Speaker 1: Good evening and welcome to another edition of The Cajun
Speaker 1: Night Live. I am your host, Jacob Mook the Cajun Knight.
Speaker 1: For anybody who has not been checking out the news lately,
Speaker 1: America is going through some things. We got some stuff
Speaker 1: going on, things and stuff, some might say, primarily centered
Speaker 1: around our president in Washington, DC. There's a lot of
Speaker 1: Epstein conversations going on right now. There's a lot of
Speaker 1: FBI corruption going on right now. I'm seeing reports that
Speaker 1: there is absolutely a connection between Trump's would be assassin
Speaker 1: and Charlie Kirk's assassin. It's a wild time. It's a
Speaker 1: wild time. So on this episode, we are going to
Speaker 1: stick primarily on the continent of North America, more specifically
Speaker 1: the good old US of A, although there was enough
Speaker 1: going on in China within the past week to where
Speaker 1: we are are gonna spend a little bit of time
Speaker 1: talking about them towards the end. Segueing over would be
Speaker 1: the Chinese AI cyber attack that just took place on
Speaker 1: US soil, and nobody's really talking about it because they
Speaker 1: don't want to acknowledge how bad the cybersecurity side of
Speaker 1: things are with AI. Because more and more people are
Speaker 1: leaning more heavily on AI as the answer to all
Speaker 1: their problems. We're gonna talk about all good people. So
Speaker 1: I'm gonna go ahead and share the screen at this
Speaker 1: time for anybody who would like to be a part
Speaker 1: of the conversation. Every Wednesday night at nine pm Central,
Speaker 1: go to the link in the description below to cajun
Speaker 1: Night on Patreon. Well, only one tier for injury. We
Speaker 1: do this every Wednesday night at nine pm Central. We're
Speaker 1: trying to grow this into a good, fun information sharing
Speaker 1: community that gets together to just discuss things as we do.
Speaker 1: So let's start off with a more humorous talking point
Speaker 1: before we get into the more serious and potentially diabolical things.
Speaker 1: Did you know that Target employees are now forced by
Speaker 1: corporate order to smile at you if you are within
Speaker 1: so many feet of them. That's a thing, now, that's
Speaker 1: a thing now. So yes, Target employees typically are a
Speaker 1: little happier than a Walmart employee. You know, that's a
Speaker 1: whole thing. To walk into a Target, pants are required.
Speaker 1: Those are not required at a Walmart. And because of that,
Speaker 1: you have a little bit of some understanding there. You're
Speaker 1: gonna go in there and people are gonna be a
Speaker 1: little happier. You're gonna get the smell of Starbey's in
Speaker 1: the air. You know, it's that upscale shopping experience, not
Speaker 1: actually upscale, but you know what I'm saying. Right that
Speaker 1: being said, now, Target Corporate has let out a memo
Speaker 1: telling people that if a customer is within I want
Speaker 1: to say, it's like five feet of them, they are
Speaker 1: forced to give them a like overly nice Mormon smile.
Speaker 1: And the employees are actually kind of pissed about that.
Speaker 1: But we're gonna talk about this. Let's read a little
Speaker 1: bit into this is from the New York Post. Target
Speaker 1: workers and shoppers slam companies new forced greeting policy. Nothing
Speaker 1: says corporate joy like a mandatory smile. Yeah, you know,
Speaker 1: I agree. I agree. Target missed the mark on this
Speaker 1: new initiative. A new staff policy at Target, part of
Speaker 1: a program called ten four, is forcing employees to engage
Speaker 1: with customers more. The retailer confirmed to USA Today employees
Speaker 1: within ten feet I said five excuse me, within ten
Speaker 1: feet of a customer are now required to smile, make
Speaker 1: eye contact, wave, and use quote friendly, approachable, and welcoming
Speaker 1: body language. End quote. That's that's such a recipe for
Speaker 1: belligerency if I've ever seen it in my life, Like
Speaker 1: I could just imagine the target employee who should like
Speaker 1: stocking shelves, you know, I guess idn't even somebody who's
Speaker 1: supposed to be up at the front. They're just somebody
Speaker 1: who's stocking shelves. They see somebody walk up, they just hi.
Speaker 1: They like scare the shit out of the customer. I
Speaker 1: really hope it goes to that level. I hope that
Speaker 1: they give like overly creepy vibes to the target customers,
Speaker 1: and I hope the customers return fire in that regard,
Speaker 1: just so that everybody's in on the joke. I'm here
Speaker 1: for that buffoonery. But yeah, that's a new thing, friendly
Speaker 1: welcoming body language that also opens the door for so
Speaker 1: much buffoonery, so much chicanery. I don't know. Maybe maybe
Speaker 1: I'm just a bit of a shit stir when it
Speaker 1: comes to forced company policies. So like I look for
Speaker 1: ways to oh, I'm gonna abide by your rules. I'm
Speaker 1: gonna abide the fuck up out of your rules, but
Speaker 1: you're gonna wish that I didn't. That's always been my jam,
Speaker 1: even when I was in the Marine Corps. Like and
Speaker 1: I told this story before. We had a colonel who
Speaker 1: we had to tuck in our shirts into our pants
Speaker 1: in civilian attire. So even if you're going home at
Speaker 1: the end of the day, you're wearing a T shirt
Speaker 1: and jeans, you were expected to tuck your shirt into them,
Speaker 1: and if you didn't, you would get reprimanded, loss of rank,
Speaker 1: possible confinement to the barracks depending on how he felt
Speaker 1: about it. The only shirts by order that were not
Speaker 1: forced to be tucked in were Hawaiian shirts and Cuban shirts.
Speaker 1: He put out that order in the middle of winter,
Speaker 1: thinking that a bunch of Marines wouldn't be wearing Hawaiian
Speaker 1: shirts in the snow. He underestimated our level of belligerency.
Speaker 1: So we were within the realm of the order. We
Speaker 1: were freezing our ass off, but we hit every store
Speaker 1: locally and it got on online shopping and ordered so
Speaker 1: many different Hawaiian shirts, the most flamboyant and loudest and
Speaker 1: most ridiculous, as young Marines are one to do. And yeah,
Speaker 1: we were out there on the smoke pent chain smoking
Speaker 1: Marlboro Reds with our Hawaiian shirts untucked, because you know,
Speaker 1: this one's for you, sir. So yeah, I'm hoping that
Speaker 1: this also goes to that level of belligerency with these
Speaker 1: target employees that are not making enough to also have
Speaker 1: a sunny disposition to the Karens of the world that
Speaker 1: shop at this establishment. I don't know, but I think
Speaker 1: it's I think that this is prime for some real
Speaker 1: hilarious TikTok content. I don't know. Furthermore, staff within a
Speaker 1: four foot radius of a shopper must also personally greet
Speaker 1: the customer and initiate a warm, helpful interaction. The retailer said, So,
Speaker 1: if you're ten feet away, you have to smile, wave
Speaker 1: and have very inviting body language. If you're four feet away,
Speaker 1: you're forced to interact with these people. That's, oh my god,
Speaker 1: that's amazing. The company said that the new program is
Speaker 1: an attempt to elevate the shopping experience for patrons, making
Speaker 1: them feel truly appreciated. That's not the exchange here. That's
Speaker 1: never been the exchange. The customer is appreciative that there
Speaker 1: is things on the shelf for them to buy and
Speaker 1: get the fuck up out of there. I don't know
Speaker 1: when this became a thing to where we are appreciative
Speaker 1: of the employee who appreciates us. What is this? What
Speaker 1: even is this direct quote here? We know when our
Speaker 1: guests are greeted, not customers, guests like you're checking into
Speaker 1: a hotel or going to a restaurant, You're a guest
Speaker 1: at Target are greeted feeling welcomed and getting the help
Speaker 1: they need. That translates to guests love and loyalty. No, No,
Speaker 1: cheap prices are what give customer loyalty, and Tarja is
Speaker 1: not exactly cheaper than Walmart. But at the same time,
Speaker 1: unless you're trying to deal with the wal Martians of
Speaker 1: the world, you're gonna find a reason to go to
Speaker 1: the Target, honestly. But anyway, heading into the holiday, oh man,
Speaker 1: that was the whole point of this. So you're gonna
Speaker 1: have people on Black Friday that are forced to be
Speaker 1: overly nice to these savage human beings. That's gonna run
Speaker 1: rampant in the Tarja. That's incredible. Let's it's a ball
Speaker 1: of strategy, Catt, and let's see if it works out
Speaker 1: for him. Headed into the holiday, we're making adjustments and
Speaker 1: implementing new ways to increase connection during the most important
Speaker 1: time of the year, powered by our team. Target did
Speaker 1: not specify when the new policy would be implemented or
Speaker 1: what would happen if an employee does not comply. Oh,
Speaker 1: I could imagine there's gonna be a verbal warning, a
Speaker 1: paperwork warning, maybe three or four chances and they're gonna
Speaker 1: lose their job. But again, as we are drifting ever
Speaker 1: so close to Black Friday, I have a hard time
Speaker 1: believing that Target's going to be trying to get rid
Speaker 1: of any employees for not smiling and waving. That's that's preposterous.
Speaker 1: But anyway, yeah, it's really crazy. Oh, actually this is
Speaker 1: pretty good. However, one Reddit user claims to be a
Speaker 1: Target employee's shared that there has been an increase in
Speaker 1: secret shoppers to see if they are abiding by the
Speaker 1: new rules. Yeah. I could imagine that employees seen sounding
Speaker 1: off online about the new policy agree it's likely to backfire.
Speaker 1: I bet direct quote here from a Target worker who
Speaker 1: wrote this on Reddit. Who the fuck is waving at guests?
Speaker 1: If I was sick a shopper or a secret shopper,
Speaker 1: I would find that creepy. Yeah, I would agree if
Speaker 1: I'm just like shopping and every time I walk by
Speaker 1: an employee that's stocking a shelter forced to wave at
Speaker 1: me and smile and like have quote unquote inviting body language.
Speaker 1: I would think that they're trying to like pick me
Speaker 1: up like I would. I would take that as a
Speaker 1: whole different thing. But that's just me. I don't know's
Speaker 1: it's great, that's great. One worker mocked the policy, saying
Speaker 1: the person who came up with it is quote obviously
Speaker 1: an alien and should be investigated by US authorities. I
Speaker 1: love it. I love it. Okay, anyway, all the good
Speaker 1: retinue of the Cajun Knights. I just wanted to bring
Speaker 1: this one up. I thought it was humorous, and apparently
Speaker 1: this is actually real. The Target correspondence have verified this,
Speaker 1: and yeah, the Target is really going to try to
Speaker 1: make their employees be essentially Mormon to their customer base.
Speaker 1: It's hilarious. But anyway, moving on to the next topic,
Speaker 1: let's dive in on what is going on with Trump
Speaker 1: and these Epstein files. This is from NBC News. It
Speaker 1: only dropped a couple of hours ago as of time recording.
Speaker 1: This has been kind of crazy for months. Well, let's
Speaker 1: go even further back. Net For years now, Trump has
Speaker 1: been talking about release the files. Release the files, right,
Speaker 1: we need truth, we need transparency, all this shit. Then,
Speaker 1: come to find out Trump and Epstein were a little
Speaker 1: tighter than what people thought on the onset. Now, all
Speaker 1: of a sudden, he in the course of like two weeks,
Speaker 1: he went from beating the table talking about release the
Speaker 1: files too. I'm Sara, are we still talking about this?
Speaker 1: And his bass? The MAGA bass has really shifted their
Speaker 1: opinion on him. I'm not saying they don't still support
Speaker 1: him in the role that he's in, but they are
Speaker 1: definitely looking at him with side eye glances as of
Speaker 1: right now, cut two emails just got released. Your girl
Speaker 1: Maxwell talked to in three separate occasions, saying that she
Speaker 1: never saw Trump doing any kind of wrongdoing in any
Speaker 1: of her interactions with him. Nowhere Trump is talking about, well,
Speaker 1: you know, it is within my rights to pardon her brother.
Speaker 1: Nobody asked you. Nobody asked if you're thinking about pardoning her.
Speaker 1: Nobody even brought up the word part you, Donald Trump,
Speaker 1: You brought up the word pardon when no one even
Speaker 1: brought it up, which is also highly suspect. Okay, now
Speaker 1: cut to there are so many people that want this release,
Speaker 1: so many politicians that have flipped sides. And now you
Speaker 1: have a conglomerate of victims of Epstein Island that have
Speaker 1: come together and they're going to form their own list
Speaker 1: if something isn't done, and they have gotten some real
Speaker 1: weight behind them. Marjorie Taylor Green has thrown in her
Speaker 1: lot with them, and now Donnie t is calling her
Speaker 1: Marjorie Trader Green and that was one of his biggest
Speaker 1: advocates for the longest time. So now finally Trump is
Speaker 1: set to sign the bill releasing the Epstein files. Before
Speaker 1: we play this video, Royce, go ahead.
Speaker 2: So I don't know what kind of deal that miss
Speaker 2: Kisley Maxwell made with Trump beforehand, but there's no way
Speaker 2: in hell she went from whatever security level to a
Speaker 2: camp and not.
Speaker 3: Have that approval. That's just not that's just not the
Speaker 3: way that works. So for her to say, oh, there's
Speaker 3: there's no way he was on the list, you know,
Speaker 3: and I didn't even do anything, well, yeah, no, of
Speaker 3: course she didn't.
Speaker 1: That MACS.
Speaker 2: She wanted to go to go to a camp so
Speaker 2: she can have a much better time with the potentials.
Speaker 2: Choes give me part. I really don't think that that's
Speaker 2: too much of a or sure thing only because I
Speaker 2: think there's too many eyes on it, right, There's there's
Speaker 2: a lot of eyes in general on the fact that
Speaker 2: she went from either a medium security or whatever to
Speaker 2: a minimum security, which doesn't happen for people with sex
Speaker 2: offenses because you have a management variable which says you
Speaker 2: can't do it. So the fact that she's already there
Speaker 2: is step one, like, of course.
Speaker 1: She's not.
Speaker 2: Guess you're gonna say, oh, well, you know Trumble's never
Speaker 2: was never anywhere on here. Yeah, well no fucking shit. Yeah,
Speaker 2: Like this doesn't take it any genius. So I think
Speaker 2: that's the best case snarra. But I don't see her
Speaker 2: getting pardoned just because even if it's quour to quote
Speaker 2: on the table, because I think that would just look
Speaker 2: that would look way to sus like it's looking suspicious anyway.
Speaker 2: But that's like, that's I think that might be crossing
Speaker 2: the line.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I don't believe that she's gonna get pardoned for
Speaker 1: the exact reason that you just said. The optics on
Speaker 1: that alone would ruin not just Donye t that would
Speaker 1: ruin the Republican Party because of so many people that
Speaker 1: are of the Republican side of things that have Trump
Speaker 1: derangement syndrome of that side that basically, anything Donny t
Speaker 1: does it is the most amazing thing that's ever been done,
Speaker 1: because Donniet's the one that did it. If he was
Speaker 1: to pardon her, that would screw over the Republican Party essentially.
Speaker 1: But with that being said, yeah, I don't know what
Speaker 1: kind of deal was cut. I don't know what kind
Speaker 1: of intel she was actually able to give to get
Speaker 1: her moved to this minimal security situation. Her biggest problem
Speaker 1: right now, her Gislaine Maxwell's biggest issue is that she
Speaker 1: is not allowed to have a puppy. That's not a joke,
Speaker 1: by the way. At the secured facility that she's at,
Speaker 1: they'd have dogs. They train dogs there, And the one
Speaker 1: stipulation is that any prisoner that has ever been who
Speaker 1: is in jail right now for an offense involving animals
Speaker 1: or children, they prey upon the innocent. Therefore they're not
Speaker 1: allowed to have a dog. And she was all up
Speaker 1: in arms about that because she wanted a puppy just
Speaker 1: like all the other women in this prison and she
Speaker 1: wasn't allowed. That's her biggest issue right now. Everything else
Speaker 1: as far as this goes she's basically at a hotel
Speaker 1: with bars. That's the short and dirty of it. So
Speaker 1: I'm with you. I don't know what kind of de
Speaker 1: was cut. I don't know what kind of information she
Speaker 1: was actually able to give in the what was it
Speaker 1: like twelve hours of an interview that they finally did
Speaker 1: with her or whatever. But it's, uh, it's kind of crazy.
Speaker 1: I don't believe that Trump is going to pardon her.
Speaker 1: He kept bringing it up like that was a thing
Speaker 1: that was within his power. It's like, nobody's questioning if
Speaker 1: the president has the power to pardon people. We know
Speaker 1: that that this is not the time nor the place
Speaker 1: to be bringing that up as if it's just regular conversation,
Speaker 1: especially when nobody asked you about it.
Speaker 2: Maybe he was c loudsourcing. Maybe he was crowdsourcing. I
Speaker 2: mean because if he would have been given a disresponse
Speaker 2: people like, oh yeah, give her a chance, then that
Speaker 2: might have been going that direction. That kind of makes
Speaker 2: sense to me.
Speaker 1: I mean maybe, but I feel like he wouldn't really.
Speaker 1: Maybe you're onto something here. Maybe Donald Trump is so
Speaker 1: disconnected from reality and what people actually want and what
Speaker 1: people actually think, that that was his way of testing
Speaker 1: the water. It's possible just to see what the response
Speaker 1: would be, but I feel like it doesn't take a
Speaker 1: genius and however, disconnected from reality, you actually are the
Speaker 1: madam of a child sex trafficking ring getting a part in.
Speaker 1: I feel like you wouldn't need to take a quick
Speaker 1: pull to see what people think. As far as that
Speaker 1: that's a good idea or not, I don't know, but
Speaker 1: you might be right. He's been a billionaire for years.
Speaker 1: He's been not a normal human being for years. Maybe
Speaker 1: that was his attempt just to see what people would think,
Speaker 1: because I mean, him and just Layne Are they were friends.
Speaker 1: Him and Jeff were friends at one point in time,
Speaker 1: so maybe that was the case. I don't know. But
Speaker 1: the other side of this with him releasing these files
Speaker 1: is that there have now been fifteen hundred emails that
Speaker 1: have been released, and some things within these emails are extreme,
Speaker 1: to say the least one of them. People keep going
Speaker 1: on and on about this is to say that basically
Speaker 1: there is evidence or at least witnesses to Donald Trump
Speaker 1: giving Bill Clinton a blowjob. I don't know if that's
Speaker 1: a true statement or if that was just a crazy
Speaker 1: email that was sent or what. But that is absolutely
Speaker 1: within the emails. Then there's all kinds of records of
Speaker 1: Donald Trump being a lot closer to Epstein than what
Speaker 1: he has been telling us over the past few months.
Speaker 1: Then there's a lot of things to say that the
Speaker 1: FBI has been lying to the American people for the
Speaker 1: last few months, which again we all knew that this
Speaker 1: isn't like a hot take that nobody is considered over
Speaker 1: the past six months. But the release of these files
Speaker 1: are going to show that Cash Betel and Dan bong
Speaker 1: Gino and Pambondi are so either a incapable, b incompetent
Speaker 1: or c outright dishonest, and they need to be removed
Speaker 1: from their positions or do the honorable thing to salvage
Speaker 1: the one shred of honor and decency that they might
Speaker 1: be able to get from this and step down gracefully.
Speaker 1: I don't know how this is going to go down,
Speaker 1: but apparently enough people have signed all but one, which
Speaker 1: we're going to talk about him here in a minute,
Speaker 1: Clay Higgins from Louisiana. Every other politician signed off saying yes,
Speaker 1: release these files. Trump is supposed to be signing off
Speaker 1: on that either tonight as a time of recording or
Speaker 1: tomorrow morning, we're going to learn about that together. So,
Speaker 1: without further ado, this is from NBC News to talk
Speaker 1: about Trump to sign the bill releasing the Epstein files.
Speaker 4: President Trump now set to sign a bill to force
Speaker 4: the release of Justice Department files related to Jeffrey Epstein,
Speaker 4: starting the clock for the DOJ with thirty days to comply.
Speaker 5: We will continue to follow the law with maximum transparency
Speaker 5: while protecting victims.
Speaker 4: But how much material, if any, could become public.
Speaker 1: While the bill compels the.
Speaker 4: Department to share records like flight logs, sealed settlements, and more,
Speaker 4: it contains caveats letting the DOJ redact files for victims
Speaker 4: privacy and withhold certain information that would jeopardize an active
Speaker 4: federal investigation, like the one opened days ago after the
Speaker 4: President directed the Attorney General to look into Democrats connections
Speaker 4: to the late sex offender. What makes you confident that
Speaker 4: you may actually see the public release of these Epstein files,
Speaker 4: because I don't think the American people will settle for
Speaker 4: anything less. The DOJ said back in July, it did
Speaker 4: not uncover evidence to warrant charging anyone else. Attorney General
Speaker 4: Pambondi was asked today what changed.
Speaker 5: There's information that new information.
Speaker 4: Additional information that could include material from the Epstein estate.
Speaker 4: Some released last week by the House, including emails between
Speaker 4: Epstein and former Harvard president and Clinton Treasury Secretary Larry Summers,
Speaker 4: who today stepped down from the board of Open AI.
Speaker 4: He's not been accused of involvement in Epstein's crimes. The
Speaker 4: now public documents also showed Demo A Delegate Stacey Plaskett,
Speaker 4: who represents the US Virgin Islands, where Epstein had a home,
Speaker 4: had texted with him during a twenty nineteen hearing as
Speaker 4: she questioned President Trump's former fixer Michael Cohen. Epstein, writing
Speaker 4: Cohen brought up Rona, keeper of the secrets, Plaskett later
Speaker 4: responding quick, I'm up next? Is that an acronym?
Speaker 1: And then miss Rona? What is Rona?
Speaker 6: Griff is the mister Trump's executive assistant?
Speaker 7: And will she be able to corroborate many of the
Speaker 7: statements that you've made here?
Speaker 4: Epstein texting her good work. Plaskett now defending herself and
Speaker 4: calling Epstein's actions reprehensible.
Speaker 7: I believe that Jeffrey Epstein had information, and I was
Speaker 7: going to get information to get it. The truth having
Speaker 7: a friendship with him is not something that I would
Speaker 7: deem to have, all.
Speaker 1: Right, Halle joins us now live and Halle.
Speaker 8: Bottom line here, people may expect.
Speaker 1: Real quick before we let miss Hallie speak on it here,
Speaker 1: so plasket. She just went on a whole tirade. It
Speaker 1: was like a three minute monologue trying to explain her actions.
Speaker 1: They showed a quick clip of it. She where she
Speaker 1: was wearing the blue or whatever, and essentially she is saying,
Speaker 1: and y'all gonna come at me for texting a felon.
Speaker 1: Let me ask you this, how many of you have
Speaker 1: texted Donald Trump this week? And it's like, yeah, that's
Speaker 1: that's the route you need to go right now when
Speaker 1: you just got caught red handed talking to the guy
Speaker 1: in question when questioning Trump's fixer in a open like
Speaker 1: the whole thing, the whole thing. It's phenomenal. But yeah,
Speaker 1: hopefully the swamp starts to get dreamed here. But we'll see.
Speaker 1: Let's listen to this lady to learn a lot from
Speaker 1: these Epstein files, but they may not be the case.
Speaker 4: Right, Yeah, that's right, Tom, because of those caveats we mentioned,
Speaker 4: and if what the Justice Department puts out is extremely limited.
Speaker 4: There may be political fallout considering the majority of Americans
Speaker 4: support the release of more documents.
Speaker 8: Tom okay, hallie fit.
Speaker 1: All right, So all that to be said, I did
Speaker 1: want to go back to this one part here where
Speaker 1: it talks about here we go. So this is from
Speaker 1: Donald Trump on I believe it's x. Now. The Democrats
Speaker 1: are using the Epstein hoax, involving Democrats not Republicans, to
Speaker 1: try and deflect from their disaster shutdown and all their
Speaker 1: other failures. I will be asking A. G. Pambondi and
Speaker 1: the Department of Justice, together with our great patriots at
Speaker 1: the FBI, to investigate Jeffrey Epstein's involvement and relationship with
Speaker 1: Bill Clinton, Larry Summers, Reid Hoffman, JP, Morgan Chase, and
Speaker 1: many other people and institutions to determine what is going
Speaker 1: on with them and him. There's another Russia. Oh shit, Russia, Russia, Russia,
Speaker 1: Russia scam with all arrows pointing to Democrats records of
Speaker 1: these men oh man. Yeah, so everything's got to be
Speaker 1: about Russia when it comes to Donnie T. And I'm
Speaker 1: not saying that there is no level of truth to that,
Speaker 1: But the same time, his name was on the documents
Speaker 1: more than a few, like a lot, actually a lot.
Speaker 1: I'm not saying more than anyone else's by any stretch
Speaker 1: of the imagination. There are other very high profile people
Speaker 1: whose names you would know, who made frequent flyer trips
Speaker 1: on the Lolita Express and to the island and to
Speaker 1: the New York apartment, all the things, most notably off
Speaker 1: the top of my head, as a former Israeli prime
Speaker 1: minister who it seemed like once or twice a month
Speaker 1: was making his way to Epstein's private New York penthouse suite,
Speaker 1: all all the things which there are victims that say
Speaker 1: that that was where they were based out of. So
Speaker 1: I mean, we could already see the connections of the debauchery.
Speaker 1: But all that to be said, Trump is talking about
Speaker 1: how he's going to release them, and that's good. That's good,
Speaker 1: we want this. They're going to redact the victims' names, Okay, cool.
Speaker 1: No one had any issue with the redaction of victim's names.
Speaker 1: Nobody has ever questioned that. We don't. We're not trying
Speaker 1: to make these victims relive the most traumatic event of
Speaker 1: their life. I think we all have a little bit
Speaker 1: more of a soul than that. But what I'm afraid
Speaker 1: of is that, like they said, those caveats, I am
Speaker 1: afraid that that is going to redact a lot more
Speaker 1: than just the victims' names. I don't know this for
Speaker 1: a fact. I am hoping, and especially when we're talking
Speaker 1: about the same Justice Department that went on and on
Speaker 1: saying there are no files. There is none. They went
Speaker 1: on and said there was like ten thousand hours of
Speaker 1: footage and there was binders and binders of these documents
Speaker 1: that they were going to go through and release them
Speaker 1: to the public, only to say later, no, never mind,
Speaker 1: there was nothing. Actually the whole time, I don't even
Speaker 1: know what you're talking about, and there's no other guilty
Speaker 1: parties actually, believe it or not. It was just at
Speaker 1: Jeff and Gizlain, and that was the only two. Crazy.
Speaker 1: Now they're going to release the files, and what are
Speaker 1: we supposed to trust after they just lied? Either they
Speaker 1: lied at point A or lied at point B, both
Speaker 1: of which take all credibility away from them. If anything,
Speaker 1: I think both the them being said in the manner
Speaker 1: that they were within six months of each other discredits
Speaker 1: the entire DOJ. That's just my take, but we'll see, hopefully,
Speaker 1: they grow a spine and start releasing the actual files. Now,
Speaker 1: let's read into this article from NBC. The Justice Department's
Speaker 1: records related to Jeffrey Epstein are on their way to
Speaker 1: becoming public after President Donald Trump signed the Epstein Files
Speaker 1: Transparency Act. But what could be in them and when
Speaker 1: could the public actually see them. Here's a look of
Speaker 1: what we know about the release so far and what
Speaker 1: can be expected. So the Epstein files, we already know
Speaker 1: what they are. I'm not gonna waste time on that one.
Speaker 1: The indictment, Yeah, yeah, he was under investigation in Florida
Speaker 1: and of allegations he prayed on a number of young
Speaker 1: victims in the mid two thousands, but ultimately cut a
Speaker 1: deal to plead guilty to stay charges involving just one minor.
Speaker 1: The Justice Department said this year that he had one
Speaker 1: thousand victims. Yeah, and whenever he played guilty, he got
Speaker 1: like the sweetest of sweetheart deals.
Speaker 9: Ever.
Speaker 1: He had to spend eight hours in jail a day.
Speaker 1: That was it. He got furloughed on a daily basis
Speaker 1: to go out in town and do what he had
Speaker 1: to do. He basically just sleeping at the jail. That
Speaker 1: was it. And it was only for like nine months
Speaker 1: something like that. It was disgusting. But anyway, all right,
Speaker 1: let's go down here. Which files are supposed to become
Speaker 1: public and win. The documents scheduled to become public are
Speaker 1: from the FBIS and the Justice Department's investigative files into
Speaker 1: Epstein and has accomplished Isla Maxwell, who is serving a
Speaker 1: twenty year prison term for conspiring to sex traffic miners.
Speaker 1: The bill gives the Attorney General thirty days to quote
Speaker 1: make publicly available in a searchable and downloadable format, all
Speaker 1: unclassified records, documents, communications, and investigative materials in the possession
Speaker 1: of the Department of Justice involving Epstein, including all investigations, prosecutions,
Speaker 1: and custodial manners and Maxwell. It also calls for information
Speaker 1: on people, including government officials named or referenced in connection
Speaker 1: with Epstein, criminal activities, civil settlements, community or plea agreements,
Speaker 1: or investigator investigatory proceedings, rather and entities, corporate, nonprofit, academic,
Speaker 1: or governmental with known or alleged ties to Epstein's trafficking
Speaker 1: or financial networks. Talking about that. Also, it's crazy that
Speaker 1: the woman that was texting Jeffrey Epstein is the representative
Speaker 1: from the Virgin Islands, where his island was located. That
Speaker 1: is also pretty crazy to me because whenever it all
Speaker 1: went down and Jeffrey Epstein got arrested, the it's not
Speaker 1: the governor because they're not a state. Whatever the top
Speaker 1: dog of the political spectrum is on v I, they
Speaker 1: were actually arrested and indicted for their connections to Jeffrey Epstein.
Speaker 1: Because there's no way that the political people see the
Speaker 1: boats coming and going, they know what's going down there,
Speaker 1: they turn a blind eye to it for forever. Now,
Speaker 1: this woman who is saying, oh, that wasn't what you
Speaker 1: were thinking. I was trying to get good information to
Speaker 1: a question about Trump, it doesn't matter. That is also
Speaker 1: very very much so guilty by association, and that was
Speaker 1: confirmed by these emails. Now she's having to play the
Speaker 1: ultimate damage control when she was just caught red handed.
Speaker 1: That's it's beautiful. It's beautiful, and I cannot wait to
Speaker 1: see how many politicians start floundering in the next few days.
Speaker 1: But all right, and then also Summers, he stepped down
Speaker 1: from the board of X was it or AI Open
Speaker 1: AI or whatever it was. But there's no connection to Epstein.
Speaker 1: But he just stepped down, and he's about to I
Speaker 1: guarantee you he's about to go to Greece. He's about
Speaker 1: to go to a country and no extradition laws, and
Speaker 1: he's gonna go just take up residency there, might even
Speaker 1: get a dual citizenship there before it's all said and done.
Speaker 1: I don't know, but that's I don't want to call
Speaker 1: myself a prophet, but I just I could see it.
Speaker 1: I see it in the ether that that's about to
Speaker 1: be what goes down here. Continuing on here, it says
Speaker 1: the Justice Department is also directed to turn over any
Speaker 1: immunity deals, non prosecution agreements, plea bargains, or sealed settlements
Speaker 1: involving Epstein or his associates, as well as internal DOJ
Speaker 1: communications including emails, memos, meeting notes concerning decisions to charge,
Speaker 1: not charge, investigate, or decline to investigate Epstein or his associates.
Speaker 1: So this is very interesting. Why is this information being
Speaker 1: directed to be released now?
Speaker 9: Why?
Speaker 1: Now? The directives are the result of a bipartisan House
Speaker 1: bill co authored by Republicans or Representatives Thomas Massey, Republican
Speaker 1: from Kentucky and Roe Kanna, Democrat from California, who have
Speaker 1: said they want transparency and accountability on behalf of Epstein's victims. Well,
Speaker 1: I don't know how else I can word this. When
Speaker 1: you have bipartisan agreement on something, typically there is a
Speaker 1: conspiracy a foot. Typically you I don't think there's ever
Speaker 1: been a time in the last oh hell, I'd say
Speaker 1: probably seventy five years in American history. I want to
Speaker 1: say a hundred, but I feel like that also we're
Speaker 1: talking like to get us out of the Great Depression
Speaker 1: and then the world wars and stuff, So I'll leave
Speaker 1: it at seventy five. I'd be willing to bet a
Speaker 1: good number. I mean a good number that the only
Speaker 1: time that we have seen bipartisan support for anything to
Speaker 1: go through Washington, DC was when there was some sort
Speaker 1: of conspiracy a foot. So when we look at this,
Speaker 1: which is this is one of the ultimate conspiracies, honestly,
Speaker 1: we know that there were people on both side the
Speaker 1: aisles that were making their way to and from Epstein
Speaker 1: Island and or using Jeffrey Epstein to help launder money
Speaker 1: because that's what he was. So now when we have
Speaker 1: it's not just the majority except for one guy. Everybody
Speaker 1: agreed to release these files. This is damn near unprecedented.
Speaker 1: And I wouldn't be shocked if these files that get
Speaker 1: released are so heavily redacted that it's actually a big
Speaker 1: old nothing burger. I could see that. I hope I'm wrong. God,
Speaker 1: I hope I'm wrong. I hope that it says every
Speaker 1: name that was associated with this shit and everybody goes down.
Speaker 1: I hope this. But to have this heavily bipartisan support
Speaker 1: on this that's got my hackles raised a bit, that's
Speaker 1: got all the red flags thrown on that particular play.
Speaker 1: And I know I'm not alone in that sentiment. But anyway,
Speaker 1: the measure was stalled for months, in part because of
Speaker 1: the government shutdown. The government shutdown was not even two
Speaker 1: whole months. It was stalled for months because of the shutdown,
Speaker 1: that's a take, and in part because of opposition from Trump,
Speaker 1: who changed his position when the bill appeared headed for
Speaker 1: passage the PAS. It passed the House on Tuesday by
Speaker 1: a vote of four hundred and twenty seven to one.
Speaker 1: Out of four hundred and twenty eight seeded congressmen, only
Speaker 1: one said no. Then the Senate approved it by unanimous
Speaker 1: consent and sent it to the White House for Trump
Speaker 1: to sign into law. Go ahead, Royce, So did this
Speaker 1: more of a question?
Speaker 2: So I agree with you from what you said as
Speaker 2: far as whenever there is a bipartisan things so unanimous
Speaker 2: like this that they're on the outset, might be a
Speaker 2: conspiracy to things. First of all, for everybody else who
Speaker 2: doesn't look at things with the conspiratorial thrown open eye,
Speaker 2: they're like, this is effing great. Yeah, But so what,
Speaker 2: in your opinion, could be the play or could be
Speaker 2: the conspiracy with this whole thing? Like why because it
Speaker 2: seems like it should be a good thing when everybody
Speaker 2: both parts are like, hey, let's get this lead less released. However,
Speaker 2: there are probably plenty of names on both sides, So and.
Speaker 1: Let's look at it just on the political side of things.
Speaker 1: Although we know for a fact that multiple Fortune five
Speaker 1: hundred CEOs, held Fortune one hundred CEOs, tech gurus, political
Speaker 1: leaders from all over the world, they all made their
Speaker 1: way to Epstein Island, right, But just for this conversation,
Speaker 1: let's keep to the realm of American politics and American politicians. Therefore,
Speaker 1: so I got a couple of working theories right now,
Speaker 1: and it's way too early to call it one way
Speaker 1: or another. But have you ever heard the expression they
Speaker 1: can't arrest us all. I'm of the belief that that
Speaker 1: might be what this is. They all vote to release them,
Speaker 1: and it's gonna come out, and if ninety nine percent
Speaker 1: of our American politicians, even at the state level, are
Speaker 1: on that list, I think that they will unanimously also
Speaker 1: call it a hoax and discredit it because they can't
Speaker 1: arrest everybody. Yeah, really, so all of us renamed? You're
Speaker 1: gonna believe that? Come on now. I thought this is
Speaker 1: gonna be an open and honest releasing of the files.
Speaker 1: In reality, it was, but they're gonna play it off
Speaker 1: like it was a giant hoax, lean more heavily into
Speaker 1: Trump's hoax statements that he's been making for so long,
Speaker 1: and then it just goes by the wayside, no justice
Speaker 1: gets served. I could see that being a possibility. The
Speaker 1: other side of it is that it will be released,
Speaker 1: but it's gonna be so so heavily redacted, and they're
Speaker 1: just gonna say, well, these were victims' names, or we
Speaker 1: had to redact it because this is still critical to
Speaker 1: an ongoing investigation and that can't be released to the public.
Speaker 1: We released what we could, but we couldn't release all
Speaker 1: the names. In reality, they released like ten percent of
Speaker 1: the names, and it's already people that were suspected of things.
Speaker 1: That's what I'm saying. I don't think that real justice
Speaker 1: is going to come out of this at all whatsoever.
Speaker 1: I don't know. There may be a whole other option
Speaker 1: that I haven't considered yet. It's still crazy to me
Speaker 1: that Trump has flip flopped and then flip flopped on this.
Speaker 1: But seriously, I don't see this going positively. Although, like
Speaker 1: you said, I want this to go positively, and people
Speaker 1: are looking at this like, hell, yeah, they're releasing it.
Speaker 1: We're gonna find out who these pieces of shit are
Speaker 1: going to be served. I'm with that one hundred percent.
Speaker 1: And I God, dude, I hope I'm wrong. I hope
Speaker 1: I'm so wrong on this. Justice will be served. And
Speaker 1: if nine percent of our politicians are on that list,
Speaker 1: then ninety nine people are going to Guantanamo Bay. Like
Speaker 1: I God, I hope that happens. I just have a
Speaker 1: hard time believing it. I have a hard time believing
Speaker 1: that all of a sudden, our elected officials are taking
Speaker 1: the route of morality. I don't I just don't see it.
Speaker 2: Bro well, especially because the whole hoax thing, and that's
Speaker 2: just really crazy to where whenever you have all these
Speaker 2: emails that are coming out and they're like, oh no,
Speaker 2: that's a hoax, it's like, what are you talking about?
Speaker 2: These are just being getting released.
Speaker 1: It's like, ah, I'm with you.
Speaker 2: There's just such a such a such a level of
Speaker 2: disbelief and distrust with this whole thing.
Speaker 1: If you uh, there's examples all over the country of
Speaker 1: and this is a micro but bear with me. So
Speaker 1: there was a police departm in Sorno, Louisiana, very small town,
Speaker 1: very very small town, backwoods some would say, and the
Speaker 1: police department was shut down because of inherent corruption. And
Speaker 1: it wasn't just the police chief, it wasn't just his
Speaker 1: immediate staff, all the way down to your average cop
Speaker 1: that was just doing his patrols. All of them were
Speaker 1: on the take. I think there was maybe five out
Speaker 1: of the entire department that weren't dirty, and they were
Speaker 1: primarily used as the face because they weren't dirty. When
Speaker 1: this got brought to light, whole investigation blown wide open
Speaker 1: and they were like wait, wait, wait, you mean to
Speaker 1: tell me every cop of this department is dirty. Really,
Speaker 1: we're really gonna do that? What are you gonna do? Now?
Speaker 1: Shut down the department? Who's going to patrol the streets? Now?
Speaker 1: So what happened was the information was brought to light.
Speaker 1: It absolutely was damn near every cop in that city,
Speaker 1: and the department was shut down and then they got
Speaker 1: enveloped by the local sheriff's office. So that is a
Speaker 1: microcosm for what I think might be going on here.
Speaker 1: But it's to such a large scale, if not everyone.
Speaker 1: Let's say, of the four to twenty eight that voted,
Speaker 1: let's be generous, Let's be very generous and say that
Speaker 1: a hundred of them are implemented in some way, shape
Speaker 1: or form. These career politicians that have been in their
Speaker 1: seat for the last thirty years because they've never been dethroned. Right, fine,
Speaker 1: a fourth of our congressman to be arrested in some
Speaker 1: massive like it's gonna be all over the news, that's
Speaker 1: gonna make air, national news, all the stuff. Now what
Speaker 1: Now we have to hold emergency elections all over the
Speaker 1: country to try to get those seats filled. Now we
Speaker 1: have more political turmoil and uprisings and all these things,
Speaker 1: and it's gonna drive even more of a wedge to
Speaker 1: divide the country further, because it's not just electioneer kind
Speaker 1: of tactics. It's emergency election right now kinds of tactics.
Speaker 1: I could see that even potentially leading to some sort
Speaker 1: of a crazy event, to a civil war. I could
Speaker 1: so even still.
Speaker 2: Yeah, but then Robert, then you would actually have to
Speaker 2: start looking at the person's politics and say, hey, who
Speaker 2: is this person? Do I want to vote for them?
Speaker 2: Not just an R or a D or an I.
Speaker 2: And that's where how it should be. So even if
Speaker 2: there is shit, even there is two hundred, who the
Speaker 2: hell says that the person who is in there needs
Speaker 2: to be a lawyer, and it needs to be a politician,
Speaker 2: needs to be this needs Like look at our founding fathers.
Speaker 1: Yep.
Speaker 2: People think that our founding fathers were like forty fifty six.
Speaker 1: No, these are.
Speaker 2: Like like twenty one, twenty two, twenty three year old guys,
Speaker 2: and they didn't have jack shitt for any kind of
Speaker 2: you know, education. They weren't career politicians. Like our country
Speaker 2: was not designed for what it is right right now,
Speaker 2: Like because these people who are sixty seventy eighty whatever
Speaker 2: they're not connected to who we are for the most
Speaker 2: part for our generation. And if they're get him the
Speaker 2: s out of the office.
Speaker 1: Like I agree with you to your point, there are
Speaker 1: founding fathers. The majority of them that hailed some sort
Speaker 1: of seat of position were a part of the aristocracy
Speaker 1: in some way shape when they may not have been
Speaker 1: like a British lord before they became an American governor
Speaker 1: or something like that. But they were typically well to do,
Speaker 1: land owning males who you know, had successful businesses or
Speaker 1: farms or whatever the case was. But to your point,
Speaker 1: they weren't career politicians. They were educated for the day
Speaker 1: and age, but they weren't scientists by any means. Or
Speaker 1: I see what you're saying here. But there is a
Speaker 1: uprising going on in American politics right now. I've mentioned
Speaker 1: this guy before and I'm such a massive fan of
Speaker 1: him I will continue to do so. Named Brandon Herrera.
Speaker 1: He is running right now in Texas's twenty eighth congressional
Speaker 1: district against the incumbent, a Republican, a Rhino, I might add,
Speaker 1: named Tony Gonzalez. He lost the last selection by like
Speaker 1: four hundred votes. This is a career gun tuber. That's
Speaker 1: what he does. He owns an AK forty seven facility.
Speaker 1: He's a gun manufacturer who started a YouTube channel, and
Speaker 1: with enough money and clout, he decided to try to
Speaker 1: remove the incumbent because this guy is a massive piece
Speaker 1: of shit and a horrible representation of Texas. So he
Speaker 1: got that close to taking his job from him. This time,
Speaker 1: he didn't even have to work at it. Come to
Speaker 1: find out, Tony Gonzalez was having an affair with one
Speaker 1: of his assistants and there's reports that say that got
Speaker 1: her pregnant. Next thing, you know, she burned herself alive
Speaker 1: in her car. If you could believe such wild things
Speaker 1: like that would take place in American politics or whatever.
Speaker 1: Right beside the point, there are a multi cases of
Speaker 1: younger adults who are taking on the mantle of American
Speaker 1: politics because they're disgusted at what they see on the
Speaker 1: news when they're watching DC. And I'm hoping that we
Speaker 1: have a resurgence of true patriots, regardless of what letter
Speaker 1: designation is by their name. I have my own biases,
Speaker 1: but fine, I believe that you can be a Democrat
Speaker 1: and also be a patriot, all right, You not a
Speaker 1: screaming lib tard. I think that we need to keep
Speaker 1: it within the box of acceptable behavior here. But I
Speaker 1: believe that you could be an independent and be a
Speaker 1: true American patriot. I believe all of these things are possible,
Speaker 1: but there are so many young adults that are trying
Speaker 1: to take on these roles strictly because of the corruption
Speaker 1: that we've seen our entire lives. I am hoping that
Speaker 1: in the next ten, fifteen, twenty years we see a
Speaker 1: new wave of I only want to call them politicians
Speaker 1: of Americans taking a stance in American politics. But it's
Speaker 1: slow going because of these incumbents that are so heavily
Speaker 1: entrenched into DC. They've been in DC for the last
Speaker 1: twenty two years, and the only reason why they are
Speaker 1: there is because of simply name recognition. At this point,
Speaker 1: and what I'm afraid of as of this moment, let's
Speaker 1: say that there was a mass event where a hundred
Speaker 1: of these four hundred and twenty eight have to be replaced.
Speaker 1: Right now, I'm afraid that the people that would try
Speaker 1: to take on that role, And you're right, we should
Speaker 1: should look at their politics and who they are as
Speaker 1: a person to decide if they are a good representation
Speaker 1: of what we as American citizens want their constituents. But
Speaker 1: I'm also afraid that it would be so short noticed
Speaker 1: and so shortsighted that it would be an open opportunity
Speaker 1: for nepotism to run rampant, and for these politicians that
Speaker 1: aren't implemented on the list to just fill those slots
Speaker 1: with their homeboys, to just throw a lot of weight,
Speaker 1: a lot of money, a lot of endorsements behind these
Speaker 1: people that we right now, if I mentioned one of
Speaker 1: their names, you would never know it. But all of
Speaker 1: a sudden, they're going to be the next latest and
Speaker 1: greatest thing. In reality, It's like, you know, it's same shit,
Speaker 1: different day. I don't know. I'm with you that I
Speaker 1: hope that it would go in a very positive direction
Speaker 1: for the country, But I have such a lack of
Speaker 1: faith in humanity at this point that I don't see
Speaker 1: it working out well for us. But I'm torn. I'm
Speaker 1: really torn here. I want the swamp to be drained.
Speaker 1: I want every politician, every product of the Beltway of
Speaker 1: DC that is implemented or connected or was complicit even
Speaker 1: of what was going down on Epstein Island and his
Speaker 1: apartments and all the shit. I want all of them
Speaker 1: to be in jail right now. That being said, what
Speaker 1: would the blowback of that look like? And could America
Speaker 1: withstand that? Could America survive that? I don't know. If
Speaker 1: our current status in America, I don't know the typical
Speaker 1: American has enough grit to get through the hard times
Speaker 1: to that level. I don't know. And I'm not saying
Speaker 1: that's an excuse to just keep the files hidden by
Speaker 1: any means. Fuck that. But I also I don't know, man,
Speaker 1: I don't know. I could. That's why I'm leaning more
Speaker 1: towards the fact that it's bipartisan, a unanimous decision in
Speaker 1: the Senate, and all but one in Congress that voted
Speaker 1: for this to go. I'm wondering if it is so
Speaker 1: bad that legitimately ninety five percent of them are named
Speaker 1: in these documents to where they're gonna release it to
Speaker 1: the public as a way to show how much of
Speaker 1: a hoax it was, and then it just gets shelved,
Speaker 1: never to be brought up again. I hope I'm wrong.
Speaker 1: I don't know. Gonna We're gonna keep a very very
Speaker 1: close eye on this over the next few weeks to
Speaker 1: bring it up as more things unfold on this, but anyway,
Speaker 1: let's continue on here. Can the do withhold any of
Speaker 1: the files? The measure allows the Attorney General to withhold
Speaker 1: some documents, including records that quote would jeopardize an active
Speaker 1: federal investigation or ongoing prosecution, provided that such withholding is
Speaker 1: narrowly tailored and temporary. These are very legal terms. Temporary.
Speaker 1: Does that mean next week? Does that mean in a
Speaker 1: couple of months? Does that mean ten years? It's not indefinite?
Speaker 1: Is it is temporary? You see what I'm saying. This
Speaker 1: is them speaking legalese, if you will. It doesn't define
Speaker 1: how long quote unquote temporary is or what the penalty
Speaker 1: for failing to comply would be. There you go. In
Speaker 1: a joint memo in July, the FBI and the Justice
Speaker 1: Department said that they have conducted an quote unquote exhaustive
Speaker 1: review okay of the case, and that no one else
Speaker 1: is expected to be charged. Shocker. Trump, however, directed Attorney
Speaker 1: General Pambondi to investigate former President Bill Clinton, his former
Speaker 1: Treasury secretary Larry Summers, and Democratic donor Reid Hoffmann after
Speaker 1: their names appeared in the email documents last week. It's
Speaker 1: not it doesn't take a genius to also say the
Speaker 1: investigation needs to look more heavily into old Billium because
Speaker 1: keep in mind, there was a painting of him above
Speaker 1: Jeffrey Epstein's fireplace at Epstein Island, wearing heels in a
Speaker 1: blue dress of all things. That's not a conspiracy, that's
Speaker 1: a guaranteed fact. So yeah, I think it'd be worth
Speaker 1: the time to really take another look at will or
Speaker 1: Bill Clinton and see what the fuck was going on there.
Speaker 1: But do I think that Billiam's gonna see the inside
Speaker 1: of a jail cell? Absolutely not, absolutely not. And the
Speaker 1: other side of this, God, the other side to it,
Speaker 1: And this just hit me, what is the chances do
Speaker 1: you think that if it is that systemic and that
Speaker 1: ninety percent fifty percent of the elected officials are on
Speaker 1: that list, what do you think is a likelihood of
Speaker 1: Trump pardoning all of them to gain more favor to
Speaker 1: where they will vote, however he says, to vote to
Speaker 1: pass whatever legislation he wants to pass because now he's
Speaker 1: got leverage over them.
Speaker 2: I don't know that seems like political suicide because if
Speaker 2: if you have people who are known on the.
Speaker 10: List, like hey, all right, everybody, we know the list,
Speaker 10: but they're really good guys, and I'm in a party like.
Speaker 11: That would be giving a big middle finger to literally everybody.
Speaker 1: But that's literally what he's done thus far, which is Laane.
Speaker 1: You know, she was a great girl. I wish you
Speaker 1: the best. You know, I do have the right to
Speaker 1: pardon her. Like wait, but.
Speaker 2: He still hasn't done it. But he hasn't done it,
Speaker 2: so okay, you're right. There's a difference between maybe threatening
Speaker 2: it or putting it out there in the in the
Speaker 2: ether and actually doing it. If you had all these
Speaker 2: people either party, but both Republican and Democrat whatever, so
Speaker 2: oh well, you know, we already know that. You know,
Speaker 2: the Republicans are fine, so those guys, it's just a
Speaker 2: hook for them, and we already know that the Democrats
Speaker 2: are like that would just be a bad move.
Speaker 1: I agree. But also, this is Trump's last term in office.
Speaker 1: He doesn't care, but hear me out. There's been murmurs
Speaker 1: in the conspiracy space to say that Trump is going
Speaker 1: to try to do something outlandish to go for a
Speaker 1: third term. To get that approved, he would need Congress
Speaker 1: and the Senate to vote yes on that. This is
Speaker 1: also the same guy who literally wrote the book The
Speaker 1: Art of the Deal, where leverage is mentioned more than
Speaker 1: a few times. I don't know. I don't know, but
Speaker 1: I could see that also being a potential way for
Speaker 1: this to play out. That everybody gets implemented, and the
Speaker 1: same day that their names get dropped, he has a
Speaker 1: closed door meeting with all of them and says, listen,
Speaker 1: I'll pardon you, but you're gonna play ball my way.
Speaker 1: I don't give a fuck if you have a D
Speaker 1: AN R and I A L A G. I don't
Speaker 1: care what letter designation is on your desk. You're gonna
Speaker 1: vote the way I want you to vote, or this
Speaker 1: pardon goes way. I don't. I hope that doesn't happen.
Speaker 1: But at the same time, like you said, that would
Speaker 1: be political suicide. But do you also think that Donald
Speaker 1: Trump cares about that at this time? I don't. I
Speaker 1: don't know. I hope he would, but I cannot say
Speaker 1: with certainty that he actually cares about that.
Speaker 2: Anymore so I don't. So when I say political students,
Speaker 2: I don't necessarily mean just for him, because as you said,
Speaker 2: he is completed. I mean, unless there's a third whatever term.
Speaker 2: I'm saying more for the party itself.
Speaker 11: Because then being a Republican or whatever, than anybody in
Speaker 11: the future be like is going to remember, Hey, well,
Speaker 11: this Republican hardened these people, so let's keep these people
Speaker 11: out of office.
Speaker 2: So that's what I'm really going towards. It's more of
Speaker 2: a the macro than the micro.
Speaker 1: No no, I hear you, I do. But let's also
Speaker 1: remember that Biden pardoned how many people within hours of
Speaker 1: him leaving the Oval office, which a lot of people
Speaker 1: would have said, and we even said on The Cult
Speaker 1: of Conspiracy that that was basically suicide for the Democrat Party.
Speaker 1: All Donald Trump has to do is come in and
Speaker 1: do a decent job, and there probably won't be another
Speaker 1: Democrat elected again for the next twenty years. I could envision,
Speaker 1: especially if this is so systemic that it's so rampant
Speaker 1: on both sides of the aisle. It's I don't know,
Speaker 1: it's not like if those are the only two options
Speaker 1: for present next election cycle that we have, or a
Speaker 1: Republican or a Democrat. Even though it's true that the
Speaker 1: Democrats are fraught with corruption and that the Republicans are
Speaker 1: also fraught with corruption, that that's the way politics goes.
Speaker 1: You're only ever left to vote for a third sandwich
Speaker 1: or a douche. There's no there's no third or better
Speaker 1: option that's ever really been gotten real weight behind it.
Speaker 1: I don't know, man, I'm hoping that we are speculating
Speaker 1: into wild, untrue things. But man, the possibilities here are endless.
Speaker 2: So so I'll just say one more thing and then
Speaker 2: we can move on. So my only rebuttal as far
Speaker 2: as the difference between what Biden did and let's to say,
Speaker 2: what Trump would could theoretically, potentially hypothetically do, is that
Speaker 2: there were so many names that I think a lot
Speaker 2: of it just got lost to the ether, as opposed
Speaker 2: to let's to say, if if you have one, two,
Speaker 2: three hundred names and everybody knows them, there's gonna be
Speaker 2: a much larger spotlight because like, even though I don't remember,
Speaker 2: if you guys in the Cubic Conspiracy did an app
Speaker 2: episode on all the people that he pardoned, because if
Speaker 2: you because if there were how many, how many hundreds
Speaker 2: or one thousands or whatever, So unless you really take
Speaker 2: a look at every single one of those names, and
Speaker 2: just like it's John Smith, Sally Jane, like you know,
Speaker 2: most people aren't going to pay attention because there are
Speaker 2: so many, but this would be such a small or
Speaker 2: less maybe it's but that's it.
Speaker 1: No, no, I hear you. And it's possible that this
Speaker 1: would be a small list. But keep in mind they
Speaker 1: may not release it if it would jeopardize an active
Speaker 1: federal investigation or ongoing prosecution, provided that such withholding is
Speaker 1: narrowly tailored and temporary. That's the other thing, so they
Speaker 1: may Even if all these politicians are implemented, Trump might
Speaker 1: still order his DOJ to withhold that information because it's
Speaker 1: quote unquote hindering a ongoing investigation, and by temporary he
Speaker 1: means ten years down the road, and he might use
Speaker 1: that as leverage to enact certain laws to get passed
Speaker 1: that he wants passed. I don't know. I'm oh, it's dirty, dirty.
Speaker 1: Continue on. It says none were accused of wrongdoing or
Speaker 1: implicated in any criminal activity in these emails, but Bondi
Speaker 1: ordered a US attorney to comply with Trump's directive. It's
Speaker 1: unclear how that might affect files being released. There is
Speaker 1: also an exception authorized under criteria established by an executive
Speaker 1: order to be kept secret in the interest of national
Speaker 1: defense or foreign policy. The bill's language makes it clear
Speaker 1: that the bar to withhold information is high. Quote. No
Speaker 1: records shall be withheld, delayed, or redacted on the basis
Speaker 1: of embarrassment, reputational harm, or political sensitivity, including to any
Speaker 1: government official, public figure, or foreign dignitary. At least that's
Speaker 1: the verb. But again, I'm hoping that that's very accurate,
Speaker 1: and I hope that I'm just looking at things with
Speaker 1: the worst black pill mind that there is. I could
Speaker 1: also see Trump having a lot of closed door meetings
Speaker 1: with hundreds and hundreds of politicians in DC, basically saying, listen,
Speaker 1: your name will be dropped today unless you don't bend
Speaker 1: the knee. But I'm a Republican. I didn't fucking ask you.
Speaker 1: I'm telling you, if you don't start voting the way
Speaker 1: that I tell you to vote, your entire reputation and
Speaker 1: career and life because you're going to serve life in
Speaker 1: prison for this is screwed. I could see that going down.
Speaker 1: I could see it going down. Weren't these documents already
Speaker 1: supposed to be turned over by Congress. The House Oversight
Speaker 1: Committee subpoena the Justice Department for the entirety of its
Speaker 1: Epstein files in August. The subpoena called for quote all
Speaker 1: documents and communications relating or referring to end quote e
Speaker 1: f Cein and Maxwell to be turned over to the
Speaker 1: committee by the nineteenth of August. The Justice Department later
Speaker 1: told the panel it needed more time. It turned over
Speaker 1: more than thirty three thousand pages of the panel, which
Speaker 1: became public in early September. Representative Robert Garcia of California,
Speaker 1: the top Democrat on the committee, said that the vast
Speaker 1: majority of these records were already public and that only
Speaker 1: three percent were new okay. A judge who presided over
Speaker 1: in Epstein related case this year said that there are
Speaker 1: roughly one hundred thousand pages in the file. The House
Speaker 1: Republicans called the documents that had been turned over an
Speaker 1: initial batch, with House Speaker Mike Johnson, Republican from Louisiana,
Speaker 1: shout out saying this is the beginning, not the end.
Speaker 1: But the Justice Department has yet to turn over more
Speaker 1: documents to the committee. So now that this is being passed,
Speaker 1: is it going to be all? Is it going to
Speaker 1: be all? But they're going to be super redacted because
Speaker 1: it's still in the middle of ongoing investigations. I don't
Speaker 1: know will the DOJ records include Epstein's emails. The committee
Speaker 1: has more success so far with other subpoenas, including ones
Speaker 1: to the Epstein estate, which last week turned over more
Speaker 1: than twenty thousand emails and documents, including correspondences about Trump
Speaker 1: and Clinton and with the likes of former Prince Andrew
Speaker 1: and Summers, the ex Treasury Secretary at and Harvard President.
Speaker 1: The estate also provided the panel with body fiftieth birthday
Speaker 1: card that Trump allegedly sent to Ebstein in two thousand
Speaker 1: and three. Trump, who said an initial Wall Street Journal
Speaker 1: report about the card was made up, denies having sent it.
Speaker 1: Trump sued over the story's publication. Yeah, remember when he
Speaker 1: was like sue crazy. He was suing CBS, He was
Speaker 1: suing everybody that was saying anything close to in you
Speaker 1: unkind about him. Yeah, he hadn't really been about that lately. Interesting,
Speaker 1: It's unclear whether the Justice Department previously had any of
Speaker 1: the same or any of the information or documents the
Speaker 1: estate turned over. None so far seemed to have been
Speaker 1: implicated anyone in criminal wrongdoing. Wow, Okay, so that is
Speaker 1: that's the situation as of DC as of this moment.
Speaker 1: But with that being said, let's hear from this guy,
Speaker 1: Clay Higgins. Now, I gotta tell y'all if you don't
Speaker 1: know who Clay Higgins is. He was a cop who
Speaker 1: later became the sheriff of his neck of the woods
Speaker 1: in Louisiana. He had a very motivational speech that he
Speaker 1: let out. It was a YouTube video went viral where
Speaker 1: basically he and his cops all geared up like they
Speaker 1: were ready to kick in a door somewhere. He was
Speaker 1: basically letting the message out to the criminals in his area,
Speaker 1: like if you want the smoke, we're here for you.
Speaker 1: And it was excellent. I was a massive fan of
Speaker 1: Clay Higgins until now, literally last week. If you would
Speaker 1: have asked me about him, I would have said nothing
Speaker 1: but positive things, just raving about the guy. And he
Speaker 1: ran for politics after that. And one because he is
Speaker 1: a staunchly conservative, upright moral guy. Has been his whole thing.
Speaker 1: But he is the only one in Congress who did
Speaker 1: not vote to release the files. Out of the four
Speaker 1: to twenty eight, he was the only one. It's wild,
Speaker 1: it's a wild thing, but let's talk about it here.
Speaker 1: Republican Clay Higgins was the only House member to vote
Speaker 1: against a bill today or Tuesday that will order the
Speaker 1: Justice Department to release files related to convicted sex offender
Speaker 1: Jeffrey Epstein. Higgins, a conservative with the background in law enforcement,
Speaker 1: said he has been a principled no on the Epstein
Speaker 1: File Transparency Act from the beginning. As written, this bill
Speaker 1: reveals in injuries. Yeah, it reveals and injures thousands of
Speaker 1: innocent people, witnesses, people who provided alibi's family members, etc.
Speaker 1: He wrote on Tuesday in a statement on x IF
Speaker 1: enacted in its current form, this type of broad reveal
Speaker 1: of criminal investigative files released to a rabid media will
Speaker 1: absolutely result in innocent people being hurt. The Louisiana Republican added,
Speaker 1: not by my vote. The lawmaker, in his official bio,
Speaker 1: touts himself as one of the most conservative members of Congress,
Speaker 1: which I would have to agree with, and often leans
Speaker 1: into his law enforcement background. He's also a member of
Speaker 1: the House Freedom Caucus and serves as chair of the
Speaker 1: House Oversight and Government Reform Federal Law Enforcement Subcommittee, where
Speaker 1: he's tasked with investigating corruption, which I think he'd be
Speaker 1: very well slated for that as a matter of fact,
Speaker 1: So the hardline conservative Throughout his involvement in politics, Higgins
Speaker 1: has remained in lockstep with key principles that champion for
Speaker 1: smaller government, lower taxes, secure borders, and individual freedoms. He
Speaker 1: is close ties with organizations that advance those core components,
Speaker 1: including three Percenters, which are known for promoting a decentralized
Speaker 1: and anti government movement. Shout out to the three Percenters
Speaker 1: out there, in addition to the oath Keepers, who define
Speaker 1: themselves as a far right anti gover government militia. Also
Speaker 1: shout out to the Oathkeepers. I like both of those
Speaker 1: groups to be honest with you. The Louisiana lawmakers resigned
Speaker 1: from the Saint Landry Pearis Sheriff's office after comments he
Speaker 1: made online drew backlash from the local American Civil Liberties Union.
Speaker 1: According to KLFY. Eight years later, he came under fire
Speaker 1: again for criticizing Haitian immigrants and making racist comments after
Speaker 1: President Trump and VP Vance made false claims that they
Speaker 1: were stealing and eating dogs in Ohio, which wasn't false.
Speaker 1: There was a video that was released of a woman
Speaker 1: doing that, but that was a let's call it intellectually
Speaker 1: dishonest because they made it sound like that was a
Speaker 1: epidemic in Ohio. That was one case of a woman
Speaker 1: who was so drugged out of her mind that I
Speaker 1: don't even know that she knows that she was a
Speaker 1: human at that moment. But yes, there was a video
Speaker 1: of a woman eating a dog squatting on a sidewalk.
Speaker 1: It was raw to like just killed the dog, just
Speaker 1: was like gnawing on it. So it was like that
Speaker 1: was a thing, but it was portrayed to be a
Speaker 1: much bigger deal than it actually was. So fair, he says, Lol,
Speaker 1: these Haitians are wild eating pets, voodoo, nastiest country in
Speaker 1: the Western Hemisphere, colts, slapstick gangsters, but damn that they
Speaker 1: don't feel all sophisticated now filing charges against our president
Speaker 1: and VP. He deleted the post, but that was the
Speaker 1: post on X at one point in time. All these
Speaker 1: thugs better getting their minds right and their asses out
Speaker 1: of our country before January twentieth, he added at the time,
Speaker 1: referring to the presidential inauguration date. So all right, this
Speaker 1: guy himself again, I was a massive fan of his,
Speaker 1: But he's saying that releasing these files are going to
Speaker 1: hurt innocent people. Those names are gonna be redacted obviously,
Speaker 1: So what is he talking about here? I don't know.
Speaker 1: We're actually gonna play this little clip from the Hill
Speaker 1: where this article is from, to learn more together about this.
Speaker 12: Out as a long shot is now on the verge
Speaker 12: of becoming a reality, with Congress passing the bill to
Speaker 12: essentially release the Epstein files.
Speaker 1: The bill is past.
Speaker 12: The House voted tuesday to force the Justice Department to
Speaker 12: release all unclassified files related to Jeffrey Epstein.
Speaker 13: It's time for the Epstein class to go to be
Speaker 13: held accountable. It was an overwhelming vote, four hundred and
Speaker 13: twenty seven to one.
Speaker 2: I hope they hang them.
Speaker 14: I literally hang them with a rope and a tree.
Speaker 12: Survivors of Epstein's crimes were on Capitol Hill ahead of
Speaker 12: the vote.
Speaker 15: Putting your Shane and your story out there and like
Speaker 15: owning it is not easy at all for any of us.
Speaker 12: Just hours later, unanimous consent to clear the Senate once
Speaker 12: the bill arrives today.
Speaker 1: They've worked so hard and long to make this happen.
Speaker 12: At the White House, President Trump hosted the Saudi Crown Prince,
Speaker 12: his first visit since US intelligence said he likely ordered
Speaker 12: the murder of journalist Jamal Kashogi.
Speaker 16: Whether you like him or didn't like him, things happened,
Speaker 16: but he knew nothing about it.
Speaker 1: It's painful and it's a huge mistake. And you'll do
Speaker 1: an all missus that this does happen again.
Speaker 12: And the White House says President Trump plans to sign
Speaker 12: the Epstein Transparency Act once it makes it to his desk.
Speaker 1: All right, So moving on here, let's uh actually know what,
Speaker 1: We're gonna skip ahead and talk about the Saudi Prince
Speaker 1: because I was actually gonna bring that up a little
Speaker 1: bit later, but we might as well bring it up now,
Speaker 1: because boy, oh boy, the Saudi Prince is talking about
Speaker 1: spending some serious chick chunk of change in America right now.
Speaker 1: It was somewhere around like six hundred million that just
Speaker 1: got brought up to a billion dollars. And there's talks
Speaker 1: of him also joining certain uh gee, you know, certain groups,
Speaker 1: certain groups. I don't know. But as Trump was going
Speaker 1: on about the Epstein files and this is getting passed, now,
Speaker 1: let's talk about the Saudi Arabian it brings who just
Speaker 1: made his way to America and the amount of money
Speaker 1: he is about to pour into America. Let's learn about
Speaker 1: this together.
Speaker 13: One week for Congress to release the Epstein files.
Speaker 8: Why not just do it now?
Speaker 16: Well, it's not the question that I mind. It's your additive.
Speaker 16: I think you are a terrible reporter. You just keep
Speaker 16: going on the Epstein files. And what the Epstein is
Speaker 16: is a Democrat hoax to try and get me not
Speaker 16: to be able to talk about the twenty one trillion
Speaker 16: dollars that I talked about today. It's a hoax.
Speaker 17: President Trump going sports to earth on reporters and Democrats
Speaker 17: for trying to distract from his major domestic and foreign
Speaker 17: policy wins with what he says is the Epstein hoax.
Speaker 17: As lawmakers on Capitol Hill advanced the Epstein measure, Trump
Speaker 17: was making new security guarantees and trillion dollar deals at
Speaker 17: the White House. We have the very latest on both
Speaker 17: developing stories, and thank you for joining us. I'm jan
Speaker 17: Jeff Cote. It is Wednesday, November nineteenth, and this morning
Speaker 17: President Trump is set to deliver remarks at an investment
Speaker 17: form meant to the growing alliance between the US and
Speaker 17: Saudi Arabia. It also comes after Trump did secure major
Speaker 17: economic and work commitments from the Crown Prince during his
Speaker 17: visit to.
Speaker 12: The White House.
Speaker 2: Saudi Arabia.
Speaker 17: SI is going to increase as six hundred billion dollar
Speaker 17: investment into the US, who is staggering one trillion dollars.
Speaker 17: Saudi Arabia also considering joining the Abraham Accords, and Trump
Speaker 17: has officially declared them a major non NATO ally. We
Speaker 17: want to get ray to Mark Boyle at the Live
Speaker 17: desk following the very latest, very historic mark this alliance
Speaker 17: growing stronger by the minute, it scenes. What can we
Speaker 17: expect today?
Speaker 18: More meetings today here in d C. Saudi Arabia slowly
Speaker 18: becoming a top US ally under the Trump administration, no.
Speaker 12: Doubt about that.
Speaker 18: After hosting several events for the Crown Prince Muhammed bin
Speaker 18: Salmon at the White House, the two sides expected to
Speaker 18: meet again to get today at the Kennedy Center here
Speaker 18: in d C. They'll meet by and with tech firms,
Speaker 18: investment firms from around the world, and not just DC
Speaker 18: elites or elected leaders, all with the goal here of
Speaker 18: drumming up business and more innovation now. In the past
Speaker 18: twenty four hours, the President also underlined the military cooperation
Speaker 18: between the two sides.
Speaker 16: We're taking our military cooperation to even greater heights by
Speaker 16: formally designating Saudi Arabia as a major non NATO ally,
Speaker 16: which is something that is very important to them. And
Speaker 16: I'm just telling you now for the first time because
Speaker 16: they wanted to keep a little secret for tonight.
Speaker 18: Another big headline, the Middle Eastern nation is going to
Speaker 18: increase its investments into the United States by billions of
Speaker 18: dollars now, bringing the total investments into the US to
Speaker 18: one trillion dollars.
Speaker 19: Real investment and real opportunity by details in many areas
Speaker 19: and the agreement that we are signing today in many areas,
Speaker 19: and technology, AI and materials magnet. As you said mis
Speaker 19: to the President, it's the most hottest country and the planet.
Speaker 19: But what you are creating is not about opportunity today.
Speaker 19: It's about also long term opportunity. And I said to
Speaker 19: America that would affict American economy positively.
Speaker 18: In the President's to be at Kennedy Center at noon
Speaker 18: today to deliver remarks at the US Saudi Investment Forum.
Speaker 18: We'll track that for you here at the live desk.
Speaker 1: So, Saudi Arabia has decided to up their investment in America,
Speaker 1: and uh yeah, most of that is in f thirty fives.
Speaker 1: Most of that are in fighters, which I'm not necessarily
Speaker 1: mad at. But also, oh my god, one trillion dollars
Speaker 1: is not that's not small. That's not small whatsoever. So
Speaker 1: let's learn a little bit more about this today. This
Speaker 1: is from CNBC dot com. Their economic arm anyway, from
Speaker 1: one trillion dollars spending to f thirty fives. US Saudi
Speaker 1: pledges aren't done deals yet. The key points of this
Speaker 1: before we dive into the meat and potatoes of it.
Speaker 1: Trump rolled out the red carpet for Saudi Arabia's de
Speaker 1: facto ruler as he arrived in Washington for talks ranging
Speaker 1: from security to civil nuclear energy partnerships. The leaders signed
Speaker 1: a defense cooperation packed and held discussestions about the sale
Speaker 1: of American AT thirty five fighter jets to the Kingdom.
Speaker 1: The White House said Saudi Arabia has pledged to increase
Speaker 1: it's already promised six hundred billion worth of investments in
Speaker 1: US to one trillion. Let's get into it now. The
Speaker 1: US President trumpeted Saudi Arabia's one trillion dollar investment pledge
Speaker 1: in the States and the potential sale of American fighter
Speaker 1: jets to Riad, but experts say there are lingering doubts
Speaker 1: over whether such deals will materialize. We talked about Trump
Speaker 1: rolling out the red carpet Da da DA. The US
Speaker 1: visits by Mohammed Ben Salmon, or NBS as he's widely known,
Speaker 1: was not without controversy, as it was the first time
Speaker 1: he had visited the States since the killing of the
Speaker 1: Saudi critic and journalist Jamal Koshogi in twenty eighteen. US
Speaker 1: intelligence determined that the Crown prints had approved the operation
Speaker 1: that led to Kashoki's death in a Saudi Arabian consulate
Speaker 1: in Istanbul, but Riad denied any involvement in the murder.
Speaker 1: He approved of that it was not involved. Sure, that's
Speaker 1: a hot take. Undeterred by global outrage over the death
Speaker 1: of Kushogi, end question marks over Saudi Arabia's rehabilitation and
Speaker 1: initiative or invitation to the White House. Rather, Trump and
Speaker 1: NBS said they had finalized a series of landmark agreements
Speaker 1: that deepened the US SAWDY strategic partnership. Among them, the
Speaker 1: White House said in a statement, was the Saudi's pledge
Speaker 1: to increase the spending or the investment rather from six
Speaker 1: one hundred billion dollars to one trillion in May or
Speaker 1: in May had said six hundred billion. Now it's saying
Speaker 1: one trillion. The White House said the bump reflected deepening
Speaker 1: trust and momentum for the United States under President Trump's leadership.
Speaker 1: No further detail was given as to a timescale around
Speaker 1: that trillion dollar investment. However, a one trillion dollar investment
Speaker 1: is equal to Saudi Arabia's annual economic output in twenty
Speaker 1: twenty three of one point zero seven trillion dollars. Wow,
Speaker 1: and eka economists question whether that level of investment would
Speaker 1: or could materialize anytime soon. Is a direct quote here
Speaker 1: from Paul Donnovan, the chief economist at GBS Global Wealth Management.
Speaker 1: These sorts of pledges have become regular features of the
Speaker 1: international landscape, even when, as in the case of the
Speaker 1: EU and its pledged investment into the United States as
Speaker 1: part of a trade deal, there's absolutely no enforcement mechanism
Speaker 1: available to put the Saudi pledge in context that is
Speaker 1: equivalent of almost an entire year's GDP for the Kingdom.
Speaker 1: The pledge may not therefore be honored in the near term,
Speaker 1: he cautioned. And that's true. I mean, I don't think
Speaker 1: anybody's really expecting for that to be handed over in
Speaker 1: one lump sum. But even still, even if that's spread
Speaker 1: out over the course of the next ten years, that's
Speaker 1: still massive. Now, let's talk about the F thirty fives.
Speaker 1: In addition to the investment pledges, Trump and NBS discussed
Speaker 1: the sale of F thirty five fighter jets to Saudi Arabia,
Speaker 1: with the kingdom reportedly looking to buy as many as
Speaker 1: forty eight of the stealth fighter jets in what could
Speaker 1: be a multi billion dollar deal. The President approved a
Speaker 1: major defense sale package, including future F thirty five deliveries,
Speaker 1: which strengthen the US defense industrial base and ensure Saudi
Speaker 1: Arabia continues to buy American the w No details were
Speaker 1: given on the number of planes sold or any timeframe
Speaker 1: for their supply. Fair enough, Uh, let's see, is this
Speaker 1: a video talking about the deal. I'm not going to
Speaker 1: read on that one. It's cool. The F thirty five
Speaker 1: deal in focus, it's whatever. Such a sale could prove
Speaker 1: controversial with the US lawmakers, whose sympathies and allegiances has
Speaker 1: traditionally led towards Israel, the US's main and long standing
Speaker 1: ally in the Middle East. Israel is currently the only
Speaker 1: country in the Middle East to have F thirty five's
Speaker 1: and any sale of such advanced stealth technology to Saudi
Speaker 1: Arabia could be seen as risky, having the potential to
Speaker 1: shift military and power dynamics in the fractioned, fractious region.
Speaker 1: For its part, the IDF is reportedly unhappy at the
Speaker 1: prospect of F thirty five deal with Saudi Arabia, warning
Speaker 1: that Israel's air superiority in the region would be jeopardized. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I know, though, but isn't Israel the one controlling on
Speaker 1: Membo codo. I thought Israel runs on Memboco. Yeah, they
Speaker 1: used to, They used to. That's there is a changing
Speaker 1: of the guard happening right now. Katar is making very
Speaker 1: big plays right now. Saudi Arabia is making very big
Speaker 1: plays right now the UAE as far as that goes,
Speaker 1: Trump is looking to make a better ally of multiple
Speaker 1: countries in the Middle East, not just Israel, and a
Speaker 1: lot of people are gonna just reject that outright and
Speaker 1: say that it's clearly Israel and the Jews that are
Speaker 1: making this happen, even though selling Saudi Arabia F thirty
Speaker 1: five's spits in the face of that whole conversation. But okay, sure,
Speaker 1: Trump shrugged off those concerns, selling reporters in the Oval
Speaker 1: Office on Tuesday that we'll be selling F thirty fives,
Speaker 1: although he alluded to Israel's discontent, noting this is a
Speaker 1: great ally, and Israel is a great ally talking about
Speaker 1: Saudia with this, I know they'd like to get planes
Speaker 1: of reduced caliber, But as far as I'm concerned, I
Speaker 1: think they are both at a level where they should
Speaker 1: get top of the line. He added. Okay, analysis say,
Speaker 1: giving Saudi Arabia F thirty fives before it has signaled
Speaker 1: or signed rather the Abraham Accords, thereby normalizing relationships with Israel,
Speaker 1: would be a reward too far for RIAD. Saudi Arabia
Speaker 1: is an important US security partner, and increasing bilateral defense
Speaker 1: cooperation can further common interest and support efforts to build
Speaker 1: a regional security architecture that more effectively deters and defeats aggression.
Speaker 1: That's from Bradley Bowman, a senior director at the Foundation
Speaker 1: of Defense of Democracies. Which is crazy because Saudi Arabia
Speaker 1: is not a democracy. But okay. However, before providing RIOD
Speaker 1: with the F thirty five's, Washington should address concerns related
Speaker 1: to riod's relationship with China, follow the law regarding Israel's qualitative,
Speaker 1: qualitative military edge, and demand Saudi Arabia's first normalized relations
Speaker 1: with Israel. That's very fair. That's fair anyway. So talking
Speaker 1: about the long road to supply, lingering and deep seated
Speaker 1: differences over a two state solution could give the White
Speaker 1: House reasons to hesitate over the supply of F thirty
Speaker 1: five to Saudi Arabia. Analysis noted, it's one thing to
Speaker 1: announce big deals. It's one thing to announce that Saudi
Speaker 1: Arabia will be permitted to buy F thirty fives and
Speaker 1: with advanced self abilities. But it's another thing to actually
Speaker 1: have planes touching down and taking off from Saudi runways.
Speaker 1: That's from Paul Musgrave, an associate professor of Government at
Speaker 1: Georgetown University in Katar. Interesting and between here and there,
Speaker 1: there's a lot of details. And when you start to
Speaker 1: get into the details about what's going to transfer what technology,
Speaker 1: at what point that's where Congress, which is I think
Speaker 1: fair to say a little bit more friendly towards Israel
Speaker 1: than towards Saudi Arabia, is going to have some input. Again,
Speaker 1: that's a very fair Now, that's not to say that
Speaker 1: this deal is not going to go through, because of
Speaker 1: course Israel has also has suffered some reverses in its
Speaker 1: public standing. But there is going to be, I think,
Speaker 1: probably a decently long road between where we are and
Speaker 1: where we get to. That's what he told CBS in
Speaker 1: squawk Box in Europe. So anyway, the F thirty fives
Speaker 1: are a pretty solid linchpin in this deal with Saudi Arabia.
Speaker 1: But even still, for them to invest a trillion dollars
Speaker 1: in the United States, that's massive. That say what you
Speaker 1: want about lobbyist money making its way into certain politicians pockets,
Speaker 1: that's not this level. And I don't know off the
Speaker 1: top of my head how many countries are openly wanting
Speaker 1: to invest to this level in US soil. I just
Speaker 1: I don't know of many off the top of my head.
Speaker 1: But anyway, all right, moving on here, as we were
Speaker 1: talking about the DOJ and all of these things, I
Speaker 1: think it's also kind of interesting to read this one.
Speaker 1: Have y'all heard about the Olympic Canadian snowboarder who just
Speaker 1: made the CIA's top ten most wanted individuals Because I hadn't.
Speaker 1: Let's learn about this together, This is pretty crazy.
Speaker 15: I'm Christine for Zowen, Washington, where the US State Department
Speaker 15: has just raised the reward from ten to fifteen million
Speaker 15: dollars for information leading to the arrest of a former
Speaker 15: Olympian from Canada. In a brand new indictment, Ryan James
Speaker 15: Wedding is charged with two additional counts of witness tampering
Speaker 15: and intimidation, murder, money laundering, and drug trafficking. That's on
Speaker 15: top of previous charges against him from the two thousand
Speaker 15: and two Winter Olympics. Canadian snowboarder Ryan James Wedding more
Speaker 15: recently gained notoriety for something else, landing on the FBI's
Speaker 15: top ten most wanted list.
Speaker 20: Make no mistake, Ryan Wedding is extremely dangerous, He's extremely violent,
Speaker 20: and he's extremely wealthy. He's being protected by the Alaloa
Speaker 20: cartel along with others in the country.
Speaker 1: In Mexico, charges.
Speaker 15: Include running a transnational drug operation that shipped massive amounts
Speaker 15: of fentanyl, heroin, methamphetamine, and especially cocaine through Columbia and
Speaker 15: Mexico for distribution in Canada and the United States.
Speaker 5: That's how much cocaine the weight of forty cars he
Speaker 5: is bringing into our country a year.
Speaker 15: He and his associates are also accused of money laundering,
Speaker 15: witness tampering, and of orchestrating the murders of several people,
Speaker 15: including an FBI witness shot in the head five times
Speaker 15: in a restaurant in Medaine.
Speaker 17: His lawyer told him, if you kill this witness, the
Speaker 17: case would be dismissed.
Speaker 8: That lawyer is now in custody, while Wedding.
Speaker 15: Is still at large. Several other people connected to him
Speaker 15: have now been arrested, the State Department offering fifteen million
Speaker 15: dollars for information leading to his arrest.
Speaker 21: Best for those of you out there that have any
Speaker 21: information on Ryan Wedding, now is the time to speak up.
Speaker 1: Now is the time to help US.
Speaker 15: Justice Department officials made clear their counterparts in both Canada
Speaker 15: and Mexico are cooperating in this effort. They say several
Speaker 15: arrests have already been made, just not the most important one.
Speaker 1: Okay, So yeah, Ryan Wedding, I'm be honest with you.
Speaker 1: I'm uh, I don't keep my finger on the pulse
Speaker 1: of Canadian Olympia, olympiads or anything like that. But apparently
Speaker 1: after he made his way to the Olympics, he turned
Speaker 1: into a drug kingpin and uh yeah he is at
Speaker 1: large as of time recording, and the State Department is
Speaker 1: offering millions of dollars for information on him. Before I
Speaker 1: get to this article, Sam, I see your hand raised, brother,
Speaker 1: what you got?
Speaker 21: I'm just talking about a celebrity tone motor.
Speaker 22: Did you do you remember the power of Wildforce pile
Speaker 22: injur show early two thousands, so that the Red Rangers
Speaker 22: from that show is sitting in prison for motor he
Speaker 22: h to the show ended. He ended up trying to
Speaker 22: get a yacht. He tricked the older couple into get
Speaker 22: going on out to the taking them on the yacht
Speaker 22: to go sell it like a practice, driving everything for it. Well,
Speaker 22: he ended up killing them, robbing them and throwing their
Speaker 22: bodies over water. And uh his pregnant baby mama is
Speaker 22: the one who turned him in and everything.
Speaker 21: Uh all because he wouldn't give her the money.
Speaker 1: Wow.
Speaker 21: Yeah, I just found that today.
Speaker 1: I was today years old when I found that out myself. Sam.
Speaker 23: Okay, apparently Power Rangers aren't always what they cracked up
Speaker 23: to be.
Speaker 1: Dog. That is a fact. That is a fact, And
Speaker 1: apparently need Olympic snowboarders.
Speaker 21: So Austin rest in piece, Jason David Frank, you were
Speaker 21: a real one, Tommy Oliver, the Green Ranger and Light Ranger.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, he was indeed the real one. He did
Speaker 1: uh F'm not mistake and take his own life correct.
Speaker 21: Yeah, but there's uh some kind of fishy stuff about.
Speaker 1: That, and we might do an episode on him.
Speaker 21: Yeah, I'm not gonnae.
Speaker 23: I called because he was my favorite Power Enginer and
Speaker 23: I had every Power Engine movie from the nineties up
Speaker 23: to SPD on VHS and he was my favorite Power Enger.
Speaker 1: Nice dude, Yeah, all right, p all right, So let's
Speaker 1: read in here. It says a former Olympic snowboarder who
Speaker 1: officials say runs one of the most violent drug trafficking
Speaker 1: organizations in the world, faces new charges related to the
Speaker 1: murder of a federal witness. In the case against him,
Speaker 1: officials said Ryan James Wedding placed a bounty on the
Speaker 1: witness's head in the erroneous belief that the victim's death
Speaker 1: would result in the dismissal of criminal charges against him
Speaker 1: and his international drug trafficking ring. He is alleged to
Speaker 1: have used a Canadian website to post images of the
Speaker 1: witness and his wife to locate him. Official said at
Speaker 1: a news conference Wednesday. The witness was fatally shot at
Speaker 1: a restaurant before he could testify against Wedding, and an
Speaker 1: indictment unsealed Wednesday. Wedding was charged with murder, witness, tampering
Speaker 1: and intimidation, money laundering, and drug trafficking. Yeah. He's uh,
Speaker 1: he's getting quite the as far as this goes. If
Speaker 1: he was in GTA, he's doing everything he can to
Speaker 1: get that five star rating right now. Good lord. And again,
Speaker 1: I I didn't know that Canada got down like this.
Speaker 1: I know, of course they have their like criminal elements,
Speaker 1: no doubt, But I didn't realize that a former Canadian
Speaker 1: snowboarder would just go to the Sinaloa cartel and be like, hey,
Speaker 1: I'm halfe now and just run that shit. That's wild.
Speaker 1: The new indictment also addresses several other people, including a
Speaker 1: Canadian lawyer who officials say were involved in the murder. Yeah,
Speaker 1: that lawyer that they said is in jail now. The
Speaker 1: State Department increased its reward from ten billion to or million,
Speaker 1: with an m sorry ten million to fifteen million for him.
Speaker 1: That leads to the arrest and or conviction of wedding,
Speaker 1: who is on the FBI's ten most Wanted Fugitives list.
Speaker 1: You don't get to be a drug kingpin and evade
Speaker 1: the law, FBI director Cash Hotel said at the news conference.
Speaker 1: Make no mistake about it. Ryan Wedding is a modern
Speaker 1: day iteration of Pablo Escobar. He's a modern iteration of
Speaker 1: El Chapo Guzman. He will not evade justice. Okay, Cash,
Speaker 1: you got enough things on your plate right now. Stop that,
Speaker 1: just just stop that. A kill Davis, Assistant director in
Speaker 1: charge of FBI's Los Angeles Field office, said, officials believe
Speaker 1: he's being protected by the cartel and others in Mexico.
Speaker 1: I would believe that. Please understand that he might change
Speaker 1: his hair color, his appearance, and do anything to avoid capture.
Speaker 1: Attorney General Pam Bondi said Wednesday or Weddings organization is
Speaker 1: responsible for importing about sixty metric tons of cocaine a
Speaker 1: year into Los Angeles via semi truck from Mexico. Yeah. Also,
Speaker 1: you really, Pam, You just said forty cars, that's how
Speaker 1: much weight he's moving in. You don't have to do
Speaker 1: that to say sixty metric tons. I feel like most
Speaker 1: Americans could at least grasp the concept that it's a
Speaker 1: it's a it's a metric fuck ton that your boy
Speaker 1: is moving in to say it's forty cars worth, that's
Speaker 1: kind of dumb. That that was really dumb, because I
Speaker 1: mean cars weigh different things from vehicle to vehicle. I'm
Speaker 1: just saying I don't want to be that guy. But
Speaker 1: there was a way better, like messaging you could have
Speaker 1: used to convey the point. Go ahead, Sam, So a
Speaker 1: metric ton would be too twenty two hundred pounds.
Speaker 24: That's two two hundred pounds, and you said, and you
Speaker 24: said sixty Helmut safety metric tons, so six sixty times
Speaker 24: twenty two that would be what.
Speaker 21: You know what, I'm not even going to try that.
Speaker 21: That made my age, buton hurt, No.
Speaker 1: It's a lot. It's what I'm saying, like, it's not
Speaker 1: a small amount like this did this is kingpin level moves.
Speaker 1: He's moving this well.
Speaker 6: At that point when I'd be like over one hundred
Speaker 6: and forty eight thousand, Yes, but a metric ton is
Speaker 6: string too, so that'd be like well one thousand and
Speaker 6: not one and forty eight thousand.
Speaker 21: If I'm not mistaken.
Speaker 1: Uh so, a metric ton is a thousand kilograms, which
Speaker 1: is twenty two forty pounds two two hundred and forty pounds. Yeah,
Speaker 1: a short ton, which is what we use in America's
Speaker 1: two thousand pounds. Thank you Tony for the clarification. But yeah,
Speaker 1: it's it's a lot. But that's my point to say
Speaker 1: he's moving forty cars worth of weight like that. There
Speaker 1: was that made her look dumb, That's all musta say.
Speaker 1: There was. There's a better way of conveying the message
Speaker 1: than what Pam Bondi said. But anyway, he controls one
Speaker 1: of the most prolific and violent drug trafficking organizations in
Speaker 1: the world. He is currently the largest distributor of cocaine
Speaker 1: in Canada. Yeah, with that kind of weight being moved,
Speaker 1: I could I could imagine that, no doubt. Over the
Speaker 1: course of the investigation, Bondie said, more than thirty five
Speaker 1: people have been indicted, numerous weapons have been seized, about
Speaker 1: three point two million dollars in cryptocurrency has been recovered,
Speaker 1: and over thirteen million in physical assets have been confiscated.
Speaker 1: According to the FBI, weddings organization often resorted to violence,
Speaker 1: including orchestrating murders of multiple people. Wedding who represented Canada
Speaker 1: in the Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City in two
Speaker 1: thousand and two, was charged in a September twenty twenty
Speaker 1: four superseding indictment with attempted murder and other counts. Wild things, y'all,
Speaker 1: wild things, you know. Let's see here. So you did
Speaker 1: the math on that, Sam, So it is one thousand,
Speaker 1: three hundred or one thousand and thirty four. Jesus, I'm
Speaker 1: misreading this year. Hold on the amount that they are
Speaker 1: accusing him of moving is one hundred and thirty four thousand,
Speaker 1: four hundred pounds. That's yeah, I think that falls well
Speaker 1: within the realm of what we would call a metric
Speaker 1: fuck ton, But yeah, wild things.
Speaker 8: That is life dis.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, absolutely absolutely all right. So now let's go
Speaker 1: over to this next article from the Economic Times Madeleine Westerhout.
Speaker 1: If you haven't heard of her name, you may soon.
Speaker 1: She denied these defamatory claims that Trump boasted about an
Speaker 1: affair during twenty eighteen shutdown following the release of the
Speaker 1: Epstein linked emails. So, for anybody who doesn't know, this was,
Speaker 1: at one point in time, Trump's assistant and there's a
Speaker 1: lot of people that were saying that Trump was having
Speaker 1: an affair with her, and they've been trying to run
Speaker 1: that story up for the past couple of days, only
Speaker 1: to have the person herself come out and say no,
Speaker 1: nothing like that happened.
Speaker 16: Uh.
Speaker 1: And they were trying to show the track record of
Speaker 1: Trump being a prolific cheater of his wives in the
Speaker 1: past as justification for this. But she even herself denied it.
Speaker 1: But let's read it here. Former White House aid Madeline
Speaker 1: wester Hout has forcefully rejected claims that President Trump boasted
Speaker 1: two friends about having an affair with her, calling the
Speaker 1: allegations absurd and unhinged from reality. The allegation stems from
Speaker 1: a twenty nineteen email sent by author Michael Woolfe to
Speaker 1: convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Yeah, we're still own the
Speaker 1: Epstein shit. The correspondence, part of the draft manuscript, now
Speaker 1: released among twenty three thousand documents handed over to Congress
Speaker 1: by Epstein's estate, suggested that Trump told friends that he
Speaker 1: was banging quote unquote Western Hought during the twenty eighteen
Speaker 1: Christmas government shutdown while he remained at the White House
Speaker 1: instead of joining his family at mor Lago. Western Hout,
Speaker 1: who served as Trump's personal secretary and later as director
Speaker 1: of Oval Office operations from twenty seventeen to twenty nineteen,
Speaker 1: responded to through her lawyer, stating these are absurd in
Speaker 1: defamatory accusations from a discredited writer who has been known
Speaker 1: to pedal falsehoods. The lies in this email are unhinged
Speaker 1: from reality and simply not true. Well, then there you
Speaker 1: have it. I suppose the email did spark controversy. However,
Speaker 1: the House Oversight Committee released the email as part of
Speaker 1: the larger cache of Epstein related documents. Democrats highlighted several
Speaker 1: exchanges between Epstein and wolf that referenced Trump, Notably, the
Speaker 1: passage naming Wester Howt was removed from Wolfe's twenty nineteen
Speaker 1: book Siege before publication, with her identity excised. In the
Speaker 1: draft shared with Epstein, Wolf describes Trump's choice to spend
Speaker 1: Christmas in twenty eighteen at the White House during the shutdown,
Speaker 1: while First Lady Milania Trump had already departed for Florida.
Speaker 1: According to the manuscript, western Hout had delivered papers to
Speaker 1: the residents, and Trump allegedly told friends that he was
Speaker 1: staying because he was spending time with her. The White
Speaker 1: House dismissed the document re past as politically motivated. Press
Speaker 1: Secretary Caroline Levitt labeled her report as bad faith efforts
Speaker 1: to distract from President Trump's historic accomplishments. So now, who
Speaker 1: is Madeleine western Holt? She was born October eighth, nineteen
Speaker 1: ninety in Newport Beach, California. Western Holt earned a political
Speaker 1: science degree from the College of Charleston in twenty thirteen.
Speaker 1: Prior to her political career, she worked as a fitness
Speaker 1: trainer at Pure Bear Gym in Washington, d c. Interesting
Speaker 1: western Holt began her political journey on Mitt Romney's twenty
Speaker 1: twelve presidential campaign and later hail positions at the Republican
Speaker 1: National Committee starting in twenty thirteen, eventually serving as assistant
Speaker 1: to RNC Chief of Staff Katie Walsh. She joined Trump's
Speaker 1: administration in twenty seventeen as Special Assistant and Executive Assistant
Speaker 1: to the President, later being promoted in February twenty nineteen
Speaker 1: to Director of Oval Office Operations, with an annual salary
Speaker 1: of one hundred and forty five thousand dollars. During her tenure,
Speaker 1: Trump reportedly referred to her as quote unquote my beauty.
Speaker 1: So the dramatic dismissal. Western Hout's White House career ended
Speaker 1: abruptly in August of twenty nineteen, after she reportedly shared
Speaker 1: personal information about the Trump family and Oval Office operations
Speaker 1: with reporters and an off the record dinner near Trump's
Speaker 1: golf course in Bedminster, New Jersey. Sources indicated that after
Speaker 1: a couple of drinks, the twenty eight year old boasted
Speaker 1: of having a closer relationship with Trump than he did
Speaker 1: with his daughters, Ivanka and Tiffany. She also allegedly remarked
Speaker 1: that the president was so unfamiliar with Tiffany that he
Speaker 1: couldnot recognize her in a crowd. Trump addressed her dismissal
Speaker 1: on Twitter, writing that while Madeline Westerhout has a full
Speaker 1: enforceable confidentiality agreement, she is a very good person. Now
Speaker 1: I looked into these emails that are in question here.
Speaker 1: It doesn't I'm not saying that they're false. I'm not
Speaker 1: saying that they're true. I'm saying that the claim that
Speaker 1: he was banging his assistant because there was just something
Speaker 1: about her, you know, keep in mind that that's a
Speaker 1: bit crazy. It's a bit wild to say. It's not
Speaker 1: the wildest. Bill Clinton got dome in the Oval office
Speaker 1: from one of his assistants, so it's not like this
Speaker 1: is unprecedented for a president to do. That. Being said,
Speaker 1: Millennia was at the Mar A Lago estate but then
Speaker 1: returned to the White House to spend Christmas Eve and
Speaker 1: Christmas Day with Donald Trump. So I don't know what
Speaker 1: the gap was, if it was a day or three
Speaker 1: days or what, but yeah, the claim. There was also
Speaker 1: a claim that he called for her to bring some
Speaker 1: files to him or something, and then when she got
Speaker 1: to his room, she was he was literally just wearing
Speaker 1: his underwear, which like led to some sort of entanglement.
Speaker 1: These claims have also been vehemently denied by her and
Speaker 1: outright rejected. There's also while we're still talking about the
Speaker 1: whole Epstein and Trump and all the claims and emails
Speaker 1: and things, there's also a claim, I don't know how
Speaker 1: verified this is. I'm sure we will all be hearing
Speaker 1: about it in the next few days to say that
Speaker 1: Trump apparently spent Thanksgiving with Epstein in twenty eighteen. I
Speaker 1: don't know, and this was after they had their big
Speaker 1: falling out and all these things, this email list and
Speaker 1: all the files that are about to be released again.
Speaker 1: We talked about it at the beginning of this episode.
Speaker 1: I hope and pray that this leads to a flood
Speaker 1: of information and knowledge to be just released to the public,
Speaker 1: and that justice is served and that we find out
Speaker 1: who is the true shtheads in DC. I just have
Speaker 1: a hard time really seeing any justice get served. I
Speaker 1: don't know. Maybe I just have no hope in humanity anymore. Now,
Speaker 1: this is also interesting. I don't know how many of
Speaker 1: you have heard about the MAGA movement dying in the
Speaker 1: America First movement spawning. These people are wearing these red
Speaker 1: MAGA hats and then they show a picture of them
Speaker 1: burning them and replacing it with a blue America First hat.
Speaker 1: You see people like Tucker Carlson doing these things. And
Speaker 1: all this that being said, apparently there's been a bit
Speaker 1: of backlaine for this. Trump clashes back or Trump claps
Speaker 1: back at a MAGA group after America First backlash. So
Speaker 1: let's see about this. President Trump is clapped back at
Speaker 1: his fractured magabase after being accused of betraying his American
Speaker 1: First principles, which again I don't think that that's a
Speaker 1: baseless thing to say. He has absolutely shifted as far
Speaker 1: as what he said he would do on the campaign
Speaker 1: trainded now. But the President also made a rare admission
Speaker 1: that his approval rating had fallen after a tumultuous few weeks,
Speaker 1: telling a business for him in Washington, quote, my poll
Speaker 1: numbers just went down, before quickly adding but with smart people,
Speaker 1: they've gone way up. So he's basically saying that people
Speaker 1: that were Maga were idiots. So there's that. The comments
Speaker 1: come as Trump's once unbreakable grip on his Make America
Speaker 1: Great movement appears to be slipping over everything from affordability
Speaker 1: and skilled workers to his halty response about the Epstein
Speaker 1: files being a hoax. On screen right now as a
Speaker 1: picture of Trump, Millennia, Jeffrey Epstein, and Gieslam Maxwell. Maga
Speaker 1: rage intensified last week when the President dismissed concerns from
Speaker 1: his base that Chinese students were taking up college places
Speaker 1: that Americans wanted. I know what Maga wants better than
Speaker 1: anyone else, he said in a jaw dropping interview with
Speaker 1: Fox News ally Laura Ingram. But the next day that
Speaker 1: rage turned white hot when he suggested that they were
Speaker 1: not talented or there were not talented workers in the
Speaker 1: United States. After being cornered over wanting to bring more
Speaker 1: high skilled foreign workers into the country on HB one visas,
Speaker 1: the hashtag America Last began to trend on social media,
Speaker 1: and some even declared MAGA is dead. However, speaking at
Speaker 1: a US Saudi investment for him on Wednesday, whose guests
Speaker 1: included billionaires, company executives known to higher form workers, and
Speaker 1: Saudi investors, the President doubled down. You can't come in
Speaker 1: open a massive computer chip factory for billions and billions
Speaker 1: of dollars like it's being done in Arizona and think
Speaker 1: you're gonna hire people off an unemployment line to run it.
Speaker 1: They're gonna have to bring thousands of people with them,
Speaker 1: and I'm gonna welcome those people, he declared. So yeah,
Speaker 1: that's the whole move right now. It gets in to
Speaker 1: say that. Marjorie Taylor Green, who now Trump is calling
Speaker 1: a trader, began urging the President to focus less on
Speaker 1: foreign affairs and do more to advocate domestic problems such
Speaker 1: as the cost of living pressures. No one cares about
Speaker 1: foreign countries. No one cares about the never ending amount
Speaker 1: of foreign leaders coming to the White House every single week,
Speaker 1: said Green, who has clashed bitterly with Trump over the
Speaker 1: Epstein files. However, on Wednesday, Trump announced that after brokering
Speaker 1: numerous peace deals around the world, he was now planning
Speaker 1: to wade into a new conflict at the request of
Speaker 1: his quote unquote friend, the Crown Prince Arab Leaders from
Speaker 1: all over the world, in particular the highly respected Crown
Speaker 1: Prince of Saudi Arabia, have asked me to use the
Speaker 1: power and influence of the Presidency to bring an immediate
Speaker 1: halt to what is taking place in Sudan. We will
Speaker 1: work with Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt, and
Speaker 1: other Middle Eastern partners to get those atrocities to end
Speaker 1: well at the same time stabilizing Sudan. The comment came
Speaker 1: as a new Marist poll puts Trump Jesus. The new
Speaker 1: Marist poll puts Trump's approval at just thirty nine percent,
Speaker 1: his lowest since right after the Jan sixth, quote unquote
Speaker 1: attack on the US Capitol in twenty twenty one. Democrats
Speaker 1: now have their largest advantage fourteen points since twenty seventeen
Speaker 1: on the question of who America would vote for in
Speaker 1: the midterm elections if they were held today. Some Maga
Speaker 1: some in the MAGA world have sought to blame Trump's
Speaker 1: chief of staff and so called quote unquote Ice Maiden
Speaker 1: Susie Wilds for the missteps, but Trump's allies and family members,
Speaker 1: including Vice President Advance, Donald Trump Junior, and RFK Jumior,
Speaker 1: have firmly rejected this. So anyway, it's it seems like
Speaker 1: the America First movement is overtaking the Maga movement. However,
Speaker 1: certain political analysts would say that this is actually all
Speaker 1: a part of a plan. This is Ry macbeth talking
Speaker 1: about how this whole thing is actually a Russian op.
Speaker 1: I didn't see this one coming, but the proof is
Speaker 1: kind of irrefutable, y'all. Let me know what y'all think.
Speaker 1: Let's listen to ol Ry macbeth.
Speaker 8: Russia is at war with America. Need proof.
Speaker 13: The current split and a Republican Party between the make
Speaker 13: America Great Again people and America firsters who are on
Speaker 13: the side of racists and anti Semites like Tucker Carlson
Speaker 13: and Nick Fouentes is being manufactured by Russia. Russia isn't
Speaker 13: even being subtle about it anymore because they found something
Speaker 13: that works. It doesn't matter what political party you're in.
Speaker 13: This is not a Republican issue. This is an America issue.
Speaker 13: Russia is forcing us to fight amongst ourselves. Will they
Speaker 13: run rampant in the world? Information warfare is a weapons effector.
Speaker 8: Videos like this are weapon systems. So how do we
Speaker 8: fight this? Well, it's actually threefold.
Speaker 13: Number one, we need to hold social media companies responsible
Speaker 13: for allowing weapon systems like this to spread. When it
Speaker 13: comes to things like materials that exploit children, we tell
Speaker 13: social media companies that they have to police that. But
Speaker 13: yet when it comes to weapon systems that are designed
Speaker 13: by Russia and China to make Americans hurt.
Speaker 8: Each other, we go ahaha, free speech.
Speaker 13: No, we need to tell social media companies to start
Speaker 13: policing this kind of generated content. Number two, we need
Speaker 13: to consider striking the manufacturers and distributors of this content.
Speaker 13: That might mean kinetically, or that might mean.
Speaker 8: With cyber effects.
Speaker 13: If the adversary was launching a cyber attack on our banks,
Speaker 13: would it be okay to drop a bomb on their
Speaker 13: data center?
Speaker 8: Probably it would be. So why is this any different.
Speaker 13: So third, we need to ca that are kinetically or
Speaker 13: using cyber effects against the adversary's infrastructure and war you
Speaker 13: always take the information warfare a high ground. This would
Speaker 13: be going on the offensive against our adversaries. And hey,
Speaker 13: whether a Republican, a Democrat, or somewhere in between, we
Speaker 13: can all agree that Norarad helps defend America. So grab
Speaker 13: my Norad Christmas sweater from Bunker Branding dot com.
Speaker 1: All right, So Ryan McBeth is showing the receipts to
Speaker 1: say that actually the whole movement is being perpetuated on
Speaker 1: social media by Russian state TV and being manufactured by Russia.
Speaker 1: I don't know necessarily how I feel about that, to
Speaker 1: be honest with you. I mean, Nick fuint Is, it's
Speaker 1: not a secret. I'm not exactly a huge fan of him.
Speaker 1: I think he is a closeted homosexual who is going
Speaker 1: out of his way to He's basically like a he's
Speaker 1: a Paul Brother. He's a quote unquote political Paul Brother
Speaker 1: right now, like he's sipping hater aid just to payorades.
Speaker 1: That's fine, Tucker Carlson, he's also on one right now,
Speaker 1: and he worships Russia in so many regards, So to
Speaker 1: say that they're helping to perpetuate that movement because of
Speaker 1: that kind of time, Okay, that that doesn't sound out
Speaker 1: of the realm for these two gentlemen. But the America
Speaker 1: First movement itself to replace the MAGA movement. Yeah, you'll
Speaker 1: see small pockets of that, but for it to be
Speaker 1: prolifically put out on social media to the level that
Speaker 1: it is, could this be considered some sort of a
Speaker 1: cyber attack by a foreign adversary?
Speaker 10: Sam, go ahead, all you who bought up Nick french As.
Speaker 10: All I'm gonna say is the dude he knows how
Speaker 10: to use karismo and not the good type.
Speaker 25: And if you know, like, if you pay attention to
Speaker 25: his bi language, the way he does his hand movements
Speaker 25: is very wominiss and of a certain political leader of
Speaker 25: the forties in UH Germany, Mas Street.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, he ni Hitler by his own admission, he's like,
Speaker 1: you know what, heley was all this, but you know what,
Speaker 1: he was also kind of cool and it's like you
Speaker 1: so you're just like doing the most just to get
Speaker 1: a response from people, So like, fine, whatever.
Speaker 26: The only thing that I can I can say that
Speaker 26: he kind of had a idea that was kind of cool.
Speaker 26: Was the Volkswagen Beetle. That was Adolph's bing child. But
Speaker 26: that's like even that dude was a piece of shit.
Speaker 1: He wanted an affordable and easily manufactured German made vehicle.
Speaker 1: Those are engineers that actually puts, you know, pin to
Speaker 1: paper and actually got the mechanics all figured out on that.
Speaker 1: So what it wasn't his brain child. He he put
Speaker 1: the order out there and Volkswagen answered the call's here.
Speaker 1: But anyway, but yeah.
Speaker 25: I know his dude's bonning and hill and he's getting
Speaker 25: a pineapple shoved up with his son, don't shine?
Speaker 1: I think so? Personally? Tony, please weigh in on this one, brother.
Speaker 9: Yeah, I don't think there's any reason to believe that
Speaker 9: Russia's behind any significant amount of you know, Twitter or
Speaker 9: Facebook influence in this country forever has been. I failed
Speaker 9: to see what kind of receipts there were in there?
Speaker 9: What did you pick up on? Because I didn't really
Speaker 9: see anything significant.
Speaker 1: The Russian TV watermark and then their website that he
Speaker 1: also had pulled up showing that. Now, granted, could that
Speaker 1: be that RT took an American clip and reposted it
Speaker 1: on their news media and they didn't actually create it themselves.
Speaker 1: That's very possible, but I don't know. I don't know
Speaker 1: if this is, like I said, if this was a China, sure,
Speaker 1: I would believe that one hundred percent that China would
Speaker 1: be doing that, But I don't know. It's not like
Speaker 1: we are doing any more or less to help Ukraine
Speaker 1: right now than we have in a while. I know
Speaker 1: Russia's pretty pissed at us right now because we just
Speaker 1: for India and China stop buying oil from their rigs.
Speaker 1: So that's that could be a reason why Russia's kind
Speaker 1: of putting the screws to us in that regard. But
Speaker 1: I don't know. I don't know. You are more of
Speaker 1: a Russia I don't want to say the term expert,
Speaker 1: but you are a lot more well read into Russian
Speaker 1: politics than I am.
Speaker 9: Yeah, and I'm clearly biased. I'm a Russia fan. I
Speaker 9: just don't see them having anywhere near enough influence in
Speaker 9: this country. So any posts they put up, any video
Speaker 9: they put up on the Internet, it's like a fart
Speaker 9: in the windstorm compared to all the domestic political propaganda
Speaker 9: that we already have here. I would say It's even
Speaker 9: similar with regard to Israel or any influence Israel wants
Speaker 9: to have on American public opinion. They have some, you
Speaker 9: could even say to have a lot, but domestic propaganda
Speaker 9: just overwhelms it. It's like a drop in the bucket.
Speaker 9: Same with Chinese. So you know, all these foreign countries
Speaker 9: and they're parties, they want to influence our country, but
Speaker 9: it's expensive to do so, and there's already just so
Speaker 9: much English language media coming out from our own people
Speaker 9: that I don't think it has anywhere near enough of
Speaker 9: an effect. And the whole idea that Russian disinformation is
Speaker 9: to blame for, you know, any kind of political controversy
Speaker 9: in this country, that's really more of a Democrat talking
Speaker 9: point than anything that goes way back to twenty sixteen
Speaker 9: and twenty fifteen, And in my opinion, there's just never
Speaker 9: been any real truth to it.
Speaker 1: Okay, And that's fair. That's fair. Now, with that being said,
Speaker 1: we also just brought up China. Now we move to
Speaker 1: the next article of concern here. China's autonomous AI powered
Speaker 1: hacking campaign still required a ton of human work. For
Speaker 1: anybody who doesn't know, yes, China just launched a massive
Speaker 1: AI cyber attack on America and not many news media
Speaker 1: people are talking about it, and I don't know why,
Speaker 1: but we're gonna learn about it together here. Anthropic and
Speaker 1: AI security experts told cyberscoop that behind the hype, effective
Speaker 1: AI driven cyber attacks still require skilled humans, with the
Speaker 1: attack possibly done to send a message as a show
Speaker 1: as to show what's possible. Let's dive in here. Anthropic
Speaker 1: made headlines Thursday when it released research claiming that a
Speaker 1: previously unknown Chinese state sponsored hacking group used the company's
Speaker 1: Claude AI generative AI product to breach at least thirty
Speaker 1: different organizations. According to Anthropics report, the threat actor was
Speaker 1: able to bypass Claude security guardrails using two methods, breaking
Speaker 1: up the work into discrete tasks to prevent the software
Speaker 1: from recognizing the broader malicious intentions and tricking the model
Speaker 1: into believing it was conducting a legitimate security audit. Jacob Klein,
Speaker 1: who leads Anthropics Threat Analysis or Intelligence team, told cyberscoop
Speaker 1: that the company has seen increasingly novel uses of Claude
Speaker 1: to assist malicious hackers over the past year. In March,
Speaker 1: threat actors were copying and pasting from chatbot interactions trying
Speaker 1: to build malware or phishing lures. When the company's code
Speaker 1: developed tool, CLAUD code was released, they saw bad actors
Speaker 1: use it more quickly, excuse me, use it to more
Speaker 1: quickly generate scripts and build code for their operations. And
Speaker 1: then this operation in September. I think what we're seeing
Speaker 1: now is the case. In this case is to me,
Speaker 1: the most autonomous misuse we've seen. However, Klin also made
Speaker 1: it clear that most autonomous is a relative term. There
Speaker 1: is plenty of evidence to indicate this hacking group devoted
Speaker 1: significant human and technical resources in the way it used Claud. Namely,
Speaker 1: the automation detailed and anthropics report performed by Claude was
Speaker 1: made possible through a front end framework designed to orchestrate
Speaker 1: and support its operations. The framework handled tasks such as scripting,
Speaker 1: provisioning related servers, and significant back end development to ensure
Speaker 1: every step was followed correctly. Client noted this development process
Speaker 1: was the most difficult and importantly human lad step in
Speaker 1: the operation. The first part of this autonomous is building
Speaker 1: the framework, so you need a human being to put
Speaker 1: this all together. You had a major excuse me, you
Speaker 1: had a human operator that would put in a target,
Speaker 1: they would click a button and then use this framework
Speaker 1: that was created ahead of time. The hardest part of
Speaker 1: this entire system was building this framework. That's what was
Speaker 1: human intensive. Additionally to conductor connaissance on targets, scan for vulnerabilities,
Speaker 1: and conduct other tasks, Claud called out a set of
Speaker 1: open source tools via Model Context Protocol servers, which help
Speaker 1: AI model secure interface with external digital tools. Setting up
Speaker 1: these connections requires coding expertise, advanced planning, and technical work
Speaker 1: by humans to ensure interoperability. Finally, Claude's work was subject
Speaker 1: to constant human validation and review. An illustration of the
Speaker 1: attack chain details at least four different steps that explicitly
Speaker 1: involve having a human check Claud's output or send the
Speaker 1: model back to work before taking additional steps. This suggests
Speaker 1: that although Claude could perform these tasks autonomously, it relied
Speaker 1: on human oversight to review output, validate findings, ensure back
Speaker 1: end systems were working, and direct its next steps. Anthropics
Speaker 1: report highlights a flaw common to all AI generated research.
Speaker 1: Models like Claude frequently hallucinate, fabricreate credentials, exaggerate findings, or
Speaker 1: present publicly available information as significant discoveries. Because of this,
Speaker 1: using AI generator research is challenging. Threat actors like any
Speaker 1: users have no reliable way of trust to trust the
Speaker 1: outputs at each stage without having technical human experts review
Speaker 1: and correct their results. So they're basically saying that this
Speaker 1: wasn't an autonomous AI cyber attack. They're saying that there
Speaker 1: were humans that were just using AI to perform the
Speaker 1: cyber attack. But yeah, anybody who is unaware of this,
Speaker 1: now you know, I highly recommend that you look more
Speaker 1: deeply into your own personal cybersecurity. And if there's any
Speaker 1: cybersecurity companies out there that want a to offer us
Speaker 1: a sponsorship here at the Cage tonight or on the
Speaker 1: Cold Conspiracy, we are all here. But anyway, yeah, a
Speaker 1: hacker group was using AI to conduct cybersecurity issues in
Speaker 1: quote unquote cyber terrorism and they were Chinese based, So
Speaker 1: there's that. Moving on, this is also pretty interesting before
Speaker 1: we get to the humanoid robots. Actually, no, we are
Speaker 1: going to get to this. So this is from Live
Speaker 1: Science Watch. Chinese companies new humanoid robot moves so smoothly.
Speaker 1: They had to cut it open to prove a person
Speaker 1: wasn't hiding inside of it. I am actually very interested
Speaker 1: to see this. Royce is the one that sent this in.
Speaker 1: Shout out to Royce the xping Iron robot. Let's watch
Speaker 1: this video and see what it looks like.
Speaker 14: The story surrounding the xpang Iron robot was about more
Speaker 14: than just US technology. It was about proving authenticity. After
Speaker 14: the press conference, the EXPEG team saw a wave of
Speaker 14: online speculation suggesting that the humanoid robot might actually be
Speaker 14: a person in disguise. That disbelief hit the engineer's hard.
Speaker 14: They had worked tirelessly to showcase something real, only to
Speaker 14: face accusations of fakery. So instead of staying quiet, they
Speaker 14: decided to do something bold. They brought the expeng Iron
Speaker 14: robot back on stage and physically revealed part of its
Speaker 14: structure to show it was genuinely mechanical. It was an
Speaker 14: emotional moment. The speaker admitted it was painful to have
Speaker 14: to unzip the robot and expose its inner mechanics simply
Speaker 14: to convince people it was not human. He also reflected
Speaker 14: on something deeper. If the same robot had been presented
Speaker 14: by a foreign company, many would have accepted it instantly
Speaker 14: because it came from a Chinese startup, Skepticism ran high.
Speaker 14: That was the real challenge, not just criticism about zippers
Speaker 14: or camera angles, but bias against the idea that a
Speaker 14: Chinese firm could achieve this level of innovation. To silence
Speaker 14: the doubts, the team brought the xpeng Iron robot back
Speaker 14: on stage for a second demonstration. This time, they cut
Speaker 14: open a section of the robot's leg to reveal the
Speaker 14: layers beneath the synthetic skin, the muscle like material, and
Speaker 14: the mechanical skeleton. It was risky because the robot was
Speaker 14: still powered on and the team had never done such
Speaker 14: a live procedure before, but the decision paid off. The
Speaker 14: moment viewers saw the internal design, it became clear the
Speaker 14: machine was real. That transparency even drew more suppliers to
Speaker 14: support XPEG, eager to be part of a project proving
Speaker 14: itself through courage rather than words. The speaker then apologized
Speaker 14: to the expeng Iron robot, saying he hoped this would
Speaker 14: be the last time they would have to prove it
Speaker 14: was real. He emphasized that every startup faces doubt, criticism.
Speaker 1: And disbelief.
Speaker 14: What matters is resilience, the drive to keep building and
Speaker 14: improving until the results speak louder than skepticism.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that actually is pretty crazy. I know that Elon's
Speaker 1: got a robot he's been working on lately, and it's
Speaker 1: pretty damn good as far as being you know, looking
Speaker 1: or moving like a like a human does. But it's
Speaker 1: still clearly a robot that one. Yeah, there was a
Speaker 1: little bit of some lag you could see, but they're
Speaker 1: getting damn close to smoothing out all those bumps. That's
Speaker 1: that's crazy and also scary because you know these robots
Speaker 1: are going to be powered by AI, and it is
Speaker 1: not a secret that I am a strong proponent that
Speaker 1: we need to stop using AI. Go ahead, Sam, Yeah,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna.
Speaker 27: A what is it called yah blocking the you right now.
Speaker 27: But no, that is a dirty clanket that they're building.
Speaker 27: We somebody hit it with the e MP. You know what, Betiet,
Speaker 27: they should say square, the CCP will nuke them, damnself.
Speaker 1: Probably not. I could actually see the CCP using this
Speaker 1: in place of actual frontline soldiers. I could. I mean,
Speaker 1: it's not like China has ever cared about losing a
Speaker 1: whole bunch of people in some sort of a military campaign.
Speaker 1: That being said, China's population is not looking the best
Speaker 1: because of their one child policy that they had that
Speaker 1: screwed them out of their economic future. So I could
Speaker 1: see that implementing more robots, not just in military, but
Speaker 1: also in manufacturing as well, because especially in like sweatshop
Speaker 1: labor that they have over there, you don't have to
Speaker 1: worry about the robot getting tired or needing a break,
Speaker 1: or needing to go home at the end of the
Speaker 1: day or go stopping for food or whatever.
Speaker 16: Like.
Speaker 1: It's if you get enough of them to power a
Speaker 1: sweatshop labor force. Now, granted, it depends on to what level, right,
Speaker 1: Like I mean, some of these jobs are very technical
Speaker 1: and they do require a human touch. Some of them
Speaker 1: can be replaced by robotics. It's very interesting to look at.
Speaker 1: But yeah, shout out to Roys for sharing that one anyway.
Speaker 1: So now, still sticking on to China, three more Chinese
Speaker 1: astronauts are now stranded in space following successful rescue of
Speaker 1: their colleagues. Yeah, that's true. So I'm not gonna read
Speaker 1: the article, but I will give you the synopsis of it.
Speaker 1: There were three astronauts that were stranded in space, and
Speaker 1: you know they've been up there for a while. China's
Speaker 1: been trying to figure out a game plan to try
Speaker 1: to figure out how to get them down and what
Speaker 1: to do next and all these things. So instead of
Speaker 1: what they did in a response was they basically replaced
Speaker 1: them with three moored astronauts. They sent a ship up
Speaker 1: there with enough fuel to come home. But they just
Speaker 1: did a one for one swap. So now three new
Speaker 1: fresh astronauts are stranded in space and the three that
Speaker 1: were stranded are now home. Why wouldn't you bring a
Speaker 1: ship that had six seats in it to get everybody home.
Speaker 1: I know, I'm just a dirty capitalist of American here,
Speaker 1: but that just seems like the logical solution. But okay, yeah,
Speaker 1: that's the thing. So three Chinese astronauts were stranded in space.
Speaker 1: Now three more Chinese astronauts are in space. When I
Speaker 1: had three more has a bit of a misnumber three
Speaker 1: different Chinese astronauts are of stranded in space. So that's
Speaker 1: a whole thing. That's the whole thing. And they basically
Speaker 1: did this to provide them more time to figure out
Speaker 1: a solution on how to make a rescue operation happen.
Speaker 1: And again, I feel like just adding more seats would
Speaker 1: have been the right option. But I'm not an engineer
Speaker 1: in space, so I don't be knowing. I just I
Speaker 1: just be guessing here now. Sticking on to China for
Speaker 1: our last article, the video in questionnaire shows the collapse
Speaker 1: of a newly built bridge in China. There were no
Speaker 1: reported casualties from the collapse of the Southwestern Hong Ky
Speaker 1: Bridge Honky Bridge. Shut up. They named their bridge Honky,
Speaker 1: which officials closed the day earlier after cracks appeared on
Speaker 1: nearby slopes and roads. Yeah, let's go ahead and play this.
Speaker 1: The video is only forty four seconds long. We could
Speaker 1: check this out. Hung Chi just by the way, So
Speaker 1: the Q is a che noise? Yeah, Hung Chi Bridge.
Speaker 1: I about to say, boy, y'all crazy in China for
Speaker 1: calling it the Honky bridge.
Speaker 7: Man.
Speaker 1: All right, so Hung Chi Bridge, my apologies. Let's watch
Speaker 1: this collapse together. I don't bleeping out Chinese bad words,
Speaker 1: all right.
Speaker 8: Wow.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that was a section of the bridge that went down,
Speaker 1: but the rest of it seems like it's okay.
Speaker 7: Wow.
Speaker 1: Thankfully nobody was injured. But still, so let's read into
Speaker 1: this together. And I think this is also pretty remnant
Speaker 1: of China's let's just call it tofu architecture that they
Speaker 1: have been doing over the past few years, or basically,
Speaker 1: they built some new big thing that's supposed to be
Speaker 1: the latest and greatest, and everything in China is just awesome.
Speaker 1: But then give it a couple of years and it's
Speaker 1: crumbling because it's not built with these same types of
Speaker 1: specifications or good materials to last and stand the test
Speaker 1: of time. But it's not about what it'll look like
Speaker 1: in ten years. It's about the optics of what it
Speaker 1: looks like right now. And China's been doing that for
Speaker 1: the past I mean, I would say probably two decades,
Speaker 1: but I don't know. Let's read about this here. A
Speaker 1: newly built bridge partially collapsed in the southwest China on Tuesdays,
Speaker 1: sending large pieces of concrete plunging far below in a
Speaker 1: cloud of dust. Authorities said that the two four and
Speaker 1: eighty seven foot long hong Qi Bridge, which connects Seschuan
Speaker 1: Province with Tibet as part of a national highway, was
Speaker 1: closed on Monday after cracks began to appear on nearby
Speaker 1: slopes and roads in the mountainous region. On Tuesday, a
Speaker 1: landslide caused the bridge to fracture and collapse, according to
Speaker 1: officials in the Sechuan city of mi Ar Kang, also
Speaker 1: known in Tibet as Barkham. And I know what you're thinking, Jacob,
Speaker 1: It's a landslide. This happens. Who can predict what this
Speaker 1: is gonna do? Like it to say that the bridge
Speaker 1: was poorly constructed. Not every bridge is rated to build
Speaker 1: to withstand a landslide. Some have some decency here, Okay,
Speaker 1: I hear you, except for the fact that this area
Speaker 1: is very very very very well known for landslides and
Speaker 1: rock slides on a frequent, if not regular basis. So
Speaker 1: if you're gonna build a bridge there, you would think
Speaker 1: that they would put the engineering, you know, brain power
Speaker 1: behind it to make sure that it could stand up
Speaker 1: against what they know to a mathematical mathematical certainty is
Speaker 1: going to happen. I don't know. Again, I'm just a
Speaker 1: dirty American capitalist. I don't get it.
Speaker 24: Uh.
Speaker 1: There were no report of casualties from the incident. The
Speaker 1: cause is still being investigated by authorities in Sechuan, a
Speaker 1: seismically active region where a seven point nine magnitude earthquake
Speaker 1: killed more than sixty nine thousand people in two thousand
Speaker 1: and eight. Again, it's this area is known for this
Speaker 1: type of thing to go down. Maybe not this year,
Speaker 1: but sometime in the next couple of years, something's gonna
Speaker 1: happen and things are gonna shift here. You would think
Speaker 1: that they would build a bridge to be, you know,
Speaker 1: to withstand in that type of environment, knowing that that
Speaker 1: is a thing. But hey, I don't know. NBC News
Speaker 1: has verified videos widely shared on Chinese social media that
Speaker 1: showed the bridge collapse and its aftermath. Construction of the
Speaker 1: bridge was only completed earlier this year. Local media reported wow.
Speaker 1: Chinahan has in recent years made massive investments in infrastructure,
Speaker 1: including roads, railways, and bridges. In September, the world's highest
Speaker 1: bridge opened in the southern province of giz Who gwaide Joe,
Speaker 1: thank you. I'm so glad that you were writing on
Speaker 1: the standpi for that graade show taking the crown from
Speaker 1: another bridge in the same province. In July twenty twenty four,
Speaker 1: Chinese authority said at least eleven people died in a
Speaker 1: partial collapse of a highway bridge in the northwest province
Speaker 1: of shang Shanxi with two a's. I don't know if
Speaker 1: that's an angur on noise.
Speaker 9: Yeah, shan she In fact, there's two Shanxi provinces. One
Speaker 9: of them has a low tone and the other one
Speaker 9: has a high tone, and the double A is a
Speaker 9: low tone.
Speaker 1: Interesting. Yeah, Okay. Anyway, so that's the end of this article.
Speaker 1: Like I said today, we were gonna stick more primarily
Speaker 1: on American politics and all of the wild things going
Speaker 1: down in DC, but there was a few little things
Speaker 1: I wanted to bring up as far as China. The
Speaker 1: astronaut thing is also still just mind blowing to me.
Speaker 1: But again, maybe there's like a mission parameter that I'm
Speaker 1: just unaware of, you know, as to why they still
Speaker 1: need astronauts in that space right now. But if they
Speaker 1: were stranded and there was a whole rescue operation to
Speaker 1: go get them, I just I don't understand it. I
Speaker 1: don't understand it, but I don't have to. That's not
Speaker 1: my job to understand it. My job is to talk
Speaker 1: about it. So anyway, as we wrap this episode up,
Speaker 1: I want to thank everybody for coming out and joining
Speaker 1: me on this evening. Once again, if you would like
Speaker 1: to join us every Wednesday night at nine pm Central
Speaker 1: to be a part of the Cajun Night. Retinue and
Speaker 1: join us for these lives. Go to the link in
Speaker 1: the description below to patreon dot com slash Cajun Night.
Speaker 1: We do this every Wednesday night at nine pm Central.
Speaker 1: We like to share information. We like to talk about
Speaker 1: the things of the day, the goings and comings of politics, politics, history, religion.
Speaker 1: Whenever the case comes up, and this one was a
Speaker 1: pretty wild one, especially with everything going down in DC.
Speaker 1: We will be talking about how the rest of this
Speaker 1: unfolds next week, I promise you, so if you want
Speaker 1: to get in on the conversation, I hope to see
Speaker 1: you next Wednesday Night. Once again, everybody, I am the
Speaker 1: Cajun Knight and as always, God bless