theme for today. It's this idea that don't trust the experts, man.

SPEAKER_28 12:55

Parents need to be on their guard because you, you know, we were told by the last administration, trust the experts. That's not a thing. It's not a thing. I argued Monsanto case, and they had experts from Harvard, Sanford, and Yale, and I had experts from Harvard to Sanford Yale, and they're saying two opposite things, depending on what you know what their bias was. And so, you know, um and trusting the experts is not a feature of democracy, and it's not a feature of science.

SPEAKER_08 13:32

It's a that's important to understand. Trusting the experts is not a feature of democracy. The whole point of democracy is everybody is equal in their vote, and everybody then can take information and interpret it for themselves. The duty of authority figures, experts and scientists and whatnot, is to explain to the individual voter, person, whatever, the information in such a way that it becomes easy for consumption. The trust me model is not democratic.

SPEAKER_17 14:05

Right. So that's the other thing that everybody just completely doesn't understand or ignores, and that is that science does not equal truth. Science is a process.

SPEAKER_28 14:16

It's like exactly, exactly of religion and totalitarianism, and not of democracy. So in democracy, we need, you know, my dad told me when I was a kid, people in authority lie. And, you know, the government lies all the time, and it lied to us about the dietary guidelines for 50 years.

School Walkouts And “Weaponized” Students

SPEAKER_08 14:40

50 years. There are people walking around with spare tires, morbidly obese, because they trusted the food pyramid and their dietitians and their school cafeteria lunch ladies and all the people involved in the food process.

SPEAKER_17 14:55

Somebody should do a Venn diagram on people's weight versus their trust level.

SPEAKER_08 15:02

That would be really interesting. Yeah. That sounds like a veritassium thing or something.

SPEAKER_17 15:06

Huh? That sounds like a veritassium thing or something that they can do.

SPEAKER_08 15:09

Yeah. So when people in people in authority lie, imagine what it would be if you're in authority and you're lying about, say, an election. And what if you were the one who won the election, but you were also the one who was administering the election? How much would you be like, trust me, I I checked, I won fair and square, right? You think that that person, whoever is in charge of counting the votes for an election in which they're in, you think that that person would want to be the most transparent, like the most, hey, everybody come look at the ballot so everybody can see I won fair and square, even though it's my job to count the ballots. Does that make sense?

SPEAKER_17 15:44

Like, let me get a couple extra set of eyes in here and get consensus on it's the same thing as recusing yourself if you're a judge and you're involved in the whatever.

SPEAKER_08 15:51

Yeah, it's like, hey, let's avoid the appearance of conflict. Let me let someone else do the counting. Well, that kind of happened down in Arizona with Katie Hobbs. She was the secretary of state in charge of running the 2020 election. She was running for governor and she won. And you know, trust me, I counted everything just fine.

SPEAKER_22 16:07

What if Trump ordered the FBI to search Maricopa County for Arizona's 2020 election records? Can you can they just walk in and do what they did in Fulton County, Georgia?

SPEAKER_23 16:16

Look, these ballots from the 2020 election. I'm it's 2026. Yeah. Uh the Maricopa County ballots have been relitigated over and over again, dozens of times. Uh, we're good on 2020. We know where we stand, we know who won that election, we know who lost.

SPEAKER_08 16:34

Uh doing she's the governor of Arizona. Oh that's Carrie, that's Kitty Hobbs. Okay, liar. Okay. People in people in power lie. That's the default position. Yeah. Oh no. Okay, you had the whole cyber ninja symposium. I remember calling my defense attorney. I was driving on Beaverdick Highway up there, right? Heading up to Port Townsend, and I was making one of those$350 an hour phone calls to my defense attorney. This is, you know, and uh this cyber symposium was going on with or the with the excuse me, the uh ninja thing was going on. And I was incensed. I mean, they had batched up, screwed up signatures, unfold all the stuff, unfolded ballots, you know, poll tabs, and this doesn't match, and that doesn't match. I mean, it was like at the end of the thing, you're waiting for the last sentence of the cybersecurity report to be like the election was fraudulent, and then they go, and that's all we have, folks. It was like, here's our investment, here's all the things that are wrong. And what's your conclusion? Oh, we don't have a conclusion. The end. At the end, we don't have a conclusion. Okay, so then Katie Hobbs is like, see, there's we're good, we still won the election, and everybody who looks at it's like the math doesn't add up, but cyber ninjas wouldn't say it was stolen. And then you look at the pressure he had and stuff like that.

SPEAKER_17 17:50

It's like, okay, but she uses a big word like adjudicated, yeah.

SPEAKER_08 17:54

They didn't have standing, Ron. So, so, anyways, uh, I was calling him, but I was like, hey, after all this cyber ninja stuff, they're surely gonna drop my J6 case. I don't think so, man. I don't think so. Oh, how naive I was. This Fulton Cali election ballot thing is and we're supposed to see the warrant today. So we're gonna see the warrant and the affidavit for probable cause. At some point today, it's gonna be released. I'm I'm I'm actually watching my feed here to see if it possibly pops up while we're talking because I'd love to see what they had, what they presented to a judge, a leftist judge that goes, oh snap. I think five years after the fact or six years after the fact, I think I will send the cops in there to grab the ballots. You know what I mean? I really want to know what they say. There is, again, a narrative being developed on the other side that Trump is going to use this to try to create national elections. Of course he's gonna do that. They're trying to paint that as unconstitutional. Of course it's unconstitutional. When did you think we were living under the constitution? I mean, I'm pretty sure we abandoned that somewhere around 1913, 1933, 1971, 1881. I mean, there's so many moments where I can go, we are post-constitutional, right? So shut up about that. At this point, we're just trying to make it work for us. So, anyways, Face the Nation on Sunday had this on, and they are again in absolute panic over having these ballots, and they're concerned about Tulsi Gabbard being involved. They cannot and will not acknowledge on the left side of the propaganda sphere, they will not acknowledge the potential for foreign involvement that these elections were stolen. After they spent a decade telling us Russia helped Trump, right? What if, what, what if that's it? What if Trump came out and said, Well, we want to look at those ballots, we want to make sure Putin wasn't trying to help me win? Will that give them another narrative to run with? Maybe they can lean into it and go, Yeah, those ballots are all fake. No. This is they're terrifying.

SPEAKER_04 19:56

Ballots you just talked about from Fulton County, we have body camera footage of these FBI agents going and taking the ballots. Why would the FBI now be taking the ballots? Why was the Director of National Intelligence there? And what would they do with that?

SPEAKER_13 20:09

This is a great question, and it still has not been answered. First of all, there was no crime committed in 2020. Those ballots have been counted and reviewed so many times. We know exactly what happened in Georgia in 2020. Joe Biden won that state by a relatively narrow margin of 11,779 votes. In 2024, Donald Trump won that state. Democrats didn't somehow have the magical ability while out of the White House to steal an election in 2020 and then forget to use that power in 2024 when they had the White House.

Tacoma Shooting And Local Crime Snapshot

SPEAKER_08 20:39

Okay. This is where being informed matters. What was the difference between 2020 and 2024? In 2016. If you're deep into this like we are, in 2016, there was a server room in Virginia that somebody walked into with a hammer and bang, bang, bang. And that prevented the last second flip for Hillary Clinton. And it was a shocker. Trump won. He'd overwhelmed all of the on-the-ground cheating. And when the servers couldn't flip things, it was a problem. Okay. So then, fast forward to 2020, not only did you have the servers flipping things because they got in control of it, and the server went to Serbia. So it wasn't in a in a closet in Virginia now, it's in Serbia. Got to keep it away from the hammers. Yeah. Keep it away. Because it's the hammer and scorecard program, apparently. Right? So they took it to Serbia. 2020, that happens. They're backloading ballots. We watched it happen. They've got the COVID, the mail-in ballots, all the rules changed. Cheat, cheat, cheat, cheat, cheat. Period. Then you fast forward to 2024. The RNC finally gets taken over by uh Lara Trump and the I can't remember the chairman's name, the main guy. He's running for uh Senate in North Carolina now. But, anyways, it got taken over. They hired attorneys, unlike in 2020, where they had like 40 attorneys. Now they're They had like 500 attorneys and they were camped out outside of all the critical voting centers, turning away U-Haul trucks at midnight. Literally turning away U-Haul trucks at midnight. In Detroit, they kept waving a U-Haul truck on all night long until Detroit finalized their counting. They kept trying to bring the ballots in, and people stood outside the voting center to deny the receipt of ballots after midnight. And they were too afraid to go to court to try to accept them because they were showing up in a freaking U-Haul. Imagine asking a judge to allow to count ballots that came in on a U-Haul after midnight. They didn't do it. That's why 2024 happened. Not only was the Serbia server fried, but then on top of that, they were vigilant about quickly going to court and things like that.

SPEAKER_17 22:56

You know, every time every time somebody on the news or on the radio says, well, this has been just adjudicated, it's all settled. We've already figured it out. Everybody knows George's, you know, the way it went. Every time somebody says that, I'm just like, but that's why we're doing a podcast here, because I nobody has still, to me, demonstrated to me in like simple terms that some dummy at some dumb ass like me can understand that it was won by Joe Biden. You need to demonstrate to the lowest denominator people, that's me, that it was won by Joe Biden in easy terms. Is there some way you can do that? No. There's no way any nobody can do it. Nobody can. And quit saying that this is all settled. It's not. It never was. It was never adjudicated. It was never settled. I can keep going on like this. You know, Taylor's laughing. Yes, I love the things like this. Finally, we're all playing something.

Theme Shift: Don’t Trust The Experts

SPEAKER_08 23:53

It is the trust the experts. Yeah. In a democracy, you should be able to show me the ballots. I keep having this contention in the Peasant's Pod living room with the in the chat in there. I keep having this argument. It's not an argument, it's a discussion. Because one of one of our listeners is an election worker. Like they work for the county and they manage and supervise elections. And they've got all kinds of safeties for how many ballots come in and how many ballots go out of the machine. But there's a couple spots. They're having open discussions about putting the machines inside of rooms without Wi-Fi and uh cell phone access. Why are you having that discussion? I thought these weren't supposed to connect to the internet. Well, they do, but we but we don't, but but they don't, but they do, but we know they do, but they don't. So oh, and then and then they're having serious discussions about putting the machines in Faraday bags, Faraday cages when they're out on site away from what? What? Why you're this is county workers having this discussion. So clearly you have some insecurity, but trust the machines. Can you spot check them? Well, we do these little spot audits. Well, that's not counting ballots. Like, if you're like, here's the ballots, you're gonna audit, because that's what was happening in Arizona, that Cyber Ninja said they were very specific about which boxes they pulled out the ballots to audit.

SPEAKER_17 25:02

Yeah, and that's that's not a real audit, folks. That's just uh that's like an in-house housekeeping thing that you do just to know where you are. That is not an audit.

SPEAKER_08 25:11

So it's not democratic. I'm like, our elections should be so simple that third graders who know how to add plus one to any whole number should be able to sit and pretty much verify any election. Right. Like it should be that simple. You should be able to just have people sitting around tables counting ballots, multiple people, you figure it out. This this doesn't have to happen.

SPEAKER_17 25:31

Okay, so every time that somebody says, Well, the it's already been adjudicated. The reason that they're saying that is because they're answering a question that somebody across the table asked them. And why can't you give the answer?

SPEAKER_08 25:44

Right, every damn time. Why do you deflect to it's been adjudicated instead of just telling me the answer? Right, every damn time. That's what I want. I just want the answer. Oh, yeah, what was their decision? Oh, the candidate didn't have standing to challenge and look at the ballots. Well, that's what we want to do is look at the ballots. It's been adjudicated. And what was the adjudication? The candidate didn't have standing.

SPEAKER_17 26:07

Exactly.

SPEAKER_08 26:08

So, did anybody look at the ballots? Yeah, after we decided that based on latches, that they couldn't change the outcome, we went ahead and ahead and let them poke around it at, you know, the Cyber Ninja Symposium. So, again, what this guy's saying here in his nice pinstripe suit with his little pocket protect, you know, whatever he's got going on there, right? He's neglecting to tell the whole story. He's neglecting to give the full bit of information. It's just propaganda.

SPEAKER_13 26:35

In 2024, when they had the White House. So we know exactly what happened. If there was a true, honest review of those ballots, it'll confirm exactly uh what the result was, just as when the cyber ninjas reviewed the Maricopa County ballots in Arizona, they found the same exact outcome. Let it happen.

SPEAKER_08 26:51

They didn't.

SPEAKER_13 26:52

Let it happen then.

SPEAKER_08 26:52

I was so excited about it because I thought the Department of Justice might let me off the hook because the election was stolen. That's how convinced I was by the information that the cyber ninjas provided.

SPEAKER_13 27:02

As for the Director of National Intelligence being in Fulton County, um, there is no viable reason to have a high-level political appointee during the execution of a search warrant. That search warrant is as many defects as the body cam footage showed. There was a defect in the address when they first showed up. They had to go back and get a corrected uh search warrant.

SPEAKER_08 27:22

And there's also this um this issue of the statute of limit statute of what would be the reason why a high-level cabinet official that's in the department of the department of national intelligence, what would be the reason they would be there? There's no reason they should be there, but if they were, what would be the reason?

SPEAKER_13 27:40

Limitations. There's a five-year statute of limitations under federal law for any of the crimes that they mentioned in the warrant. There were two specific statutes. That five-year statute has expired by any measure. And so I'm not sure why a magistrate signed off on it.

SPEAKER_08 27:54

Because it's a conspiracy, it's an ongoing conspiracy.

SPEAKER_13 27:58

We're not sure why the DNI was in Fulton County inside a local election warehouse. We've heard shifting explanations first. The deputy attorney general said she happened to be in Atlanta. I don't know that that's particularly credible. And then the president, then we heard the president directed her and then Attorney General Bondi directed her. We have no idea what actually happened.

SPEAKER_04 28:14

Well, we checked, and at least nine top Trump administration officials by CBS criteria raised doubt about the validity or integrity of the 2020 election. That count does not include the president of the United States himself.

Science, Democracy, And Bad Incentives

SPEAKER_08 28:25

At least nine of the cabinet officials are convinced 2020 was stolen. Good. They have a lot of shit to clean up in those departments from the last four years. They should be under very clear understanding that Biden was an auto-pin president and was not the actual elected leader of this country. Right. So I'm glad there are nine cabinet officials who have questioned the 2020. Bartlete says, just looked at the calendar. The 2026 elections fall on 1113. I hope that's a cue marker. I do too. I would love it if we had a huge red wave and we just absolutely swept into office a whole bunch of Republicans. Here's the problem: the Democrats and the Progressives are one step ahead of you. Are you running for office? Are you involved politically? Because if you're not, you might be surprised at some of the shiz that we get on the ballot in 2026. Because the Democrats absolutely know that eventually their brand is going to be so tainted they can't run as Democrats.

SPEAKER_26 29:22

So they are openly, openly running as Republicans. I'm not a real Republican. Like I am telling people the truth. I knock on a door and I say I'm running in the Republican primary, but I'm not a Republican. I'm a progressive. I'm running as a Republican in the Republican primary for Congressional District 14 because that is where the actual competition happens in our gerrymander district. It happens in the primaries. Like if you're in a district that is a lock for Democrats, that Democratic primary is where the competition is. And quite frankly, while the can't win strategy is about building for the long term and like building our bench and being ready for fair maps in 2030, we gotta fucking win right now. Because we are in an emergency, like a democratic emergency. And so the place I can win is as a fake Republican.

SPEAKER_08 30:10

I'm not a real is as a fake Republican. What's a rhino? Republican in name only. I'm running as a rhino. I'm a progressive. Vote for me. But you know what happens is all the Republicans that don't follow politics close enough for pay attention, they're gonna get their ballot. They're gonna know that someone big is at the top of the ticket, they're gonna know the vote for the big, and then they're gonna go down ballot and just vote R. You're gonna vote for that gal. Yep. She's gonna win the primary, then she's gonna go on to the general and she's gonna run against a Democrat.

SPEAKER_17 30:37

Yep. And you have no idea what her platform is or what she's gonna vote for. Nope.

SPEAKER_08 30:42

Because she's lying to you from the start. Because we gotta go fix things. Well, what are you gonna fix? Well, I can't tell you the truth because I'm trying to get the Republican votes, right? But I'm a progressive. Well, what does that mean? Oh, everything you think it means, baby. Everything you think it means. Yep. Bolshevik through and through. If words have no meaning, Republican Democrat, the party system is about power.

SPEAKER_17 31:08

Well, it's the same, it's the same thing as me in Washington State that's been blue for about 30 years, thinking, you know, if I want to run for office, if I'm gonna run I and I want to win an office seat, I kind of need to like pretend I'm a Democrat.

SPEAKER_08 31:22

Yeah, I was kind of thinking the same thing. I'm like, I don't know how long I'd last though. Like maybe I'd be like, I was Antifa at the Capitol. Oh, well, come on over. I think they'd be like, hey, I already hate the government. Oh, we love the government right now. We love the government, but we hate the government. Does anybody love the government? Or does the government become like the stooges' useful tool?

SPEAKER_17 31:44

Well, I think that the people that are getting paid from the Democrat love the government.

SPEAKER_08 31:49

Unless the Republicans are in power. I don't know. I mean, it's like snip-snap snip snap, you know. I I Scott Adams had it best. If your default position is don't trust the government, you almost always end up being right.

SPEAKER_15 32:02

Yeah.

SPEAKER_08 32:02

Almost always end up being right. Why is Donald Trump different? Donald Trump is different because he doesn't care, right? He made his billions on his own. He's not like our last handful of presidents. Sure, they were worth millions of dollars, but millions ain't billions.

SPEAKER_17 32:16

Well, and he's also not distracted from day trading like Pelosi.

SPEAKER_08 32:21

He's not distracted by day trading. Yeah, he doesn't care. He said many times if I lose two million, lose five billion, it doesn't matter. This is about saving our country. Robert Kennedy Jr. and Donald Trump has very opposing views on policy. Okay, they they're very different people. Robert Kennedy Jr. is a classic Democrat. Donald Trump has been a classic Republican for as long as he says the idea that he switched parties from Democrat to Republican, that's I think that's a lie. Because you can go back to when he was talking to Oprah and he's like, I'd run as a Republican. I'm a Republican. Reagan was the greatest president ever. That's not something Democrats say. Okay, he was a Republican. In fact, he he was even a little while a part of the Libertarian Party or the liberal, whatever the you know, far right Republican Party thing going on. So he's definitely a Republican. Now, he's socially progressive, you know, whether he likes spaghetti or steak, he doesn't care. So here's RFK talking about how great it is to work for Donald Trump because he doesn't care. He's not bot.

SPEAKER_28 33:19

He doesn't care about vested interests, and he doesn't care about, you know, uh about offending powerful people. So uh it's a joy to work for him because he lets me do stuff that I don't think anybody else would ever let me do.

Elections, Audits, And Adjudication

SPEAKER_08 33:38

When I consider the long-term project trajectory of our country, our health as a nation is one of the most important things. So everything that I see RFK doing over there at HHS, he's kind of operating in the background. I mean, every now and we we get a big hoopla, but he is, I mean, he's taken out chemicals out of our food. I mean, these are not insignificant things. You you start to chart that out over 10, 15, 20 years. You know, we might go back to the time, you know, you see the pictures of people in the 1960s all fit and all the kids are like doing pull-ups and stuff. And now there's like one kid in the whole elementary school that can do a pull-up. And uh, we might go back to that, Ron. Like, we might actually be a healthy people again. I was watching this other thing where it was like a bunch of boomers being like, I ate junk food growing up and it was fine with me, and it was showing ingredient lists, and it was like latest potato chips, like potatoes, oil, salt. It's like, and now it's like a paragraph of all these chemicals. He's like, these are not the same product, you know. It was like going through all these Oreos, like they've added 200 chemicals to it, you know. These are not the same products anymore.

SPEAKER_15 34:40

Yeah.

SPEAKER_08 34:41

Now, our show is called The Peasants Perspective. And one of the things I say at the beginning of the show, and I recognize that I misstate words regularly, I leave S's off the end. Okay. Man, I don't correct you. Huh? I don't correct you. It's it's good because you'd be correcting me constantly. I know. I realize that word. My brain is obviously running faster than my mouth, but there's a scene there where I say, you know, when the kings and queens go riding by, but it comes out kings and kings. When the kings and queens go riding by, we're the peasants in the background, right? We're the guys that are off in the blacksmith shop pounding away on horseshoes. We're the people that are picking carrots to take to market. Like, we're just the people that have to live here, no matter who's in charge. So when the kings and queens ride by, it's like, ah, great, there's some something. So I find it fascinating because England still lives under this monarchy. They still have this, you know, holding them up on a pedestal, whatever that means.

SPEAKER_17 35:38

I know they have they're getting a different flavor of whatever we're getting.

SPEAKER_08 35:42

Yeah, yeah.

SPEAKER_17 35:43

We kind of we kind of are highly involved in our places. We're getting the Neapolitan version and they're getting the Spumoni version.

SPEAKER_08 35:50

There you go. So here's a modern day version of the kings and queens go walking by and we're like on the sidelines watching it. So this is this is yesterday in England. This Epstein thing is rocking the royal family.

SPEAKER_16 36:15

So this is So as you guys know, you can't hardly ever hear the kingdoms in the podcast.

SPEAKER_08 36:24

But this is King Charles walking through the crowd and in the background King Charles! How long have you known about Epstein and Advoodies being heckled by his own people walking through the crowd? You know, historically, when that starts to happen to the kings and queens, when they go out into public and start getting heckled, bad things usually follow. Bad things usually follow. Uh the whole Epstein thing. Now I didn't talk about this yesterday because it was I just there was so much to cover. But there was on August 9th, and if you remember, Jeffrey Epstein died on August 10th. And on August 9th, Jeffrey Epstein uh was still alive. He was still in his cell, he was still, you know, meeting with his attorneys and whatnot. But someone in the Southern District of New York, U.S. attorney Jeffrey S. Berman, drafted a for-immediate release, a for-immediate release file here. And it was on Friday, August 9th. Manhattan U.S. attorney Jeffrey S. Berman said, quote, this is a quote. This was a quote that was prepared on August 9th. This is not a hoax. This has been confirmed. Well, it was published August 9th.

SPEAKER_17 37:38

It could have been prepared before that.

SPEAKER_08 37:40

It was in their computers. Okay. So this got released because everything that touched Epstein got dumped in these files. So this is one of the, like, we're getting all the tips and all that stuff. It's like getting a bunch of discovery. So this is one of the things, like it's part of the case file. So you open up the case file and there's a for immediate release draft notice.

SPEAKER_17 37:57

With a quote.

SPEAKER_08 37:58

With a quote. Earlier this morning, August 9th, the Manhattan Correctional Center confirmed that Jeffrey Epstein, who faced charges brought by this office of engaging in sex trafficking of minors, has been found unresponsive in his cell and pronounced dead shortly thereafter. Today's events are disturbing, and we are deeply aware of their potential to present yet another hurdle to giving Epstein's many victims their day in court, to those brave young women who have already come forward and to the many others who have yet to do so. Let me reiterate that we remain committed to standing with you in our and our investigation of the conduct charged in the indictment, which included a conspiracy count, remains ongoing. Okay.

SPEAKER_17 38:36

Weird.

SPEAKER_08 38:36

That's a weird quote. Because the next day, when he actually died, they updated it. So here's the August 10th one. Earlier this morning, the Manhattan Correctional Center confirmed that Jeffrey Epstein, who faced charges brought by this office of engaging in sex trafficking of minors, had been found unresponsive as Dell and was pronounced dead shortly thereafter of an apparent suicide. It's the same damn letter. No, it's not. It's not pronounced dead shortly thereafter. Oh pronounced dead shortly thereafter of an apparent suicide. Oh weird. They killed Jeffrey Epstein. Just this confirms what I alleged yesterday. They planned it. Patrick Burns said a foreign government had gas that came in that got the guards that were on duty to fall asleep, you know, the whole thing, and then they came in and did this. They were prepped. August 9th, they had a draft statement with a quote in their files. There's the metadata. It was created on August 9th. Epstein was alive in his cell, living a life, awaiting trial. August 10th. Oh, hey, that draft that we prepared yesterday had uh out of apparent suicide and go ahead and hit publish. They never thought this would come out. This is a smoking gun.

SPEAKER_17 39:55

Absolutely.

SPEAKER_08 39:56

This Jeffrey S. Herman, uh I don't know. I don't know what to think about this. This is horrendous. You don't think your government lies to you? Here it is, right here. You're staring at it. They prepared a death announcement for a living man.

SPEAKER_17 40:11

They need to suffer.

Fulton, Arizona, And Counting Battles

SPEAKER_08 40:13

He decided to hang himself as if they could project into the next day that this would happen. Are you awake yet? You think it was easy for me to walk through prison knowing shit like this happens? You want to know the stories that I heard about four-point harnesses getting detained in the warden's office for days on end? I mean, the stuff that goes on inside of prison can hardly be spoken. When you've got U.S. attorneys' offices that are drafting suicide announcements the day before the suicide happens, I'd nay call it a suicide. I would nay call it a suicide. Here's another one. Looks like hard confirmation that the FBI knowingly wiped the footage from Epstein's prison. Holy crap. So let's see if we can read this here. On March 12th, 2020, date of birth, blah, blah, blah. So that's identifying who it was. Blank advised that the only one hard drive of the camera system was working at the time of the incident on August 10th, 2019, when a DVR went bad. None of the cameras recorded. There was a system failure of the D VR2 on July 19th, 2019, and the motherboard failed on DVR2 on August 8th, 2019. The hard drive failure occurred on August 10th, 2019. He recalled that there was a body alarm around 6 a.m. on August 10th, 2019. A body alarm is where a guards have the guards have radios. Okay. These are specialized radios. And if the radio turns horizontal because it's on your belt, so if you get knocked on your back or you, if you if that thing turns horizontal, it alarms every guard. Their thing goes off. And then the rate, the the watchtower says which one went off and where they're located. And I've I've what I've seen it happen because I had a CO in the woodshop who tripped once. And about 45 seconds later, there were 19 guards in the woodshop getting ready to pound our brains in. And all he did was trip.

SPEAKER_15 42:05

Okay.

SPEAKER_08 42:06

There was another CO that did this so often that his radio would fall out and fall over, and there'd be a body alarm and everybody would come running. And it was like intense. That we actually made him a wooden dummy radio in the woodshop. Perfect mock-up. Painted everything. Perfect mock-up. And they did it as the whole game. Like, you know, it's like uh the show where the uh with Mark Wahlberg and where he does the table pop and shoots his gun inside. So they take his gun and they give him a wooden gun and a rape whistle. It was like that. I was like, you can't have that radio because you keep running the body alarm. So a body alarm went off. The MCC personnel who responded stated that he was one of the personnel who briefly tried to resuscitate Jeffrey Epstein. Okay. After the incident was asked about the cameras, there were two new hard drives to install, but installing the new hard drives would mean the prior data would be lost. The warden wanted video, and so Blank was told to start working on the system. Blank started removing the hard drives in order to rebuild the DVR. Blank advised that an FBI agent was the one who pulled out the DVR. Also, Blank also advised that they knew that were replacing the hard drives, the system would be wiped out. And he advised personnel at the MCC of that. Hey, if you swap out that hard drive while it's running, you'll lose all the data that's on it. Yeah, yeah, no, we want to do that. We just had a guy die in that cell block yesterday. We should probably preserve the evidence. No, no, it's let's just skip, let's let's go ahead and replace the hard drive. Wow, that's coincidental. That's interesting.

SPEAKER_17 43:36

You know, I I also don't believe that. You know, I also have a server with with uh hard drives in it right over there making noise. And when you pull one of those uh uh hard drives out, it just keeps running. And the other hard drive has a copy of everything on that hard drive. So you got two hard drives? Yeah. I think what he's saying here is they pulled them both. You pull them both, you're still fine because the data stays on those hard drives. So the this is I don't 100% believe this story.

SPEAKER_08 44:08

This is these are like 1999 systems. They still work that same.

SPEAKER_17 44:11

Okay. Well, it's the same way. It's called a RAID system. And uh what a RAID system is, it's has nothing to do with what we're doing. But it it copies the data on the hard drives from hard drive hard drive. And if one of those hard drives is missing, it goes into a different way that it copies and writes the data. And so none of it ever gets lost. So I I don't believe that this data got lost. You know, lost. You know, I think that they're just using this as an excuse to not have data to look at.

SPEAKER_08 44:41

Maybe. Maybe. Here's another one where one of the guards wrote his report of the incident. And he said, Upon arriving at the MCC, Blank completed some tasks before Blank assigned him to the hospital on Park Row, which is separate from the main MCC building where Epstein's body was being guarded. When Blank arrived at the hospital with case management coordinator, D. Blank, who was responsible for taking Epstein's fingerprints, COs Blank and Blank, that's correctional officers, were with Epstein's body and had secured the scene. Blank remained with the COs and Blank until personnel from the office of Chief Medical Examiner, OCME, arrived to transport Epstein to their facility. Due to the large news media presidence outside the MCC, a male OCME official called and said he would be arriving at the loading dock with a black vehicle in order to thwart the media, blank and blank and blank used boxes and sheets to create what appeared to be a human body, which was put into a white OCMC OCME vehicle, which the press followed, allowing the black vehicle to part unnoticed with Epstein's body. Oh, so you're still body doubling us, and you've got the decoy body, which just opens the conversation of where's the real body, or is he still alive? I'll hold the contention until I see evidence further. He is dead. And the misdirect that's happening right now that people like Alex Jones and many other pundits are biting on is that he's not dead and he's alive somewhere. I believe he's dead, but by you not thinking he didn't kill himself, you're not asking who killed him. That's the thing. They put a press release statement saying he was found unresponsive. There were intentions to run a murder, death. You know, they could have said he was stabbed, right? He was found unresponsive in himself. From what? Right. The next day they uh they updated the draft and added of apparent suicide. It's like prima fase evidence. Who in their right mind prepares a press release about a dead person that's not dead? Right.

SPEAKER_17 46:42

Unless they're going to suicide them.

SPEAKER_08 46:46

Or just take them out of there and call it a death.

SPEAKER_15 46:48

Right.

SPEAKER_08 46:49

Again, I mean, we have to hold open the possibilities. I believe that he's dead and that they're misdirecting us by making us look it's the Elvis, you know, like there's literally going to be Epstein sightings from now to the end of time.

SPEAKER_15 47:02

Right.

SPEAKER_08 47:03

Right. Anybody who's got gray hair and looks halfway like him in a grainy photograph at a distance is like Epstein's hanging out in Silverdale.

Simple Elections Vs Machine Mystique

SPEAKER_17 47:10

Hey, if there's some 20-year-old out there that wants to start a channel, you can start one right now that Epstein's still alive, and that could be your channel, and that could be your thing. That's all you do is go out and get the likes. Just do deep dives every day on new videos.

SPEAKER_08 47:22

Literally with latex masks, you can get an Epstein mask. And yes, you could absolutely do this. Epstein in the theater, Epstein at the restaurant, Epstein at the coffee shop. It's a Wells Where's Waldo. Ron, let's do it. Somebody listening to this podcast, please reach out to me. Let's do a joint venture together. And we're going to do the Where's Epstein channel. And it's going to be like a modern-day Welsh Waldo where we're going to put YouTube videos, random shots at the mall, at the food court. And it's going to be for people to put in the comments where the Epstein is. That's exactly what we're going to do. Ron, take a note, please. Write it down. Latex Epstein mask, where's Epstein YouTube channel, where we just show video footage of public spaces with the Epstein mask person walking around, and that'll be the whole point is for people to look at the YouTube videos just like a Warschwaldo book and find the Epstein. And in fact, we could either make it fun, we could have multiple Epsteins. Bad Epstein, Epstein with a hat, Epstein with the fake nose and mustache glasses. It's perfect.

SPEAKER_17 48:21

If you find one of our Epsteins out in the wild, you could get prizes.

SPEAKER_08 48:28

That's right. Yes. Yeah, if you come up on them, are you Epstein? Well, of course I am. Epstein pull the mask off. I love it. And then it'll even be better. We'll pull the mask off, and below that mask will be a reptilian mask.

SPEAKER_17 48:43

Oh no, no, you gotta pull off the Clinton mask first.

SPEAKER_08 48:46

Yeah, the Clinton mask to the Epstein mask to the reptilian mask. I love it. And then we'll pull it off, and it will just be Kristen Welker. I love it. All right. Frasier.

SPEAKER_17 49:01

Uh-oh. Small technical difficulty.

SPEAKER_08 49:05

Unplugged my microphone. Uh let's see here. Uh God's Army Brat 9444. You need that you need the clip of the section of the woman running as a Republican and post it with does a two-party system exist? Yeah, that's it. Carlito, great setup for a tweet. Pony boy, he's lucky guy to win the lottery, also. I know. Yes, uh, people don't know that. He won the Zor the lottery and put the money in the Zoro trust, which is his trust, right? Okay.$80 million. He wanted a lottery ticket. What that guy is one of the luckiest guys. I mean, not only does he escape his own suicide attempt. Uh Frazier, you should talk to your father. He knows about failed hard drives recovery and raid systems. Epstein is with Elvis. I saw them the other day at Burger King. Exactly. I think that the Where's Epstein idea is a million-dollar idea. So I need some help. I'm gonna have to get some front cash for the vinyl mask, but it's probably totally worth it. So, in other news, and this is something that we have discussed for a long time in context with Epstein, but this idea that Donald Trump is the one who turned him in. We now have absolute confirmation Donald Trump is the one who turned him in. You're going to hear people say Donald Trump called the police after the fact. That's not what happened. Okay, so there's this report from 2019 of a police officer who's being interviewed about Epstein's prior case. Okay.

SPEAKER_15 50:29

Okay.

SPEAKER_08 50:29

And I I have it somewhere, the page one of this explains it. But basically, this is the report. Trump knew Epstein was disgusting. Trump said Maxwell was Epstein's operative and quote, she is evil and to focus on her. Trump told Blank that he was around Epstein once when teenagers were present and Trump got the hell out of there. Trump was one of the very first people to call when people found out that they were investigating Epstein and he was the tipster. No one could explain how Epstein made his money. They knew he worked for Bear Stearns. Blank was told that Epstein was kind of a technical guy and that would make it happen, but you didn't know, you didn't want to know how. None of the Epstein's that P P PBPD, that's Palm Beach Police Department, spoke with, said they had sexual contact with men other than Epstein while in Epstein's orbit, and the one went out screaming. Prince Andrew was a fixture in Palm Beach, but had and and he had no protection as in security while there. Blank has done interviews in the past with Blank people victims that PP B D was paid off by Epstein, which was Blank went to to and did these interviews. He felt he felt he needed to defend the police department. An interior designer told the police department that rooms in the Virginia Virgin Islands had been decorated for teenage girls. Blank contacted the Virgin Island Police Department, but they were not helpful. In the end, Epstein had turned himself in to plea to the misdemeanor and was not notified and found out from the newspaper. Anyway, so Trump was the informant, which we found out during the first big dump of Epstein stuff when Michael Wolfe, the Trump hater, who's written a couple books about Trump and was coordinating with Jeffrey Epstein to dig up dirt on Donald Trump, said this.

Royals, Epstein, And Public Backlash

SPEAKER_12 52:12

Epstein believed that Donald Trump went to the Palm Beach police and said, um uh, you know, Jeffrey Epstein has young girls at his house, thereby beginning the legal process which would ultimately bring Jeffrey Epstein down.

SPEAKER_08 52:29

Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Makes perfect sense. Makes perfect sense. Now, um, which video is that? Hold on a second. I might be out of out of order on my queue here, which is not unusual.

SPEAKER_17 52:44

I was just reading that Fraser comment again. Epstein is with Elvis. I saw them the other day at Burger King. Did you already read that? Yeah.

SPEAKER_08 52:55

Um, here it is. Okay. So Alan Dershowitz is all over these Epstein files. He was uh Epstein's attorney. And there's been allegations that he did this, did that. The biggest thing was Virginia Goofy, who included Alan Dershowitz in her accusations. And then Virginia Goofy recanted those allegations.

SPEAKER_15 53:14

Okay.

SPEAKER_08 53:15

Which creates a lot of problems because now it's like, well, what other allegations are you going to recant when put under pressure? You know what I'm saying?

SPEAKER_17 53:22

I don't know. Is there money involved?

SPEAKER_08 53:24

I don't know. So I don't know. Now, now Alan Dershowitz has long held Trump wasn't involved. He holds opinions that Epstein wasn't a pedophile. I don't know, right? But here's one thing that this post says, and I like this. This comes from the Rubber Duck 79. Remember, Alan Dershowitz went on live on TV in 2019 and sang like a canary about what was dropped last weekend. Alan Dershowitz was one of the first to capitalize to Trump during capitulate to Trump during his public term, which is the reason he successfully defended Trump on impeachment 21. Number one. This interview was 2019, right after Epstein was arrested, and Trump's labor secretary, Alexander Costa, resigned in shame after Trump put the spotlight on him, as he was the one that gave Epstein a sweetheart deal in 2019, the U.S. attorney. Scripted. The whole thing looks scripted. Dershowitz popped up on flight logs. So this is him getting ahead of the story and going on TV and stating he had evidence of videotape showing Bill and Hillary Clinton having sex with underage girls and other elites being handcuffed and put in jail. Here you go. This is Dershowitz talking about it and then everything Trump has said about it leading up to it. This is the part that all the hoaxers, the Epstein hoaxers, when Trump says Epstein's a hoax, it's because Trump's the one who turned in Epstein. Trump's the one who made sure that he got prosecuted for the real deal this time. Trump's the one who went out to the people that were in his orbit and flipped them and unburdened them from having to do Maxwell's or Epstein's bidding, including Alan Dershowitz, as it says, the first to capitulate to give to Trump everything he needed to know. This is what happened, and this is one of the reasons why they hate him so much, and they must smear Trump with Epstein.

SPEAKER_11 55:17

There are emails are secret, but that prove there'll be prominent people in handcuffs when prominent people in handcuffs.

SPEAKER_19 55:32

Human trafficking is the biggest deal. Children are probably the most harmed. They grab them, they put tape over their mouth, they tie their heads, and they take them to another country.

SPEAKER_11 55:55

It names names. These people are gonna go to jail once these emails come out. The woman who wrote to the New York Post claiming she had videotapes of these people are going to jail when this stuff comes out, right?

SPEAKER_08 56:08

That was early on. That was the initial 2019.

SPEAKER_17 56:13

Okay.

Prewritten DOJ Release And Camera Wipes

SPEAKER_08 56:14

That was that was when Epstein was arrested. That was like, and Trump was saying those things beforehand. So these guys have coordinated taking down Epstein. Now there's this hoax. What is the Epstein hoax? What is the Epstein hoax? I'm gonna reveal to something to you guys, my audience, right now that has been patently obvious to anybody who's paid attention to this. I have sympathies for underage kids who get wrapped up in this stuff and get involved in trafficking. Unfortunately, my sympathy has to end when you turn 18. That's just the way the law works. Once you turn 18, you're supposed to have some accountability. You're supposed to have a moral compass, supposed to know what's right or wrong. And uh Thomas Massey and Lauren Bulbert and MTG and others and Rokana rallied around these victims. These victims of Jeffrey Epstein, these women, these people that were victimized by him, victims. They were victims, Ron. These women were victims. And so one of the things that the redaction scheme based on the law that they created and passed was that you could redact the name of victims. So in all these documents that have been released, the problem now is being presented as the DOJ redacted names of perpetrators. Okay. Perpetrators. So are they redacting these names to avoid embarrassment? Are they redacting these names because there's ongoing criminal prosecution, which Todd Blanche has kind of alleged there's not? Why did they redact the names? Victims have accused other alleged victims of not being victims but being traffickers.

SPEAKER_15 57:57

Right.

SPEAKER_08 57:57

This is the Golene Maxwell saying she was a victim of Epstein.

SPEAKER_15 58:00

Right.

SPEAKER_08 58:01

Were you? This is the, you know, if if you're over 18 and you're a victim of Epstein and then you go out and procure girls, are you still a victim?

SPEAKER_17 58:09

Right. You know, every all of a sudden everybody's a victim.

SPEAKER_08 58:12

So this is Lauren Bulbert coming out of the SCIF having reviewed documents.

SPEAKER_09 58:18

Congresswoman, are you among the members who got to see the unredacted files today?

SPEAKER_03 58:21

Um, yes, I saw some of them, not all of them, obviously. Uh I'll be going back tomorrow to see more.

SPEAKER_09 58:26

Any reaction on what you've seen so far?

SPEAKER_03 58:27

Um, I I think that there's uh folks who are definitely implicated in post-conspirators. And uh, you know, I don't think everyone there that was uh talking about underage girls being trafficked are victims.

SPEAKER_08 58:39

Mm-hmm. So they redacted names of people talking about underage girls and they're not victims.

SPEAKER_09 58:46

And do you support any clemency for Glenn Maxwell? She was saying that she's I do not.

SPEAKER_03 58:49

I think I think Glenne Maxwell should get more time, and she should definitely be in a harsher prison than what she's in. It's absolutely disgusting. Got it.

SPEAKER_09 58:56

Thank you, Congresswoman.

SPEAKER_08 58:57

That makes sense. Glenne Maxwell testified yesterday and she just pled the fifth straight across the board. Stuff question. What's your name? Plead the fifth. Or so now here's what she's talking about. This is representative Anna Paulina Luna, who highlights this email. To Jeffrey Epstein, Jeffrey Epstein estate vacation. That's what J-E-E stands for. Sent to, and it's from thank you for the fun last night. Dot dot dot. Your littlest girl was a little naughty, sent from my iPhone. And oh and Lauren Bulbert points out this name that's redacted is not a victim. And guess what? It's a woman. It's one of these women that stood behind Massey and Mem T G and said, release the files, release the files.

SPEAKER_17 59:40

Now, is she one of the is she a person that was underage when she first got involved? And so she could claim victim status. It doesn't matter. I know it doesn't matter to you right now, but I'm just trying to figure out the logistics of how you could possibly figure out how to claim a status so that you could get your name redacted, you know, legitimately, uh, quote unquote, and and be able to avoid all of the nonsense by having your name wiped out.

SPEAKER_08 1:00:07

You know, this is the hoax.

SPEAKER_17 1:00:09

Yes.

SPEAKER_08 1:00:09

This is the hoax, folks. This is turned in from a who's a victim, who's a perpetrator hoax into why did you redact this name hoax? And that's what we're gonna see from Thomas Massey and Rokana. Why is this name redacted? Why did the DOJ redact this name? That's the hoax. The hoax is the misdirect to put the attention on the DOJ for having done something wrong, right? For having over-redacted these documentations. Here's Anna Paulina Luna being asked about this.

SPEAKER_09 1:00:37

Are you gonna are you able to see the uh the DOJ unredacted versions?

SPEAKER_25 1:00:40

I'm gonna be going tomorrow. There's an uh I think every member of Oversight has gone through so far or is going to be going through so far. So yes.

SPEAKER_09 1:00:45

But tomorrow will be your first time?

SPEAKER_25 1:00:46

No, my second.

SPEAKER_09 1:00:47

Okay, is there anything you can share from what you saw today?

SPEAKER_25 1:00:49

Um, I posted about it publicly, but some of the people that are in the most egregious redactions are claiming to be victims, and I don't think that they're victims if you're engaging in child sex trafficking.

SPEAKER_08 1:00:58

Got it. There you go. There you go. You've been claiming to be victims, but you are absolutely engaged in child sex trafficking and you're using victimhood status to protect yourself and your women. And the DOJ probably just redacted all the women's names because they've overblown this status of victim. And keep in mind what happened as soon as these files got released, those same victims that were clamoring for the release want them resealed. Why? Because maybe they forgot that they had sent an email saying that little girl was naughty. Oh, I'm not a victim. When reality hits you in the face, it's like reality hit me in the face. I touched a cop. You touched a cop. The election doesn't matter, the votes don't matter. You did a thing. Reality. Oh, I'm a victim. I'm a victim. Yeah, but you're victimizing. Maybe you're not Jeffrey Epstein, but you're supposed to be of the age of accountability, right? And so here it is again. Let's just play it again.

SPEAKER_09 1:02:01

Are you gonna are you able to see the uh the DOJ unredacted versions?

SPEAKER_25 1:02:05

I'm gonna be going tomorrow. There's an uh I think every member of Oversight has gone through so far or is going to be going through so far. So yes.

SPEAKER_09 1:02:10

But tomorrow will be your first time?

SPEAKER_25 1:02:11

No, my second.

SPEAKER_09 1:02:12

Okay, is there anything you can share from what you saw today?

SPEAKER_25 1:02:14

Um, I posted about it publicly, but some of the people that are in the most egregious redactions are claiming to be victims, and I don't think that they're victims if you're engaging in child tech trafficking.

SPEAKER_08 1:02:23

Got it. Now, when we listen to Rokana, when we listen to Rokana and we listen to Thomas Massey, notice how they change it. If Lauren Boebert and Luna saw rich billionaire men's names, they're not claiming to be victims. Lex Wexner, who seems to be a fixation of Massey yesterday, has never claimed to be a victim. But his name was redacted in a few spots, but unredacted in other spots, which probably just means it was an over, you know, uh open case or something like that. But notice how Massey focuses on the men. Whereas these ones are like, if you're claiming to be a victim, no men have claimed to be a victim.

SPEAKER_09 1:03:05

Questions you mentioned that uh there are some things that have been redacted that probably shouldn't have been redacted. Yeah.

SPEAKER_14 1:03:09

Is anything can you elaborate on that? Yeah, six men's names. One of them's listed as a co-conspirator. Why would you redact his name?

SPEAKER_08 1:03:21

Six men's name. One why would you redact his name? So is this about uh prosecution or is this about going after the DOJ and impeaching Pam Bondi and Trump's people who he needs to use to clean up the election fraud? Why would they not redact the names? You're making a whole lot of noise, Massey and Rokana, about the DOJ's actions here. Name the fucking names. And then when you do, you name Lex Wexner? We know Lex Wexner's involved.

SPEAKER_17 1:03:51

Yeah.

SPEAKER_08 1:03:52

This isn't new. Oh, but why didn't they un-redact his name? Because he was unredacted in a bunch of other places.

SPEAKER_14 1:04:00

Right. There's not victim what I'm saying is it's not just victims' names that they've redacted.

SPEAKER_09 1:04:07

Then how can we get those names then? Ah like the public generally.

SPEAKER_14 1:04:11

Well, I'm hopeful the DOJ will release them now that I've pointed it out to them. We could we've either got to say, okay, we made a mistake, um, or we're not gonna un-redact that.

SPEAKER_09 1:04:24

Okay. And are you gonna be going back to see I know like there's there's sort of like a procession now of members who are going yeah, I'm scheduled for tomorrow morning too. Okay. So what are you looking to what are you gonna look into tomorrow that you haven't looked into today?

SPEAKER_14 1:04:39

There's millions of files. I've still I've still got files on my list to look at. Got it. All right, thank you. Thank you, Congressman.

Body Doubles, Missing Video, And FOIA Notes

SPEAKER_08 1:04:45

So Massey's focused on the co-conspirators that are not redacted. Because Massey's Massey's point on this is to go after the DOJ. I don't believe Massey wants justice for this victims. I mean, Lauren Boebert and Luna both clearly, in my opinion, implied that the females who have claimed to be victims I know that was really weird. What was the word Annapolina used? Most egregious emails. The most agree Hey, nice torture video. Probably one of the girls. Hey, the one was really naughty. One of the girls. They're claiming to be victims. Massey looks, in my opinion, when you see that, he's like, How do I play this? How do I play this? I took up, I took up for them, which is fine, but now they're the perpetrators, and now I'm gonna go target the people who've been unredacted forever. How many times have I said Victoria's Secret was that they were tra she was trafficked because Lex Wexner's involved?

SPEAKER_14 1:05:45

An example of something, maybe it wasn't intentional on their part. I'd like to hear his take on the redaction of the CEO, who's listed as a co conspirator in the 2019 child sex trafficking case.

SPEAKER_05 1:05:56

So, can I ask you because uh and I want to ask you this is the same person. And Todd Blanche also said about that tonight that the document you're citing there has victim names in it. To say that's why there are redactions. He said, we have just unredacted Les Wexner's name from this document, but his name already appears in the file.

SPEAKER_08 1:06:13

Okay, so this is really interesting. So Thomas Massey kept going in and saying, Well, what about this person? And Todd Blanche, he's clearly been assigned to babysit Massey and make sure that he cuts Massey off on any corner from having a wedge to hurt Trump, was like, Oh yeah, unredacted that real quick. Oh yeah, we'll unredact that real quick. Because, and then he goes on to say, you know, we have just unredacted Lex Wester's name from the document, but his name already appears in the files thousands of times. DOJ is hiding nothing. They're not protecting Wexner by by accidentally redacting it here. Now, here's the other thing we found out. These documents already came redacted from the Southern District of New York because they've been in case, they've been open case files for a decade now or six, seven years now. So they've been redacted for various purposes, and clearly the DOJ just assumed some of these redactions. So, Thomas Massey, this well-known retired CEO, who has been one of the ongoing people in this conversation, you have revealed nothing. You have not advanced this narrative one inch. But oh boy, have you pointed the finger at the DOJ. You want to impeach these people because why? Because they redacted his name on a single document when he appeared thousands of times elsewhere.

SPEAKER_05 1:07:26

Well, thousands of other times. And he says the Justice Department is hiding nothing. Is that the retired CEO that you're referencing?

SPEAKER_14 1:07:34

It is. He unredacted it after I found it. That's a problem. And I'm glad they have admitted.

SPEAKER_08 1:07:40

Why are you wasting our time here? I'm back to this. I have we joke about it.

unknown 1:07:45

Thanks.

SPEAKER_08 1:07:47

Massey, you're not showing your best face here. You're not showing your best face here. Tell us about one we don't know. Don't give us the list of people we already know. We already know Lex Wexner was involved with Epstein. Epstein managed his estate. You're not and his name's everywhere. You're using this to get airtime. And she just called you out. Caitlin Calls was like, is it Lex Wesner? The CEO? Say his name. It's not a secret, Massey.

SPEAKER_17 1:08:14

He's like, yo, the sky is blue. They told us it was green, but I let them know. So it's like, oh, thanks, man.

SPEAKER_05 1:08:21

So you're saying it was redacted when you went in there today. And after you tweeted that, they un-redacted it.

SPEAKER_14 1:08:27

Correct. Now he's got four other names he needs to un-redact. Did he respond to that? There's a list of 20 people. Um, and there's four men in there that need to be un-redacted. Here's another troubling thing that I found.

SPEAKER_08 1:08:39

Hold on, hold on.

SPEAKER_14 1:08:40

Can you just tell us who they are?

SPEAKER_08 1:08:42

Hold on, hold on. There's a list of there's a list of 19 people, and there are four men. Epstein, one, two, three, four. That leaves 15 women that are co-conspirators. Anna Paulina Luna and Bobert have both implied that people claiming to be victims are traffickers, abusers. They do not deserve our support. Who are the 15 women, Ron? I don't know. That is a good question. Why are they redacted? Well, because Massey and these people gave them victim status. Because this is a hoax. This is a Democrat hoax to make to paint over their crimes and try to just find any connection to Trump. But those victims, the ones who cry the loudest, are the traffickers themselves. Why wouldn't you? This is classic projection. It's not my fault. It's not my fault. It's all his fault. Yeah. Don't redact the four men's names. But what about the other co-conspirators? He's not even asking.

SPEAKER_17 1:09:45

Right.

SPEAKER_08 1:09:45

Because why? Because you took up with them. Because you broke bread with them. Because you taught you you got on their wagon. You hitched your wagon to their shooting star.

SPEAKER_05 1:09:56

Can you say who those four men are tonight?

SPEAKER_14 1:09:58

I don't think they're well known. And so if I did, it wouldn't matter, but I could probably say them on the floor of the house. But I'll give the DOJ a chance to do what they did in these two examples, where I've discovered something and now they've responded.

SPEAKER_08 1:10:13

I should have prepared it, but I'm pretty sure Todd Blanch goes straight through his uh his, if you see his Twitter, it's Todd Blanche, Todd Blanche, Todd Blanch just following up. Pretty sure he exposed all the names. Like these are all names that were elsewhere in the files. Right? It's like it's like, oh, yeah, we didn't, yeah, that's grand jury information. It kind of came that way. You know what I mean? Notice how the only unredacted names are Maxwell and Epstein. Now, again, the victims, they're getting away with this. They're getting away with this. And this is what's happened. All these years, Ron, you were saying, you know, the the people who are the whistleblowers end up getting punished. So people who investigated Pizzagate die by suicide. Superstar DJ Avici found dead after exposing the pedophile ring. Oh my god. Famous Argentina model who made whistleblower re uh researched on elite pedophile ring in Argentina, named top politicians and Pope Benedict in a live TV show, killed. How much longer until they kill me, says uh Andrew Bitbart. Or if a heart attack or car accident or frame me for a crime, read me while you can. Now, if you go look at what he wrote, he was constantly talking about John Pedessa being a horrific trafficker. Model, who exposed the elite pedophile ring, found dead after tweet predicting she'd be killed. Filmmaker, known for her documentary series, The Fall of the Cabal, has been confirmed as dead by suicide. Isaac Cappy named Hollywood Pedophiles dead. Now, people who debunk Pizzagate, these are the people who write articles debunking Pizzagate. John Podesta's friend who debunked Pizzagate arrested for raping toddlers. Award-winning ABC journalist, by the way, who this guy was the producer for Jake Tapper and all these shows on CNN and ABC. He was a CNN before that. Award-winning ABC journalist who debunked Pizzagate pleads guilty in a horrific child porn case. He went on the run for a while.

SPEAKER_15 1:11:58

Oh boy.

SPEAKER_08 1:11:59

Okay, here's one CNN producer sentenced to 19 years for sickening child sex crimes. Tech reporter Peter Bright found guilty for litting minors for sex online. Left-wing Rs Technica generist Dr. Pizza convicted of pedophilia offense. So if you investigate and expose it, you get suicided. If you debunk it, you're a pedophile. That was one of the things I learned in prison. Never defend a Chomo. Never defend a Chomo.

unknown 1:12:28

Okay.

SPEAKER_17 1:12:31

You might need to tell people what that means. Child molester.

SPEAKER_08 1:12:34

That's prison slang for child molester. Chomo.

SPEAKER_17 1:12:36

There you go.

SPEAKER_08 1:12:37

Chomo. All right. Steve Bannon and Epstein had quite the connection. Obviously, we know Steve Bannon, you know, in the Trump administration, Steve Bannon and Jeffrey Epstein were talking during the campaign. Now, you have to understand Steve Bannon's background, right? He's gone to Harvard, he's got all the degrees, he worked in high finance, Bear Stearns or Goldman Sachs, or whatever it was. He's participated in a lot of different campaigns. He's a sleazy, dirty political operative. And we'd love him. I say that lovingly because he's my spirit animal, right? I say that lovingly because he's my spirit animal. But he's a sleazy, dirty operative by any measure. But he's also one of the more influential people in the country right now, clearly. So here's a little interesting exchange between Epstein and Bannon. And I've been through a lot of these text message exchanges, and I don't find anything particularly nefarious on Bannon's end. I kind of see him just keeping Epstein on the line. Does that make sense? Which very well could have been there's this proposal that Epstein, that Bannon is a consistent double agent. Like if you want to get dirt on Trump, you go to Bannon and Bannon kind of plays either Trump or plays you. Does that make sense? Like he's always the double agent.

SPEAKER_15 1:13:46

Yeah, yeah.

SPEAKER_08 1:13:47

So this is Epstein saying to Bannon, live by the tape, die by the tape. What's the tape? What does that mean? That's I don't know, you know, reality. It's on tape. You live by the tape, you die by the tape. There you go. Along with some other tidbits, this is Epstein writing. I was shown a photo of Macron's boyfriend. Ah, hypocrisy. Hey Candace Owens. I think you might be right. So Steve Bannon says, Is that true? Question mark, question mark, question mark. Quote, the soldier. So there were rumors that Macron had a gay lover that was a soldier. And then Epstein writes back, it gives new meaning to no worry, I have your back. And then, oh, remember, the French stand behind you. Yuck. When is the next cut of made in Vietnam? And Bannon says, coming soon, got announced to today. So there's trade deals. Let's talk about strategy. As November looks more problematic, you don't want to spend your time in front of a committee. So that's pretty interesting. What is this here? It is weird. Anyways, pretty interesting exchange. So there's Macron and his wife.

SPEAKER_17 1:14:54

Okay.

SPEAKER_08 1:14:56

Who will not take a DNA swab to prove she's a girl? Seems the easiest thing. So this is my this is my opinion on Bannon. I share this exact same opinion as this gentleman right here, who is uh Julian Dory. Okay, I don't I've never heard of his podcast before, but I saw this clip. Oh, he's great. Is it?

SPEAKER_17 1:15:13

Is he? Yeah.

SPEAKER_08 1:15:14

Totally worth sharing. Maybe we should connect.

SPEAKER_17 1:15:15

Oh, yeah.

SPEAKER_08 1:15:16

Sounds like he'd be a guy that we could go on.

SPEAKER_17 1:15:18

Dude, he's got a show that for somehow has exploded. And, you know, I can't help but think that if we weren't taken off the air, we would be way past him.

SPEAKER_08 1:15:28

Yeah, because he's got he's episode 381.

SPEAKER_17 1:15:30

Yeah. Yeah.

SPEAKER_08 1:15:31

There you go. And also clips and editing helps a little bit, which by the way, if anybody out there knows anybody who can do clips and edites and they want to do it as a labor of love, just do it. Contact us. Yeah, just do it. Okay, so this is his take on Bannon. I agree wholeheartedly, these very words could have come out of my mouth.

SPEAKER_06 1:15:47

Because I have told people for years that I think Steve Bannon is the most dangerous known man in America. I've said that. It has nothing to do with his politics. Nothing to do with his politics. But he he is not a media guy. This is this is someone I don't know what or for who. I can't really put my finger on it, but this is an intelligence person. 100%. Most of the time, as in 99.99999999999% of the time, when some fucking content creator or commentator is accused of being a spy, they're not. They're all some level of a useful idiot. We all are at some point. Okay? Some just all the time, and some once in a while when you don't catch it. It's just a part of being in the business. They're not spies, though. Even people that you revile and you're certain are. They're not. Steve Bannon is. I have been clear on this. Four years. And uh that was a good take. It's a really good take. Yeah, good one. Yeah. So he's I I don't I I don't know what he's one guy I've never been able to say. Oh, this is that, yeah, that. But something. He he you know what I would describe him as? He's a Robert Maxwell type character. That's how I describe him. Yeah. You know, doing a lot of work in a lot of places. Yep, for a lot of people.

SPEAKER_08 1:17:19

A lot of work for a lot of places. That's true. And that's the thing that makes Epstein really interesting. He does know a lot of people, he's tied into a lot of people, and that's not necessarily a bad thing.

SPEAKER_15 1:17:29

Yeah.

SPEAKER_08 1:17:30

What are his motivations? I honestly, because of having been to prison, he didn't capitulate. He held strong on his charges. He did not believe that that January 6th committee was committed. And he has supported the election fraud and given Mike Lindell a platform, and he was banned. Remember, they were not on any of the social media channels. They had to basically run their own broadcast. Doug Wyatt is saying here, I sure enjoyed the Steve Bannon's civics class at Danbury. Doug Wyatt, my dear, dear friend from prison, was in prison with Steve Bannon and took a civics class from him. Hey, Doug, compare and contrast me from Steve Bannon. Where do you think we are? Do Steve Bannon and I need to get together and have a little chat. Anyways, I think Steve Bannon is very sincere. Steve Bannon yesterday had his conviction overturned. This is a big deal. In a stunning reversal, the Department of Justice seeks to dismiss Steve Bannon's uh Steve Bannon's conviction and indictment. In a stunning reversal, the U.S. Justice Department on Monday asked the Supreme Court and federal judge to dismiss the criminal contempt indictment and conviction of Steve Bannon for refusing to testify in the January 6th investigation by Congress, declaring such a request is in the interest of justice after years of politically weaponized law fair by Democrats. The move by DOJ is extremely rare but not unprecedented, considering Steve Bannon was already convicted and served time in prison. The government has determined in its prosecutorial discretion that dismissal of the crime in this case is in the interest of justice, solicitor John Sauer wrote in a brief to nine justices who were reviewing the case. The government accordingly lodged a motion to have it dismissed. The indictment with prejudice, so it can't be brought again. The filing note it allows the government to seek dis the law allows the government to seek dismissal of cases that they brought inappropriately. Of course, after sending a man to prison, which, you know, a lesser man than Steve Bannon might not have made it. Could have destroyed their lives and everything about it. Doug Wyatt says, would have been fun if you took that class for sure. That would have been great. Today the Department of Justice said the uh the uh told the Supreme Court Steve Bannon's conviction arising from the J6 Un Committee's improper subpoena should be vacated. Blanche said, under the leadership of Turner Brand Jam Pram Bondi, we will continue to undo the prior administration's weaponization of the very strong action.

SPEAKER_17 1:19:57

I mean that should tell you something.

Redactions, Victims, And Co‑Conspirators

SPEAKER_08 1:20:00

Yeah. And you know, yeah. Now Peter Navarro had the same charges. Peter Navarro has essentially asked the DOJ not to dismiss his charges because he's working on actually getting it good law and good case precedent to uh provide uh uh executive immunity, right? Right for for advisors of the president. Steve Bannon was in a unique situation because he was out of government. So he potentially could have during January 6th, so he potentially could have had to testify for things where he was not in working for the president. Does that make sense? Peter Navarro was in the cabinet, he was an uh executive advisor, so he's got a little bit of different case law that needs to be adjudicated. And along with this whole J6 thing, as we know, it was a Fed surrection. It doesn't mean the individuals didn't take individual actions that day, clearly. But what we're finding out now is something that I found out when I was in DC in the gulag. There was a guard there who was a Muslim man, and I thought he was a hater. Okay, he had tattoos everywhere on the back of his head, and he had earrings and nose rings and all kinds of stuff. Okay, and on the back and a tongue ring. It's interesting. Colorful. On the back of his head, he had get thee behind me Satan psalms and then whatever the scripture was. He's bald, literally tattooed on the back of his head. When I say you couldn't tell the difference between inmates and guards, except for the uniform, I mean it. Like some of the guards were as tatted in all the weird places, the inmates get tatted. So I actually thought he was like a Christian because he had a Bible verse on his head. Apparently he's a Muslim man who owns a distillery and sells alcohol to the infidels. He doesn't drink alcohol, but no reason I can't profit off selling it to you. He's never tasted his own whiskey. Let's put it. So, anyways, he and I got talking and we got to be pretty good associates, like surprisingly enough. And one of the things he shared with me, and he had shared this with other inmates as well, which is kind of how the discussion got started, was that Donald Trump, in the uh COVID relief bill that happened in 2020, the summer, that January 6th funding was already in there, that they had money to do the sales, and it specifically cited January 6th events and stuff like that. So we were like, oh my gosh, this ran deep. Well, now we have absolute proof and confirmation that Christopher Ray and other prominent Democrats, as they were putting a bill on Trump's desk to be signed that was essentially loading the gun that would be used to shoot back at Trump on January 6th, they were doing tabletop exercise planning January 6th.

SPEAKER_01 1:22:33

And we start tonight with what we do best, breaking some news. We have some new bombshell revelations to get you about the weaponization of the Department of Justice in the lead up to the 2020 election. Just the news is a pain documents that show that the FBI actually conducted a secret tabletop exercise in summer 2020 that imagined what sort of violence might ensue in a contested presidential election that year. Now, that's important because remember the FBI said they had no inkling that there might be violence on January 6th, but their tabletop exercise showed they not only imagined it, they identified some players and devised strategies like undercover informants and mass prosecutions for minor crimes. That's exactly what they did after January 6th. They had the playbook written for months. They had those informants in the crowd, they had those informants in the groups. They just simply failed to pass on the most important intelligence that was coming in there. That's something that uh Chairman Barry Laudermelk of the House, January 6th committee is going to come on and talk about in the second block of the show. Now, the memo show the Bureau's Boston office led the tabletop exercise in cold open source intelligence on the potential for violence for both left-leaning anarchists and right-leaning extremists. The memo's also warned that foreign enemies like Iran and China are likely to foment domestic violence in the USO. Number one, we would talk about that, and people say that's a conspiracy theory. The FBI actually believed it. They actually were very concerned. Now, these uh documents were never turned over to Congress under the watch of FBI director Chris Ray, the former FBI director, but uh they were turned over by Cash Patel, the current director, in the last few days, and we got a set of them, and we've been talking about that today. It's one of the big trending stories over at Justin News.

SPEAKER_08 1:24:13

So they saw it coming and planned it. You could have given us a heads up. You know, you you you you gave us a heads up, or we're getting ready to give us a heads up about Epstein dying a day before he did. It seems like you could have drafted a press release, unbelievable amount of violence on January 6th. You could have published it on the 4th. I'd have canceled my flight.

SPEAKER_17 1:24:33

Yeah. Or at least left your megaphone home.

Massey, DOJ, And Name Games

SPEAKER_08 1:24:36

These guys are so good at predicting our calamity. You know what I mean? It's almost like it's almost like they plan this stuff. It's crazy. All right, we are just about to do a raid. So hold on, not quite yet. We're just about to do a raid. We're gonna jump over into private. And I want to tease you with what we're doing over there. So if you're a subscriber to Rumble, you get to stick with us going into premium. If you're not, then when we go into private, you just get a blank screen. Okay. So we would love for you guys to click through our link. And if you are going to subscribe to Rumble and become a premium subscriber, I think it's like$8 a month. I provide a minimum of five hours of private streaming content to that. I will give you the cheat code. Everybody listening needs to go and download this podcast on an audio app as an Apple Podcast or Spotify. And make sure you download the entire library, at least the first time you download. That gives me a lot of credits. We are on the verge. Our audio podcast audience is almost bigger than our video podcast. If we add it all up, we're right about 50-50. I have no idea why it has taken so long for our audio audience to grow, but we're starting to get a little bit of momentum. Please subscribe on audio somewhere and set it to auto download. That would be wonderful. Okay. Everybody, go do it. I I have I seem to have a separate audience between the two. Those of you that listen to audio, you get an extra little bonus because what we say on premium gets uploaded to the audio version. So if you're watching the video version and you got the premium, you got to subscribe to premium Rumble. If you're an audio subscriber, you get the whole thing. If you enjoy us live and you just can't do the subscription, also do the audio and you can catch the pre. Okay, so please do that. So let's go ahead and we're gonna do a raid and head on over to wherever Ron sends you there. So if you're heading off there, go say hi. You're going to the InfoWars channel and uh Alex Jones Network. I hope they've got stuff going on. They've got about 50 people streaming over there. Go say hi and uh invite people over there that are watching to join us on Peasants Perspective. And those of you, you get to go watch Brianna Morello. She's doing a great job. Go for it, Ron. There you go. Come back if you want. Okay, great. Yes, I see over here Peasants Perspective has rated this channel. Hello. We love InfoWars and American Journal, which is what's streaming right now. Keep fighting for those hetero frogs. Hetero frogs. In fact, Doug was known as the Info Sprayer because he wore an InfoWars hat and then sprayed a deer gas gun at the Capitol. So he was the infosprayer. Info sprayer. Yeah. Okay, so something interesting did happen also yesterday. Donald Trump posted this. He said, as everyone knows, Canada has treated the United States very unfairly for decades. Now things are turning around for the USA and fast. But imagine Canada is building a massive bridge between Ontario and Michigan. They own how did Canada end up owning both sides of the Canadian and the United States side? We gave away land? That doesn't make any sense. And of course, built it with virtually no U.S. content. President Barack, Hussein Obama, stupidly gave them a waiver so they could get around the Buy America Act and not use any American products, including our steel. Now the Canadian government expects me as President of the United States to permit them to just take advantage of America. What does the United States of America get? Absolutely. Nothing. Ontario won't even put U.S. spirits, beverages, and other alcoholic products on their shelves. And they are absolutely prohibited from doing so now, on top of everything else. Prime Minister Carney wants to make a deal with China, which will eat Canada alive. We'll just get the leftovers. I don't think so. The next thing China will do is terminate all ice hockey being played in Canada. Now, I don't think that's true, but I imagine there's a lot of Canadian ice hockey fans that are like, is that true? What? What? What? Is China gonna cut off ice hockey and permanently eliminate the Stanley a comp? The tariffs Canada charges us for our dairy products have for many years. By the way, as far as persuasion goes, this is important. You might think China's not gonna get rid of the Stanley Cump. What would they care? It doesn't matter.

SPEAKER_17 1:28:43

It doesn't matter.

SPEAKER_08 1:28:44

If you're a hockey fan and you're like, did Trump say that? Are they really gonna do it?

SPEAKER_17 1:28:49

It's just agitation.

SPEAKER_08 1:28:50

But what's happening is now you're talking about the China deal.

SPEAKER_17 1:28:53

Right.

SPEAKER_08 1:28:53

A hockey fan doesn't know about the China deal. Right. But when the hockey fan has hockey threatened and they're like, oh, but don't worry, it's not gonna be threatened. Well, what was he threatening it over at a China deal? We're doing deals with China.

SPEAKER_17 1:29:03

Right.

SPEAKER_08 1:29:04

It's Trump has this great thing, like that, not necessarily true or verifiable, but everybody's gonna talk about it in the back of their minds. What's the context is China deal, China deal, China deal.

SPEAKER_17 1:29:16

Right. It creates real leverage.

SPEAKER_08 1:29:18

This is why Scott Adams says he's so persuasive. The first thing China do, eliminate the ice hockey. The tariffs Canada charges us for our dairy products have, for many years, been unacceptable, putting our farmers at great financial risk, and I will not allow the bridge to open until the United States is fully compensated for everything we have given them. And also importantly, Canada treats the United States with the fairness and respect that we deserve. We will all start, we will start negotiations immediately with all that we have given them. We should own perhaps at least half of this asset. The revenue generated because the U.S. market will be astronomical. Thank you for your attention to this matter. So there's a picture of the bridge from into Michigan. This is brilliant. Trump is brilliant the way he does this. Like, yes, this bridge, it's it's a small thing in the big scale of the US economy, but he's gonna use it as leverage because it's right about the open. And he's gonna say, No, you just can't open it. He's I'm sorry. Just like all the other things that you guys have done to us, where you just shut us down at the last minute, you know, the Nord Stream pipeline, Nord Stream 2, that Biden just well, I think he what he would say is give us a reason to open it.

SPEAKER_17 1:30:22

I mean, you want to do some trade with us, okay. That's a reason. But if we're not gonna trade, why?

unknown 1:30:27

Mm-hmm.

SPEAKER_08 1:30:27

And you gotta understand in Canada, they got some real problems. Okay. So I love this interchange with all my heart. And it's a little slow, but I love this woman's accent, the way she says this so deliberately and concise. So she's talking to Mark Miller, who's they've got a bill in place that eliminates, or it basically it makes the code the only thing applicable and gets rid of all other laws that Canada has in favor of this code. It's written there. So this is one of their legislators that's in a hearing asking the guy who's going to be empowered with this incredible power to basically just overrule 150 years of Canadian law. But again, does government tell the truth?

SPEAKER_24 1:31:13

But why shouldn't one minister, individual minister, be allowed to uh bypass 150 years of Canadian law and exempt the person a person or company of their choosing?

SPEAKER_10 1:31:30

That may be your view, but I don't think that is what's happening.

SPEAKER_24 1:31:33

Well, that's how it's written.

SPEAKER_10 1:31:35

It doesn't say uh people are being exempted from 150 years of law.

SPEAKER_24 1:31:39

It says from any federal law except the criminal code.

unknown 1:31:42

Right.

SPEAKER_24 1:31:42

You there's no mention of years or it's any federal law except for the criminal law that has been passed over the last 150 years.

unknown 1:31:52

Right.

SPEAKER_10 1:31:52

We're not I'm not gonna parse this out with you.

SPEAKER_24 1:31:55

I'm so so just to be clear, you don't need a point of the committee meeting is to parse it out to do your job, but you want to keep it nonetheless.

SPEAKER_10 1:32:03

I think it's helpful to have.

SPEAKER_24 1:32:06

Do you see the potential of abuse though, in that companies or people will have to lobby you personally and not care about the law itself?

SPEAKER_10 1:32:15

No one's asked me to overturn any laws.

SPEAKER_24 1:32:18

You would have the ability to.

SPEAKER_10 1:32:22

In some context, perhaps, but again, this is something that would have to be used very judiciously.

SPEAKER_11 1:32:26

Uh-huh.

SPEAKER_08 1:32:27

Trust me. Trust me. We'd have to use it judiciously. Trust Trust me, nobody's coming to me to ask to overturn laws because we haven't passed it yet. At the moment we do. I'm sure a lot of people are going to be knocking at your door. Right. Yeah, but I'll I'd use it judicially.

SPEAKER_24 1:32:41

How could you possibly think that this would not undermine the trust in our democracy, then?

SPEAKER_10 1:32:50

I think Canadians expect us to act reasonably. I think Canadians expect us to be judicious in our decision making. Um, passing a law like C-15, which all members will have the opportunity to vote on, uh, is something that uh is inherently in accountable in and of itself.

SPEAKER_24 1:33:12

Well, it it has this particular clause that is very problematic.

SPEAKER_08 1:33:17

It's inherently unaccountable. The mob might come for us. That's what he just said. That's the only accountability that you have in the law. The mob might come for us because Canadians expect a certain behavior. But you're not going to be bound by any kind of law or anything like that. In fact, you're going to be able to overwrite laws. Yeah, but we would use it judiciously trust us.

SPEAKER_24 1:33:34

I think it's it is all over the news. Uh I have a letter with 43 organizations asking for you to strike it because of the potential of abuse, but you still want to keep it.

SPEAKER_10 1:33:44

I think I've answered that question about three times now. You can't be trusted.

SPEAKER_24 1:33:48

I just don't find it reasonable for you to have the powers of a king, essentially.

SPEAKER_10 1:33:54

I certainly don't have the powers of a king.

SPEAKER_24 1:33:57

If you are allowed to exempt any entity from any federal law, it is like the powers of a king.

SPEAKER_10 1:34:08

Is that a statement or a question?

SPEAKER_24 1:34:10

Well, it it's a fact.

SPEAKER_04 1:34:12

You miss Kobina. That concludes the time for this reason.

SPEAKER_17 1:34:15

Gosh.

Bannon, Intelligence, And Overturned Case

SPEAKER_08 1:34:17

So I'm sure they'll pass that law. Because you know, here in Washington State, we're just we're in the middle of passing an income tax, too. So, you know, I mean, why not?

SPEAKER_17 1:34:25

You know, we cost to the city.

SPEAKER_08 1:34:29

Whatever. Yeah. You're gonna override all these laws and go against the will of the people. Well, the Canadians expect us to be judicious, but are you? You're about to lose ice hockey because of your deal with Canada, China. Right.

SPEAKER_17 1:34:42

Well, and he was saying, like, well, the fact that it's being voted on means that it has accountability built in. It's like, you dumbass.

SPEAKER_08 1:34:49

Yeah. So over at American Journal, the Alex Jones Network feed, Carlit says, Hey, AJ, TIF Time, good morning from Peasants. Ferrasure, great to be here with you. We are from the peasants' perspective. Good morning from the peasants' perspective, says, says Carlimba. And Carlit says, come check out Peasants Perspective 2. Thank you guys so much for jumping over there. That is awesome. Excellent engagement. All right, it is time for us to go ahead and jump into private mode. We are going to be exposing more of the fraud of Black History Month, talking about the great Tulsa race massacre that didn't happen. And then we're going to be hearing about the cannabis paradox. And we are also going to hear from billionaire hedge fund Ray Dalio talking about digital banking and how that is basically happening, like right now. Okay. So let's jump on over there. Three different topics and some good content. Okay, so let's start out with Ray Dalio. I want to do this one first. So this is Ray Dalio talking to Carlson about digital currencies. And he talks about this as a definite thing. Right.

SPEAKER_10 1:35:55

What happens if the government issues digital currency? What does that mean?

SPEAKER_00 1:36:00

Well, digital currency is uh right. You're talking about um central bank digital currencies. Yeah. Okay, and that um um there's a great deal of appeal because of uh the fact that it's easy and so on, but it's um and I think uh it'll it'll be um uh it'll be done. A lot happens.

SPEAKER_14 1:36:22

Do you think it will be done?

SPEAKER_00 1:36:24

Um I think it's and uh but what happens in the digital currency, um of course it's easy to transact and so on, um almost am uh and it'll be like money market funds, I think. Um the question will be first uh will they be able to offer interest? So there's a debate now as to whether they will be interest. If they're not able to offer interest, and they there will be a debate, probably they won't be, but then they're not an effective vehicle to hold it in because you have the depreciation. You'd rather hold it in a money market fund or a bond, but that's debate. There will be no privacy, and it's a very effective controlling mechanism by the government. What I mean is all the transactions will be known, all transactions done with digital currencies will be known, um, which is good for illegal activities, getting control of legal activities, but it also means that the government has a great deal of control. For example, they can they can tax that way, they can take your money, they can establish foreign exchange controls and the like. And that'll um, so that's something that uh will be an increasing issue, particularly for international holders of that currency, because they might feel, let's say, if you're a Frenchman and they wanted to have sanctions, they could take your money. Of course. You know, and and so on. So there's the privacy issue uh of that. Um so um And if you're politically disfavored, you could be shut off. Politically disfavored, you could be shut off, yes. Um, so those kinds of and that's the crux of it.

SPEAKER_08 1:38:07

And he's pretty definitive. I mean, it's coming, one way or the other. Digital currency is coming. So, you know, let's make sure our side of the politics wins. That's about where you got. All right, this is the per cannabis paradox. So there was a huge study that was just completed, a 44-year study that was just completed on cannabis.

SPEAKER_17 1:38:28

Wait, wait, wait. How do they do a 44-year study when they're not supposed to be doing studies on illegal stuff?

SPEAKER_08 1:38:33

Let's let them explain. Okay, let's let them explain it. They did a 44-year study on the use of cannabis. Okay. And it this has overturned a lot of our previous studies and understanding about cannabis use and its long-term effects. So, you know, this is a really good little video. I've read the entire article. This I think does a really good job of capturing it for us visually.

J6 Tabletop Plans And Informants

SPEAKER_27 1:38:55

The story about cannabis and your brain, it seemed pretty simple, right? But what if that story is wrong? Well, we're about to dive into this absolutely landmark study that might just flip everything we thought we knew about its long-term effects. So this is the big one, isn't it? What does cannabis really do to your brain over a whole lifetime? I mean, sure, we all kind of know about the short-term stuff, but the long game, that's been a mystery. Well, a massive new study is finally giving us a real clue. And for years, the story was super simple, almost a given. The common wisdom, and yeah, even a lot of the early science basically said that long-term, consistent use, well, it's gonna lead to cognitive decline. It's gonna slow you down. Right, so let's be clear. This wasn't just pulled out of thin air. This idea came from the real, observable, short-term effects we see on thinking and memory. But the big missing piece of the puzzle has always been good, solid long-term data. You know, what happens over decades? Well, until now. Okay, so before we get into the weeds here, let's just make sure we're all on the same page. When we talk about cognitive decline, what do we mean? Basically, it's that gradual slowing down of our thinking skills, memory, problem solving, that kind of thing, that just naturally happens as we get older. It's a part of life. The real question has always been, does cannabis speed that process up? And that brings us to the main event, this incredible 44-year study. Seriously, this was a massive project out of Denmark, where researchers set out to put this whole assumption to the test once and for all. And look at the scale of this thing. We're talking about 5,162 men. This isn't some small little experiment. When you have a group this big, the findings carry some serious weight. So here's how they did it. They got a baseline, a starting point, by testing these guys' cognitive abilities when they were young, around 20 years old on average. This was actually part of their military conscription tests, which gave the researchers this perfect snapshot to start with. And then they just waited for decades. They came back all those years later, found the very same men who were now on average 64 years old, and tested them again, all to see what had changed over a lifetime. I mean, just let that sink in for a second. An average of 44 years between tests. In the world of science, getting data that spans that much of a person's life is just it's incredibly rare. And that's exactly what makes the study so important and so powerful. Okay, so the stage is set. Decades of data, thousands of participants. What did they actually find? Well, this is where the story takes a really sharp, unexpected turn. So here it is. The big question. After all that work, what did the 44-year data actually show? What was the real connection they found? Okay, get ready for this. Because it flips the old story completely on its head. The non-users, they show the expected totally normal cognitive decline that comes with aging. No surprise there. But the cannabis users, they actually showed less cognitive decline over that same period. Yeah, you heard that right. Less. Of course, the researchers didn't just stop there. They wanted to dig deeper into the data. I mean, did it matter how people used it? Like, what if you started young or used it really frequently? Did that make a difference? And this is maybe even more surprising. When they sliced and diced the data for the cannabis users, things like the age they started or how often they used it, well, neither of those things was linked to greater cognitive decline. The result held up. It was consistent. So what's the big takeaway? What was the official conclusion from the scientists themselves? You know, in science, the exact wording is everything. So let's look at what they actually said. And here it is, straight from the published paper. Quote In a sample of more than 5,000 men followed for a mean of 44 years, we found no significant harmful effects of cannabis use on age-related cognitive decline. So to put it simply, after this monster 44-year study, they found no evidence in their data that cannabis use made people's brains age any faster. So what does this all mean? Does this one study just rewrite the whole book on cannabis? Well, probably not. It's just one study, and an important one for sure. But it's not the final word. We have to remember it was a study of men and it's showing a correlation, not necessarily causation. But what it absolutely does is open a brand new, fascinating chapter. It forces us to ask all these new questions. Is it possible some compounds in cannabis could actually be neuroprotective? What other lifestyle factors could be mixed in here? This study doesn't close the book, but man, it definitely makes you want to start reading it all over again from a totally new perspective.

SPEAKER_08 1:42:50

When you go read the article, you find them showing, because they took CAT scans and MRIs and all kinds of stuff, more oxygen in the brain, like no decline cognitively, all the different metrics they scored significantly better. And the conclusion is, well, we don't see decline. And it's one of it's like the cyber ninjas can't say there's fraud. In fact, it almost looks like the cannabis users think better. You know what I mean?

SPEAKER_17 1:43:13

It's like it's like the primary thing they always tell you, they scare you with like, don't use pot, you'll get stupid. You'll get stupid short term, apparently.

SPEAKER_08 1:43:22

Anyways, very interesting study. And it again, one of the things my wife and I exchange these articles back and forth from time to time, and I'd be like, There's some study for everything. You know, there's anything you want. So take it, take it as a grain of sand, do as thou want within the guidelines of whatever. All right, Black History Month. The massacre. Did it really happen?

SPEAKER_07 1:43:43

Day nine of exposing black history because it literally didn't even happen. So you know the story of the Tulsa race massacre, right? 1921, the thriving Black Wall Street community burned to the ground by a bunch of racist white people, hundreds are killed. It's just another tale of oppression, right? It's in movies, books, TV shows, even demands for reparations. Okay, so that's the story. What is the truth? First, what even was Black Wall Street? This was not something like black economic powerhouse. Greenwood itself was just a few blocks in Tulsa's segregated north side, had barber shops, a grocery, a communist newspaper office. Really not too much different from a modern inner city ghetto. What about the name Black Wall Street? That was actually coined by Booker T. Washington, a black writer who never even lived in Tulsa. No banks, no stock exchanges, literally just like a normal black neighborhood. So, what caused all the problems then? On May 30th, 1921, Dick Roland, a 19-year-old black delivery boy, gets arrested for attempting to rape a 17-year-old white girl who was an elevator operator in the Drexel building in Tulsa, named Sarah Page. And the local papers are already on it. Nab Negro for attacking girl in elevator. So Pai says that Roland grabbed her arm, scratched her, tore her clothes, and tried to assault her, and she screams, and then he only runs away once a building employee comes to help her. Roland denies harm but says that he may have actually touched her arm, but only because he tripped and needed something to grab onto. Okay. So tensions explode in Jim Crow Tulsa, and word starts spreading all around that there may be a lynching. And ironically, the only reason that people believe that there might be a lynching was because a year prior, a white man named Roy Belton was lynched after being suspected of murder. So a bunch of angry white people show up outside the courthouse, but they were kept at bay by the sheriff and his six armed men. And the most chaotic it got was when a bunch of white people, like three of them, walked inside the courthouse and said, Hey, hand him over. The sheriff was like, No. And then they just left. So now, seeing this angry mob of white people, a bunch of black people decide to go arm themselves to confront this mob to protect Dick Rowland, even though, again, the sheriff pretty much has it all under control. So a bunch of them arm themselves.

SPEAKER_08 1:45:40

Remember what I said? Never defend a chomo? When you defend chomos, you end up having bad things happen. Never defend a chomo. The black community went to defend a chomo.

SPEAKER_07 1:45:54

Shotguns and march to go confront this mob outside of the courthouse. So then the white people are like, Why are they armed? We should probably be armed. So then they go get armed. And this standoff ends up turning pretty deadly with black people actually attacking first, opening fire on whites after they claim a white guy tried to disarm one of the armed black guys in front of a bunch of other armed black guys. I don't know if I buy that, but the result was 12 people dead, 10 of whom were white and two were black. So total chaos erupts. Riots, shootings, fires, over 24 hours, Greenwood burns, up to 300 people die, most of whom are black, and thousands become homeless. But that did start because of black aggression, right? Wasn't just like random white rage. And why was Black Wall Street never rebuilt? Well, because it never even existed as this like lost Atlantean utopia in the first place. It was just an ordinary black district, no different from the strip malls you see that have check caching places, dollar stores, what have you. But of course, later on the myths grew. They were amplified by civil rights narratives, which wanted to ignore the attempted rape triggering the event and the black initiation of violence in the first place. Like my black brothers always say, knowledge is power.

Rumble Premium CTA And Podcast Push

SPEAKER_08 1:46:58

I have nothing to disparage these stories. I don't care. I mean, I just think we need to know the truth. And having been a part of a big fat freaking hoax called J6, and you know, things happen that are real, like my life was really affected, and I really did go there, and like this is all real. I can see exactly how this plays out. You know, you got a mob, we're defending our guy. Well, what did your guy do? Well, he raped the girl. Well, don't mention that. Well, we're raising the militia, but once you're all there with arms, you know, 10 white guys did two black guys. That's chaos. It's over. Tulsa Massacre, Black Wall Street. Right. Okay. Because it never really happened. Okay, guys, that's it for today. We will talk to you again tomorrow.

Canada Bridge Leverage And Trade

SPEAKER_21 1:48:09

What time? I'm 37. I'm 37, I'm not old. But I can't just call you Matt. You could say dentist. I didn't know you were called Dennis. I didn't say sorry about the old woman, but from behind you. Well I have experience. The loft Excalibur from the bottom of the water. Signifying by divine providence that I Arthur was to call it Excalibur. That is why I'm your king. Listen, strange women are an important discriminative 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. You can't expect to wield supreme executive power just because some watery talks through a sword. I mean, if I went around saying I was an emperor, just because some moistened bitch has loved the scimitar at me. They put me away! Shut up! Will you shut up? Now we see the barrel that's inherent in the system. Shut up! We see the barrel that's inherent in the system! Help, help! I'm being repressed, bloody peasant! Oh, what a giveaway! That's what I'm on about. Do you see it repressing me?

SPEAKER_16 1:50:53

You saw it, didn't you?