Speaker 1: Get ready for Oh Friar's Day Night, And this will
Speaker 1: be a abbreviated version of the show because I lost
Speaker 1: twenty something minutes to set up problems. Let's call them
Speaker 1: technical issues. And sure there's gonna be lots of issues
Speaker 1: tonight and you can bring them. So I'm going to
Speaker 1: dispense with the long monologue. I got a couple of
Speaker 1: announcements to make, and we'll get to one of those
Speaker 1: as soon as I turn it over to my co host.
Speaker 1: But in the meantime, I want to turn over the
Speaker 1: majority of the conversation and everything to you guys tonight.
Speaker 1: Interpret for me the current reality. Please please, Also, for
Speaker 1: those of you that love when I do stuff in Jfkland,
Speaker 1: I have a show coming up on Tuesday that I'm
Speaker 1: almost not wanting to announce so somebody doesn't try and
Speaker 1: interfere with it. A very unique guest that for the
Speaker 1: first time ever, actually myself and Larry Hancock might be
Speaker 1: the team interviewing a particular JFK related guest. Anyway, we'll
Speaker 1: we'll get to that in a little bit. I want
Speaker 1: to get to whatever's on your mind tonight, and greetings
Speaker 1: to you. It is about twenty three minutes after eight
Speaker 1: pm Eastern. Dear God, I'm sorry it took so long
Speaker 1: to get live, and hopefully you guys stuck around and
Speaker 1: hopefully you stick through this one, because one way or another,
Speaker 1: no matter who shows up and what they got to say,
Speaker 1: I'm going to try and make it as interesting as
Speaker 1: possible tonight, and my co host always does that, so
Speaker 1: we'll see how it goes. The number to dial in
Speaker 1: and become part of this three one nine five two
Speaker 1: seven five zero one six. Indeed, the phone lines are
Speaker 1: paid for for the month, and yeah, and I did
Speaker 1: pay the stream bill. I'm a little concerned about the
Speaker 1: drop and support and will I be able to handle
Speaker 1: the bill on April fifteenth because somehow my billing cycle
Speaker 1: now my yearly billing cycle for the big bills is
Speaker 1: April fifteenth, and I don't know. Yeah, am I going
Speaker 1: to be able to keep the feed that runs out
Speaker 1: the podcast and the website? We shall see anyway. Three
Speaker 1: one nine five two seven five zero one six. That's
Speaker 1: the number to call, and if not, you want to
Speaker 1: join me via Skype live tonight any of the shows.
Speaker 1: Reach out to Charles dot o'helly on Skype. Send me
Speaker 1: a message and I can call you into the show
Speaker 1: if you're on Skype, but regular old you know, even
Speaker 1: if you got a landline in your house still, which
Speaker 1: I was talking to somebody about that recently. I don't
Speaker 1: remember who or why, but I was talking to them
Speaker 1: about the reality in which we used to have landlines
Speaker 1: and that was the only way to talk to somebody anyway.
Speaker 1: And I know it wasn't Larry Hancock, although I've had
Speaker 1: to have all fair conversations with him recently, clearly because
Speaker 1: of the upcoming show. Anyway, all of that happening, and
Speaker 1: I think, finally, even though I have some sniffles, my
Speaker 1: apologies again, the head cold is even going away, so
Speaker 1: maybe I'm done with illness for a few days maybe,
Speaker 1: and once I get over this. Also, we got a
Speaker 1: special event coming up on Saturday night. It's going to
Speaker 1: be a little more live stuff coming out and many
Speaker 1: more podcasts emerging than have been for the past few months,
Speaker 1: because first of all, i won't be at my at
Speaker 1: death's door, and secondly, I've actually got some interesting bookings
Speaker 1: and possibilities upcoming, so it's going to be more than
Speaker 1: just the Friday night show and whatever I can get
Speaker 1: out of Aaron coming up very very soon, or the
Speaker 1: guest spot, which I just put on our podcast feed
Speaker 1: where B Pete and I did our first you know,
Speaker 1: team guest appearance on somebody Else's podcast, which we did
Speaker 1: on the Third Rail with nature Boy, and I made
Speaker 1: a slightly unauthorized audio copy of it. So anyway, it
Speaker 1: is what it is. It was what it was, and
Speaker 1: this is the week that we're in. So after a
Speaker 1: couple of minutes of talking to you, I want to
Speaker 1: turn it over to my co host and get to
Speaker 1: the phone callers, which there already are a couple on
Speaker 1: the line. Last I looked hopefully you hung out with
Speaker 1: me and listen to me struggle getting the radio stuff
Speaker 1: together to do the show, which you do get to
Speaker 1: hear behind the scenes even if you call in to
Speaker 1: three one nine five two seven five zero one six. Anyways,
Speaker 1: B Pete, what's on your mind this week? My friend?
Speaker 1: I mean, are you interested in the Doze situation? Do
Speaker 1: you think Elon's doing such a good job you had
Speaker 1: to join X this week? Oops, I just gave away
Speaker 1: one of the announcements. B Pete has joined X Twitter.
Speaker 1: I never thought he would do that. I thought you
Speaker 1: were too happy with Facebook or too unheal happy with
Speaker 1: Facebook and sort of just wanting to maintain your you know,
Speaker 1: virtual venting site. But you've actually joined Twitter now, which
Speaker 1: I find great, and I urge everybody go ahead and follow.
Speaker 1: What is the exact Twitter handle? Damn, I don't have
Speaker 1: it in front of me, but you can tell people
Speaker 1: be Pete along with whatever the hell you think goes
Speaker 1: to the top of the list of what we need
Speaker 1: to talk about this week. How you doing, I'm doing good.
Speaker 2: Oh.
Speaker 3: The Twitter handle is at DP nineteen sixty.
Speaker 4: Nine, right, which is just like your website, just like
Speaker 4: my website.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I was well.
Speaker 2: I had tried signing in a couple episodes ago. In fact,
Speaker 2: I was trying to get through, and it's like the
Speaker 2: problem you had.
Speaker 3: I would get to the final code for approval and
Speaker 3: it would.
Speaker 2: Never go through, never go through, never go through, or
Speaker 2: tell me it timed out.
Speaker 3: So I happened to some news story.
Speaker 2: I went there for the link to watch a video
Speaker 2: and it said signing with Google. I said, all right, well,
Speaker 2: we'll see if this works. So I signed in under
Speaker 2: my big feet Google I'd right through. So I'm now
Speaker 2: on X and I think next week. I may I
Speaker 2: may go ahead and total money out there for a
Speaker 2: blue check.
Speaker 3: What the hell?
Speaker 1: Wow, Well, it actually gives you a couple of advantages.
Speaker 1: And watch your mic there. It's doing something weird because
Speaker 1: you moved it around just then. But it would be interesting.
Speaker 1: And you know, if you're on Twitter and I'm on Twitter,
Speaker 1: we could actually use it as a broadcast as another
Speaker 1: broadcast outlet. I don't know if it would do us
Speaker 1: any good, but it would definitely give us the opportunity
Speaker 1: to get exposed to some new listeners, which I think
Speaker 1: we'd need very very badly at the moment. But anyway,
Speaker 1: I'm glad to see you on there. And I kind
Speaker 1: of gave him a smart ass tweet. So if you
Speaker 1: go to bpte's handle there and you see why is
Speaker 1: o'chelly tweeting out him like a little hostel. That's that's
Speaker 1: my sense of humor.
Speaker 3: I know they'll get over it.
Speaker 2: The only top thing I got to mention before we
Speaker 2: get to callers is a shout out to Rob Clark.
Speaker 3: It's his birthday today, So happy birthday Rob.
Speaker 1: Anymore, I did not know it was Bob Bob's birthday.
Speaker 1: To day Rob Bob. You know, other people call him Bob,
Speaker 1: but I've always called him Rob.
Speaker 3: I don't know, I've always called him Rob.
Speaker 1: That's all.
Speaker 3: I'll go over there, right.
Speaker 1: And he's come a long way over the years, you know,
Speaker 1: from I mean, he hasn't changed much, but then again,
Speaker 1: he's kind of changed a bit. You know, he's a
Speaker 1: bit more technologically advanced than he used to be and
Speaker 1: a little less.
Speaker 3: Well that just comes with using the mediums.
Speaker 2: I mean, when he first started out, you know, he's
Speaker 2: like everybody, he's racking down the weeds, working.
Speaker 3: His way through it.
Speaker 2: But he's been on long enough, he's gained a lot
Speaker 2: of experience and he puts out a good product.
Speaker 1: And you know, I don't remember if his show started
Speaker 1: before mine. I think he came in around the same
Speaker 1: time I started going live on the internet.
Speaker 5: I think I think I might not be sure, but
Speaker 5: I think he was after you. I think I'm not
Speaker 5: don't quote me on that, but that's what I'm thinking.
Speaker 3: But who knows if that's true. I have a very
Speaker 3: good podcast, yeah, my formative. He's got good guests.
Speaker 2: You know, he doesn't he does spend a lot of
Speaker 2: time on the bullshit, you know, he can brush it
Speaker 2: aside and move on and clear it up a lot
Speaker 2: of things.
Speaker 1: No, absolutely, and I've always appreciated the information he brings.
Speaker 1: He's usually a little ahead of me getting podcasts out,
Speaker 1: even about JFK stuff, because I do other things. But
Speaker 1: he's maintained a focus. And if he joined after me,
Speaker 1: I got to tell you, if he started after me,
Speaker 1: it wasn't long because within the first year I started
Speaker 1: talking to car Mine and I Yeah, that's true.
Speaker 3: I don't know. I'll have to go back. I've got
Speaker 3: a I thought I had a link to his podcast
Speaker 3: on my on my blog.
Speaker 2: I'll have to go and look and look at the days,
Speaker 2: because I think I've got both of you linked there.
Speaker 2: But I was thinking that maybe you had started just
Speaker 2: before him. I'm not sure, but anyway, my start.
Speaker 1: Is yeah, my live start date for this show and internet.
Speaker 1: You know, I have the podcast I started in twenty thirteen,
Speaker 1: but I really didn't have many places for it to go.
Speaker 1: I started doing the live show exactly. I know. The
Speaker 1: exact date was February fifteenth of twenty fourteen. That's the
Speaker 1: first time I went live. Yeah you're still there.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I'm here.
Speaker 2: I'm trying to get to my blog page and see
Speaker 2: if I've got a link to where.
Speaker 3: I started listing.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's not long after though, because I.
Speaker 3: Was going to send him a message too.
Speaker 2: I asked him a question fell into this damn rabbit
Speaker 2: hole the past week on the number of bullets in
Speaker 2: Daley Plaza that they found supposedly the one in the grass,
Speaker 2: the one that hit the curb, the ones that went
Speaker 2: through the windshield, trying to add up exactly how many
Speaker 2: totally right people had come up with.
Speaker 3: And I apologize for the call from my sinuses.
Speaker 1: Yeah, no problem. I'm still sniffling and everything too. But
Speaker 1: the problem that you're going to run into there is
Speaker 1: you've got to be very careful about people have conflated
Speaker 1: the bullets from like the immediate event right after, and
Speaker 1: some people have gone back and added things that don't
Speaker 1: need to be added. Now. I mean, there's the photograph
Speaker 1: if you remember the mystery FBI man they called him
Speaker 1: for many years because two.
Speaker 2: With the deputy sheriff that was Buddy Walters, were looking around.
Speaker 1: The manhole, yeah right, and he bends down to pick
Speaker 1: up something, and you see that in that photograph. I
Speaker 1: believe that that's verifiable. Some people don't even know about it, right,
Speaker 1: the bullet that was just sort of in the grass.
Speaker 1: I believe it was verifiable, but I don't know if
Speaker 1: that really became part of the evidence collection. I don't
Speaker 1: think it did. And that's where the confusion lies. Even
Speaker 1: though we and also we know that the take was struck, right,
Speaker 1: but we don't know exactly if there was a bullet
Speaker 1: or part of a bullet from the take strike found
Speaker 1: because somebody comes by later and cuts out the curbstone.
Speaker 1: You know what I'm saying. It's not a simple ABC question.
Speaker 1: So it is difficult to like come with a number
Speaker 1: and say, okay, there were six bullets or there were
Speaker 1: four bullets, or like, honestly, off the top of my head,
Speaker 1: I would want to go back over it if somebody
Speaker 1: asked me definitive with chuck, and it should be a simple,
Speaker 1: off the top of my head question, right.
Speaker 2: Well, and that's what I fell into, the number reported
Speaker 2: versus the number that were actually collected, which is basically none.
Speaker 1: Right, you have two chunks of bullet recovered from the limousine, right,
Speaker 1: and those were recovered that night, and the public wasn't
Speaker 1: told about them right away. But they were the mangled
Speaker 1: remains up to you know, fractions of bullets. Right.
Speaker 2: So not only that, but you had the supposedly the
Speaker 2: fragments that were taken out of the windshield right in
Speaker 2: one report where they said that they recovered.
Speaker 1: Them, right, sometimes referred to as lead smears even right.
Speaker 1: So you have these fractional bits, and then you have
Speaker 1: what did they actually run into and when was it discovered?
Speaker 1: And where which stretcher was it on? At Parkland? Right?
Speaker 1: And nowadays people going oh hey, you know, and there's
Speaker 1: a real divide between the people that believe Paul damn it,
Speaker 1: the Secret Service agent. You know that guy who says, well,
Speaker 1: I picked up the bullet and I put it on
Speaker 1: Kennedy's stretcher. Anyway, you know the guy that got me
Speaker 1: into an argument last year at Lancer where the guy
Speaker 1: was yelling at me, Oh, after all those years, why
Speaker 1: would a guy make that up? But I'm like, are
Speaker 1: you really that new to this case? Why would a
Speaker 1: guy make stuff up years later? Is one of those
Speaker 1: questions I expect from a five year old. I mean, really,
Speaker 1: at this point.
Speaker 3: Why would you make something up twenty years down?
Speaker 1: Well, there's that, well, there's that because you know, if
Speaker 1: Buel Fraser, who I believe is a genuine nice guy.
Speaker 1: I mean, I've met him a few times. You've met him, right, Fraser?
Speaker 3: No, I haven't met him.
Speaker 2: I never have.
Speaker 1: Oh I see, I thought maybe he was there. No, wait,
Speaker 1: he wasn't there the year and I went at Lancer. No.
Speaker 3: I was hoping he'd show up. But I've never met
Speaker 3: him because I've got a ton of.
Speaker 2: Questions for him, and you know, you wonder at what
Speaker 2: point these people get tired of answering questions.
Speaker 1: Yeah, well, that's definitely going to be fair down this
Speaker 1: Tuesday if I get my way with a guest. It's
Speaker 1: not set in stone yet, so I'm not going to
Speaker 1: announce exactly who it is, but I will say it's
Speaker 1: a family member of a name that if you've been
Speaker 1: researching the Kennedy case for a while, you will know
Speaker 1: this person's relative right away. And you're saying to yourself, well, Chuck,
Speaker 1: why bother interviewing their relative? Well, because A they're dead
Speaker 1: and B they have a piece of evidence in their
Speaker 1: possession that is kind of intriguing. It doesn't definitively it's
Speaker 1: not like the smoking gun that absolutely proves something, but
Speaker 1: if it's to be taken at face value, it's a
Speaker 1: pretty extreme piece of evidence. Let's call it a confession
Speaker 1: from somebody who definitely was connected to the executive branch
Speaker 1: of the government at the time. Maybe they weren't in
Speaker 1: the executive branch of the government, but they were connected
Speaker 1: to the executive branch of the government. And they have
Speaker 1: a unique piece of evidence that has been discussed in
Speaker 1: the lore of the case, the legend of the case before,
Speaker 1: but has never been revealed until now. Okay, so it's
Speaker 1: gonna be an interesting interview on Tuesday if I get
Speaker 1: my way. If not, I'm definitely gonna try and nail
Speaker 1: it down so soon after. And I've got a schedule
Speaker 1: with Larry on Tuesday, and we're going to go to
Speaker 1: air an hour early just to try and accommodate all
Speaker 1: of this. And yeah, so I find this very interesting
Speaker 1: if I get my way, and I'll let everybody know
Speaker 1: over the weekend if we're definitely getting to it, because
Speaker 1: I want to make sure we do. Hey, listen, before
Speaker 1: we totally bleed out time on JFK, I say we
Speaker 1: get to a couple of the callers before we start
Speaker 1: losing them, because, yeah, because I've got an anonymous caller,
Speaker 1: I've got what looks like Danny, and I've also got
Speaker 1: what looks like Jimmy James on the line already, and
Speaker 1: I want to get to everybody, always do, and get
Speaker 1: to them more than once if we can.
Speaker 3: Okay, all right, Well, when we go to the anonymous first?
Speaker 1: Uh? Well, I I because I've always promised to take
Speaker 1: people in order, I'm gonna go to Danny first. Okay,
Speaker 1: I'll go to anonymous.
Speaker 3: Yeah, in order to take him in order, he needs
Speaker 3: to say him in order.
Speaker 1: I'm sorry I just mentioned the anonymous one because on
Speaker 1: my screen, the anonymous caller is above Danny. But the
Speaker 1: time that the anonymous caller has been on hold is
Speaker 1: lower than Danny. I don't know why I did that,
Speaker 1: but I pay attention to when they called in to
Speaker 1: try and minimize wait time as best I can. So
Speaker 1: I'm gonna go to Danny first, and we're gonna stop
Speaker 1: discussing this. We're gonna find out what's on his mind.
Speaker 1: Maybe it's Elon Musk, maybe it's something in the trade war.
Speaker 2: Maybe it's maybe like tulci and and drop the Democrat Party.
Speaker 1: I don't think that's gonna happen.
Speaker 3: But I slay myself sometimes.
Speaker 1: Yeah, well there's that, you know. And I'm going to
Speaker 1: talk about a recent argument I had with somebody over
Speaker 1: you later on when we run out of some material.
Speaker 1: But for now, let's get to the most important part
Speaker 1: of the show, which is you guys calling in and
Speaker 1: again you can join in three one nine, five, two
Speaker 1: seven five zero one six, And I really want to
Speaker 1: make sure we focus on whatever's on your minds this
Speaker 1: week as best we can. Okay, so let's do it,
Speaker 1: and we'll start with Danny. I believe there it the
Speaker 1: button worked. Danny. How you doing this week?
Speaker 6: I'm doing fine, and I wish you and be people. Well,
Speaker 6: if you want to go to that an anonymous call,
Speaker 6: we're all hold yeah, if you want to give them
Speaker 6: a shot.
Speaker 1: No, because they've actually come and gone. Now okay, okay,
Speaker 1: they're back on the Yeah, no, I got you. But
Speaker 1: they're back on the line. But they've only been there
Speaker 1: thirty seconds, and I don't know if they're having connectivity
Speaker 1: or some other trouble. So let's let them settle in
Speaker 1: and yeah, which, by the way, I think if you
Speaker 1: press five, if you press five anonymous caller, like, it's possible.
Speaker 1: Maybe you don't want to be called on because of
Speaker 1: the way you dropped out when you did. If you
Speaker 1: don't want to be called on, I think if during
Speaker 1: the call you press the number five on a regular TOUCHTNE,
Speaker 1: it'll show me a signal. And if you do that,
Speaker 1: I won't pick you up. You might be just trying
Speaker 1: to listen to the show. I had a couple of
Speaker 1: people tell me that's why they hung up a few
Speaker 1: times recently. That's why I mentioned it. And if you're
Speaker 1: one of those guys, then cool, hit the number five,
Speaker 1: I think, and that'll show me that you don't want
Speaker 1: me to put you on air. Okay, but really, the
Speaker 1: phone lines are there for people to be put on
Speaker 1: air anyway, Danny. I know that's weird, but it's a
Speaker 1: new piece of information, so I wanted to get to
Speaker 1: it again. What's on your mind this week? Though? Please?
Speaker 6: Well? What's on my job? Overwhelmed? What's on my mind
Speaker 6: is I never thought I did the day that you know,
Speaker 6: a billionaire should basically give a president a quarter million
Speaker 6: dollar quart of a trillion dollars and then be able
Speaker 6: to take a whole bunch of ads, you know, adderall
Speaker 6: ridden twenty somethings and go into like the Department of Treasury,
Speaker 6: use a private server without even a security clears and
Speaker 6: gather information. I mean, I never thought George Soros would
Speaker 6: be just just brazen.
Speaker 1: You know, Neither did I. The weird thing is, by
Speaker 1: the way, is you know, you just quoted a number,
Speaker 1: and I want to be accurate here. I don't think
Speaker 1: he gave him a quarter of a trillion dollars. I
Speaker 1: think he might have given him two hundred and fifty
Speaker 1: million dollars, but I'm gonna double check that. Yeahspoke, okay,
Speaker 1: But I just wanted to be accurate about it. And
Speaker 1: a lot of things concerned me about this because he's
Speaker 1: got no accountability, and he wouldn't be the first person
Speaker 1: to have no accountability. But I've never seen somebody who
Speaker 1: wasn't elected or vetted by Congress have this kind of
Speaker 1: access before. And wouldn't they call this a data breach
Speaker 1: if this was in the private sector. I'm thinking, you know,
Speaker 1: because I don't think we ever you know, signed off
Speaker 1: on okay, I'm also by signing this, you know, threat
Speaker 1: of perjury and blah blah blah. But also I'm aware
Speaker 1: of the DOGE have access to my information. I didn't
Speaker 1: think that anybody ever signed anything like that. And I'm
Speaker 1: being facetious, but and I'm not trying to make the
Speaker 1: Democratic talking points here. You know, realistically a lot of
Speaker 1: us would agree that there's a lot of government waste
Speaker 1: and the guy needs to go in there and deal
Speaker 1: with it, for sure. And yes, I'd like to see
Speaker 1: a lot of things done away with, But I don't know.
Speaker 1: Is the wrecking ball too big? Is my big question.
Speaker 1: But anyway, Danny, back to you, I'm just going to
Speaker 1: look up a couple of things while you're talking.
Speaker 6: No, go ahead, sure, please please do I mean? And
Speaker 6: just I think it was either today or yesterday. Went
Speaker 6: in the Department of Education and a lot of Democratic
Speaker 6: Corgissans showed up to go in, and they denied access.
Speaker 6: But his team they will go ride in. Do as
Speaker 6: you please, you know, and I understand that, you know.
Speaker 6: I saw. Another thing was Belltown, Kentucky, heavily red state,
Speaker 6: eighty four percent voted for Trump. And as they were
Speaker 6: talking to several teachers in school, people who worked at
Speaker 6: the school there, and they are heavily subsidized by the
Speaker 6: federal government, and they know that if they get cut
Speaker 6: off the federal funds, it's not only going to hurt
Speaker 6: you know, the classroom size, eliminate teachers. There's also food programs.
Speaker 6: I mean, it's one thing if you want to vote
Speaker 6: against your own self interest, its strot against interesting children
Speaker 6: really bothers me. I mean also to cut off a
Speaker 6: lot of aid, like there's aid to help malaria, HIV overseas,
Speaker 6: cervical cancer, support for pregnant women, and non tripping tumberculos.
Speaker 2: Sure I have to ask question all right now, yes,
Speaker 2: things are showing the effects of being cut off, but
Speaker 2: how else would you how else would you take an
Speaker 2: agency and go through it without automatically just saying okay,
Speaker 2: we're going to allow half of it while we go
Speaker 2: through this half, and then we're going to get on
Speaker 2: the other half, and then the stuff that makes you
Speaker 2: do the first meeting will put back on. I mean
Speaker 2: a lot of this stuff. Yeah, it puts a stop
Speaker 2: to things, and it puts a glitch in the system.
Speaker 2: But when you look at how much money we're sending
Speaker 2: out compared with what other nations are, how else can
Speaker 2: you audit something without putting a stop to it, taking
Speaker 2: a look at it and see if it needs to continue.
Speaker 1: Now, how just do that? Well, you guys are laying
Speaker 1: out something. Think about that answer for a moment, Danny,
Speaker 1: because it is an important question and one that I
Speaker 1: think is relevant. But I want to add to this
Speaker 1: pray a bit, and because the two of you are
Speaker 1: right now perfectly representing the right and left wing part
Speaker 1: of the discussion. Okay, I want to give you the
Speaker 1: alternative because I'm actually, despite people's complaints, not part of
Speaker 1: either side of the equation. I'm not in the middle.
Speaker 1: I'm coming at it from a different angle. And none
Speaker 1: of my thoughts seem to match the talking points from
Speaker 1: either side, whether they're valid, And there's something more than
Speaker 1: just talking points irrelevant to this part of the discussion.
Speaker 1: Here's the thing about it that I don't understand just
Speaker 1: from a business standpoint, from a flow standpoint, from the
Speaker 1: fact that a lot of these things are more important
Speaker 1: for strategic reasons. You know, why do you pay for
Speaker 1: some country to have something stupid over across the sea
Speaker 1: that you know, really we shouldn't care about. We're giving
Speaker 1: to their you know, arts and crafts program over there
Speaker 1: or whatever, and people would say, that's a stupid waste
Speaker 1: of money, and why do I care about you know,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna make up you know, JIUJUSI stand and what
Speaker 1: they have over there, Okay, I'm making up a fictional
Speaker 1: place to attach no sentiment to it. Well, it could
Speaker 1: be that they border a nation that you know, could
Speaker 1: easily suck them into joining a cause that we don't
Speaker 1: want to have expanded. So strategically we'd rather give them
Speaker 1: arts and crafts, money and food so that they're not
Speaker 1: tempted to join you know, the old don't let the
Speaker 1: communist dominoes come in, right, because if they do, that
Speaker 1: country might become communists because they're getting help from them.
Speaker 1: So maybe we need to help them. Now, that's one
Speaker 1: very oversimplified way of understanding that it's not always about
Speaker 1: the aid. Given number one, it could be a strategic
Speaker 1: move to avoid something else from happening. That's not even
Speaker 1: part of that discussion. Why do you want to save
Speaker 1: this particular animal because their poop happens to fertilize a
Speaker 1: particular area where wild something or other grows. That's important
Speaker 1: to an industry. It's not because we care about the
Speaker 1: spotted gopher. Even what I'm saying is is there's often
Speaker 1: strategic alternatives to why or why not to have these things? Right.
Speaker 3: But that's the thing.
Speaker 2: When this, when this whole thing was set up for
Speaker 2: a lot of years, it was strictly for one thing,
Speaker 2: and that was to combat Russia. It was an armed
Speaker 2: and I'm talking about you say it was an arm
Speaker 2: of a government used to fight the communists AI.
Speaker 1: You're talking in general about us AI.
Speaker 2: D right, not in general. I'm talking in specific. Sorry,
Speaker 2: But here's my point. Okay, you may have that thing
Speaker 2: that is done giving arts and crafts and something cultural
Speaker 2: to an entity that's next to another entity. So we're
Speaker 2: talking about something strategic, right, How can you go in
Speaker 2: and determine.
Speaker 3: If it's good.
Speaker 2: Strategy or bad strategy considering the players behind the curtain
Speaker 2: and what their intention is without grabbing a hold of
Speaker 2: it while in motion and checking it out to see
Speaker 2: what it is.
Speaker 3: Well, I understand what you're getting at.
Speaker 2: Yes, there are a lot of reasons that we give
Speaker 2: certain types of aid.
Speaker 3: To certain areas and to certain groups.
Speaker 2: But when you have something as massive as these payments
Speaker 2: that are going out through the Treasury Department, to look
Speaker 2: at something that big, you immediately start.
Speaker 3: You immediately have to start.
Speaker 2: Weeding out bad good bad good bad good. Okay, we'll
Speaker 2: set this on the third pile to look at first, but.
Speaker 3: We've got to get a handle on it.
Speaker 2: I mean, you talk about the billions of money that
Speaker 2: go out every day through these treasury payments. You've got
Speaker 2: to find a way. Okay, we're doing this strategically for
Speaker 2: a purpose. Is it a good purpose? Is it in
Speaker 2: the best interest of us to do it this way?
Speaker 2: Or do we just cut it off again?
Speaker 3: This is all I understand where you're getting.
Speaker 2: But to be able to make that decision, when you
Speaker 2: consider the massive amount of money and the massive out
Speaker 2: of groups that are receiving this money, you gotta start somewhere.
Speaker 1: Look, I get that, and that's fine, and that's a
Speaker 1: fiscally responsible idea. However, we do know that even in
Speaker 1: a massive store, even among a massive corporation private sector,
Speaker 1: you take inventory sometimes of places without shutting them down.
Speaker 1: And you can do that. There's more than one way
Speaker 1: to skin that cat number one. Number two, Given that
Speaker 1: Elon Musk, even though he's a super genius, super genius,
Speaker 1: Wiley coyote, I'm sorry, but even though he's a super genius.
Speaker 1: One must admit that, based on what you just said,
Speaker 1: even he could not possibly be familiar with the ins
Speaker 1: and outs of many of these things, so instantaneously he
Speaker 1: would have to go in and familiarize himself also, right.
Speaker 2: With first of all, the way, but think about the
Speaker 2: way that they're doing this. He got a bunch of
Speaker 2: computer nerds together and they went in. Once they got
Speaker 2: access to the database, they turned ailands on it and
Speaker 2: they started punching in names, phrases, locations, and groups to
Speaker 2: see the immediately pull these payments to the top. So
Speaker 2: he's using a tool that everybody has said, Oh, you know, Ai,
Speaker 2: that's the thing we need to invest in it.
Speaker 3: You know, the wave of the future. It's going to
Speaker 3: change how we live.
Speaker 2: And here's a perfect example of them taking that, putting
Speaker 2: it to use and seeing what comes to the top
Speaker 2: of the pile right off the bat. And that's where
Speaker 2: we found out that one politico suddenly had their money
Speaker 2: cut off and now they can't pay their employees. We
Speaker 2: find out the organization that was making was putting stories
Speaker 2: out there about Vinman back when Trump first got into office,
Speaker 2: and about these calls to Ukraine that got the whole
Speaker 2: impeachment thing going we find out that there's one thousand
Speaker 2: NGOs out there that are being paid to bus fly
Speaker 2: and donkey cart people from Peru.
Speaker 3: To our border.
Speaker 2: Okay, these are the things that came up first, and
Speaker 2: what they wanted to do was make They wanted to
Speaker 2: make headlines with the first things that they brought to
Speaker 2: the top of the table.
Speaker 3: Right now, now, while.
Speaker 2: Everybody is arguing about, oh my god, look they gave
Speaker 2: money to AP and to the BBC, and while everybody
Speaker 2: is just going hog nuts over this, and I have.
Speaker 3: To admit the Democrats are apoplectic right now while this
Speaker 3: is going on, they're looking at other stuff. I mean,
Speaker 3: this is a whole method that they're going about.
Speaker 1: To do this, right, And here's the thing, you're you're
Speaker 1: very much hammering what people can get from somewhere else.
Speaker 1: These are given points that people could have heard elsewhere
Speaker 1: the whole time. How did you intense Well, I'm fine,
Speaker 1: it's common sense. You could say that, or you could
Speaker 1: say it's a particular position. Either way, I'm not arguing.
Speaker 1: I'm just trying to say these things have already been said.
Speaker 1: You're going on reporting here because you haven't seen evidence
Speaker 1: for this yourself. We're not being shown the evidence for this,
Speaker 1: just like we weren't shown the particular ins and outs.
Speaker 1: We're speculating on a lot of things that we don't.
Speaker 2: Got guys like Michael Schellenberger and that that are going
Speaker 2: out there running these investigations into this stuff, reporting on
Speaker 2: what's coming up through these checks at all.
Speaker 3: I mean, yeah, I'm based on my reporting on people
Speaker 3: that I trust that report.
Speaker 2: Yes, O got mainstream media and certainly not a White
Speaker 2: House and certainly not anything from Elon Musk Okay, but.
Speaker 1: They are echoing what those guys are putting out. I'm
Speaker 1: just letting you know that the people you trust are
Speaker 1: echoing those people. Now, I'm trying to get at something
Speaker 1: different here that to my mind, this seems a bit
Speaker 1: reckless and a bit too fast paced for something that
Speaker 1: is so giant and is so complex. And as I
Speaker 1: said before, you don't necessarily have to put a stop
Speaker 1: to something immediately before you judge it. And yes, they
Speaker 1: may have used AI and all that, I don't necessarily
Speaker 1: trust that technology and I certainly don't trust it with nuances.
Speaker 1: If you don't believe me about that, go to the
Speaker 1: deep seek and ask it questions and it works pretty good.
Speaker 1: But I use the you know, an auxiliary, so I
Speaker 1: got insulated from the deep seek, but I used it
Speaker 1: a bit to test their AI. It's pretty funny. But
Speaker 1: using that AI, you can easily see flaws that I'm
Speaker 1: sure Elon Musk has a better AI than any of
Speaker 1: us can get hold of. Absolutely true, But the fact
Speaker 1: that nobody is taken into account that there's a bit
Speaker 1: of a danger in allowing a let's just go with
Speaker 1: the positive side of it. A nearly trillionaire, the richest
Speaker 1: guy on the planet, now has access to all of
Speaker 1: that and the personal information of everybody in the country
Speaker 1: that has Social Security number anyway. I mean, if you're
Speaker 1: an a legal immigrant and Elon doesn't know you, but
Speaker 1: if you're on paper somewhere, he's got access to all
Speaker 1: of your information right now, and all of these things
Speaker 1: are happening side Hang on just a second, I'll shut
Speaker 1: up after I promise. I want to let Danny speak,
Speaker 1: and then I'm gonna let you too handle this. But
Speaker 1: the thing is that nobody is raising the proper flag there.
Speaker 1: The liberals are being stupid about everything, as they usually are,
Speaker 1: because they're fighting with you know, we want we're here
Speaker 1: to protest, and they're doing exactly the dumb thing to
Speaker 1: do as per usual, and you have the lopsteck, the
Speaker 1: lockstep other side walking in one direction perfectly, and it's
Speaker 1: working out great for him, and they have the power
Speaker 1: to do it. And I don't even necessarily object to
Speaker 1: all this, but I see serious potential for danger and
Speaker 1: a bit too much trust put in to Elon Musk,
Speaker 1: who again is not accountable. And I'm not doing this
Speaker 1: from the liberal side. I don't see this point being
Speaker 1: made overall, that the complexity of this doesn't support either
Speaker 1: side of the alleged argument at the moment. We have
Speaker 1: a problem here that when it does become a problem,
Speaker 1: nobody's going to claim responsibility for it, and it's going
Speaker 1: to be put off on somebody else. That's what I
Speaker 1: predict for what's happening here. And why in the world
Speaker 1: does anybody trust the guy who was under investigation. I'm
Speaker 1: sure he's not now, but by the FEC and everything else,
Speaker 1: for inflating his stock price, for pulling off, you know,
Speaker 1: different stunts, the guy has become you know, a media
Speaker 1: mogul because he bought his way in and he bought
Speaker 1: his way into the White House, basically brought his way
Speaker 1: into Trump's universe. Basically, I mean, if you want to
Speaker 1: argue with any of that, great, but I leave it
Speaker 1: to you. I don't get how it is that anybody.
Speaker 1: I mean, is it just if you're rich, you're trustworthy?
Speaker 1: Now I don't see anybody asking that question. Maybe I
Speaker 1: missed it somewhere. Because I can't stand listening to the
Speaker 1: idiocy on the mainstream any longer. I've actually decided to
Speaker 1: go to the two extremes that I could find in
Speaker 1: what's left of independent media. And I'm telling you, I
Speaker 1: can count on one hand what I actually believe is
Speaker 1: even remotely independent, because I know that, yes, some things
Speaker 1: are funded by the state, some things are funded by
Speaker 1: the billionaire oligarchs, and that's the competition at the moment.
Speaker 1: There's the state, the billionaire oligarchs, and that's it. That's
Speaker 1: who's competing for the overall media mic. There are literally,
Speaker 1: and I without counting me in it, there are literally
Speaker 1: five voices left of any significance on the Internet that
Speaker 1: I can find that appear to be independently thinking and
Speaker 1: not just grabbing the talking points and running with them
Speaker 1: and hammering them so well that a lot of people
Speaker 1: are convinced that these are their original thoughts. It's so
Speaker 1: bizarre this reality we're in. Anyway, I'm going to shut
Speaker 1: up at that, and I need to give a turn
Speaker 1: to Danny here to run with all of this. And
Speaker 1: you know, probably forgot the original thing that you asked.
Speaker 1: Do you remember the original question you asked me, Pizzo,
Speaker 1: we can give families to Dan.
Speaker 3: How else would he go through?
Speaker 1: What way?
Speaker 2: What method would he use to go through all these
Speaker 2: programs and all these payments and everything that are being
Speaker 2: sent out to determine which ones to stop and which
Speaker 2: ones to continue, and which ones to prosecute people along
Speaker 2: because they're breaking the law.
Speaker 3: I mean, how do you go about that? That's that
Speaker 3: was my question. Okay, you got a way to do it.
Speaker 6: Good question. I don't have a complete answer to it,
Speaker 6: but I think Chuck made my point. Really care about
Speaker 6: the recklessness. And I deliberately used George Soros because if
Speaker 6: it would be George Soros right would be wanting to
Speaker 6: call on the SWAT team, would I be wrong?
Speaker 3: Well it depends, Well, yeah, I think he would.
Speaker 2: We've already found out that George Soros is Open in
Speaker 2: Society or whatever his group is called, has been receiving
Speaker 2: money from you say, for years millions.
Speaker 1: Well, and you know, in fairness, the Trump administration now
Speaker 1: has a couple of former Sorrows people in it, by
Speaker 1: the way, which I thought would have been like the
Speaker 1: end of the world. Not. To my point is that
Speaker 1: it's all the same mix. It's it doesn't matter if
Speaker 1: it's a left wing or a right wing oligarch. That's
Speaker 1: just the particular color jersey they decide to wear. Okay,
Speaker 1: as far as left and right. In my mind, it's
Speaker 1: all about competition.
Speaker 2: When do you put value in a statement if it's
Speaker 2: I mean, because you consider most everything out there talking points,
Speaker 2: no matter which side it's coming from. Where do you
Speaker 2: draw the line and say, okay, it may be a
Speaker 2: talking point, but it is a fact, and give it
Speaker 2: some weight because it is something that exists, not just
Speaker 2: a talking point.
Speaker 1: When I see people not using exactly the same language
Speaker 1: in order, when I can't trace a timeline where okay,
Speaker 1: at seven am, this became the statement, and now every
Speaker 1: network is using that phrase.
Speaker 2: It's because even in our comments and discussions here, in
Speaker 2: several conversations you know, well, that's a talking point.
Speaker 3: That's a talking point. Well, yeah, it may be a
Speaker 3: talking point.
Speaker 2: But it very well might be a fact that needs
Speaker 2: to be figured into the equation.
Speaker 1: Uh. Yeah.
Speaker 2: So if it's just a talking point, okay, if it's
Speaker 2: just you know, the talking point of well, Democrats are
Speaker 2: against this, this, and this. Okay, we can generalize about anything.
Speaker 2: Republicans are against this, this, and this, we can generalize.
Speaker 2: But when you get down to brass packs about a
Speaker 2: specific subject and a specific thing that happened, it is
Speaker 2: a fat Yes, people use it as a talking point,
Speaker 2: but it has to have some weights if it's true.
Speaker 1: Yeah. But the point is the reason why this keeps
Speaker 1: coming up is when I think why you're asking why
Speaker 1: I keep saying that, is because you can get that
Speaker 1: everywhere else. I'm trying to do something that everybody else
Speaker 1: isn't already doing. That's what I'm trying to go after here,
Speaker 1: is not you know, look, we could just run with
Speaker 1: those things all day, and we could just do the standard,
Speaker 1: and that's fine, but there's no point for me.
Speaker 3: You understand where you're coming from, Yes, and I agree
Speaker 3: with you.
Speaker 2: It is very reckless in the way that some of
Speaker 2: these things are being gone about.
Speaker 3: I agree with you.
Speaker 2: Yeah, but when it's something that's never happened before, sometimes
Speaker 2: things are going to be reckless.
Speaker 1: I understand.
Speaker 2: I mean, people are going to have to learn from
Speaker 2: what they do, and if it blows up in their face,
Speaker 2: they're going to find out pretty quick.
Speaker 3: Well you use the wrong method. But here's on about
Speaker 3: it in a different way.
Speaker 1: But here's the big question I have for somebody like
Speaker 1: you who does use the talking points but also has
Speaker 1: the ability to think on their own, which I swear
Speaker 1: there's a lot of people who get a microphone who
Speaker 1: don't have that ability. Okay, they're just they're going with
Speaker 1: the script, that's all they're doing. Okay, they're sharing a
Speaker 1: brain with Sean Hannity, they're sharing a brain with god
Speaker 1: knows is Rachel Maddows. No count out there on the
Speaker 1: other side, I don't even know. I know she's out
Speaker 1: there still now, you know. But the real opposition there
Speaker 1: is actually the Midas touched guys on YouTube and they're growing,
Speaker 1: you know, YouTube substack in the independent media. They're actually
Speaker 1: in opposition that does some research, you know, doesn't just Okay,
Speaker 1: the Democrats said this, therefore it is now law and law.
Speaker 1: They are on that side, and they do repeat some
Speaker 1: of that, but they go past it and they go, now,
Speaker 1: we're going to give you the rest of it. And
Speaker 1: it's outside of it's still all lefty, lefty, lefty, you know,
Speaker 1: and it's got the Michael Cohen cooperation and all that.
Speaker 1: And anybody who's against Trump is our ally that's them,
Speaker 1: you know, whether it's the Lincoln Project or it's you know,
Speaker 1: the recently fired guy from CNN. They're happy, Okay, great,
Speaker 1: but they're an actual opposition because they're doing something outside
Speaker 1: of just running with the script. I'm frustrated with the
Speaker 1: massive amount of people running with the script and because
Speaker 1: it's been repeated so often, not everything is being checked,
Speaker 1: and not even not everything is being checked, nothing is
Speaker 1: being checked.
Speaker 2: Our media has gotten lazy. All this started back during
Speaker 2: Clinton when you had the when you had the Bimbo eruptions,
Speaker 2: and the mainstream media fell wrought in line behind the
Speaker 2: Democratic Party and the DNC and just started with the
Speaker 2: talking points and the talking points. In fact, who wasn't
Speaker 2: had the blog talking points memo?
Speaker 1: Well, yeah, there was talking points, but there was also
Speaker 1: the launch of the opposition, which was the guy whose
Speaker 1: website was that the website that didn't change basically for
Speaker 1: twenty years, that actually had the first announcements about this stuff.
Speaker 1: Drudge Report, right.
Speaker 3: Yeah, Drudge. You know, he's a complete one eighty Drudge.
Speaker 1: But Drudge was something different at the time because he
Speaker 1: actually offered and I hate to use this phrase anymore,
Speaker 1: an alternative media. Okay, a real alternative.
Speaker 3: I mean even Tucker got started back then with Lucy
Speaker 3: and Goldberg.
Speaker 1: Yeah, but Tucker Carlson another disingenuous anyway, forget it, Forget it.
Speaker 1: I don't want to get in a commentary on these
Speaker 1: specific guys. The thing is but.
Speaker 2: That point, and it is reckless. And there are certain
Speaker 2: things now.
Speaker 7: You know, but alternative meaning everybody's up in arms over
Speaker 7: must no i'mun accountable. Well okay, fine, but every president
Speaker 7: has had their advisors that are not being able to
Speaker 7: be held to account other than being fired.
Speaker 2: Yeah, but believe it must it must did something to
Speaker 2: tick off the base. Trump would get rid of them
Speaker 2: in a minute, You do it. Saw how long a
Speaker 2: vet hung around?
Speaker 1: You do admit that this is unprecedented, the level of
Speaker 1: power that has been granted to Elon Musk, Right, well.
Speaker 3: No, I don't.
Speaker 2: I think there were other people hitting Kissinger over the
Speaker 2: years when Nixon had the power.
Speaker 1: All the years. So it's it took years over the years.
Speaker 1: Elon Musk, this is less than a month, the right.
Speaker 3: Right, Yeah, but this is you get this is on
Speaker 3: a new administration. Kissinger was from Nixon, you know, from
Speaker 3: get go.
Speaker 2: So the whole time Nixon was in you had Kessinger
Speaker 2: in there pulling the strings behind things.
Speaker 3: Sure, what was his name? Not Wine? Was it Wine?
Speaker 3: Not Weinberger?
Speaker 1: But this year's speed Casper Weinberger. Short, Fine, whatever you
Speaker 1: want to say there, but nobody has moved this quickly
Speaker 1: into so many areas of sensative stuff.
Speaker 2: Happened, That's what I mean up to this point that
Speaker 2: they could. Okay, Trump was very smart when he did this.
Speaker 2: He took an organization created by an executive order by
Speaker 2: Kennedy in sixty one, and because it was an executive
Speaker 2: order and not mandated by Congress, he was able to
Speaker 2: go in there and re route that thing.
Speaker 3: And look what he's been able to do with it.
Speaker 2: I'll tell you what Trump did his homework before he
Speaker 2: started this this current term.
Speaker 1: Okay, well, I disagree with that there because this is
Speaker 1: that fast.
Speaker 2: And to make the changes that he made right off
Speaker 2: the bat, he was prepared for them.
Speaker 1: No, somebody convinced him that these are his ideas. But
Speaker 1: I assure you this agenda exists.
Speaker 2: But it was his I'm not saying it was Trump's ideas.
Speaker 2: You've got people around Trump right now that have their
Speaker 2: own ideas and can convince him let's do this.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's what happens. Okay. But the first thing you
Speaker 1: said was that he was smart and he did his homework.
Speaker 1: What I'm telling you is, yeah, Trump has You.
Speaker 3: Have to admit Trump did his homework.
Speaker 2: He's around him now that he didn't have the issues
Speaker 2: with on his first term because he believed a bunch
Speaker 2: of insiders. Oh he's the guy, that's who you need.
Speaker 2: Look at the way the Republicans were when he first
Speaker 2: came in.
Speaker 3: That's not in some of his choices. But that's it
Speaker 3: allows job.
Speaker 1: That's not homework. That's an insulation and changing your organization
Speaker 1: to make sure you have a much more loyal group
Speaker 1: of soldiers around you then you had the last time.
Speaker 1: That's that's not homework to me, that's, you know, learn
Speaker 1: a painful lesson. If quite honestly, loyalty is the most
Speaker 1: important aspect to this whole operation. Then you better figure
Speaker 1: out a way to do it better, because it didn't
Speaker 1: work out too well last time, because, as you said,
Speaker 1: he thought he needed certain establishment people to get things done,
Speaker 1: Which is an argument I made against somebody on a
Speaker 1: show that I don't know if it's ever going to appear,
Speaker 1: because somebody went on his long rant about how, you know,
Speaker 1: how this is absolutely ridiculous and everything else, and I
Speaker 1: tried to explain, you know, it's a different management philosophy
Speaker 1: where the people at the top, Cash Patel can be
Speaker 1: a dumb ass and not know how to run the
Speaker 1: FBI if he is just trying to get general things
Speaker 1: done and he actually lets the you know, the middle
Speaker 1: management do the work. But he puts middle management in
Speaker 1: that he knows is going to agree with him, but
Speaker 1: actually knows how things work. Cash Ptel can be just
Speaker 1: an idiot who goes on TV, just like our secretary
Speaker 1: of Defense can do that. Okay, he can be an
Speaker 1: idiot who goes on TV. And if he's got some good,
Speaker 1: good assistant managers, let's say, then you know who actually
Speaker 1: understand the culture, the system. Maybe how to run a
Speaker 1: big organization. He can be the face man and not
Speaker 1: actually be the guy who gets things done. I want
Speaker 1: this done, figure out how to do it. Some organizations
Speaker 1: work that way, and I get it. And the guy
Speaker 1: freaked out on me that I was talking to. I'm
Speaker 1: not even gonna publicize the podcast because I don't know
Speaker 1: if it's going to appear. He didn't handle it well.
Speaker 1: He's like, I thought you were this way, and I'm like,
Speaker 1: you're Everybody takes me the wrong way. I'm trying to
Speaker 1: go at things differently. I think differently than what I see.
Speaker 1: I'm gonna speak the truth the way I see it,
Speaker 1: and I'm gonna come at you with things you don't
Speaker 1: hear elsewhere. I'm sorry, I'm not just gonna paarro stuff,
Speaker 1: even if I think it's the best. I mean, unless
Speaker 1: it is really the only alternative, you know, the only answer,
Speaker 1: and I don't default to I mean, think about this.
Speaker 1: You would not protect this. If this was something being
Speaker 1: done by a Democrat, you wouldn't trust it because you
Speaker 1: have a preconceived notion about if it came from that side,
Speaker 1: it's this way. Your defaults do influence what you're willing
Speaker 1: to accept and what you're not. And I'm not saying
Speaker 1: they don't do the same for me. It's just that
Speaker 1: I have such a high rejection level for both sides.
Speaker 1: I come up with things that you don't hear out
Speaker 1: of other people's mouths that are looking for a team
Speaker 1: to support, that's all. And it's about the type of
Speaker 1: media we're producing, not even necessarily about the issue itself.
Speaker 1: I'm trying to make it so that we're having a
Speaker 1: different discussion here, so that there's a reason to tune
Speaker 1: here and it doesn't just become yet another place where
Speaker 1: they hear the same points they've heard on Fox or
Speaker 1: the same thing they're hearing on News Nation because Bill
Speaker 1: O'Reilly's got to show again and whatever else. I don't
Speaker 1: want it to be like heard this, you know, yes,
Speaker 1: that's exactly the same thing. And when you hear it
Speaker 1: word for word in places where they're competing with each other,
Speaker 1: even but they're you know, obviously in the same business,
Speaker 1: and word for word they repeat it like it's a script.
Speaker 1: I mean, you could have the same thought, but you're
Speaker 1: gonna word it differently if you came up with it yourself.
Speaker 1: When they use exactly the same phrases, except for in
Speaker 1: certain cases where they screw up and put things out
Speaker 1: older a little. It gets a little boring, a little redundant,
Speaker 1: and a little bit like, well, gee, that's our propaganda time. Now,
Speaker 1: can we get onto something that's actually news or actually
Speaker 1: you know, thought and discussion. Anyway, Danny, I'm going to
Speaker 1: turn it back to you and let you two guys
Speaker 1: handle this for a bit. I want to shut up
Speaker 1: and listen to you guys. Sure, please go ahead.
Speaker 6: Sure, I'm glad you brought it. I'm glad you brought it.
Speaker 6: Cash to tell now you I know the people with
Speaker 6: me and I even said this in the past at Shift,
Speaker 6: who unfortunately is the Senator of California who I didn't
Speaker 6: vote for. He's a proven liar. Wouldn't you agree to me?
Speaker 1: Oh? Definitely, ing you guys can agree on something there
Speaker 1: attention to watch, Yeah, I did pay attention watching Cash Pattel's.
Speaker 6: Hearing that guy blatantly lied. I mean I had to
Speaker 6: go dig a little deeper because with Adam Shift. But
Speaker 6: I don't like liars. I don't trust liars, and he's
Speaker 6: a blatant liar.
Speaker 1: Well, Patel or or just to be clear here, Is
Speaker 1: Patel a blatant liar or is Adam shiff a blatant liar? Yes?
Speaker 1: During the hearings, Yes both. The only thing I had
Speaker 1: in trouble with with Patel hearing, because I did pay
Speaker 1: attention for about an hour and a half of that,
Speaker 1: was I don't believe for a second that he can't
Speaker 1: remember as many things as he said. He can't remember
Speaker 1: about statements said Zach that he was trying to make
Speaker 1: you made a statement like this, and it's like, oh,
Speaker 1: I don't remember that. He was making a big deal
Speaker 1: out of it. He was getting mentioned in the media
Speaker 1: about it. I doubt he forgot about it, you know,
Speaker 1: his tweet that set off eight million replies. I don't
Speaker 1: believe for a second, I don't remember if I said that.
Speaker 1: You know, I believe it about as much I actually
Speaker 1: believe Reagan Moore the amount of times he said I
Speaker 1: don't recall. I really believed him a lot more, even
Speaker 1: though I was very suss on the whole you know,
Speaker 1: Iran concert thing, and still am. I think we still
Speaker 1: haven't gotten the whole truth. Yeah, but I believe Reagan
Speaker 1: a bit more than I do Cash Betel going, Oh,
Speaker 1: I don't remember that particular political statement that I'm sure
Speaker 1: actually got the attention to Donald Trump because I remember
Speaker 1: him tweeting at me. So you mean to tell me
Speaker 1: that you don't remember when the now president who you're
Speaker 1: now standing up with, You don't recall that even though
Speaker 1: it was key to you getting noticed with these people.
Speaker 1: I'm sorry, Magnation paid attention to you, you got rewarded,
Speaker 1: and you forgot about it. I don't buy it, but anyway,
Speaker 1: please continue, Danny. I'm sorry.
Speaker 6: Well, the point I'm making, even though I'm on the
Speaker 6: left and I yees sometimes over repeat talking point, but
Speaker 6: I'm principal enough that I won't repeat that talking point
Speaker 6: when I find out that people are either punching down
Speaker 6: or they're blatant liars. And he was a blatant liar.
Speaker 6: So I mean, it's just a point about talking points to.
Speaker 1: Me, and shift to stand with you on this Shift
Speaker 1: as many times repeated things over and over again, and
Speaker 1: you know, when somebody's repeating it and they're a politician,
Speaker 1: they're trying to make a stick for a purpose. Various
Speaker 1: times I find him making those statements, and then you
Speaker 1: go and do a little research. I got this nasty
Speaker 1: habit of let me find out how much I can
Speaker 1: verify the extraordinary thing I just heard. You know, I
Speaker 1: guess maybe it's all the years in the JFK community.
Speaker 1: If you tell me that Jackie Kennedy had a gun
Speaker 1: in the Lamb Chop puppet, which somebody actually tried to
Speaker 1: tell me at one point, because at a certain point,
Speaker 1: somebody gave her a puppet. Remember the lamb Chop puppet?
Speaker 1: What was their name, Shelley Winters had right on TV.
Speaker 1: You know we have that.
Speaker 3: How are you let me?
Speaker 1: Lamb chop? Somebody gave one to Jackie Kennedy in Texas, right,
Speaker 1: So at some point she had this thing and a
Speaker 1: guy was trying to convince me that there was a gun.
Speaker 1: What's that? Vpete? I'm sorry, Lewis, Sherry Lewis, You're right,
Speaker 1: I said, what did I say? Winters? I'm sorry?
Speaker 3: I have pictured.
Speaker 1: Yeah, crying. Well, Jack Nicholson's about ready to chop her
Speaker 1: up with an axe. I mix that up, my mistake,
Speaker 1: Shelley Duvalla, another shell. I'm mixing my Shelley's here. I
Speaker 1: got mixed shells, all right. Sorry, you know what I'm
Speaker 1: talking about though, right, Sherry Lewis. She had that show
Speaker 1: for years. Lamb chop right. Anyway, they're trying to convince
Speaker 1: me that Jackie Kennedy had like I forget what they said,
Speaker 1: like a revolver inside the puppet and shot Kennedy in
Speaker 1: the head with a revolver from inside the puppet. Okay,
Speaker 1: I'm not kidding. You know, it's almost as ludicrous as
Speaker 1: the guy was going around with the you know that
Speaker 1: was a confetti ken And you know when you see
Speaker 1: all that stuff spraying out of Kennedy's head and Dealey Plaza,
Speaker 1: that was from a confetti explosion. Yes, I just said
Speaker 1: that with a straight face. Don't anybody take this out
Speaker 1: of context. Please, the ridiculous claims, that's all I'm trying
Speaker 1: to point out here, and they will try and convince
Speaker 1: you of it anyway. That's what it reminds me of.
Speaker 1: Would shift on a couple of occasions where I go
Speaker 1: to look and I'm like, there is no proof that
Speaker 1: this absolute fact as he claims it. He's trying to
Speaker 1: repeat it over and over again. So either he is
Speaker 1: ignorant of the reality of what he's saying, or he's
Speaker 1: a liar. You have no other choices. Here, either he
Speaker 1: has been ignorantly convinced to something like the Sherry Lewis
Speaker 1: puppet with the gun in it and the confetti canon,
Speaker 1: or he's lying for a purpose one or the other,
Speaker 1: and pick one. Neither one's good for a guy who
Speaker 1: has a lot of power in the state of California.
Speaker 1: And Danny or BPTE, nobody's going to argue with me there. Sorry,
Speaker 1: but but go ahead, Danny, make a few more points,
Speaker 1: and you guys talk a bit. I want to really
Speaker 1: drop back again and just listen.
Speaker 6: Sure, sure, yeah, I mean one of the big things
Speaker 6: like that, I have a problem mosque and it's not
Speaker 6: even that you know, prior to even dropping into all
Speaker 6: these departments, is this guy here is soon that an
Speaker 6: LRB twice. He's got two lawsuits which basically protects workers.
Speaker 6: And what they want to do they want to get
Speaker 6: to the Supreme Court in their basis is it's unconstitutional.
Speaker 6: And this is this is this is a huge issue.
Speaker 6: And I just heard an interview that uh Sean O'Brien,
Speaker 6: who I've met and talked to twice, made some really
Speaker 6: good points, but we got to ask this particular question.
Speaker 6: He dodged it and and I'm your thoughts. Are you
Speaker 6: happy with what what Musk is doing? Would you say
Speaker 6: this is reckless? Or are you on board? Are You're
Speaker 6: just not sure? But you with your thoughts on.
Speaker 1: This, you want to be Pete's opinion on this right
Speaker 1: this whole process.
Speaker 3: You know, I don't.
Speaker 2: I don't particularly have anything against Musk, but I'm not
Speaker 2: a fan. I mean, the guy, the guy has so
Speaker 2: far has been good at what he does. He's got
Speaker 2: what a case with the National Labor Relations Board. I
Speaker 2: could care less because I know the National Labor Relations
Speaker 2: Board a lot of times will bring up crap just
Speaker 2: to punish somebody by having to fork over the money
Speaker 2: for a bunch of lawyers for something that's ridiculous or
Speaker 2: makes no sense. You see a lot of these things
Speaker 2: get thrown out of court and on both sides of
Speaker 2: the aisle. Whether it's you know, Ford Motor Company, or
Speaker 2: whether it's Elon Musk's X or whoever.
Speaker 3: A hostile work environment, those things happen. Those are a
Speaker 3: diamond dozen.
Speaker 2: I personally don't have anything against Musk, but like I said,
Speaker 2: I'm not a fan. I'm glad to see that somebody
Speaker 2: is doing something to get to the bottom of where
Speaker 2: and the hell all this money has been going.
Speaker 3: You know, we're treatings of dollars.
Speaker 2: In debt, and what's putting us treatings of dollars in
Speaker 2: debt are things like Moroccan pottery classes, you know, checking
Speaker 2: out the lesbian tendencies of the iguana that's you know
Speaker 2: in southern Borneo.
Speaker 3: Is the ridiculous crap. And then we do a lot
Speaker 3: of good in the world.
Speaker 2: There's a lot of aid that we send out there,
Speaker 2: there's a lot of food that we send out there.
Speaker 2: But we also do it to corrupt organizations that we
Speaker 2: think we're feeding a bunch of people. And you would
Speaker 2: think with the amount of money we've been poured into
Speaker 2: some areas, we kind of would have gotten a handle
Speaker 2: on the famine part of the people not being able
Speaker 2: to eat. But it seems like we can't make We're
Speaker 2: to put it bluntly, we're shoveling shit against the tide.
Speaker 2: You know, we just so our money can't touch it,
Speaker 2: and we just keep pouring more, more and more money
Speaker 2: into it. We don't have more and more money.
Speaker 3: Plus you want to just print it and then we'll
Speaker 3: just put inflation everywhere in the world. I don't like them.
Speaker 2: I don't like some of the things about Musk, but
Speaker 2: then again, I don't have to work for him. I
Speaker 2: would like to see somebody, I don't care who it is,
Speaker 2: do what he's doing right now and start cracking open
Speaker 2: this damn secrecy that envelops anything that comes out of Washington.
Speaker 2: You know, we've been spending money that bureaucrats that have
Speaker 2: been their thirty years in these agencies have no damn
Speaker 2: idea that we've been spending money on it.
Speaker 3: Well, who the hell's watching the damn books? Well, Chris,
Speaker 3: about time to start cracking this stuff open.
Speaker 2: I'd love to see him go after the FED and
Speaker 2: audit them and see what's on the books.
Speaker 1: Absolutely true. Transparency and auditing of all this stuff is great.
Speaker 1: But again, you know there are nuances. I mean, look,
Speaker 1: you are well aware. I mean Vladimir Putin is not
Speaker 1: a dumb guy. Right at a certain point he funds
Speaker 1: things that you wouldn't believe if you pay attention, including
Speaker 1: a biker gang that is actually literally funded by the
Speaker 1: Kremlin and Vladimir Putin he funds a biker gang in Russia.
Speaker 1: I'm not you don't believe me. Look it up, there's
Speaker 1: something wolves. I forget what the specific name is, but
Speaker 1: but yeah, I was looking up. You know, different corrupt
Speaker 1: organizations that are employed by large government entities, okay, that
Speaker 1: are literally funded, kept alive and exist only because of
Speaker 1: those government entities. Because people argue against me all the
Speaker 1: time that our government wouldn't support these people in that.
Speaker 1: And then I go, well, what about the mob trying
Speaker 1: to help, you know, kill Castro, Well, that was one
Speaker 1: that was strange. No, it's not strange at all. Sometimes
Speaker 1: criminal organizations are literally funded by your so called legitimate
Speaker 1: government for different reasons, sometimes strategically intelligent reasons, other times
Speaker 1: more corrupt reasons. Okay, but either way, without even judgment,
Speaker 1: you got to admit that criminal organizations get funded by government,
Speaker 1: whether they're foreign or domestic. It happens.
Speaker 3: Why the Russian motorcycle gang is the night.
Speaker 1: Wolves, thank you. I knew they were some kind of wolves,
Speaker 1: but I forgot the name because it was just astounding
Speaker 1: the amount of money that went in. And I didn't
Speaker 1: picture Vladimir Putin funding a biker gang. But it's true.
Speaker 3: I can see it. I could see it.
Speaker 2: I think, I think, if you know, if he wasn't
Speaker 2: doing what he's doing now, he's part of being a
Speaker 2: partner jam well.
Speaker 1: And that's the funny thing too, well, I don't think
Speaker 1: he would. I think he'd be a very good KGB
Speaker 1: operative who we wouldn't know about if he wasn't doing
Speaker 1: what he's doing now. And that's the thing. The guy
Speaker 1: is an intelligent operator. Whether I agree with what he's
Speaker 1: doing or not, he's been pretty intelligent about it. He's
Speaker 1: made sure to get away with plenty of things, including,
Speaker 1: you know, getting rid of journalists that criticized him over
Speaker 1: Chatchney and things like that, you know, maintaining control credit
Speaker 1: where credits due. But here we go, and I'm no
Speaker 1: fan of Vladimir Putin's but there it is. Some people
Speaker 1: say that's a leftover prejudice from the time when the
Speaker 1: Soviet Union existed, but no, it's actually not. It's that
Speaker 1: I recognize that a government brought organized criminals into the government,
Speaker 1: and that doesn't happen directly every day, but it did
Speaker 1: in Russia. Okay, just saying, and I'm not saying it
Speaker 1: was the bad move. It was probably the most intelligent
Speaker 1: move for him at the time. Anyway. With all that
Speaker 1: being said, Danny I do want to get to some
Speaker 1: other people. And I know we got Jimmy James waiting
Speaker 1: for quite a while, and I'm sure he's got something
Speaker 1: to say, and you know, but yeah, if you want
Speaker 1: to hang on a little bit, and I'm gonna try
Speaker 1: and bringing somebody through Skype and we'll see how that
Speaker 1: goes and everything else. Okay, So let me put you
Speaker 1: on hold and get back to you, Danny. Oh sorry,
Speaker 1: in the middle of his sentence, I didn't mean to
Speaker 1: do that, but there was a delay on the button. Meantime,
Speaker 1: I want to get over to Jimmy James and give
Speaker 1: him at least one shot, if not to to get
Speaker 1: his thoughts out for this week. Jimmy, how you doing, man?
Speaker 1: What's on your mind? Well?
Speaker 8: Hey, after listening to that for an hour, I can't
Speaker 8: help keep politics is on my mind.
Speaker 1: I really would love to avoid it a couple of times.
Speaker 1: I think I should ban it from at least one
Speaker 1: Friday night, you know, no politics tonight. Yeah, I think
Speaker 1: we should start doing that. But I'm not getting a
Speaker 1: lot of feedback when I ask those questions and posts
Speaker 1: and stuff like what do you think we should do
Speaker 1: with the calling shows? I'm not getting a lot of responses. Jimmy,
Speaker 1: what do you think though? I mean, would you still
Speaker 1: call in on a no politics Friday night?
Speaker 8: I don't want freedom Friday nights if someone really wants
Speaker 8: to talk about it.
Speaker 1: But that's what I'm doing.
Speaker 8: I don't want to think. I don't want to remove
Speaker 8: the possibility.
Speaker 1: But then again, it gets overwhelming. It's too much sometimes right.
Speaker 8: Well, and it's an hour worth of Stuff's it said
Speaker 8: a love it agitated me? No, No, I'm not doing that.
Speaker 8: I'm gonna tell my story from the Twilight Zone this week.
Speaker 1: Cool. I'm looking forward to it. While you're doing that,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna try and connect somebody ya Skype. We'll see
Speaker 1: if it works because I have suspect on this. I
Speaker 1: feel as though this the Skype account this person is
Speaker 1: on might not connect to us for some reason. But
Speaker 1: I'm gonna try anyway. And go ahead, Jimmy, I'll shut
Speaker 1: up while you do this.
Speaker 8: Oh you already know about it, Chuck more or less?
Speaker 1: Okay, go ahead.
Speaker 8: Uh well, I want to get Btpete. Unless you're pretty well,
Speaker 8: you know the conservative media people pretty good? Don't should
Speaker 8: be Pete?
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, I guess better than me?
Speaker 3: That is most.
Speaker 8: Uh, hard to hear you. I'm having trouble hearing you.
Speaker 3: But I said, I'm as I'm as good.
Speaker 2: As he's being familiar with the conservative side of things.
Speaker 3: So yeah, what's yours right?
Speaker 1: And I would say you both are kind of experts
Speaker 1: in your own right on this question. Okay, by all means,
Speaker 1: go ahead, Jimmy.
Speaker 8: Do you think I'm an expert on conservative commentators?
Speaker 1: Not commentators necessarily, but in general, I would say you're
Speaker 1: an expert on conservative media. I think you consume a
Speaker 1: good amount of it, and you definitely listen to a
Speaker 1: bunch of radio. I think that's provable conservative radio. But please,
Speaker 1: by all means, go ahead and tell your Twilight Zone story.
Speaker 1: I think I know most of it, but the listeners don't,
Speaker 1: So go ahead.
Speaker 2: You.
Speaker 8: Oh well, I actually don't listen to much conservative media,
Speaker 8: plus do a lot of podcasts, most of which have
Speaker 8: nothing to do with politics.
Speaker 1: I see. Okay, then I have a misconception in my
Speaker 1: mind about the listening habits of Jimmy James. I'm sorry,
Speaker 1: go ahead. My mistake.
Speaker 8: Well, I'm just I'm very perplexed your b pete. In fact,
Speaker 8: i'd i'd like Aaron to call him because he's a
Speaker 8: technology expert on modern technological terrors. Anyways, so earlier this week,
Speaker 8: be Pete, I decided on a whim to make a
Speaker 8: call to the Mark Levin show, right, Uh, okay, okay,
Speaker 8: And I got through apparently, and he and do you
Speaker 8: know who Mark Stein is?
Speaker 3: Yeah?
Speaker 1: Yeah, no, he's hearing you, just mine, and we hear
Speaker 1: you just you.
Speaker 8: Just Mark Levin and Mark Stein. They don't get along, correct.
Speaker 3: I've never heard them interact.
Speaker 2: Mark Stein has a much different style than Mark Levin.
Speaker 2: I mean, Levin's constitutional lawyer. Stein is an editorialist. I'm
Speaker 2: sure they disagree on some things. I wouldn't know whether
Speaker 2: they get along or not.
Speaker 8: Okay, well, I knew he's a legitimate guy. I recognized
Speaker 8: his voice. You know, he's got a brutish accent. I
Speaker 8: remember tearing him. And so he answers, hello, this is
Speaker 8: Mark Stein. I'm filling in for the great one went
Speaker 8: and he said, oh, I apologize for calling your governor
Speaker 8: a name. Earlier I was talking about her and I
Speaker 8: called her which more. I said, no, that sounds about right.
Speaker 8: He kind of laughed, and then I just made my
Speaker 8: point and he commented on it, and he think be
Speaker 8: for my call, and that was it, you know, normal
Speaker 8: call and show stuff. So then the next day, or
Speaker 8: well not actually next day, like two days later, I
Speaker 8: decided to download that show to get a clip for
Speaker 8: Chuck has going to put together something. Anyway, I go
Speaker 8: to look and on that day it said guest hosts
Speaker 8: Bean Ferguson. I said, that's kind of weird. So then
Speaker 8: I started looking at the other days, different guys, different guys.
Speaker 8: No Mark Stein. So then I looked on the internet
Speaker 8: and it said Mark Stein and Mark Levine sued each
Speaker 8: other ten years ago and don't even talk to each
Speaker 8: other as far as so.
Speaker 1: My question, do you be?
Speaker 8: How did I call the Mark Levin phone number somehow
Speaker 8: supposedly get to I know, I spoke to Mark Stein
Speaker 8: for five minutes? Or did I? I can't find this
Speaker 8: audio footage. I looked on his radio show, What what
Speaker 8: in the Hagenes is going on here? BP?
Speaker 1: Before BP, yeah, before Bpete answers before bpte answers. I
Speaker 1: have a question for you just to help fill in.
Speaker 1: Maybe it'll inform b Pete a little more. Did you
Speaker 1: happen to check the host that you found out was
Speaker 1: airing on that station at that time, yet, because is
Speaker 1: it possible you just simply called that station and got
Speaker 1: a different host and thought you were talking to Mark Stein.
Speaker 1: And that's the whole of the problem, is that the problem?
Speaker 1: Maybe could that be.
Speaker 3: I've got it here?
Speaker 2: Mark Levin subtle taked Mark Stein on Fox May's Sebruary
Speaker 2: twenty twenty one. This explains that apparently there was extensive
Speaker 2: litigation between the two. Mark Stein was in the slot.
Speaker 3: For a week.
Speaker 2: Apparently this had something to do when they were you know,
Speaker 2: they're both on Blaze TV and Stein was sitting in
Speaker 2: I can't find Let me see if I can find
Speaker 2: the current What day was.
Speaker 1: This, Jimmy? And also what were the call letters at
Speaker 1: the station? If you don't mind, I'll look something up
Speaker 1: while you guys are talking.
Speaker 8: There was no call LETTERC. He's everywhere. He's got a
Speaker 8: national number. I think it was Tuesday BPA.
Speaker 3: Let me see. I mean, we're looking.
Speaker 1: Well, Mark Levin, I get it. Everybody's everywhere nowadays, but
Speaker 1: somewhere like what did you call the Mark Levin like
Speaker 1: listener number that he has at his website? Is that
Speaker 1: what you called?
Speaker 8: Yeah, there's only one listed three eight one three eight
Speaker 8: one one. And when I called yeah, I mean, it's
Speaker 8: certainly seemed like a running radio station, and yet I
Speaker 8: know what's going on there.
Speaker 1: Okay, So I'm looking at Mark Levin's website, right and
Speaker 1: you know, I'm gonna go on there and see if
Speaker 1: I can find that number. I'm gonna search for it.
Speaker 1: And uh, what did you say the no? I mean,
Speaker 1: I've been doing advertising here for Mark Levin at this point,
Speaker 1: but and I really don't like him because the way
Speaker 1: he behaves with the other people in the media directly.
Speaker 1: I don't care about his politics either. He's just kind
Speaker 1: of jerky with other people, even his alleged allies. But
Speaker 1: we'll put that aside for a minute. What's the number again?
Speaker 1: Three eight one? You said I.
Speaker 8: Like Mark Levin politics because he doesn't have politics.
Speaker 1: Great, a constitution excellent, But I don't even care him. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I don't even care about that. I'm just saying business wise,
Speaker 1: business wise, he's nasty. But anyway, go go ahead, three
Speaker 1: eight one?
Speaker 8: What I think it's eight seven seventh three eight one
Speaker 8: three eight one one.
Speaker 1: All right, let me see if I can come up
Speaker 1: with something there, because I was going to get to
Speaker 1: this on Sunday for you and actually get an answer
Speaker 1: for you over the weekend. But let me see what's
Speaker 1: going on, you know, see if we can get an
Speaker 1: answer for you, because it does seem strange. The whole
Speaker 1: mark Stein thing is funny because he's constantly having litigations
Speaker 1: with his former employees. Okay, with the former employers. You know,
Speaker 1: he turned around sued one employer in twenty seventeen and
Speaker 1: he said, I'm doing this for my staff, and then
Speaker 1: his staff goes out to the Daily Beast and literally
Speaker 1: calls him out for him being full of crap.
Speaker 3: Uh.
Speaker 1: This mark Stein guy, and I'm not familiar with him
Speaker 1: at all. I have no idea. I mean, I imagine
Speaker 1: he's conservative, but I don't know anything else about the guy.
Speaker 1: I've never listened to him, and uh, I'm just catching
Speaker 1: up on news stories and I find all kinds of
Speaker 1: instances where he's involved in court actions after you know,
Speaker 1: hosting shows, co hosting shows. He just seems a bit litigious,
Speaker 1: mister Stein. You know that's my impression. Maybe it's wrong,
Speaker 1: but you know, go ahead.
Speaker 8: It's after I looked up. I was like, there's no
Speaker 8: way that Mark Leving, But this guy hosts this show.
Speaker 8: So how did I call this number and talk to
Speaker 8: this guy for five minutes? Is it possible he has
Speaker 8: kind of weird AI thing?
Speaker 1: Well, is it?
Speaker 8: Are you having?
Speaker 1: Well, he's not going to know. Are you having a
Speaker 1: live Mandela effect effect? You know? Is is there something
Speaker 1: in the water there in? I mean, is Canada trying
Speaker 1: to poison uh in retaliation for the trade war? Canadians
Speaker 1: trying to poison people in Michigan? Now, I mean, who knows.
Speaker 1: I don't know.
Speaker 8: Well, listen, listen. It could be as simple as one
Speaker 8: of them, one of them blips, or of the I'm
Speaker 8: so called on the universe flips, those other realities.
Speaker 1: Okay, another answer? Or maybe they have similar phone numbers somehow,
Speaker 1: and you just missed saying what's.
Speaker 3: The phone number for Mark Stein's program.
Speaker 1: That's what I'm trying to find out, is what I'm
Speaker 1: trying to compare their phone numbers and see, uh if
Speaker 1: maybe they had because they could be something strange where
Speaker 1: they have a similar calling number. Yeah, go ahead.
Speaker 8: I sent you the screenshots of my of the phone
Speaker 8: call of.
Speaker 1: You calling your email. I know I have them. I
Speaker 1: put them aside because I'm working on other stuff. I
Speaker 1: had to talk with Larry on the phone today and
Speaker 1: a whole bunch of other things going on. So I
Speaker 1: told you I wouldn't have time to do the research
Speaker 1: right for you. But I was going to do the
Speaker 1: research when I got a moment, uh, and I didn't
Speaker 1: get time before the show. So we're doing it now, okay.
Speaker 1: But I want to find out about his calling numbers
Speaker 1: and maybe there's a similar call in number. I'm going
Speaker 1: to examine this and see what I can come up with.
Speaker 1: It makes them cross over because from what I can tell,
Speaker 1: and by the way, Levin's calling number you have it
Speaker 1: correct at three eight one three eight one one, which
Speaker 1: that is not our call in number. That is Mark
Speaker 1: Levin's calling number. And I didn't even give you the
Speaker 1: area code. You have that correct. The Stein calling number
Speaker 1: is a different controversy. First problem is I spelled his
Speaker 1: name wrong apparently, But anyway, I'll get to it. Do
Speaker 1: you have any ideas that BPT. Have you found anything
Speaker 1: just searching quickly for Jimmy JS.
Speaker 2: Well, I'm looking at Stein online right now and just
Speaker 2: he doesn't have a number listed.
Speaker 1: I don't know. I'm not sure if he still has
Speaker 1: a regular radio gig. Really at the moment. Does he
Speaker 1: seem to have a regular radio.
Speaker 3: Gig, Well, it's I think he does. I don't know that.
Speaker 2: I think he does more writing than just I don't
Speaker 2: think he has a podcast.
Speaker 1: Yeah, because right now, I see, you know, he's got
Speaker 1: his Stein online, right is his website looks like and
Speaker 1: I mean the last thing.
Speaker 2: This says Stein on air has got a data gene
Speaker 2: twenty first three.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's what I'm saying. I don't see. Okay, and
Speaker 1: view if we go to his like week in review
Speaker 1: on his website, right, I see that it doesn't look like, yeah,
Speaker 1: he's remember renewing member rights, blah blah blah, he's got
Speaker 1: you know, buy a membership from my website, buy my books. Uh. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean it looks to me like he's not actually
Speaker 1: actively doing a radio show.
Speaker 8: He actually is. I found it yesterday. Okay, Pete, here's
Speaker 8: another strange thing that I noticed from that phone call.
Speaker 8: His call screener was James Golden. It seemed do you
Speaker 8: know who that is?
Speaker 3: James Golden?
Speaker 2: That was he wanted he to call the screener for
Speaker 2: Limbaugh was Limball.
Speaker 8: Right, that's snerdly. Yeah, how did he get there? What
Speaker 8: are these people doing supposedly on the fake Mark Levin
Speaker 8: show that never happened, and yet I somehow called it
Speaker 8: and talked for five minutes.
Speaker 2: I don't know, maybe you hit a clone number or something,
Speaker 2: because James Golden, yes nerdly for years on Limbaugh and
Speaker 2: Mark Stein was a guest host a lot of times,
Speaker 2: just like Levin on Limbaugh.
Speaker 1: Well is that maybe? Yeah? Is that maybe the connection?
Speaker 1: Because is uh? Because I know they were for a
Speaker 1: little while trying to find somebody to sort of take
Speaker 1: over the Rush Limbaugh Show.
Speaker 2: Well, yeah, they ended up with Buck Clay Clay and
Speaker 2: Buck buck Sexton who was you know, XCI guy and
Speaker 2: Clay what's his last name?
Speaker 1: Yeah, But I don't I don't think he took over
Speaker 1: like the e I B. I don't think those guys
Speaker 1: took over the EIB network. They had different individual conservative
Speaker 1: hosts they were trying to No, no.
Speaker 2: No, no, they actually they handed Oh they didn't hand it over.
Speaker 3: Okay, they kept the EIP network going.
Speaker 2: They just found somebody for that time slot to put
Speaker 2: in that syndication.
Speaker 3: And that's play Travis and Buck and Buck Sexton.
Speaker 1: Ah okay, I'm trying to keep it straight here. All right, Well,
Speaker 1: I didn't think they actually found a suitable Okay, but
Speaker 1: you know what it is because they didn't call it
Speaker 1: the Rush Limbaugh Show.
Speaker 2: Anymore so, right, No, it's the Clay and is the Clay,
Speaker 2: Travis and Buck Section show. Yeah, okay, I mean I
Speaker 2: listened to them when I can, but it's gotten to
Speaker 2: the point that they sound so much.
Speaker 3: Alike in their voice and their taitans.
Speaker 2: It sounds like one person carried on conversation with themselves
Speaker 2: for three hours.
Speaker 3: But it's not entertainment. Okay, they're a big thing. They're
Speaker 3: into boutique coffee.
Speaker 2: Now, so gotcha get any resemblance of Limbaugh to their show?
Speaker 1: Well, I don't know, man, He sold the Ruth's Chris
Speaker 1: Steakhouse like all get out for years. I mean, maybe
Speaker 1: it is similar, but it's an earlier version. What was
Speaker 1: the exact date again, Jimmy, I don't have it in
Speaker 1: front of me, just one more time because I might
Speaker 1: have a lead here on this audio.
Speaker 3: One of the fifth, the fifth.
Speaker 4: It was Tuesday, Tuesday, So if it was Tuesday, then
Speaker 4: it was the fourth, right, Okay, let's look at now.
Speaker 1: That's the weird thing is if you go on Mark
Speaker 1: Stein's audio right where he doesn't even say it's his show,
Speaker 1: but just audio presentations on different dates. And sometimes the
Speaker 1: radio shows looks like in other things, he's got something.
Speaker 1: Let's see Mark Stein's club Land, he calls it, and
Speaker 1: obviously it's for like, you know, an audio recording for
Speaker 1: his you know, for his fans, it's his club members.
Speaker 1: And he puts up other audios on that page. I
Speaker 1: see then one thing for the fifth and then previous
Speaker 1: to that, I see January twenty nine, So it looks
Speaker 1: like once a week he puts up something there, you know.
Speaker 1: And there's also did you call into something that had
Speaker 1: a video aspect to it, Jimmy, do you know? Or
Speaker 1: was it all audio?
Speaker 8: All I heard was audio? I should have just been
Speaker 8: the usual Mark Levin call and.
Speaker 1: Numbered Well, Mark Levin, let's see if we can find
Speaker 1: his podcast archive for that day.
Speaker 3: Even I wonder if somebody hijacked his number.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's a weird time. Well Ppete was wondering if
Speaker 1: somebody hijacked Mark Levin's number, like if somebody stole the
Speaker 1: number temporarily, that would be a scandal in and of itself.
Speaker 2: Or if he called in, well, I don't know because
Speaker 2: you talked to Mark Stein. So unless they're using the
Speaker 2: same business to direct their calls and somebody cross lines
Speaker 2: into the Mark Stein Show and not the Mark Levin Show,
Speaker 2: because what did you say, Ben Ferguson was on. On
Speaker 2: the archive of the website for Mark Levin, it says
Speaker 2: Ben Ferguson was on, and you would not mistake Ben
Speaker 2: Ferguson for Mark Stein.
Speaker 3: There's just no way.
Speaker 2: I don't know unless there isn't the same service to
Speaker 2: direct their calls and they crosspatch you to the wrong show.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and here's the funny thing. Another name adds in
Speaker 1: February fourth of this year, apparently on Tuesday's show, Mark
Speaker 1: Levin Show. It says on his website w M a
Speaker 1: L's Larry O'Connor fills in for Mark.
Speaker 2: Well, well, looking on the very next day, it shows
Speaker 2: Ben Ferguson.
Speaker 3: That's why I said the fifth.
Speaker 1: Well, I don't even see that, Jimmy said.
Speaker 2: He went and looked up and it showed that Ben
Speaker 2: Ferguson and not Mark Stein was on, and then he,
Speaker 2: you know, had the information that the two were suing
Speaker 2: each other years ago, So why would he have Mark
Speaker 2: Stein on this show if they didn't like each other.
Speaker 1: Mark Levins Show. Ben Ferguson from Ben Ferguson Podcast fills
Speaker 1: in for Mark. Yeah, okay, I see that. But do
Speaker 1: you have your date wrong somehow? Maybe, uh, Jimmy, did
Speaker 1: you call it on a different day somehow? You say,
Speaker 1: think I should look at that screen.
Speaker 8: It's only two possibilities, Tuesday or Wednesday.
Speaker 1: Only Tuesday, pretty sure?
Speaker 8: Is Tuesday?
Speaker 1: All right? I mean, I want to help you get
Speaker 1: to the bottom of this, because this is very strange,
Speaker 1: and I mean, ultimately I would have to just assume
Speaker 1: that somehow you're confused about something, because it doesn't make
Speaker 1: any sense that we don't have a radio show that exists.
Speaker 1: You called into a non existent radio show with a
Speaker 1: host that shouldn't have been hosting the radio show you
Speaker 1: called into, is the bottom line, right, So it's weird.
Speaker 8: Don't forget about and don't forget about calling Rush Limb
Speaker 8: boss call Scringer being the call screener. Don't forget that part.
Speaker 1: Right. You should type all these facts together in a
Speaker 1: single email for me. I mean, because I really I
Speaker 1: want to look at this. I want to examine it
Speaker 1: off air, though, because I think it'll be even weirder
Speaker 1: if I dig into it off air. And I'm looking
Speaker 1: at the details on your call here, and let's see.
Speaker 8: You said, was this is Mark Stein filling in for
Speaker 8: the Great One.
Speaker 1: Okay, quick question though, because quick question though. I see Wednesday,
Speaker 1: January twenty nine, eight forty nine pm on the one
Speaker 1: screenshot you sent me when January it says Wednesday.
Speaker 8: I tried to call in. Oh I didn't get through
Speaker 8: that time. Oh, I'm pretty sure it's the Tuesday one.
Speaker 1: All right, I'm sorry, but that's the date I saw.
Speaker 1: So I was just wondering if maybe we're just looking
Speaker 1: at the wrong dates. Here you see, and now I
Speaker 1: see another screenshot which simply says Tuesday. And now I'm
Speaker 1: looking to see if we have the date on your phone.
Speaker 1: I don't see the date visible on your phone, so
Speaker 1: I don't know which Tuesday this is from. And this
Speaker 1: is the one that you think is.
Speaker 8: The the reason that do date is? Because is this Tuesday?
Speaker 1: Right? Okay? But what about this twenty ninth deal though?
Speaker 1: Is that that's not right?
Speaker 8: I can't be this couple of days ago I called
Speaker 8: these people.
Speaker 1: Okay, well, I'm lay ninth.
Speaker 8: That'd be like a week ago.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I'm just letting you know that there is a
Speaker 1: screenshot that has that date on it. That's all. So
Speaker 1: I wasn't sure if you were just sending that to
Speaker 1: me to show me the number, or if that was
Speaker 1: possibly the call. Because if it was possibly the call,
Speaker 1: then we're looking in the wrong places for this thing. Right.
Speaker 2: Well, according to what I find here, both Thirdlist has
Speaker 2: a radio show.
Speaker 3: He returned to radio in twenty one.
Speaker 2: He has a four to five o'clock afternoon show and
Speaker 2: the Saturdays from seven.
Speaker 3: To ten am on WABC and wli R.
Speaker 1: Right, so he's in New York.
Speaker 2: So he's also but he's also he's a senior partner
Speaker 2: of Golden Creative Communications and Let's see and continued with
Speaker 2: EiV for a while after Limbaugh passed away, but then
Speaker 2: I think he stepped down once they found the permanent
Speaker 2: replacement guests and they're using their own I think some
Speaker 2: of the people are still working behind the scenes, but
Speaker 2: I don't think both certainly still with him. Okay, but
Speaker 2: he does still he still is working with involved in
Speaker 2: the publication of Limbaugh's ongoing newsletter that's still continuing.
Speaker 1: So yeah, okay, So on the twenty ninth. The show
Speaker 1: description reads, on Wednesday's Mark Levin showed, the war against
Speaker 1: President Trump has not stopped. We can't let our guard down.
Speaker 1: But clearly he was hosting this one. Yeah. I have
Speaker 1: a hard time figuring out what happened here. Maybe it's
Speaker 1: just me. Perhaps somebody else out there knows the answer,
Speaker 1: and by the way, call in and let us know.
Speaker 3: All I can do is ask Jimmy does he own
Speaker 3: a DeLorean?
Speaker 1: Jimmy James, do you in fact own a DeLorean? And
Speaker 1: do you associate with a crazy looking man named Doc Brown?
Speaker 8: I do not own a Delorian? Okay, and I look
Speaker 8: like the crazy old man.
Speaker 1: There you go.
Speaker 3: Well, I can't explain it.
Speaker 2: I mean you, if you had said I called into
Speaker 2: Mark Levin's show and talked to Mark Stein and not
Speaker 2: gave you the background information that the two were suing
Speaker 2: each other years ago, then I wouldn't have thought anything
Speaker 2: of it, because I would have thought, Okay, well, they
Speaker 2: both connected a inball.
Speaker 3: They probably know each other and it's still on it
Speaker 3: in for each other.
Speaker 2: Yeah, but you know, I'm sure Mark Levin is pretty
Speaker 2: picky about who hosts his show when he's not there. Yeah,
Speaker 2: just because of the type of person that Levin is.
Speaker 2: So but depending on weird though, we do need to
Speaker 2: get to the bottom of this, maybe we can.
Speaker 3: I don't know, Maybe I think we are naked.
Speaker 2: News guy has got some influence and somebody.
Speaker 3: Will hear this story the call in and tell us
Speaker 3: what went on.
Speaker 1: Well, I'm gonna, you know, I'm gonna try to see
Speaker 1: if I can get a hold of somebody that might
Speaker 1: have an inside track on this. Actually, because he produces
Speaker 1: a newsletter that live In participates in and I get
Speaker 1: it all the time and I hardly ever read it.
Speaker 1: But he's a nice guy and sort of friendly with me.
Speaker 1: I'm gonna check with him on this because the more
Speaker 1: I look into the Stein guy, who I never heard of.
Speaker 1: Like I said, he's constantly involved in court actions, which
Speaker 1: I find funny. The radio guy's suing everybody, you.
Speaker 2: Know, Well, no, it's usually him getting sued, or these
Speaker 2: recent ones of him suing somebody else has been people
Speaker 2: that had gone out there and completely defamed him by,
Speaker 2: you know, making claims that he didn't say he claims.
Speaker 1: Yeah, but he's also.
Speaker 3: Involved in lawsuits.
Speaker 2: So the whole time he's been practicing his trade Mark
Speaker 2: Stein is you know, he's one of those ones.
Speaker 3: He called himself the undocumented.
Speaker 1: Well, you're saying Levin is involved in court cases all
Speaker 1: the time? Or Stein Stein? Yeah? Yeah, Okay, No, I
Speaker 1: I'm sorry, I misunderstood you. I thought you said Levin
Speaker 1: because I was going to say, I have no knowledge
Speaker 1: of that.
Speaker 2: But Stein has been involved, his biggest ones have been
Speaker 2: involved with, like dealing with Canada and some of these
Speaker 2: other nations and some of these ridiculous slander laws crap
Speaker 2: like that.
Speaker 1: To take that, well, but that would be uh, you're
Speaker 1: saying Stein or I'm sorry again, Okay, I would think
Speaker 1: would be more interested in the contents putty straightforward.
Speaker 2: I don't think he gets involved enough and sticks his
Speaker 2: neck out unless he's damn sure he's right.
Speaker 3: I mean, that's the thing about Levin.
Speaker 2: No, I I'd hate to have to go up against
Speaker 2: Levin with any lawyer.
Speaker 1: That I don't I don't want to make a judgment
Speaker 1: about that. I'm just saying that I don't see him
Speaker 1: as the kind of guy who's getting involved in lawsuits
Speaker 1: all the time. But maybe it's just me. But this
Speaker 1: Stein guy, right there, you go, that's a good way
Speaker 1: to put it. I agree with that absolutely. That's what
Speaker 1: I'm seeing all over the places. He's involved in lawsuits,
Speaker 1: and like I said, at one point, he's got he's
Speaker 1: suing and he says he's doing it on behalf of
Speaker 1: his employees, and then he's suing somebody else for breach
Speaker 1: of contract, and then he's you know, it's just he's
Speaker 1: obviously he's a guy who I'm looking at as a
Speaker 1: media guy, going I don't want Stein around me anyway. Sorry,
Speaker 1: go ahead, yeah, yeah, Jimmy, go ahead, Chuck.
Speaker 8: Are you still on that guy's website, the Stein's website.
Speaker 8: I don't know why current website.
Speaker 1: I might still have the tab open. I was trying
Speaker 1: to add somebody by a skype, but what what's on?
Speaker 8: I was going to have you open. That shows something
Speaker 8: to you. But if there's someone waiting and go ahead and.
Speaker 1: Get him on, well I'll do that too. But either way,
Speaker 1: let me go. Let me look at the Stein thing
Speaker 1: real fast. See if I got a tab open. I'm
Speaker 1: managing a bunch of things, you know, while I'm broadcasting
Speaker 1: and trying to help.
Speaker 8: You too, So I'll tell you what to look for
Speaker 8: that I found interesting when I looked at Stein's Okay
Speaker 8: website got the comments section one of the freak. One
Speaker 8: of the frequent commenters was James Olsen. Who's he Well,
Speaker 8: he's the guy in the eighties who would later have
Speaker 8: James Jesus Ankleton's job. He was the former head of
Speaker 8: countertelligence at CIA. So I'll just put that out there.
Speaker 8: Couldn't be just a guy at the same.
Speaker 1: Name to saying it could be could be a common
Speaker 1: you know name, and could be could be you know,
Speaker 1: much like I have a I literally have a Michael J.
Speaker 1: Fox as a listener, but it's not you know, the
Speaker 1: Michael J. Fox. He donated like two dollars to me
Speaker 1: last month or something, so I wasn't even gonna mention him,
Speaker 1: but you just reminded me of that funny thing that
Speaker 1: I got a donation from Michael J. Fox for two dollars. Uh.
Speaker 1: And apparently he listens to the show because he attached
Speaker 1: a comment to his donation. So anyway, weird enough. Let
Speaker 1: me put you on hold and see what else.
Speaker 8: Come on, Sarach, what are we doing here?
Speaker 1: What happened?
Speaker 8: Come man, I'm sorry all of a sudden hearted to
Speaker 8: go into Michael J.
Speaker 1: F Oh I'm sorry. I all of a sudden, I
Speaker 1: thought we had a you had such a completely different voice.
Speaker 1: I thought we had a problem with our phone. Anyway,
Speaker 1: what time is it, bpgs. We're probably almost out of
Speaker 1: time now, huh.
Speaker 3: Oh, let's see. I got about what five t No,
Speaker 3: it's about seven till. Maybe see what the computer says.
Speaker 1: Okay, so we got about six minutes till the Age
Speaker 1: of Transitions begins and Tikrulos will be on his show,
Speaker 1: the guy who wrote about that real life guy who
Speaker 1: dressed up like Super Patriots superhero and did some crazy stuff.
Speaker 1: If you don't remember t Rulos, you will after you
Speaker 1: listen to the Age of Transitions and Uncle tonight, because
Speaker 1: I think he's gonna be on for both hours. And
Speaker 1: he's definitely like a a outside of the realms of
Speaker 1: normal writer. And he followed this guy around who literally
Speaker 1: dressed up like I forget what the guy's name was,
Speaker 1: but it was like Super Patriot or something. I think
Speaker 1: I saw Aaron in our chat room. Maybe he'll help
Speaker 1: me out with that real quick and remind me what
Speaker 1: the name of the Super Patriots superhero was. Yeah, time
Speaker 1: to call a spade a spade in the digital propaganda
Speaker 1: space anyway, that's just a funny random cum I'm at
Speaker 1: first thing I saw from our friend Aaron Franz in
Speaker 1: the chat. But Aaron, yeah, remind me of what the takrwos.
Speaker 1: Maybe I'll just look it up real fast, b Pete.
Speaker 1: You know, I'm gonna put Jimmy on hold. Yeah, Jimmy's
Speaker 1: on hold. Now. I want to give them, you know,
Speaker 1: some little shout outs or whatever at the end, if
Speaker 1: they want to do that. I don't want to steal
Speaker 1: from Aaron, but that's pretty much what we're going to
Speaker 1: give him. The Phantom Patriot that was the name of it.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Aaron. He wrote about this guy, the Phantom Patriot,
Speaker 1: who was a real life guy. And you know, go
Speaker 1: ahead and do a Google image search on that if
Speaker 1: you want to give yourself a weird little how didn't
Speaker 1: I read this news story when it happened? Kind of
Speaker 1: moment anyway, real popular. I don't think he'd even make
Speaker 1: the news today, you know, given these strange times in
Speaker 1: which we live in now, you know, much like I
Speaker 1: think the whole you know, this is an issue we
Speaker 1: didn't even get to talk about. I wish we did
Speaker 1: because I wanted your opinion on something, your opinion regarding
Speaker 1: this hole. We're gonna we're gonna take over the guys
Speaker 1: the strip and it's gonna be beautiful, and it's gonna
Speaker 1: be a big real estate project, sounded like to me.
Speaker 1: And they're just gonna clear people out, and Egypt and
Speaker 1: Jordan are gonna be happy to see the Palestinians. Some
Speaker 1: of that statement, I think you would even have to
Speaker 1: say is bs. I mean, nobody wants the Palestinians.
Speaker 2: Oh, that's what I was just about to say, you know,
Speaker 2: a comment like that, like you're just gonna move Palestinians.
Speaker 3: The Palestinians went.
Speaker 2: To Jordan, tried to go over throw the place and
Speaker 2: killed the king's brother and they got kicked out, and
Speaker 2: then they went to Lebanon.
Speaker 3: So we know we're not going to resettle any of
Speaker 3: them in.
Speaker 2: Lebanon because his Belah is not gonna put up with
Speaker 2: a bunch of moss people come up there and tramping
Speaker 2: on their ground. Egypt certainly ain't gonna put up with
Speaker 2: it because the military regime that's in place now are
Speaker 2: the ones that are person keeping.
Speaker 3: The Muslim brotherhood in prison. So yeah, that one. I
Speaker 3: never understood that comment. I mean I could see it.
Speaker 2: I could see investment in the area and trying to
Speaker 2: build it back up.
Speaker 3: And given the Palestinians a Champs team.
Speaker 2: You know, have a solid economy that they can live
Speaker 2: in support off of.
Speaker 3: But that'll never happen.
Speaker 2: They had the opportunity back when Israel pulled out and
Speaker 2: gave them all the infrastructure. They went toward up made
Speaker 2: missiles out of it, so that craft shoot, I'm sorry,
Speaker 2: throw darts at the board to find an answer to
Speaker 2: that one, because you ain't never going to fix that problem,
Speaker 2: but you rein screwed it up royally when they came
Speaker 2: up with a division of countries. I just find it
Speaker 2: fascinating that after what sixty some odd years, nobody has
Speaker 2: a problem with any of the other countries like Jordan
Speaker 2: and Syria and Lebanon and Iraq and i Ran and
Speaker 2: all of these places got rearranged and everybody's happy with
Speaker 2: it except that one piece of real estate.
Speaker 3: So love figuring that one out.
Speaker 1: Well, here's the point that I wanted to get to
Speaker 1: with you is even examining that statement. And even if
Speaker 1: you want to support do something about it, you can't
Speaker 1: make sense out of that, because, first of all, nobody's
Speaker 1: gonna want them. And you can't make sense of Trump's
Speaker 1: statement because on the one hand, he saying, we're gonna
Speaker 1: let everybody in there, but we're getting the Palestinians out,
Speaker 1: We're gonna build a nice real estate and get rid
Speaker 1: of the bombs. We're also gonna send the military there,
Speaker 1: and we're gonna own it.
Speaker 2: And the predictions, well, you know when what you came
Speaker 2: out with it, it was we're going to go in there,
Speaker 2: We're going to clear out all the bombs and everything
Speaker 2: and all the booby traps.
Speaker 3: That alone is going to take you fifteen years. Okay,
Speaker 3: but that's my point. He says, Then we'll build this riviera.
Speaker 2: On the Mediterranean, And I'm sitting here thinking, ain't no
Speaker 2: way in hell you're gonna be. You know, you're competing
Speaker 2: with Dubai and Katar and all these other glorious places
Speaker 2: to go visit to where you know they don't immediately
Speaker 2: confiscate your Bible when you cross the second you get
Speaker 2: off the plane.
Speaker 3: So, like I said, trying to figure that one out.
Speaker 3: Good luck Trump.
Speaker 2: Now, if you can keep the place of peace, more
Speaker 2: power to you look at your work cut.
Speaker 1: Out for that, that would be a miracle enough. And
Speaker 1: if he destroys everything else he touches and just accomplishes that,
Speaker 1: you have to say that's miraculous. But my point is
Speaker 1: that even his own statement doesn't make sense, is all.
Speaker 1: I'm saying. You can't put these things together and also combined. Yeah,
Speaker 1: we're just gonna send the military in there. I don't
Speaker 1: see how anybody sat there and went, yeah, this makes sense.
Speaker 1: But his regular supporters all in, you know, you're gonna.
Speaker 2: See you're gonna see a bunch more money flow towards Israel.
Speaker 2: You're gonna see a lot more weapons flow towards Israel.
Speaker 1: Agree, But the minute.
Speaker 2: He starts talking about boots on the ground there, you're
Speaker 2: going to see his base say, oh wait a fucking minute.
Speaker 1: Uh okay, if you say so. I don't know if
Speaker 1: they're going to push back, is my point.
Speaker 2: I think that I think people are tired of sending
Speaker 2: our guys over full wars that end up being in.
Speaker 3: A quagmire for twenty years.
Speaker 2: Well you can bet if we've got people in goss
Speaker 2: so we're gonna be there for twenty years.
Speaker 1: Well, I want to believe you, BPTE. I really do,
Speaker 1: but I'm having a hard time believing it. I'm having
Speaker 1: a hard time believing that people are going to be
Speaker 1: rational about anything because bottom line is, they've supported everything
Speaker 1: regardless of what he said so far. If you're on
Speaker 1: his side, you're on his side. That's it. I mean literally,
Speaker 1: it's like all of his supporters have taken the same
Speaker 1: loyalty pledge. In my mind, I mean, I know that
Speaker 1: sounds crazy, but when you can agree no, that's a
Speaker 1: good idea. Glad, glad, he's doing the right thing. Based
Speaker 1: on that statement, you know he's doing the right thing.
Speaker 1: Because if that's true, I mean, then clearly the person
Speaker 1: I'm talking to has no concept of the problem there
Speaker 1: to begin with, because it makes no sense. If you
Speaker 1: want to tell me that it's a beautiful piece of
Speaker 1: realistic that could be turned into a wonderful resort. True,
Speaker 1: that is absolutely true. It's supposed to be. But the
Speaker 1: way things are, none of that makes any sense. Anyways.
Speaker 3: That's what Lebanon, Well, think about it.
Speaker 2: That's what Lebanon was at one time, a nice little
Speaker 2: Christian country, and look at what it is now with
Speaker 2: the war zone.
Speaker 1: It was it was a wonderful piece of real estate also,
Speaker 1: but regardless of why it is no longer and you've
Speaker 1: got to admit the problem is more complex than any
Speaker 1: of what you heard, and any of what you've heard
Speaker 1: for the past thirty years for sure when I was
Speaker 1: paying attention to it, and you know, went beyond propaganda.
Speaker 1: So no matter how you stand on it, we got problems. Anyway,
Speaker 1: I'm over time here and we're all done, and I
Speaker 1: want to thank you guys for calling in for joining
Speaker 1: us this week. I guess we just got Danny and
Speaker 1: Jimmy James on the show, but you know what, anybody
Speaker 1: else that calls in, I'd love to have you join.
Speaker 1: I tried to join somebody by a Skype, but the
Speaker 1: Skype wouldn't allow it, I guess, so you know, I'll
Speaker 1: have to just use a regular call in line next time,
Speaker 1: and we will do this again in a week. So
Speaker 1: I want to thank you guys and let you know
Speaker 1: that you know, at all times it's helpful if you
Speaker 1: support the network. I'm trying to expand. I'm reaching out
Speaker 1: to new people, not just for guest interviews on my show,
Speaker 1: but you know, potential new shows. Maybe I want to
Speaker 1: get some more things started. I want to get more done,
Speaker 1: more going. I want to give you guys more to
Speaker 1: listen to on the twenty four to seven radio stream
Speaker 1: that we have, even though there's not a lot of
Speaker 1: listeners to it. I want to get more people back
Speaker 1: into the podcast and
Speaker 4: Stra