Speaker 1: I'm nervous about this one.
Speaker 2: Yeah, me too.
Speaker 1: I'm really nervous about this one. You know, it's interesting.
Speaker 3: We couldn't get any mainstream media's outlets to pay attention
Speaker 3: to those interviews, and nobody would really give Sarah a voice.
Speaker 3: Now everybody wants to give Sarah a voice because, oh
Speaker 3: guess what, the fucking CIA targeter was actually right. Mainstream
Speaker 3: media gave her no attention. So that's been going crazy.
Speaker 4: Whew.
Speaker 2: I'm nervous about this one too. If you guys watched
Speaker 2: the episode that I put out last night, you already
Speaker 2: know kind of my perspective on this. So today I
Speaker 2: reached out to FBI whistleblower recovering FBI agents Steve Friend,
Speaker 2: to give me his opinion as to what we've witnessed.
Speaker 2: He had already watched this interview with Sam schu Mate
Speaker 2: and Sean Ryan. He's also familiar with the interview with Sarah,
Speaker 2: so I pepper him with a bunch of questions as
Speaker 2: to what he thinks about their theses or hypothesis, and
Speaker 2: he agrees with some of it, disagrees with some of it.
Speaker 2: But I didn't actually have these clips qued up to
Speaker 2: run for him. So I'm going to go through some
Speaker 2: of the highlights that I feel as if Steve kind
Speaker 2: of dismissed in a way that I probably would not.
Speaker 2: I think that these are are much more worthy of consideration.
Speaker 2: He seemed to dismiss some of them. So let's check
Speaker 2: it out.
Speaker 5: What do you think I told the guys down this downstairs?
Speaker 5: You know, I I jokingly said this to my wife
Speaker 5: the day that I got that email, because I read
Speaker 5: the email to her.
Speaker 1: You all have heard the email.
Speaker 5: Now, you realize, without context of who this person is,
Speaker 5: how just crazy it sounds. And I told her, I said, well,
Speaker 5: I mean, I guess if the dude ends up getting
Speaker 5: rolled up by the Feds or he gets killed, we
Speaker 5: uh we got a story. Huh man. It was last
Speaker 5: words right, that's uh so. And I want to get
Speaker 5: context on one of the things I saw this. I
Speaker 5: saw this going around on social media. People were saying
Speaker 5: that his signal chat is safety number changed. I don't
Speaker 5: know if you saw this on X, but it was
Speaker 5: all over X. Apparently his safety number on signal change.
Speaker 5: He messaged me on signal So I went on there
Speaker 5: to look myself to see if it changed, and sure enough,
Speaker 5: it had on January first, after the bombing, after.
Speaker 1: He was dead, his safety number change. That's all he
Speaker 1: sent me.
Speaker 5: He said, initial contact and I gave a thumbs up,
Speaker 5: and his safety number changed.
Speaker 1: At the bottom. Look at that. That's after he's dead.
Speaker 5: I don't know enough about signal to know why that
Speaker 5: would happen.
Speaker 1: Somebody has to have manipulated that though and messed with it.
Speaker 5: Somebody had to have been in his account after the
Speaker 5: fact and done something for that to have changed.
Speaker 2: So, as I said yesterday, I didn't think that this
Speaker 2: signal chat change was proven or that it was, you know,
Speaker 2: a smoking gun. Per se. This gentleman, Sam, he was
Speaker 2: in contact with the men who committed this act, and
Speaker 2: I am now convinced that in fact it was Matthew Livelsburger.
Speaker 2: But it is U. It's absolute fascinating because this guy
Speaker 2: was reaching out to Sam Schumante saying, I want to
Speaker 2: speak to Pete Hegseth in coming SECTEF, I want to
Speaker 2: talk to Sean Ryan, I want to talk to Fox News.
Speaker 2: He's like he's imploring, he's begging him. He's saying, I
Speaker 2: have information that could prevent a world war. That's what
Speaker 2: he says. In this email now. He then goes on
Speaker 2: to talk about this drone technology, which I probably should
Speaker 2: have aston Forbes back on because he's talking about anti
Speaker 2: gravity technology for these orbs and that essentially China can
Speaker 2: attack us at any moment on our East coast. And
Speaker 2: I have no idea if there's any validity to that,
Speaker 2: But what it does seem is that the FBI or
Speaker 2: some three letter agency had to have had access to
Speaker 2: this guy's phone, because you can't. I don't think you
Speaker 2: can change that security code after he's deceased unless they
Speaker 2: do that. I don't think that there's a backdoor and
Speaker 2: a signal, but you know, there probably is. I don't know.
Speaker 2: And if they don't have his phone, do they do that?
Speaker 2: So if they do have a backdoor, I guess they
Speaker 2: could do it that way. If they do have his phone,
Speaker 2: I guess they could do it that way. Was his
Speaker 2: phone not destroyed in the explosion. I don't know. Lots
Speaker 2: more questions and answers on that topic, but I just
Speaker 2: wanted to circle back to that issue with the signal
Speaker 2: chat because this guy experienced the same thing himself, and
Speaker 2: he was actually in contact with this guy before he
Speaker 2: committed this act so big time.
Speaker 1: Very capable guy.
Speaker 5: But he loads the Tesla up, a Tesla which Elon
Speaker 5: Musk brags about being bulletproof, right, so this is one
Speaker 5: of his his selling points, his bulletproof. He even saw
Speaker 5: Joe Rogan shoot an arrow at it and wasn't able.
Speaker 1: To puncture this thing.
Speaker 5: So he loads up a Tesla knowing that it's gonna,
Speaker 5: you know, not explode like he wants it to with
Speaker 5: fireworks and in a bunch of other junk. When he
Speaker 5: can make a car bomb that's going to level this place.
Speaker 5: Here's what I think. So the PO, the Army PO,
Speaker 5: is saying that the body inside the.
Speaker 1: Cab did not match the DNA of his child.
Speaker 5: All right, we also know that there was no They
Speaker 5: said he was shot by a desert eagle. We know
Speaker 5: that there was no signature when it rolled up, so
Speaker 5: nobody shot themselves. When it rolled up to it, you
Speaker 5: would have seen a large signature. Mister guns and year,
Speaker 5: he's on X. He goes into this a lot in depth.
Speaker 5: He's a firearms expert and he talks about this. There's
Speaker 5: no signature, So this is what happens. You get a
Speaker 5: Tesla because you know it can drive itself up to
Speaker 5: the hotel, the Trump Tower, you put a body in it,
Speaker 5: roll it up, it's already burned up, or it's already shot.
Speaker 5: Excuse me, you don't want to kill anybody, because that's
Speaker 5: not the message you're trying to send. You're not trying
Speaker 5: to level the tower or kill a bunch of people.
Speaker 5: So you load it up with firearms or fireworks and
Speaker 5: a bunch of junk to send a message. And we
Speaker 5: know that his signal number or his signal safety number changed.
Speaker 5: That can't be done unless you're inside that signal account.
Speaker 5: And a lot of people conjecture, was the FBI inside
Speaker 5: a signal account?
Speaker 1: Whatever else? But what if he accidentally changed his safety? No,
Speaker 1: goofed up there.
Speaker 5: He rolled a body up in a tesla specifically because
Speaker 5: a tesla can drive itself up to the tower, and
Speaker 5: did what he did to send a message to.
Speaker 1: Expose this stuff. And he's still alive out there somewhere.
Speaker 3: Well, the other answer to a lot of questions, The
Speaker 3: other thing is maybe the FBI wasn't in this phone.
Speaker 1: Maybe.
Speaker 3: I mean, this guy's obviously very competent. I mean he was,
Speaker 3: He's got a TSSCI clearance. Where the polygraph. It's been
Speaker 3: associated with Yususak. Obviously, he was on this operation in
Speaker 3: twenty nineteen. By the way, the general in charge of
Speaker 3: that was General Miller. You'll see that in the email
Speaker 3: that we post on X later after this interview comes out.
Speaker 3: You know, maybe he changed his number on purpose and
Speaker 3: switched phones because he obviously was tipped off for or
Speaker 3: conducted his own counter surveillance and caught Homeland or FBI
Speaker 3: tracking him. And so I think there's a very good
Speaker 3: possibility that this that that Matthew Livelsburger might be still alive.
Speaker 2: Holy shit, I'll just I'll just say that to that.
Speaker 2: I didn't even think about that. But if it's true,
Speaker 2: that all right. So they received this Shoemaker guy, or
Speaker 2: maybe with Sean Ryan, one of them receives a contact
Speaker 2: from someone in the government saying that, hey, just so
Speaker 2: you know, the reason he did this, essentially is because
Speaker 2: he found out that his child was not his own.
Speaker 2: But then they according to the DNA. According to Shoemaker,
Speaker 2: I don't know if he's right about this, but he's
Speaker 2: saying that the DNA of the body inside of the
Speaker 2: cyber truck does not match his child. So maybe in fact,
Speaker 2: that is his child, but that's not his body, and
Speaker 2: they are setting the narrative. You see the you see
Speaker 2: the frame that that would create. Oly shit. I mean,
Speaker 2: all right, So, I think the other thing that makes
Speaker 2: my interview with Steve Friend different in analysis from what
Speaker 2: Sean Ryan and Schumaker are saying is that, like he's
Speaker 2: from the FBI. Steve Friend is from the FBI. I
Speaker 2: don't think that these are like, by and large, really
Speaker 2: high level operators, like they're kind of bums. Not Steve.
Speaker 2: I'm talking about the rest of them. Sean Ryan is
Speaker 2: like he knows all of the elite special forces in
Speaker 2: the military, so when he's analyzing this, he's he's thinking
Speaker 2: in terms of this is a really capable soldier. This
Speaker 2: is not some crazy person that just sent an email
Speaker 2: and then lost his mind and go blows himself up
Speaker 2: in front of the Trump International Hotel. That's kind of
Speaker 2: what Steve friend thesis is on this. Sean Ryan's saying, no,
Speaker 2: don't think so. In fact, I don't even think he's dead.
Speaker 2: I think that he changed his signal security protocols after
Speaker 2: that event because he was probably being tracked by DHS
Speaker 2: or the FBI or whatever. Whoa, Oh shit, this is
Speaker 2: so big, like sweating just thinking about what this could mean.
Speaker 2: Oh god, all right, a little bit.
Speaker 1: More another thing to support this. So you got the email.
Speaker 5: He desperately wanted to talk to you before December thirty first.
Speaker 5: He knew, he knew beyond a shadow of the doubt.
Speaker 5: January first, was Godey. This is nobody was pressuring him.
Speaker 5: At the beginning of this email. We see, first of all,
Speaker 5: I'm not under arrest or hostile influence or control.
Speaker 1: Okay, So he says that he reached out to you.
Speaker 5: He was very emphatic that it had to be before
Speaker 5: December thirty first, because he was doing this thing on
Speaker 5: January first. For some reason, that was a landmark day
Speaker 5: to him. Maybe it was just because big, big day
Speaker 5: for everybody, January first, but.
Speaker 1: He was very emphatic that that was the time.
Speaker 4: And then.
Speaker 5: The thing he was trying to do was overall, more
Speaker 5: than anything, was get a message across on the biggest
Speaker 5: platforms possible. He was trying to talk to Pete. Hegseth,
Speaker 5: why would you want to talk to the Secretary of Defense.
Speaker 5: He's trying to blow the whistle on these war crimes.
Speaker 5: He's trying to say this thing happened, man, like, I
Speaker 5: can't live with this anymore. He you needed to talk
Speaker 5: to you, the biggest platform out there. He needed to
Speaker 5: talk to Fox News. I need to get this message out.
Speaker 5: That was his overall goal in everything else, everything I've seen,
Speaker 5: I have not seen the intended goal was to kill
Speaker 5: himself or to to create a mass casualty event. It
Speaker 5: is to get this message out. And how can I
Speaker 5: How can I do that? What is the biggest bang
Speaker 5: for my buck? How can I get that done? That's
Speaker 5: what I'm seeing here.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, it's a damn good point.
Speaker 2: So this is exactly what I was theorizing last night,
Speaker 2: that this was about the symbolic nature of the attack.
Speaker 2: It was not about creating mass casualties. This guy would
Speaker 2: have been totally capable of doing so if that was
Speaker 2: his intention, But to do it in nice cyber truck,
Speaker 2: this futuristic, flashy, you know, metal vehicle in front of
Speaker 2: Trump International Hotel, which is going to be the incoming president,
Speaker 2: Like that is symbolic. Now, what Sarah Adams was saying
Speaker 2: is like that's that's the al Qaeda and that it's
Speaker 2: all about symbolic nature of the target. Well in this case,
Speaker 2: because we have lots of evidence that this guy is
Speaker 2: trying to convey this dire warning, this message that he
Speaker 2: is being stiff armed at every turn. He's probably also
Speaker 2: be hunted by the intel agencies because they know what
Speaker 2: he's about to do in terms of like telling blowing
Speaker 2: the whistle. Well, maybe that's why he does this in
Speaker 2: this way. Maybe he's not the body in the vehicle.
Speaker 2: I don't know. But the underlying message that he's trying
Speaker 2: to convey is one this warning about these orbs, which
Speaker 2: Steve Friend writes off as him being some schizo maybe,
Speaker 2: But the other aspect that he's trying to convey is
Speaker 2: that he participated or he is at least privy. I'll
Speaker 2: have to watch back the interview with Sean Ryan, but
Speaker 2: he's privy to war crimes that happened in twenty nineteen.
Speaker 2: Sean Ryan actually pulls up the article during this interview
Speaker 2: and demonstrates that, yeah, it looks like there was somewhere
Speaker 2: in the neighborhood of thirty five or so civilians in
Speaker 2: Afghanistan that were killed and it was a war crime,
Speaker 2: and that that's the big thing that this guy's trying
Speaker 2: to convey. So that plus the ORBS is like, that's
Speaker 2: the message he's trying to get out to the world.
Speaker 2: I don't know if that's what his motivations were. I
Speaker 2: certainly don't know if he's still alive. I mean, all
Speaker 2: of this is so crazy. It's hard. It's hard to
Speaker 2: come to any conclusion at all as to what we're
Speaker 2: talking about here. But this story feels like it's just
Speaker 2: getting started, like this is not the end. We got
Speaker 2: one more, one more clip and they'll get in the
Speaker 2: interview with Steve Friend, Wow.
Speaker 6: Wow.
Speaker 3: Do you think there was any correlation between him and
Speaker 3: the New Orleans attack?
Speaker 1: No, I don't either.
Speaker 5: I looked at all that. I looked at the posts.
Speaker 5: I looked at that. You know, people are scrambling for news.
Speaker 5: Everybody wants to post something. I want to be the
Speaker 5: guy on social media to post the.
Speaker 1: The groundbreaking thing.
Speaker 5: And I saw these connections to for Brag and they
Speaker 5: deployed together at this time, great, so did half a
Speaker 5: million of the rest of us. I was at Fort Bragg.
Speaker 5: Oh Man, tie me to Delta Force. I must have
Speaker 5: been part of Delta Force, And some slip said, no,
Speaker 5: I had nothing to do with them. You know, it's
Speaker 5: this nonsense. It's a big it's a big organization. The
Speaker 5: Army is very large. You're picking things out and you're
Speaker 5: trying to make this a thing. That New Orleans guy
Speaker 5: was a staff sergeant who got out of the active
Speaker 5: duty Army in twenty fifteen and he was in the
Speaker 5: reserves until twenty twenty. People are saying in the last
Speaker 5: year he was radicalized. I talked to multiple of his
Speaker 5: peers to include I'm gonna be very very careful with
Speaker 5: this former leadership. I'm not gonna give what echelon they
Speaker 5: were at former leadership of his. There was no indication
Speaker 5: at all back then that he was radicalized. He didn't
Speaker 5: say record. I've seen the posts. I saw several people
Speaker 5: who were saying what we have confirmed posts that he
Speaker 5: was saying radical Islamic things. I don't believe it, because
Speaker 5: nobody he worked with confirmed that. They said, no, we
Speaker 5: had no indication that he was like this. And if
Speaker 5: you talk to people now, they said in the last
Speaker 5: year he was radicalized. He started taking on these more
Speaker 5: radical teachings of Islam and everything else, and he had
Speaker 5: this he fell into financial hardship and all these other things.
Speaker 5: So you're telling me this guy who was a former
Speaker 5: former forty two Alpha s one guy human resources pushes
Speaker 5: your paper and then an IT guy twenty five Bravo
Speaker 5: is somehow connected to a Green Bereat team sergeant out
Speaker 5: of a tender.
Speaker 1: No.
Speaker 3: Well, also, they found an ISIS flag in New Orleans,
Speaker 3: which they didn't find any of that here.
Speaker 2: So that was their take on the Louisiana attack New
Speaker 2: Orleans attack yesterday or two days ago now, And I
Speaker 2: don't know, I tend to agree with their assessment, And
Speaker 2: as Steve Friend and I discussed in a bit, we
Speaker 2: both come to the same conclusion that, yeah, these guys,
Speaker 2: sure they were station at Fort Bragg, but probably not
Speaker 2: related in terms of the attack, despite the fact that
Speaker 2: they're both vehicular terrorist attacks on the same day, within
Speaker 2: hours of each other, rented from the same company. Yeah,
Speaker 2: I know, that's a lot's a lot of coincidences to
Speaker 2: write off, and I'm not gonna say definitively that they
Speaker 2: aren't connected, but given the difference the different angles of
Speaker 2: these two events, it does seem as if these guys
Speaker 2: probably weren't doing things for the same reason. At least,
Speaker 2: I'll leave it at that. Let's give in the interview
Speaker 2: with Steve Friend. This is a fascinating one. You will
Speaker 2: learn a lot. Steve is a wealth of information and knowledge,
Speaker 2: and he absolutely is interested in the truth. He's a
Speaker 2: really good guy. And you know, every time I say
Speaker 2: that about an FBI age and I feel really weird,
Speaker 2: but I just think the world of him. He's an awesome,
Speaker 2: awesome dude. And I hope that he will get hired
Speaker 2: by Cash Hotel because we need people like him if
Speaker 2: the FBI is going to exist. Trust me, you want
Speaker 2: someone like Steve Frenn in there and not the current
Speaker 2: fucking scumbags. All right, enjoy, we're.
Speaker 7: Here inside the New Orleans tire home. You can see
Speaker 7: that it's been clearly destroyed the door at least from
Speaker 7: the FBI rad yesterday. But if we walk through the home,
Speaker 7: we see some signs of what he was up to.
Speaker 7: He had this work area here, lots of different chemicals
Speaker 7: splayed around and different electronics. This is again a work
Speaker 7: set up, left receipts just very unkemped in here. If
Speaker 7: we go over here, actually you can see the Department
Speaker 7: of Justice documents here, the search warrant and the property
Speaker 7: that they recorded here, which seems to be a lot
Speaker 7: of chemicals.
Speaker 2: This is what spurred my decision to invite back on
Speaker 2: recovering FBI agent's Steve friend, Steve, this is bizarre, To
Speaker 2: put it mildly, This is Jenny Tare. She is a
Speaker 2: New York Post Texas reporter covering the border and immigration,
Speaker 2: and she has given access to what I would assume
Speaker 2: is probably the most important investigative crime scene in America today.
Speaker 2: What the fuck am I looking at, Steve?
Speaker 8: Well, thanks for having me back. She was under better circumstances.
Speaker 8: That's definitely the most important crime scene of twenty twenty
Speaker 8: five so far.
Speaker 2: Right.
Speaker 4: Look, here's what.
Speaker 8: From what I understand, happened there, and there are a
Speaker 8: lot of red flags around it. The FBI were supposed
Speaker 8: to believe, conducted a full search warrant at that location
Speaker 8: and then turned it back over to the property owner,
Speaker 8: and then that individual allowed the New York Post to
Speaker 8: walk in and report on what's being on the inside.
Speaker 8: But for us to come to that conclusion that that
Speaker 8: was wholly innocent and nothing was at least strange about it,
Speaker 8: we would have to overlook certain things like the fact
Speaker 8: that the FBI conduct the search warrant at the residence
Speaker 8: of a terrorist and didn't take the bomb making material
Speaker 8: or the electronics or the laptop.
Speaker 2: Sign there's a laptop sitting.
Speaker 8: There, yes, And there's also a very interesting receipt for
Speaker 8: property that's on the kitchen counter. So just a little
Speaker 8: bit inside baseball here. When you execute a search warrant,
Speaker 8: you have to leave a copy of the warrant Fourth
Speaker 8: Amendment to make sure that you can't do it illegal
Speaker 8: search and seizure without a warrant, So they leave that
Speaker 8: there that's appropriate, And then you leave a receipt for
Speaker 8: the items that you took, so it's an inventory so
Speaker 8: the person would know what was taken.
Speaker 4: Right.
Speaker 8: Sure, that's triplicate, like the old school pink carbon you
Speaker 8: lean down on hard to make sure that it gets
Speaker 8: pushed on through handwritten. Yet that one is typed, which
Speaker 8: would mean they went back to the office and typed
Speaker 8: it up independently and brought it back over or and
Speaker 8: yet didn't have time to secure the back door.
Speaker 2: Right, So what what do you make of that?
Speaker 8: You know, I was speculating and looked very clear speculation.
Speaker 8: But now and when I speculate, I'm just saying it's
Speaker 8: not a zero chance probability. I'm now rising it up
Speaker 8: up maybe into double digit chances of probability. That the
Speaker 8: reason that they were able to react so quickly to
Speaker 8: this individual and within nine hours they had a potential
Speaker 8: co conspirators, they had locations, they had IEDs when it's
Speaker 8: taken four years to get yet another grainy video from
Speaker 8: the j six PI bomb put out, was that he
Speaker 8: was not just on their radar in the sense that
Speaker 8: somebody saw a Muslim and called the FBI because they're
Speaker 8: a racist, and the FBI dismisses it, as they should,
Speaker 8: but he was on their radar because they already had
Speaker 8: an investigation open on him, an assessment up, preliminary investigation,
Speaker 8: or a full investigation. And they were doing the thing
Speaker 8: that I have been banging the drum on for the
Speaker 8: last two years, and that is they have the hubrist
Speaker 8: to believe that they set out the bread crumbs for
Speaker 8: the would be terrorists who would never commit an act
Speaker 8: but for the involvement of the FBI. That's called entrapment,
Speaker 8: but it's at a little bit narrow in the illegal
Speaker 8: interpretation of entrapment.
Speaker 4: They set out the bread crumbs.
Speaker 8: So that they can spring the trap on him when
Speaker 8: he agrees to go and push the button for the
Speaker 8: device that is an inert device that the FBI gave him,
Speaker 8: But they have the hubris to think that it will
Speaker 8: work because it always has worked, and they never for
Speaker 8: a minute think that maybe the guy will just not
Speaker 8: take the next breadcrumb and say, you know, this sounds
Speaker 8: overly complicated, in a logistical nightmare and expensive and a headache,
Speaker 8: I think I'll just hop in my F one fifty
Speaker 8: and roll down a Bourbon street and run over a
Speaker 8: bunch of infidels and wake up in paradise. Right.
Speaker 2: Well, this is exactly what I was theorizing on my
Speaker 2: episode yesterday where I broke all this down, And it
Speaker 2: looks to me that, you know, as you've just detailed,
Speaker 2: it's a common practice for the FBI to teach potential
Speaker 2: domestic extremists or terrorists how to build bombs, but they
Speaker 2: are inert. The fact that this guy had multiple IDs
Speaker 2: placed throughout the city, that there is in fact surveillance
Speaker 2: footage of him rolling out what looks like like ice
Speaker 2: coolers that are filled with them, and none of them
Speaker 2: go off. My thought process, or my initial assessment was
Speaker 2: that this guy expects these bombs to go off. They don't.
Speaker 2: He panics, he still wants to meet allat or whatever,
Speaker 2: and he drives around the police vehicle over the curb
Speaker 2: and then barrels down that street, taking out fourteen people,
Speaker 2: maybe more. At this point, I don't know what the
Speaker 2: latest fatality rate is. Is is that kind of your
Speaker 2: gut on this? It sounds like it is.
Speaker 4: Yes, That's exactly where I'm at on this.
Speaker 8: And I've been reading more and more, and they're becoming
Speaker 8: more blatant the FBI, that is, with these sort of
Speaker 8: plots that they're going through. They're publicizing them now, they're
Speaker 8: proud of what they're doing. They're all actually they're not
Speaker 8: redacting the agent's names now on the effidavits which are
Speaker 8: becoming public, and they are the most open and obvious
Speaker 8: levels of entrapment, that to the point where they are
Speaker 8: ridiculous and absurd, And the only reason they've gotten away
Speaker 8: with it is because they've just been lucky. And for
Speaker 8: the most part, they are good at selecting their target.
Speaker 8: The vulnerable person who they pick was typically a low intelligence,
Speaker 8: emotionally disturbed person.
Speaker 2: Well, in this instance, I mean, they're not just targeting
Speaker 2: some random Muslim. They're targeting a military veteran, an American soldier,
Speaker 2: a man who's born in Texas. That seems unusual. Is
Speaker 2: this a reorienting of their homegrown domestic extremism terrorism grooming protocols.
Speaker 8: There's an element of the white whale where they really
Speaker 8: really want to push mo licia of violent extremism. And
Speaker 8: they've been putting out intelligence bulletins for years now that
Speaker 8: there could be an infiltration in the armed services of
Speaker 8: these white supremacists who are just joining up so they
Speaker 8: can get the training and then carry out an attack.
Speaker 8: This guy doesn't quite admit that meet that profile because
Speaker 8: he's not of white extraction.
Speaker 4: But they are changing what they do.
Speaker 8: And I mean the one of the more recent ones
Speaker 8: that I actually wrote an op ed on that The
Speaker 8: Blaze published was about an individual named Cole Bridges. Cole
Speaker 8: Bridges from Ohio was spouting out online. He was nineteen
Speaker 8: years old in twenty nineteen, so very young guy I
Speaker 8: was talking about ISIS because he was too dumb to
Speaker 8: know that ISIS wasn't really I llegitimate threat in twenty nineteen,
Speaker 8: and it's too young to have any other ideas about
Speaker 8: FOCO Haram or al Qaeda or anything like that. So
Speaker 8: he was as always in interfacing with an informant, a
Speaker 8: confidential human source, who brought that information to the FBI,
Speaker 8: and they groomed him and they encouraged him to join
Speaker 8: the US Army and he did, which means that the
Speaker 8: FBI either withheld that information from the DoD or they
Speaker 8: colluded with the DoD to get him into the army
Speaker 8: allowed him to remain on active duty for a year
Speaker 8: and a half. He was part of a cavalry unit
Speaker 8: at Fort Stewart, Georgia, and then the entire time he
Speaker 8: believed he was communicating with ISIS, but he wasn't. He
Speaker 8: was always with an undercover and he started giving them
Speaker 8: advice on how to take down New York City when
Speaker 8: he'd never been to New York, how to take down
Speaker 8: Special Forces when he was in Special Forces. And then
Speaker 8: a year and a half into his time in the Army,
Speaker 8: they took him down as providing material support to ISIS. Meanwhile,
Speaker 8: a year and a half would have meant he was
Speaker 8: firing live ammunition on the line with actual service members,
Speaker 8: actual people that stood up signed the dot line and
Speaker 8: raised their hand to swear to protect and defend the
Speaker 8: Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. He could have
Speaker 8: just turned to his left and right and plug one
Speaker 8: of the back of their domes, but the FBI didn't
Speaker 8: think that was a possibility, and they were fortunately right
Speaker 8: on that one.
Speaker 2: Yeah, well, it looks as if they weren't right when
Speaker 2: it came to the Dingjabbar gentlemen. He was very prepared
Speaker 2: to take lives, and the initial reporting was that he
Speaker 2: had body armor as well as I believe it was
Speaker 2: an AK. In that instance, what I mean, I have
Speaker 2: to assume this is illegal or can they not be held?
Speaker 2: I mean, I assume that the challenge would be improving
Speaker 2: any of what we're saying right now. But if it
Speaker 2: could be proven, could they not be held as accessories
Speaker 2: to murder or accessories to terrorism?
Speaker 4: It's really hard to prove.
Speaker 8: In trapman and trapman defenses are most of the time
Speaker 8: not allowed in court, and when they are, they very
Speaker 8: rarely even work. And then even then they can have
Speaker 8: qualified immunity. They were acting in good faith because they
Speaker 8: lean on these policies and the interpretations of law that
Speaker 8: say it's perfectly legal for law enforcement to lie to
Speaker 8: a subject to manipulate them because ultimately after they say, hey,
Speaker 8: do you want to go to terrorism?
Speaker 4: You sure, you're sure?
Speaker 8: It sounds like a good idea, right right, Why don't
Speaker 8: you go push that button? And then that person takes
Speaker 8: that overt act and we throw out the fact that
Speaker 8: for the last sometimes five or six years, and the
Speaker 8: manipulation that goes on not just intellectually but emotionally because
Speaker 8: a lot of these guys are lonely, have no friends.
Speaker 8: They think their only friend in the world wants them
Speaker 8: to just be the lookout, just be the lookout guy,
Speaker 8: and that the FBI exploits that vulnerability and then wraps
Speaker 8: themselves in the flag and says, you're welcome America. And look,
Speaker 8: I don't know if you want to get into this,
Speaker 8: but the most dangerous threat right now in this country
Speaker 8: are Republicans. No question, in my mind, it is January
Speaker 8: of twenty twenty five, but it might as well be
Speaker 8: September twelfth, two thousand and one.
Speaker 4: All over again.
Speaker 8: We are at the end of the slippery slope and
Speaker 8: they are still blind. We are at the last line
Speaker 8: of the knee Moeler poem. And then they came for me,
Speaker 8: and there was no one left to speak for me,
Speaker 8: and they are just blissfully ignorant. They're going to want
Speaker 8: another Patriot Act and they're going to get I'll give
Speaker 8: them partial credit. They're going to say something to the
Speaker 8: effect of the FBI was going after grandma's at the Capitol,
Speaker 8: or people praying outside of an abortion clinic, and moms
Speaker 8: at school board meetings, and they took their eye off
Speaker 8: the ball and this attack happened. Now it's a punctuation
Speaker 8: issue for me. The FBI should not investigate and should
Speaker 8: not be the arbiter of wrong think or right think,
Speaker 8: and should not investigate moms at school board meetings period.
Speaker 8: But the Republicans are going to say comma and investigate
Speaker 8: the vicious Muslim extremist terrorists.
Speaker 4: And I understand that sentiment.
Speaker 8: It's an evil ideology, as is communism, as is Wahabiism.
Speaker 8: It's resulted in the deaths of untold numbers of people.
Speaker 8: But the problem is the FBI is Skynet from Terminator,
Speaker 8: and I'm not trying to be funny about it.
Speaker 4: It's an analogy.
Speaker 8: It holds up why did Skynet when it became self
Speaker 8: aware attack the humans? Because Skynet's a computer. It's not
Speaker 8: good or bad.
Speaker 4: It just is.
Speaker 8: Its program says that it has to defend itself. And Skynet,
Speaker 8: when it was self aware, came to the conclusion that
Speaker 8: the people who wanted to turn it off were a
Speaker 8: threat to its existence.
Speaker 4: That's the FBI. You gave them the.
Speaker 8: Power from the Patriot Act, and they came to the
Speaker 8: conclusion that, yeah, we could go after what you think
Speaker 8: are the wrong thing.
Speaker 4: So we are the arbiters of wrong thing.
Speaker 8: But the best thing for us to do is make
Speaker 8: wrong think to be people who are small government, people
Speaker 8: who want to bring us to heal, who want to
Speaker 8: limit our power and limit our ability to grow as
Speaker 8: a bureaucracy, and that's the ultimate goal of bureaucracy. So
Speaker 8: you're a threat to our existence. So we're going to
Speaker 8: rewrite it and say that anti government, anti authority, violent extremism,
Speaker 8: which according to the FBI is someone who has a
Speaker 8: perception of government overreach or negligence. That's domestic terrorism.
Speaker 4: And we're going to put you.
Speaker 2: On ty, which ought to be every American in this
Speaker 2: country at this point. If you think that the government
Speaker 2: hasn't overreached at all, you're crazy. I got to pull
Speaker 2: this up because this is very apropos to what we're
Speaker 2: talking about. This is the president incoming president. At twelve
Speaker 2: twenty two last night, Donald Trump says our country is
Speaker 2: a disaster, a laughing stock all over the world. This
Speaker 2: is what happens when you have open borders with weak, ineffective,
Speaker 2: and virtually non existent leadership. The DOJFBI, and Democrat state
Speaker 2: and local prosecutors have done their job. They are incompetent
Speaker 2: and corrupt, having spent all of their waking hours unlawfully
Speaker 2: attacking their political opponents me rather than focusing on protecting
Speaker 2: Americans from the outside and inside violent scum that has
Speaker 2: infiltrated all aspects of our government and our nation itself.
Speaker 2: Democrats should be ashamed of themselves for allowing this to
Speaker 2: happen to our country. This is the line I wanted
Speaker 2: to ask you about. The CIA must get involved now
Speaker 2: before it is too late. The USA is breaking down.
Speaker 2: A violent erosion of safety, national security, and democracy is
Speaker 2: taking place all across our nation. Only strength and powerful
Speaker 2: leadership will stop it. See you on January twentieth, Make
Speaker 2: America great again. Now. I know that we usually talk
Speaker 2: about FBI shenanigans, but I find it fascinating that the
Speaker 2: incoming president and former President Trump would say we need
Speaker 2: the CIA. Now. That seems wrong headed to me. What
Speaker 2: is your instinct on that.
Speaker 8: I hope that this is a situation where you were
Speaker 8: supposed to take Trump seriously and not literally. Yeah, he
Speaker 8: might be just applying the CIA label to whatever three
Speaker 8: letter agency he thinks is appropriate, because the CIA doesn't
Speaker 8: have a responsibility for the domestic side, which would be
Speaker 8: problematic for the fact that they had a bomb squad
Speaker 8: that was there on January sixth, The available Why do
Speaker 8: we have a state side domestic bomb squad from the
Speaker 8: CIA unless it's going after bombs, it could be planted
Speaker 8: at Langley?
Speaker 1: I don't know.
Speaker 2: Well, I'll give you an answer. That was a CIA
Speaker 2: and they are functioning stateside. I mean that, that's my
Speaker 2: instinct on it. I can't say definitively, but yeah, they're
Speaker 2: not supposed to fucking be here, Steve. So if they
Speaker 2: are here, what does that tell you?
Speaker 4: You can come to no other conclusion.
Speaker 8: And the relationships that are going on right now between
Speaker 8: the three letter agencies and look, you hear about the
Speaker 8: task Force all the time right in law enforcement.
Speaker 4: It was this just innovation.
Speaker 8: That just was amazing because you were partnering with different agencies,
Speaker 8: they had different expertise, and you could really get a
Speaker 8: mission done. But I'll tell you the problem with it,
Speaker 8: because you get a hack around your own restrictions to
Speaker 8: what you can do.
Speaker 4: Right.
Speaker 8: So, the FBI under the Department of Justice has a
Speaker 8: couple of guardrails. So the Constitution is the ultimate guardrail,
Speaker 8: but the FBI, in theory, has more limits than even that,
Speaker 8: just to be sure we stay inside the lines. They
Speaker 8: have the Domestic Investigations Operations Guide, They have the Attorney
Speaker 8: gener Will Guideline for domestic investigations. But you know who
Speaker 8: doesn't have those the Department of Homeland Security because they're
Speaker 8: not part of the Department of Justice. So what you
Speaker 8: do is you form a task force and you get
Speaker 8: a DHS guy with an FBI guy and say, hey,
Speaker 8: I can't do that, but you can, Oh you can
Speaker 8: do that?
Speaker 4: Well I can't.
Speaker 8: And that's how they circumvent their own policies and procedures.
Speaker 8: And when it comes to the CIA and the FBI,
Speaker 8: do you know that you have to have experience across agency,
Speaker 8: most likely with the CIA, that's the preferred way to go.
Speaker 8: In order to promote in the FBI, if you work
Speaker 8: in Washington, DC, you have to do a tour over
Speaker 8: at the agency because they want those relationships there. They
Speaker 8: want to be able to call up their buddy and say, hey,
Speaker 8: I can't do that, but could you poke up one
Speaker 8: of our five Eyes partners to go ahead and do that.
Speaker 8: That'd be great if you could do surveillance of one
Speaker 8: of our own people when they're overseas, you know, and
Speaker 8: maybe dig up some dirt and say that they're colluding
Speaker 8: with Russia.
Speaker 4: I don't know, I'm just spitballing here.
Speaker 2: Yeah, well, I mean that seems problematic, to put it mildly,
Speaker 2: that you would have that you would prefer and want
Speaker 2: to have as many, you know, former CIA agents in
Speaker 2: the FBI, given that their tasks are supposed to be separated,
Speaker 2: you know, foreign versus domestic. I guess law enforcement if
Speaker 2: you want to view it that way.
Speaker 8: You want to, we want to talk about you know,
Speaker 8: we're coming into twenty twenty five, the most underreported story
Speaker 8: of twenty twenty four.
Speaker 4: I don't even know if you're aware of this.
Speaker 8: I mean you could I could argue that Butler is
Speaker 8: the most underreported because that went down the memory hole. Sure,
Speaker 8: but we all at least have the image of Trump
Speaker 8: pumped his fist.
Speaker 4: Right.
Speaker 8: So Carrie Pickett at the very end of twenty twenty
Speaker 8: four broke a story about a whistleblower inside the FBI
Speaker 8: who said that in twenty sixteen, the director James Comy
Speaker 8: ordered an off the book's honey Pot operation inside the
Speaker 8: Trump campaign, and they said two undercover female agents to
Speaker 8: infiltrate Trump's campaign and had sex with members of the
Speaker 8: campaign to dig up dirt. Right, it came to light
Speaker 8: because media photographed one of the undercover employees. The FBI
Speaker 8: freaked out, told the me, you can't run it. You
Speaker 8: gotta spike the story. That's an informant whose life will
Speaker 8: be at risk, not one of ours, it's an informant.
Speaker 4: So the media spiked the story and the.
Speaker 8: FBI moved her over to the CIA so she could
Speaker 8: not be called as awareness.
Speaker 2: That's huge. So they they knew that they were they
Speaker 2: were busted, so they but I guess they thought that
Speaker 2: the as long as they got her into the CIA
Speaker 2: so that she couldn't be compelled to testify, then they'd
Speaker 2: be safe.
Speaker 4: That's the cover up. Correct, That's that's the cover up.
Speaker 8: The second one is on the currently on the seventh
Speaker 8: floor of the FBI high level executive.
Speaker 2: Wow, what I mean? We already knew that the FBI
Speaker 2: they lied to the Vice of Court in order to
Speaker 2: spy on Trump's campaign in that same period. So is
Speaker 2: this that much worse? I know, forgive my naivete, but
Speaker 2: is it that much worse at your already spying on
Speaker 2: the guy. Sure, you're also sending honeypots to sleep with
Speaker 2: his campaign. Isn't that just more of the same.
Speaker 8: I would rank it as worse in the context that
Speaker 8: it came from a specific director, from the director himself.
Speaker 8: You can't even say it was a rogue employee who
Speaker 8: was an underlay and it was off the books.
Speaker 4: There's no records of it.
Speaker 8: This only came to light because there was a whistleblower
Speaker 8: who waited out till he or she got to retirement to.
Speaker 2: Lock that out. A lot of people have theorized, I've
Speaker 2: read reports on this that it was Barack Obama and
Speaker 2: Hillary Clinton, along with James Comy, that were responsible for
Speaker 2: basically setting off this investigation and spying operation on Donald
Speaker 2: Trump and his campaign. In the first place. I have
Speaker 2: to assume that this off the books operation with a
Speaker 2: sexual honeypot was also part of that same discussion. Is
Speaker 2: that your belief?
Speaker 8: Yeah, I think those people, the Barack Obama and the
Speaker 8: Hillary Clinton types, they cultivate an environment where they might
Speaker 8: have plausible deniability.
Speaker 4: It's going to be really hard to put Obama in.
Speaker 8: The room with Comy telling them, yeah, yeah, let those
Speaker 8: chicks go hoard themselves out and get some dirt.
Speaker 4: I don't. I think he's smarter than that.
Speaker 8: I talk more about like a lowest learner from the
Speaker 8: IRS who directed people to stop the five oh one
Speaker 8: c three status of organizations that were perceived to be
Speaker 8: small government and conservative. I don't think she got that
Speaker 8: directed from Obama. But it's a culture, it's a it's
Speaker 8: a way they bring in the personnel and that sort
Speaker 8: of permeates down. But that being said, James Comy is
Speaker 8: not made a secret the fact that he is a
Speaker 8: political actor.
Speaker 4: At this point. He's basically an action figure for Harris Walls.
Speaker 8: We're in their gear and their swag, and he's his
Speaker 8: personality that he cultivated. Even within the halls of the
Speaker 8: walls of the FBI, he surrounded himself with people because
Speaker 8: his image was being like beyond any sort of questioning
Speaker 8: his integrity. I think his books called a higher loyalty
Speaker 8: like come on. His entourage colloquially within the FBI was
Speaker 8: called the College of Cardinals, and those people are actually
Speaker 8: now in leadership. They remained even though he left.
Speaker 4: Interesting, that's who's.
Speaker 8: Really running the show here, because Christopher Ray is he's
Speaker 8: a passive party here when it comes to the politicization,
Speaker 8: James Comy was definitely far more active, far more nefarious.
Speaker 2: Well, and if you remember during the campaign trail just
Speaker 2: a few months ago, you had Comy, I think Brennan,
Speaker 2: I don't remember what Ray had to say about it,
Speaker 2: but they all sounded panicked about Donald Trump winning the
Speaker 2: presidency back like they were all they were all going
Speaker 2: very hard in the paint for Harris Walls. And I
Speaker 2: don't think it had anything to do with politics as
Speaker 2: much as keeping their ass is out of prison. That's
Speaker 2: my read of it. I think that these people have
Speaker 2: demonstrated that there's I mean, there's plenty of evidence to
Speaker 2: prove out what we I've just talked about with the
Speaker 2: spying operation that they are running on an incoming president.
Speaker 2: In fact, they were doing it when he was just
Speaker 2: a candidate. But they did not stop doing it. And
Speaker 2: I'd have to imagine that they didn't stop interfering and
Speaker 2: undermining and spying on and trying to screw up Trump's
Speaker 2: presidency his entire first term. So I don't see how
Speaker 2: that's not treason. I've just.
Speaker 8: It meets the statute far better than obstruction of an
Speaker 8: official proceeding the fifteen to twelve seed charge for January sixth,
Speaker 8: which is a tax law.
Speaker 2: I'm right.
Speaker 8: You have Anthony Blincoln, who at that point was an
Speaker 8: advisor to the Biden campaign in twenty twenty, who calls
Speaker 8: up Mike Morale, the deputy over to the CIA, and says,
Speaker 8: I need a talking point for the debate between Joe
Speaker 8: Biden and Donald Trump.
Speaker 4: Can you do me a solid?
Speaker 8: And Mike Morell within six hours generates the fifty one
Speaker 8: Spies who Lies letter that said that the laptop had
Speaker 8: all the hallmarks of Russian disinformation.
Speaker 2: I mean, all the people pause, Requick, I want people
Speaker 2: to realize what you just said. Six In six hours,
Speaker 2: he got fifty one guys to sign on to a
Speaker 2: letter that was a lie. Now, yes, it was in
Speaker 2: legal eese, so you could say, oh, well, we weren't
Speaker 2: saying it. It just had the whole marks. But he
Speaker 2: got fifty one of these sons of bitches to sign
Speaker 2: this letter in six hours. Unbelievable.
Speaker 8: Meanwhile, the FBI, which is part of the intelligence community,
Speaker 8: had the laptop in evidence.
Speaker 2: Yes, yes, so they knew.
Speaker 8: And then instead of they didn't even say, like, we
Speaker 8: didn't participate in that, they sent Elvis Chan out to
Speaker 8: social media companies and told.
Speaker 4: Them to censor that information.
Speaker 8: God if you knew nothing else about the FBI other
Speaker 8: than what they did in twenty sixteen with Carter Page
Speaker 8: and the illegal FIZA and then Russian dossier, and then
Speaker 8: what they did with the Hunter Biden laptop in twenty twenty,
Speaker 8: you would say that's the cheka, that's the stazzi. There's
Speaker 8: no coming back from that. That reputation is mud. But
Speaker 8: here we are in twenty twenty five, it's still kick
Speaker 8: and they're trying to buy back some trust because the
Speaker 8: politics of the FBI, they are very very communists at
Speaker 8: this point, but the still overriding prime directive of the
Speaker 8: FBI politically is do what is good for the FBI.
Speaker 4: Go where your bread is buttered.
Speaker 8: If you want me to go after someone who was
Speaker 8: a draft dodger for Vietnam, I'll put him in jail.
Speaker 8: If you want me to go for MLK, sure, Randy Weaver,
Speaker 8: you got it, Moms at school of our meeting, name
Speaker 8: it Liberty City seven. Still, the Liberty City seven is
Speaker 8: still the biggest arrest for al Qaeda in the history
Speaker 8: of the FBI. And not one of those seven guys
Speaker 8: was affiliated with al Qaeda.
Speaker 2: So basically they've done nothing to protect the homeland, but
Speaker 2: they have certainly undermined our god given rights.
Speaker 4: This record record budgets.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, this is fucking concerning. Man. To put it mildly,
Speaker 2: all right, I got to ask you about this. This
Speaker 2: is so this is the interview that I just opened
Speaker 2: up this episode with with this journalist scare.
Speaker 4: Quotes it nice yoga pants, Yes.
Speaker 2: In yoga pants, touring the hottest investigative crime scene of
Speaker 2: twenty twenty five. Within twenty four hours of the attack,
Speaker 2: we had a very similar thing that happened in San Bernardino.
Speaker 2: People probably don't remember the Sam Bernardino attack, but it
Speaker 2: had all of the same hallmarks of Muslim extremism. If
Speaker 2: you will, so let me run this for a second.
Speaker 8: Here we go.
Speaker 6: We that the first glimpse inside the lives of the
Speaker 6: San Bernardino shooters, the killer couple's landlord prying open the
Speaker 6: boarded up doors to allow media to look inside the
Speaker 6: home left behind by Sy Edwards wand Peruke and touch
Speaker 6: Bean Malik.
Speaker 7: Signs of what he was up to.
Speaker 5: Work.
Speaker 2: It's it's very similar, Steve. And you know, I'm not
Speaker 2: gonna say that that one was also an FBI operation,
Speaker 2: but maybe you have some insights. So what was your
Speaker 2: read of that one? I do find the similarities jarring
Speaker 2: that like, we don't have that many examples of successful
Speaker 2: domestic terrorism activities from Muslim extremism, Like we don't we
Speaker 2: don't have that many examples. These are two examples. They
Speaker 2: both have these almost instantaneous tours by the media of
Speaker 2: their properties. I don't see that happening in any other
Speaker 2: events ever in America. That just doesn't fucking happen. So
Speaker 2: it seems oddly coincidental, That's all I'm saying. What are
Speaker 2: your thoughts?
Speaker 8: You connected the dots that nobody who is a Republican
Speaker 8: has connected yet, And I don't know if you remember
Speaker 8: what they started to push right after Sam Bernino. I
Speaker 8: was in the FBI and I was like the lone
Speaker 8: libertarian in my office being like, you can't do this,
Speaker 8: and all these like old school Republican type agents were like,
Speaker 8: what do you want?
Speaker 4: More terrorist attacks?
Speaker 8: And that was the going Dark initiative got pushed right
Speaker 8: after that. The going Dark initiative is a skeleton key
Speaker 8: to get into your phone, your encrypted communications.
Speaker 4: You remember they couldn't get into the iPhone iPhones exactly, yes,
Speaker 4: and they started pushing that.
Speaker 8: Actually they've been pushing it intermittently, but when my red
Speaker 8: flags went way up was after the Butler assassination attempt.
Speaker 8: That's when in the hearing with Paula Bate, Deputy Director
Speaker 8: and Lindsay Graham, in a very choreographed conversation that Graham
Speaker 8: was purposely interrupting him and prodding him to say what
Speaker 8: they wanted, and he was basically like, yes, Cenator, we
Speaker 8: need more capabilities to monitor these communications. And you have
Speaker 8: Lindsay Graham and the Ultimate saying like, I'm all for
Speaker 8: free speech, but just to a point, right, they try
Speaker 8: to use these attacks on the homeland to push for
Speaker 8: more capabilities.
Speaker 4: When we've given them the power.
Speaker 8: The American people were put for a decision on September twelfth,
Speaker 8: two thousand and one, do you want liberty or security?
Speaker 8: And they chose security, and they deserved either. They deserved either.
Speaker 8: And because security is in possible, certainly not in a
Speaker 8: free society, because there's inherent danger, but even in a
Speaker 8: lockdown society, people are bad. Bad people will do bad things,
Speaker 8: they will find a way to do it. You can
Speaker 8: never have one hundred percent security, but what you can
Speaker 8: have is a government who never lets the crisis go
Speaker 8: to waste. And we have the cameras there, we have
Speaker 8: the blood and the guts and the raw emotional aspect
Speaker 8: to it, and people will just cry out, cry out,
Speaker 8: give me security.
Speaker 1: Well.
Speaker 2: And a good example of this if you recall President
Speaker 2: Trump actually said, why are you not into these phones yet?
Speaker 2: Why do we not have answers? And look, I'll admit myself,
Speaker 2: I would like answers. But what it tells me is
Speaker 2: when they don't crack these phones, when he's got I'm
Speaker 2: talking about crooks here, the Butler attacker, when they don't
Speaker 2: crack these this encryption, when they don't give us any answers,
Speaker 2: when he's got overseas, which, by the way, would then
Speaker 2: bring in CIA, because then we're talking about potential foreign
Speaker 2: as in the CIA has a whole nother toolkit. I
Speaker 2: would imagine that allows them to violate the Constitution very egregiously,
Speaker 2: but they didn't do it. We still don't have answers
Speaker 2: as to who Crooks was communicating with that was overseas
Speaker 2: or his foreign banking accounts. I don't know if you
Speaker 2: remember all those details. I find all that fascinating. But
Speaker 2: my point is the President of the United States, Donald Trump,
Speaker 2: he was also saying, crack these phones. Give me answers.
Speaker 2: Do you have any insight as to whether or not
Speaker 2: that ever happened, because I have never seen any reporting
Speaker 2: or updates on the Butler assailant, and it's like the
Speaker 2: story is just dead.
Speaker 4: And I think purposely so.
Speaker 8: And I speculate on that one, similar to this one
Speaker 8: down from New Orleans. I think they had an open
Speaker 8: case on them already and they need it to go
Speaker 8: away because they don't want people to know that they
Speaker 8: were laying out the breadcrumbs and he just went off script.
Speaker 4: I'm at a high level.
Speaker 8: Of belief that that is a likely thing that happened
Speaker 8: there and they're trying to bury it. And look, you
Speaker 8: don't even need a CIA. So we renewed FAISA. Because
Speaker 8: we're governed by tyrants, we RENEWIA. And Mike Johnson then
Speaker 8: runs down to Mari Lago to get the blessing from
Speaker 8: the boss to say, oh, he's still doing a good job.
Speaker 8: So people believe that FISA seven oh two applies to
Speaker 8: foreign actors because by policy, it's a foreign person when
Speaker 8: they're in a foreign land who's a state actor, right,
Speaker 8: So like a Russian agent in Russia. So it shouldn't
Speaker 8: affect you or me, should it. Well, if you parlay
Speaker 8: that with something else that the FBI has with it,
Speaker 8: which is called Appendix G of its Domestic Investigations Operations Guide,
Speaker 8: which says that the FBI is authorized to open up
Speaker 8: a full counterintelligence investigation on any American if they believe
Speaker 8: that they're being targeted like the victim of a foreign entity.
Speaker 8: So now we're monitoring a foreign entity and we see that,
Speaker 8: oh they sent an email and it hit your email box.
Speaker 8: Now you, Clint, are the subject of a full counter
Speaker 8: intelligence devestigation.
Speaker 4: We're not looking at you as a bad guy. You
Speaker 4: could be the victim here.
Speaker 8: But we still get all access to all of your
Speaker 8: records and we can look at everything you want.
Speaker 4: And let's take you even further.
Speaker 8: I regularly get requests from foreign media like Russia today,
Speaker 8: so do I. That's enough to open up a full
Speaker 8: CI case on either one of us, which is why
Speaker 8: when the leaks came out about Cash Btel, the Iranian
Speaker 8: leaks just because the FBI has a full counter intelligence
Speaker 8: investigation on Cashpatel.
Speaker 2: I got to tell you this story, and I completely
Speaker 2: agree with you. In fact, I know it to be
Speaker 2: true because I talked to Cash Hotel. I did this
Speaker 2: panel in Las Vegas at Freedom Fest with Cash and
Speaker 2: Brett Weinstein and Angela mccartial, the head of the Libertarian Party,
Speaker 2: and afterwards, I'm trying to book him on my show,
Speaker 2: and you know, just chit chatting. I'm like, hey man,
Speaker 2: could I like, what's the best way because you're not
Speaker 2: on Twitter? Like, how can I reach out to you
Speaker 2: to try and book you? And he goes, well, I'd
Speaker 2: give you my phone number, but I don't want you
Speaker 2: to be spied on. And I was like, I was like,
Speaker 2: wait what and he kind of like it kind of
Speaker 2: seemed like a joke but kind of not. And then
Speaker 2: there was reports a few months later that in fact, yeah,
Speaker 2: he was being spied on, so he was not joking
Speaker 2: at all. The little did he know that I already
Speaker 2: have enough context, with enough you know, dissident figures that
Speaker 2: I'm undoubtedly being watched myself at this point, which is
Speaker 2: fucking crazy because I'm not even some huge high profile
Speaker 2: podcaster by any stretch of the imagination. But I would
Speaker 2: be surprised if they're not.
Speaker 8: What are the odds that someone from the US government
Speaker 8: has a friend over at Russia today and says, hey,
Speaker 8: email that person.
Speaker 2: It'd be so easy, Yeah, you could. You could easily
Speaker 2: prad and create these avenues, especially when you're talking about
Speaker 2: you know, political commentators, like this is what we do professionally,
Speaker 2: and especially if we're like on the come up, We're
Speaker 2: going to take any opportunities we get. I've talked to
Speaker 2: Indian News, I've talked to Russian Russia today. You know,
Speaker 2: I've done all these but it's like, it's not because
Speaker 2: I have some loyalty to these foreign countries by any
Speaker 2: starch of the imagination, get noticed. Yeah exactly, I'm just
Speaker 2: trying to get my name out there and my message
Speaker 2: out there. So very dangerous president to have that be permissible,
Speaker 2: and ultimately, this is why it shouldn't be. I mean
Speaker 2: Tucker Carlson a good example. He believes strongly that his
Speaker 2: interview with Edward Snowden was scuttled by him being spied on.
Speaker 2: I don't know if you're familiar with that story, but yeah,
Speaker 2: that's and I think same with a soannge. So like,
Speaker 2: this is all madness, man, very dangerous stuff. All right,
Speaker 2: let's get into Vegas because this one is utterly bizarre.
Speaker 2: We have updated reports over the past twenty four hours.
Speaker 2: The most recent thing that I heard about, or second
Speaker 2: to most recent thing I heard about, was that the
Speaker 2: cyber truck bomber, Matthew Libblisberger's wife broke up with him
Speaker 2: days before the explosion outside Trump Hotel in Las Vegas.
Speaker 2: You can see him here holding his newborn. Look that sure,
Speaker 2: it could be a catalyst. But this is where it
Speaker 2: gets really really weird. So right now, and I'm sure
Speaker 2: you haven't seen this yet, but well, let me start
Speaker 2: with this. Haley Britsky reports. Liblsberger said in an email
Speaker 2: the day before the explosion that he was armed and
Speaker 2: in possession of a massive vbied vehicle bound improvise explosive advice?
Speaker 2: Am I right? Yes, okay, and express conspiratorial concerns that
Speaker 2: government agencies were tracking him. A copy of the email
Speaker 2: viewed by CNN said, with Natasha Bertrand and John Miller,
Speaker 2: I think Natasha Bertrand is the one that I don't trust,
Speaker 2: But anyways, I can't remember if it's her or the
Speaker 2: other lady. There's an email going around, there's screenshots of it.
Speaker 2: There's actually a Sean Ryan interview right now with a
Speaker 2: are are you familiar with this interview?
Speaker 4: Yeah?
Speaker 8: My circle got it. That to God, to Sean Ryan,
Speaker 8: I've seen the email.
Speaker 2: Oh all right, all right, shit, all right, all right, well,
Speaker 2: and then I'm fucking super glad I had you on
Speaker 2: because when I read this thing, I was like, what
Speaker 2: the fuck is this? What the fuck is it? Steve?
Speaker 2: What I mean?
Speaker 8: You're talking about a guy who was in the throes
Speaker 8: of emotional disturbance. It's it's tragic, and it does happen,
Speaker 8: and and the connections. I understand the sentiment and the
Speaker 8: cynicism that people have because we've been lied to so
Speaker 8: many times, and people are trying to connect dots, and
Speaker 8: these these two things happening in such close proximity on
Speaker 8: the timeline.
Speaker 2: Uh, but you're are printing from the same you know,
Speaker 2: the same app to get the vehicle. Both getting electric
Speaker 2: cars within hours of each other.
Speaker 8: I mean, unbelievable, question unbelievable, but but is pure coincidence.
Speaker 4: This guy was dealing with demons.
Speaker 8: He had been talking about things, you know, like uh,
Speaker 8: I mean like hovering technology, and I mean you're talking
Speaker 8: about like, you know, the the alien's got a ray
Speaker 8: of my nose type type of stuff. He was, he
Speaker 8: was going through it. And then just in my experience
Speaker 8: as law enforcement at a local level, he looks like
Speaker 8: he killed himself. Looks like he shot himself. This guy
Speaker 8: is trained military special forces. If he wanted to exact
Speaker 8: maximum collateral damage, he would have blown that thing up,
Speaker 8: not using gasoline and fireworks. But from my local knowledge,
Speaker 8: when men typically commit suicide, they go for the guts
Speaker 8: and the glory, like big sort of demonstration. They're not
Speaker 8: really worried about open casket funeral women are. And from
Speaker 8: that to me, for a guy coming from that community,
Speaker 8: a big explosion that is very consistent and there's not
Speaker 8: a plumb line of ideology that would connect to these
Speaker 8: guys on one's isis and the other one's just kind
Speaker 8: of all over the map as it's an emotional disturbed person.
Speaker 2: Well, all right, so I've got a couple follow up
Speaker 2: questions on this, because, well, first off, seems awfully redundant
Speaker 2: to use a desert eagle on yourself fifty cal and
Speaker 2: blow up a cyber truck simultaneously. What's your read of that?
Speaker 2: I mean? And so how does he trigger it? Does
Speaker 2: he does he hit the detonation and pull the trigger simultaneously?
Speaker 8: Is that your I think he's capable of putting a
Speaker 8: timer on it, and yeah, and then he But.
Speaker 2: Here's hold on, hold on, here's the really weird thing.
Speaker 2: Though I've watched the video. Granted it maybe the angles
Speaker 2: off and you can't see the muzzle flash, but I
Speaker 2: don't see any evidence that he's actually firing on himself
Speaker 2: before that explosion happens. Have you seen footage that makes
Speaker 2: you feel otherwise?
Speaker 4: No? I haven't.
Speaker 8: But I also where that you can do like remote
Speaker 8: driving from the car too true, and he could have
Speaker 8: programmed it to do that in almost like a self
Speaker 8: driving passenger, but he was already gone at that point.
Speaker 2: See that That was my other thought. But my thought
Speaker 2: was that it wasn't him that did it, that it
Speaker 2: was someone else that was using him as a as
Speaker 2: a fall guy.
Speaker 4: And I mean now as a fall guy.
Speaker 8: I mean you know, within that community, they're close enough
Speaker 8: you would hope that nobody would do this, but you know, hey,
Speaker 8: I'm gonna end it, man, can you get me there?
Speaker 8: And you know, and maybe as like a I don't
Speaker 8: know what was it like the English patient where they
Speaker 8: the woman you know, kills the patient at the end,
Speaker 8: like you made me have that element of it.
Speaker 4: Yeah, that type of thing. That's again total speculation.
Speaker 8: My biggest thing though, was like, you know, this all
Speaker 8: happened like in close proximity, and you do have to
Speaker 8: legitimately wonder like is there something coordinated here? I mean
Speaker 8: they did fly up. You know, you got plane flying
Speaker 8: in one city and another flying or another one at
Speaker 8: one point in this country, like is there something here?
Speaker 8: But these guys not connected? And then you know even
Speaker 8: the military installation, they both served it for Bragg, Like
Speaker 8: that's an enormous military installation.
Speaker 4: They were never there together.
Speaker 2: But oh they weren't there together. Okay, I read that
Speaker 2: they were both there in like twenty twelve or something
Speaker 2: like that. But regardless, Yeah, it did seem as if
Speaker 2: the inspiration would have been different. Like this guy had
Speaker 2: a Slava Ukrainian T shirt on in one of his photos,
Speaker 2: so like, yeah, he could he could have been more
Speaker 2: of the the the Florida attacker against Trump, the golf
Speaker 2: course lunatic guy because he was hard in the pain.
Speaker 2: He actually went to Ukraine and helped get passports for guys.
Speaker 2: I think that's what I had you on the last
Speaker 2: time to talk about. So very strange figure. They definitely
Speaker 2: seemed as if they had different motivations. This email, though,
Speaker 2: and I'll grant you it reads as if it's, you know,
Speaker 2: schizophrenic breakdown type of stuff, But it does correlate with
Speaker 2: the drones technology that we've been dealing with. What I
Speaker 2: thought was a psychological operation from the jump over the
Speaker 2: past month.
Speaker 8: And mysteriously stopped over Christmas holidays. It's almost like the
Speaker 8: guys doing it wanted to be home with their families.
Speaker 2: Yeah, exactly. Well, which is weird because this Libelsburger guy
Speaker 2: was stationed in Germany and he comes home to be
Speaker 2: home with his family, and then he inexplicably drives to
Speaker 2: Vegas and does this. But in this email, he says
Speaker 2: that if I don't make it to Mexico, so it
Speaker 2: seems as if his plan was not to do this
Speaker 2: in Vegas, he does, and he does it in front
Speaker 2: of Trump International Hotel in a cyber truck. He's also
Speaker 2: texting an ex girlfriend. I think it was the day prior,
Speaker 2: but it may have been the morning of. I think
Speaker 2: it was the night prior where he's saying, you know,
Speaker 2: he's like checking in with her. They're basically catching up
Speaker 2: and he's saying like, look, I just ran it a cybertruck.
Speaker 2: How cool. And he's not he's not texting her anything
Speaker 2: that's you know, emotionally concerning. So I don't know how
Speaker 2: to read it. I'll take your your opinion for what
Speaker 2: it is, and we'll I'll keep I'll kind of keep
Speaker 2: this book open. But you don't think that there's any
Speaker 2: merit to his concerns about this drone technology. Basically, what
Speaker 2: he's saying in this email is that like China has
Speaker 2: China and the US have technology via these orbs to
Speaker 2: go to war or wipe out anybody they want at
Speaker 2: any time. You think that's all nonsense.
Speaker 4: Oh, I don't know about that.
Speaker 8: To the technological prowess, you know that with the capability
Speaker 8: that's out there, I'm way out of my depth on that.
Speaker 4: I mean I was to everybody else looking at it.
Speaker 8: But my experience in dealing with people who are going
Speaker 8: through some sort of like schizophrenic episode or emotional disturbances,
Speaker 8: anything that is in the news is connected to the
Speaker 8: conspiracies that are in their heads. Yes, and that was
Speaker 8: so recent that to me might have been just and
Speaker 8: bibe it and put it down on whatever manifesto.
Speaker 4: That I happen to be creating at that exact moment.
Speaker 8: If it had been the balloon from a year ago,
Speaker 8: then it would have been the balloons.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Yeah, Well, that's the hard part is that when
Speaker 2: when someone does something like this and they're talking crazy, like,
Speaker 2: we can't know if there's any merit to what they're
Speaker 2: saying because they're you know, they're acting crazy and they're
Speaker 2: doing crazy things. But there's also this guy had I
Speaker 2: would do special forces guy have have security clearances, I'd assume.
Speaker 8: So, yes, yeah, some of them have ts, but at
Speaker 8: least he would have secret.
Speaker 2: Yeah, so he could be privy to some stuff. There's
Speaker 2: another layer of this which is bizarre, and I talked
Speaker 2: about this on the episode yesterday where there was another
Speaker 2: Special Forces guy who's who's been He was essentially getting
Speaker 2: catfished by other guys that were allegedly in his platoon
Speaker 2: or whatever they call it, and they were trying to
Speaker 2: get him to It was very it was very strange,
Speaker 2: but they were He thought that they were trying to
Speaker 2: get him to swat this guy to look after him.
Speaker 2: He was basically pretending as if he was suicidal, but
Speaker 2: it was coming from someone who was not a member
Speaker 2: of his organization in the military, and that they were
Speaker 2: trying to get this guy's address, and it freaked him
Speaker 2: the fuck out. I was on a X basis with him,
Speaker 2: and he thought that the Libelsburger was probably a patsy
Speaker 2: as a consequence of his experience with that. So, I
Speaker 2: don't know, it's very very strange. I hope honestly that
Speaker 2: they are not connected. Because Sarah Adams Wish on Ryan
Speaker 2: was talking about how there's a thousand domestic terrorists that
Speaker 2: are already here. Her implication that they were they were
Speaker 2: migrants or illegal immigrants that had come across the border.
Speaker 2: Both of these attacks were not that these were American men.
Speaker 2: What do you make of that? That prognostication from MISSA
Speaker 2: says to the sleeper cells and the danger that we
Speaker 2: are facing in twenty twenty.
Speaker 8: Five, Oh, just mathematically, I mean, it's likely that they're here.
Speaker 8: I mean, think about just even outside of the context
Speaker 8: of however many millions were allowed to come across the
Speaker 8: border completely unvented. I mean, I've talked to JJ Carroll.
Speaker 8: He thinks it's between thirty and fifty million, and he's
Speaker 8: a subject matter expert. The seven million figure is farcical.
Speaker 1: But let's just talk.
Speaker 2: About excuse me and hold on thirty and fifty million
Speaker 2: over what time.
Speaker 4: Period over the last four years?
Speaker 2: Thirty to fifty million illegal immigrants over the past four years.
Speaker 8: Yes, JJ Carroll Border Patrol was a brick guy and
Speaker 8: then all the way up to supervisor, fairly high up.
Speaker 8: He's written a book called Invasion, which does the math
Speaker 8: on it, and he makes a very strong case for that.
Speaker 2: Wow, I've I mean, I've been telling people that I
Speaker 2: thought it was probably closer to twenty million. If it's
Speaker 2: thirty to fifty million, that is, I mean, that's insane.
Speaker 8: If you split the difference and put it forty million,
Speaker 8: that's California regulation wise, right, I mean, that's that level
Speaker 8: of it. But even outside of that context, we're talking Afghanistan,
Speaker 8: the withdrawal happens and we're allowing what one hundred thousand
Speaker 8: to come in completely unvetted, and they just PLoP them
Speaker 8: down on bases and then if they wanted to call
Speaker 8: n Uber, they had a phone and they just disappeared
Speaker 8: off into the interior of the country.
Speaker 2: Yep. And I mean, obviously, the odds are that most
Speaker 2: people are peaceful, even if they are from Afghanistan, and
Speaker 2: they're probably most are not going to be a problem,
Speaker 2: but you'd have to be fucking crazy not to think
Speaker 2: that the percentage of them are going to be very,
Speaker 2: very dangerous. So you think that that intel that Sarah
Speaker 2: Adams is talking about is accurate that we are facing
Speaker 2: major terrorism this.
Speaker 4: Year, I believe so.
Speaker 8: And I think it's not limited to just you know,
Speaker 8: a bad actor from Iran. I mean you just talk
Speaker 8: about like how many of their sales do they put
Speaker 8: in here? Well, again, to take it even away from
Speaker 8: the illegal alien nexus, every single citizen of China is
Speaker 8: an agent of China. So if they're over here, even
Speaker 8: as a student visa, they get a call from the
Speaker 8: homeland saying, your family is going to be iced if
Speaker 8: unless you do this for us.
Speaker 4: That's how you get all of a sudden.
Speaker 8: A Chinese student was flying a drone. They got caught
Speaker 8: in a tree outside of military installation. They're doing it
Speaker 8: at the direction of the Chinese Communist part.
Speaker 2: Well, there's been reports of Chinese scientists that come over
Speaker 2: here to study, they get their degree, they stay, they
Speaker 2: get a job, and then it turns out that they
Speaker 2: are in fact spying. And everyone's like, well, did they
Speaker 2: come over here initially to do that? And I'm like, no,
Speaker 2: probably not. Probably they just got into a position where
Speaker 2: they had access to intelligence that the CCP would like,
Speaker 2: and they were reached out to and they were threatened
Speaker 2: and then they delivered. But yeah, that's concerning all right.
Speaker 2: So well, this has not made me feel any better, Steve,
Speaker 2: I was hoping it would. I guess it makes me
Speaker 2: feel better in the sense that it seems as if
Speaker 2: the Vegas in New Orleans attacks may not have been connected,
Speaker 2: as I was very concerned that they were when I
Speaker 2: was doing my show yesterday. Do you think there's one
Speaker 2: other aspect of this which I found interesting? Because Libelsberger,
Speaker 2: the Vegas attacker, he was stationed as special Forces in Germany.
Speaker 2: He left to go on leave in America two weeks
Speaker 2: ago for the holidays. I guess there was also a
Speaker 2: vehicular terrorist attack in Germany like days after he left.
Speaker 2: Do you think I know this sounds crazy, but the
Speaker 2: reason I'm asking is that we had the what's it called.
Speaker 2: What's the name of the pipeline that blew up? I'm blanking, Oh.
Speaker 8: The one that we definitely didn't blow up, not just
Speaker 8: the one US Navy that was in the area with
Speaker 8: a very special dive team on that boat.
Speaker 2: Yes, exactly, that one, the one that Russia blew up.
Speaker 2: You know it wasn't US. Anyways, My thought process was like, well,
Speaker 2: that was really an attack on Germany because that pipeline
Speaker 2: was their primary avenue for Russia to get oil and
Speaker 2: gas or I think it was just natural gas to Germany.
Speaker 2: Uh Like, is there any chance that we were willing
Speaker 2: to do that? Is there is there any chance that
Speaker 2: our government is involved with herorism that's happening in Europe?
Speaker 4: Right now, that's an interesting proposition.
Speaker 2: For the record. For the record, I'm not saying it's likely.
Speaker 2: I'm just just asking the question. Like the fact that
Speaker 2: Livelsburg was stationed there, he leaves the attack, the vehicular
Speaker 2: terrorist attack happens, he gets here, he immediately commits a
Speaker 2: vehicular terrorist attack. We have two on the same day.
Speaker 2: You can understand why I'm seeing this, And I'm like, huh, interesting.
Speaker 8: If it further in American interests in you know, oh,
Speaker 8: we have to get the American people all galvanized to
Speaker 8: go against Russia again, something like that, I think though
Speaker 8: it's more likely the multiculturalism, where they basically have you know,
Speaker 8: no control of their borders and they are actually like
Speaker 8: imprisoning their own citizens for going on Facebook and saying
Speaker 8: things that they find offensive. That's far and more likely.
Speaker 8: Where you see the American military go do things as
Speaker 8: like hey, there was some Navy seal just got arrested
Speaker 8: down in some South American country because he was organizing
Speaker 8: a coup off the books, and you know, basically like hey,
Speaker 8: if you get caught, we're going to deny all responsibility.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Well, in Nordstream, I finally remember the name of
Speaker 2: nordn pipeline. Well, yeah, I mean, this is the reason
Speaker 2: that I thought about it is that the nord Stream pipeline,
Speaker 2: the attack on Nordstream, basically made it so that Germany,
Speaker 2: who had been hesitant to support Ukraine because they were
Speaker 2: doing business with Russia for their natural resources, as soon
Speaker 2: as that pipeline was blown up, well, all of a
Speaker 2: sudd Germany doesn't have as much of an incentive to
Speaker 2: not stand with Ukraine and not to stand with NATO
Speaker 2: and the United States and the US State Department in
Speaker 2: Anthonie Blincoln in defense of Ukraine. So this is where
Speaker 2: I get the rationale that, yes, it's not outside of
Speaker 2: the realm of possibility that the United States government or
Speaker 2: intel agencies would use subterfuge in Allied nations. It's a
Speaker 2: reach to say that this Christmas terrorist attack was in
Speaker 2: fact that I don't. I couldn't possibly figure out the
Speaker 2: angle as to why that made sense. I just saw
Speaker 2: the timing of the two and the fact that guy
Speaker 2: was stationed there and he comes here and does the
Speaker 2: same thing as very oddly coincidental. But I'll leave that
Speaker 2: one aside. I do think that the I mean, the
Speaker 2: trajectory of things that were on with day one being
Speaker 2: two American men committing terrorist acts. And then if you're right,
Speaker 2: or that other gentleman is right, that there's thirty to
Speaker 2: fifty million the illegals that have come across in the
Speaker 2: past four years. Even if we're talking, you know, a
Speaker 2: tenth or a hundredth of a percentage of those people
Speaker 2: are dangerous, And of course at least that percentage is dangerous.
Speaker 2: If you were to take that percentage of the American population,
Speaker 2: that's at least that many are dangerous. So I think
Speaker 2: that we're in a lot of danger and I think
Speaker 2: that well, certainly terrorism is dangerous. It still is not
Speaker 2: going to impact most of us, but it can impact
Speaker 2: all of us if we make the wrong decisions and
Speaker 2: we allow for these Republicans, which is what you opened
Speaker 2: up with saying that these are the most dangerous people.
Speaker 2: That's actually what I ended my show with last night,
Speaker 2: that I do not trust the Republicans in Congress to
Speaker 2: not do Patriot Act two point zero, full obliteration the
Speaker 2: Bill of Rights, that this will undoubtedly be what happens.
Speaker 2: We also then have the weird timing of all of
Speaker 2: these terrorist attacks happening when the confirmation hearings in the
Speaker 2: Senate are popping off next week to try and get
Speaker 2: cash Betel in the FBI. You and I are both
Speaker 2: big advocates of that to happen, but also Tulsy Garett
Speaker 2: is d and I those hearings are going to happen
Speaker 2: next week, and all of a sudden, we have domestic
Speaker 2: terrorism that justifies the budgets of these institutions. Did that
Speaker 2: make you feel as if the timing could play in.
Speaker 8: Yes, yeah, that's where I'm on you. But you know,
Speaker 8: it's also the nature of government, of bureaucracy is to grow.
Speaker 8: It's amazing that when our agencies fail, their solution is
Speaker 8: we should just give them more power and money.
Speaker 2: The incentive structure is totally broken.
Speaker 8: It is, and their definition of success is completely atypical.
Speaker 8: I mean, you know, if you're a law enforcement agency,
Speaker 8: theoretically getting crime to zero is your goal, but you're
Speaker 8: incentivized to make crime go up so that you can
Speaker 8: get more capabilities and resources. But then also what do
Speaker 8: you use them towards? You look towards your perceived enemy.
Speaker 8: Your perceived enemy is anyone opposed to your growth?
Speaker 2: Yes, well exactly, And I mean look exactly at what
Speaker 2: the FBI has been doing. They are creating these terrorists.
Speaker 2: I mean, like, and I don't mean in the sense
Speaker 2: that Obama created Isis, which like I think they really
Speaker 2: did arm train and fund Isis to be a thing.
Speaker 2: But I mean they're like they're grooming these broken people
Speaker 2: almost always menu to then just pad their budget, and like,
Speaker 2: I just think I think that if you're right, if,
Speaker 2: in particular, if that Louisiana attacker was not just on
Speaker 2: their radar but being assisted with his you know process, uh,
Speaker 2: and then they fucked up and they didn't take him
Speaker 2: down and he was then able to kill fourteen Americans,
Speaker 2: they should be held criminally liable. Like I think that's
Speaker 2: the only way this stops. Because if you're not held
Speaker 2: criminally liable when people die as a consequence of your operation,
Speaker 2: that you're running like, it's not going to stop. Steve,
Speaker 2: So what are you? What are your thoughts? Should they
Speaker 2: be prosecuted?
Speaker 4: Yes, I mean, and I would extend that out.
Speaker 8: I mean, people are gonna you want to talk about extremists,
Speaker 8: like I'm an extremist. I believe that if you take
Speaker 8: an oath in a position of public trust and then
Speaker 8: from that position, you deem it to be appropriate to
Speaker 8: put people who in a cage to further your career,
Speaker 8: that it's not enough for you to well, we're gonna
Speaker 8: do some remedial training.
Speaker 2: Oh you know what.
Speaker 8: We're gonna suspend your clearance. We're gonna remove you, we're
Speaker 8: gonna fire you, We're going to prosecute you. I think
Speaker 8: that you should be on trial.
Speaker 4: For your life. Yeah.
Speaker 8: I know that that sounds extreme and people get really
Speaker 8: uncomfortable with it. I think if you were willing for
Speaker 8: evenn for a minute to take a person's freedom away
Speaker 8: to line your pocket, that you forfeit the ability to
Speaker 8: breathe the air.
Speaker 2: I have to agree. I mean I oppose the death penalty,
Speaker 2: but other than that, I do agree that you know,
Speaker 2: once you have a high level of authority, I mean
Speaker 2: you're essentially like you're a superior being to the American
Speaker 2: citizen who doesn't really have the right to do all
Speaker 2: these things, Well, you have a higher level of responsibility
Speaker 2: then and if you violate that trust, well then you
Speaker 2: have to be held to a higher level of account.
Speaker 2: And as of now, what we've seen is Liz Cheney
Speaker 2: and the other gentleman I forget his name that was
Speaker 2: on the J six hearing. Yeah, Benny Thompson, who is
Speaker 2: best I can tell withheld exculpatory evidence which allowed for
Speaker 2: American citizens to languish in prison. We're just given the
Speaker 2: second highest civilian you know, honorarium from Joe Biden.
Speaker 8: Yesterday Benny Thompson was in charge of TSA, whatever the
Speaker 8: committee is.
Speaker 4: He directed TSA to.
Speaker 8: Put all the J sixers on the quad esses on
Speaker 8: the Quiet Sky's program to impede their ability to have
Speaker 8: free movement.
Speaker 2: I mean, how can you give the I mean, this
Speaker 2: guy ought to be in jail for that, but instead
Speaker 2: he's given an award. It's to make it.
Speaker 8: I mean even you can dress that. I guess do
Speaker 8: they want this medal? I mean, really, what is the value?
Speaker 8: And when she puts her head on her pillow tonight,
Speaker 8: do you think Liz Cheney is thinking like I'm an
Speaker 8: American hero. I mean, she might because she's just that demented.
Speaker 8: But contrast that with like James Comer, who has shared
Speaker 8: the Oversight Committee for two years, has been talking NonStop
Speaker 8: about how they're going to get to the bottom of
Speaker 8: all the Biden corruption and they're going to show you
Speaker 8: they're going to connect the dots. They've done all this research,
Speaker 8: they issue, they have sham hearings, the issue reports strongly
Speaker 8: word letters. He gets himself on cable news, and when
Speaker 8: he gets on cable news during the holidays is so appropriate.
Speaker 4: So he didn't even have like the host.
Speaker 8: It was Jason Chafitz, a fill in host. He says,
Speaker 8: you can learn about it in my book that I
Speaker 8: just wrote and published. Hey, James, that's our information. It
Speaker 8: shouldn't be in your book that I can read about.
Speaker 8: But that's what these people do. They get elected to
Speaker 8: be something to line their pockets to now actually do
Speaker 8: the job.
Speaker 4: They're not interested in doing the job.
Speaker 8: The job is supposed to be a civil servant. You
Speaker 8: take that oath of office, and you're supposed to take
Speaker 8: it seriously. It's not supposed to be an opportunity for
Speaker 8: either enrich yourself or you know, get high on the
Speaker 8: hog and set yourself up Pelosi style with some stock
Speaker 8: portfolio due to the insider trading. It's gross and I mean,
Speaker 8: I can't name, I couldn't name really anyone in Congress
Speaker 8: who I trust to babiesit my kids, let alone be
Speaker 8: in charge of giving funding to agencies that are capable
Speaker 8: of taking away people's freedom or the potential of their lives.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and I have to agree with that assessment. And
Speaker 2: it's it's tragic because it seems as if the only
Speaker 2: time we get actually, you know, good things in scare
Speaker 2: quotes to happen via Congress. It's largely being done because
Speaker 2: it either allows them to write a book or it
Speaker 2: allows them to give a great speech on you know,
Speaker 2: in the in the Capitol. But it doesn't actually help
Speaker 2: the people who have been victimized by the system. It
Speaker 2: doesn't seem as if it's interested in justice. I mean,
Speaker 2: this is this has been my major critique for years
Speaker 2: now about Anthony Fauci. I mean, Anthony Fauci. He egregiously
Speaker 2: purjured himself in front of Congress, egregiously, and let's just
Speaker 2: not skip over the real details here. He purjured himself
Speaker 2: about funding a bioweapon like, That's what he purjured himself about.
Speaker 2: And no prosecution, not even for the like, not even
Speaker 2: for just lying to Congress. He's he's also apparently the
Speaker 2: fact that he violated laws that make it illegal to
Speaker 2: fund bioweapons research that we're never gonna get a fucking
Speaker 2: hearing about that.
Speaker 8: So I just think, can we contrast that with my
Speaker 8: my friend Garrett A Boyle, FBI whistleblower, who the Democrats
Speaker 8: referred for perjury charges after he had testified.
Speaker 4: Exactly he was referred. Do you know the lie that
Speaker 4: they said that he that he committed.
Speaker 2: I don't.
Speaker 8: When he was in behind closed doors, they asked him
Speaker 8: who was paying for his attorney, and he said there's
Speaker 8: a charitable foundation that's footing the bill, and the attorney said, no, actually,
Speaker 8: I'm doing it pro bono.
Speaker 4: The Democrats said he lied and wanted him put in
Speaker 4: a cage.
Speaker 8: Well, they just basically did that so they could have
Speaker 8: the leak to the media that he'd been referred for
Speaker 8: burgury charges to his credit.
Speaker 2: YEP, that's exactly what they did with a few of
Speaker 2: the people in Trump's camp that like it was basically
Speaker 2: dates that they got wrong. And then there's just but
Speaker 2: they're they're sitting down being interviewed under you know, friendly pretenses,
Speaker 2: so that they're not they're not being as cautious as
Speaker 2: they ought to be as to like make sure you
Speaker 2: get every fucking date right, because if you don't, they're
Speaker 2: going to say that you lied. And they're going to
Speaker 2: charge you. And that's what they did to like half
Speaker 2: of Trump's inner orbit, what I find fascinating.
Speaker 8: Oh, go ahead, No, I was, And that's why, you know,
Speaker 8: we'll talk about the Republicans being so dangerous.
Speaker 4: You know, the members of the mosque for.
Speaker 8: This this terrorist in New Orleans. That mosque is now
Speaker 8: represented by CARE. They're telling their members if the law
Speaker 8: enforcement reaches out to you, go to CARE.
Speaker 4: They're going to give you an attorney. And then all
Speaker 4: the people on the right are saying.
Speaker 8: Like you should investigate them all what they're not going
Speaker 8: to cooperate. I'm sorry you've been telling We've been telling
Speaker 8: our people for the last four years. If the FBI
Speaker 8: knocks on your door, lawyer up, do not cooperate. The
Speaker 8: Muslim community in this country, by and large, is like
Speaker 8: a quarter a century ahead of the curve.
Speaker 2: Yeah, of course, well, because they've been dealing with it
Speaker 2: for a quarter century longer than the rest of us.
Speaker 2: Oh my god. All right, So I think that the
Speaker 2: last question I have for you, and we'll get out
Speaker 2: of here, is you know that tweet from Trump last
Speaker 2: night about activating the CIA, As you said, hopefully it's
Speaker 2: not literal, But given what Trump's dealt with, you know,
Speaker 2: having his entire campaign spied on by the FBI, multiple
Speaker 2: impeachments over shit that he wasn't guilty of, that the
Speaker 2: Bide administration was guilty of, so many, so many examples
Speaker 2: of the deep state working against him. He still doesn't
Speaker 2: seem to me to have the the I don't know,
Speaker 2: the hutzpa to actually challenge this system. Do you think
Speaker 2: that when that bullet grazed his head he he kind
Speaker 2: of broke a little bit that he's not ready to
Speaker 2: take on this machine, that he doesn't want to die.
Speaker 2: Because I don't want to die either. I don't blame him.
Speaker 2: But what's your read of his like his energy going
Speaker 2: into his second term?
Speaker 8: I mean, I've never had interfacing with Donald Trump specifically.
Speaker 4: I mean I've read that people have been.
Speaker 8: Saying, oh, he's been changed since that experience in Butler.
Speaker 8: I mean, maybe it shocked him out of his reality
Speaker 8: of I mean, and let's just be clear about who
Speaker 8: Donald Trump is. He's a seventy eight year old Fox
Speaker 8: News guy.
Speaker 4: He's your dad. He's your boomer dad.
Speaker 8: Who watches Fox right, I got his core and the
Speaker 8: boomer dad watching Fox is the one who's saying, like,
Speaker 8: why are these Muslims at this mosque not willing.
Speaker 4: To talk to the FBI?
Speaker 8: So that I think maybe that shock has shocked his
Speaker 8: reality and got him away from saying, hey, I can
Speaker 8: ever cooperate with the media, I can ever have unity
Speaker 8: with the communists that are within government, and maybe lean
Speaker 8: on his business acumen and his experience where he's fired
Speaker 8: enough people throughout his career and seeing like, hey, you're
Speaker 8: not cutting it right. Then we're going to have to
Speaker 8: have wholesale major changes that I can do as the
Speaker 8: executive and unfortunately we don't really have co equal branches
Speaker 8: of government anymore. A lot of these changes have to
Speaker 8: be made at the executi level. So for the time being,
Speaker 8: at least he can make those changes and hopefully bring
Speaker 8: about the changes that are necessary that we're all kind
Speaker 8: of hoping for, and then just fundamentally rethink the way
Speaker 8: things are being done. Like you keep saying, drain the swamp,
Speaker 8: you keep saying it's failed. You can't try the same
Speaker 8: thing just with your guy in there. We have to
Speaker 8: be able to say that six and one half dozen
Speaker 8: the other let's not renovate, let's demolish entire agencies exactly.
Speaker 2: Well, this is this is the vac's answer. Viveks in
Speaker 2: the inner circle. Cash Pattel seems to talk that talk.
Speaker 2: Let's see if you walks it. Toulci seems to be
Speaker 2: a reformer. RFK certainly has promised major reforms. So we've
Speaker 2: got we've got a lineup that's not incapable of it.
Speaker 2: Will they have the will? Will they be undermined by
Speaker 2: our three letter agencies to stop them? I'm actually nervous
Speaker 2: about inauguration Day, like, especially with all this terrorism that
Speaker 2: we've already experienced on the first I don't know, I
Speaker 2: don't know if you have any thoughts about that, but
Speaker 2: go ahead and tell people where they can follow you.
Speaker 2: I really appreciate you your feedback on this. You did
Speaker 2: make me feel better and that hopefully these things aren't
Speaker 2: actually coordinated and we're dealing with a serious operation here.
Speaker 2: But yeah, thank you again.
Speaker 4: Man, you got it.
Speaker 8: And let me give you one more closing thought here,
Speaker 8: just maybe make you happy for the day. I know
Speaker 8: you've interacted with cash Pateel, but your audience probably hasn't
Speaker 8: I have as well. Well, everybody knows his qualifications. I
Speaker 8: think he's eminently qualified for the job. He brings a
Speaker 8: unique perspective, being both a prosecutor and a defense attorney,
Speaker 8: national security experience, just a really squared away guy. Let
Speaker 8: me tell you about the individual two and a half
Speaker 8: years ago, a little lessan two and a half years ago, one,
Speaker 8: I was first suspended unpaid, indefinitely unpaid by the FBI
Speaker 8: Thanksgiving at my parents' house, feeling a complete abject failure.
Speaker 8: Who stood at the altar with my wife and took
Speaker 8: promise to take care of her and couldn't cash. Btel
Speaker 8: found my phone number and he called me on the phone.
Speaker 8: He said, I run a foundation that supports whistleblowers and
Speaker 8: military veterans. My foundation wants to help you pay your
Speaker 8: health insurance bills and feed your family through the holiday season.
Speaker 4: So the next two months.
Speaker 8: And I don't want credit for it. I don't want
Speaker 8: you to do anything for it. I don't want you
Speaker 8: to go out publicly and say how great I am.
Speaker 8: This is just something that I believe in. That's the
Speaker 8: measure of the man that's going to.
Speaker 4: Be the FBI director.
Speaker 8: So there is hope in America when that's the type
Speaker 8: of person that's coming coming in here and then hopefully
Speaker 8: in the next few weeks. And as far as personally
Speaker 8: where people can find me, x handle is at Real
Speaker 8: Steve Friend and I have a podcast that I do
Speaker 8: with Garrett Boyle, another FBI whistleblower, that's called the American
Speaker 8: Radicals Podcast that's available on Rumble Rumble dot com, slash
Speaker 8: am ragpod and you can also pick it up on
Speaker 8: iTunes and Spotify, and iHeart love.
Speaker 2: It, love it well as much as I have. You know,
Speaker 2: you've given me real optimism about cash Hotel, and I
Speaker 2: already have it after meeting the guy. He's he's certainly
Speaker 2: an impressive figure, and I think that he's he's prepared
Speaker 2: and ready for the job. As far as I'm concerned.
Speaker 2: Until he hires people like you and Garrett O'Boyle back
Speaker 2: into the FBI, I'm still going to be extremely skeptical
Speaker 2: of that agency, but I hope it happens. We'll see
Speaker 2: if you guys enjoyed this episode. I think that this
Speaker 2: was a perfect h you know, capper to the episode
Speaker 2: I did yesterday, so I hope people will also share
Speaker 2: this one around. Do hit the like button, subscribe, leave
Speaker 2: a comment down below if you think we got anything
Speaker 2: wrong and I will catch you guys next time were
Speaker 2: out here, peace, Welcome.
Speaker 1: To Liberty, lockdown, let's got your pot. Home to Liberty
Speaker 1: ain't come.
Speaker 2: But yeah, it's alcohol. It's where did it come from?
Speaker 2: And where did he