Speaker 1: Marketing is hard, but I'll tell you a little secret.
It doesn't have to be. Let me point something out.
You're listening to a podcast right now, and it's great.
You love the host, you seek it out and download it.
You listen to it while driving, working out, cooking, even
going to the bathroom. Podcasts are a pretty close companion.
And this is a podcast ad. Did I get your attention?
You can reach great listeners like yourself with podcast advertising
from libsynads. Choose from hundreds of top podcasts offering host endorsements,
or run a pre produced ad like this one across
thousands of shows. To reach your target audience and their
favorite podcasts with libsynads, go to libsynads dot com. That's
l I B S y n ads dot com Today.
Speaker 2: Remaining and live man like this man letting butterfly flattening
wing big down in our forced Man, it gonna cause
a tree fall, letting five thousand miles away, man, nobody
see nobody else and you got directed.
Speaker 3: Acted Nan, All right, look at that. So this will
be a little different than normal. It's not an interview,
it's not a live stream, just a monologue, right me
and you. Now there's two reasons for that. One, I
haven't done one of these in a while. I thought
it'd be fun. And two, Uh, let's be honest. The
more important one is that, Uh, I'm in kind of
a content behind all right. I have a whole bunch
of things scheduled, but nothing that meets this deadline. And
the interview was supposed to come out today Thomas and
I talking about the West Memphis three with a first
hand source. Uh didn't work out. The guy, as the
kids say, crashed out, quit kind of lost. It won't
get into that perhaps best left unsaid. So I needed
something to do, and I figured we'd bring back an
old staple, the Jay Burtons Show article reading streams or podcasts.
I guess because this isn't going out live. This article
and I'm going to read for you is actually cited
in a piece that I have written coming out tomorrow
with my friends at Juneto or huntil I'm not entirely sure.
An outlet on substack started by some friends with mine,
and I might add, actually, by the way, in addition
to their substack, which is quite good, they also have
a really fascinating intel tab. This is not the point
of the stream It's just something that I was showing
me where effectively you can find all sorts of interesting
things like a campaign finance tracker, networking map, can wright
wing talent network. Not for jobs, of course, but just
track different people and their institutional affiliations. Even if you're
not a conservative per se, there's a lot you can
glean from there. Right, It's fascinating information, and the network's
growing rapidly. They didn't pay me to say that. I
just think it's kind of neat. So if you're interested,
check that out. In addition to my article which cites
this piece, the one that we're going to be going over,
it's a part of that argument, not the whole thing,
but this article written in New York Magazine by Brooks
what's his last name or first name rather, by Dan Brooks,
going over the recent DJ release of the Epstein files. Right.
And the reason I'm reading this is partially because, look,
I got a slot I need to fill, but also
because it's a really interesting argument. You see it come
up again and again from these sort of professional managerial types. Right.
Brooks may not be smart enough to express it well,
but he is smart enough to pick up on a
trend to pick up on the direction the winds are blowing,
so also somewhat interestingly, initially this article was titled Pizzagate
Wasn't real right? They changed it. I thought that name
was a lot better the new one. Jeffrey Epstein loved
sex trafficking pizza did. The newly released documents lend support
to the old Pizzagate conspiracy way worse title. The first
one was great. The latest tranch of documents released by
the Department of Justice related to its investigation of Jeffrey
Epstein contains four hundred and eighty two occurrences of the
word pizza, which seems like a lot. By comparison, the
word Hamburger appears only one hundred and ninety tens, while
the phrase sex with children appears twenty times, including in
some kind of tract sent to the FBI with the
impenetrable title sex Collectors, Halet, Tony Blair, Cullen, Gordon Brown,
British Intelligence I six MI five Dunblane Pedophiles, nWo Illuminati Freemasons,
as well as in this photograph Epstein's brother Mark provided
the Agency in twenty twenty. For those this is a
photo of a flip phone from Mark Epstein, which says
five twenty nine are five twenty four excuse me, you
have a good family. Do they know if you had
sex with children you will die? And then a link.
These two artifacts represent two ends of the evidentiary spectrum.
A seemingly explicit indication that somebody was abusing kids and
getting blackmailed and threatened for it, and a dispatch from
the most fevered corner of the conspiracy minded Internet. You
would think the conspiracists would be thrilled by the blackmail stuff,
but for the time being, they have focused their attention
on the pizza. I'm just going to go through this
intro and then once we get into actual meat of it,
get my analysis. Admittedly, some of the pizza related material
seems pretty weird. An April twenty eighteen message from a
redacted sender says, let's go for pizza and grape soda again.
No one can understand go kN oh cryptic. Some of
it is scrutable. Go no k and o appears to
be a rendering of go no, an English derivative of
the Yiddish express gay vase ge. I'm sorry, I don't
understand the Star Wars language, which is roughly equivalent to
go figure. The claim that no one else can understand,
on the other hand, is a creepy element that echoes
Donald Trump's allusion to the Wonderful Secrets and his infamous
letter on the occasion of Epstein's fiftieth birthday. This combination
is the essence of the latest cash some question. Some
questions yield to research. Others are stubborn but tantalize, inviting
readers to fill in the blanks with what they could
not possibly know. Pizza and grape soda blombe to the
latter category and appears frequently in Epstein's emails and texts.
In a twenty eighteen exchange with his zerologist Harry Fish,
who erroneously appears in Epstein's context as Harry phish Fish,
the two seem to discuss refilling Epstein's prescription for a
rectile dysfunction medication. Phish later texts, after you use them,
wash your hands, and lets go get pizza and grape soda.
This proposal seems odd. There are many things you can
do after your viagra kicks in, and getting a slice
with your doctor is not near the top of the list.
In another context, it might just be funny. But the
confluence of pizza and grape soda with Epstein, a man
increasingly known for exactly one thing, and boner pills is
enough to drive a reasonable person to conjecture. Remember when
only unreasonable people thought like this? The idea that pizza
could be a code word for illicit sexual activities was
laughable in twenty sixteen, when the so called pizza Gate
conspiracy captured the imagination of what charitably might be called
the internet's most enthusiastic use users. The theory, which emerged
after wiki Leak's publicly released the personal emails of Hillary
for America campaign chair John Podesta, hinged on the belief
that references to pizza were code for children used for sex.
From that bedrock assumption, Pizzagate theorist concluded that the Clintons
and other powerful Democrats were satanic pedophiles operating an abuse
in cannibalism, ring from various restaurants in the Washington, DC area.
Why else with the staff of presidential campaign talk about
ordering a pizza. Even the theory's most ardent believers lost confidence. However,
after a man named Edgar Madison Welch brought a rifle
to one of the restaurants, Comet Pizza, and demanded to
see the children being held in its basement. Comet Pizza
had no basement, and Welsh eventually surrendered to police. In
January twenty twenty five, he was shot and killed during
an unrelated traffic stop in North Carolina. I prefer not
to comment on this turn of events. Okay, so several
things here. One, I'm not like Pizzagate guy, but this
is a really interesting timeline because he's partially and he
also does some false equivalency here, so he is correct.
Pizza Gate happened months like roughly three or four months
before QAnon, which is probably what you're thinking of when
you hear the term pizzagate, and it came from, as
he said, the John Podesta emails. Now, the first part,
you know, the idea that this restaurant and others were
being used for child sex trafficking, is part of kind
of the og, the first strain of pizza Gate. But
all the other stuff, the Democrats, the the crazy stuff
about Hillary Clinton, that's QAnon. And I have long contended
that QAnon is a massive op. Right, just look at
the kind of similarities to what the the Communists were
doing to the white Russians, right, the propaganda they were
doing during Russian Civil War. Well, sure, some of it
was throw down your arms and surrender, but a large
portion of it was effectively, everything is fine, the Communists
are being destroyed. You don't have to do anything. QAnon
obviously has a very similar character to it, right, the
idea that there is the shadowy force in the US government,
that patriots are in control, that so many of these
hated figures for the followers of q have been arrested, tried,
and executed in Guantanamo Bank, This is a really interesting
equivalence one you see often. Now he mentions it. The
framing on this is slightly changed because for a long time,
almost a decade, Pizzagate, the widely debunked conspiracy theory, was
sort of the the the prime example for the regime
of why conspiracy theories are dangerous, because it resulted in
this mass shooting. Now he mentions it, of course that welch,
this guy brought a rifle into comment pizza. So I'm
not going to get into this. Like I said, the
point of this is not to be a pizza Gate video.
What it is to go over the reaction to it. Right,
this is sort of an inciting incident, but it's worth
saying nonetheless, So a couple things. One, it's not a
mass shooting. He didn't shoot anyone. He fired one bullet
and that bullet went through the door of the maintenance closet.
He was attempting to rescue children from into the four
hundred thousand dollars server rack in a pizza place, destroying
the hard drive. Just things that normal pizza places have.
If you're curious, if you want to watch security cam
footage of the attack, you can't because every single one
of them was turned around on that day, which is weird.
Now Brooks is actually correct, I don't have a smoking gun.
You know, this is the sort of question that defies researchers.
But it's interesting certainly. Obviously the fact that he was
shot and killed. You know, he seemed to be sort
of an unstable individual. I don't necessarily want to comment
on that, but it's a weird thing to have happened.
And also, of course, the Podesta emails are just as
if not more incriminating. My friend Daryl Cooper Martyer made
did an excellent series digging into the Podesta emails highly
recommend checking that out. There's a lot there, I'll put it.
I'll put it that way, go into his art collection
his associations. Point is the idea that this is simply
some sort of conflagration of like QAnon and like Retardo
conspiracy theory is it's like, well, sure that exists, but
that's not all of it. And it is very convenient
QAnon exists because it forms a great straw man. You
don't actually have to address real meaningful criticism inconsistencies. You
can just say, well, those people believe JFK is going
to resurrect from the grave and appear it in Rockefeller Plaza,
they're transparently stupid. Anyway, back to the article, because we
have we have a lot to go. At the time,
the assumption that pizza was code for sex with children
seemed obviously arbitrary and extravagant, a violation of the principle
that the simplest explanation is usually the right one. This
heuristic octims razor, which, by the way, progressives are very
tactical in their invocation of Oham's razor. One may may
think of systematic racism or either glass ceiling or the
patriarchy as sort of wonderful examples of this where the
most simple explanation is completely and totally inappropriate. Back to
the narrative, This heuristic Ocome's is often a handy way
to differentiate ideas and people we should take seriously from
ones we can safely dismiss. People who are frustrated that
they've misplaced the keys tend to be more credible than
those who think their keys have been stolen. Except with
the Epstein pizza thing that somebody stole my keys contingent
seems to have been suddenly and disastrously vindicated. As of
February twelfth, a Reddit post titled pizza code words littered
in Epstein files has gotten twelve thousand upduts and eighteen
thousand comments, many of which center on the idea that
the Pizzagate conspiracy has been proved basically correct, even if
it got some of the specific th wrong. One commenter wrote,
I wouldn't be surprised if they came up with the
original conspiracy to take attention away from the places where
it was actually happening. And William of Oakham rotates in
his grave like rotisserie chicken, so several things there, right, Look,
I have no great lover of Reddit for any number
of reasons. But okay, surely you know, as open minded
progressives as liberal defenders. Fourth Doxy, we should at least
hear this out. Are we going to hear this argument out?
Dear listener, I think you know the answer. One must
keep a level head. Even though these recent Epstein materials
do make the financi here seem strangely interested in pizza
and unusually committed to having it delivered to other people.
Several emails, such as May twenty fourth, twenty seventeen, send
Pizza to Bobby, appear to be an automated calendar reminder.
The Bobby in question here is comedian Bobby Slayton, the
subject of pizza reminders on consecutive days in twenty seventeen.
Another message to an unnamed recipient goes into detail about
how this pizza should be procured. Artures opens at four pm.
Be there when they open and order the pizza then
delivered to three oh one. The message reads. The numeral
three oh one refers to Epstein's townhouse at three oh
one sixty six Street, where Slayton appears to have been
staying at the time, These instructions seem too specific and
mundane to be about anything but the actual pizza. Similarly,
this message, which acts a redacted recipient to pick up
pizza from Patsy's on West seventy fourth Street and then,
in a change that should annoy anyone who has ever
worked as an assistant for the first Avenue and one
one hundred and eighteenth Street locations said looks too detailed
to be coated. To read it as a cipher, you
would have to assume that Patsi's does not refer to
one of the better pies in the city, but rather
to a specific type of illicit activity available at two
locations where actual Patsy's Pizzeri's happened to be. Okay, sure,
these specific instances, it's probably correct, but there's a lot
more there, right, you have in these files Epstein's assistant
referring to a sixty thousand dollars pizza room in his
renovated apartment. That's kind of weird. I mean, look, man, like,
you know, I like a deep dish pie as much
as the next guy, and I get it. Sixty thousand
dollars is a lot less of a thing for Epstein
than it is for me. But uh, I don't know, man,
that seems a little bit odd. You have other references to,
you know, renting a pizza. I don't know how one
would do that. And look like my conclusion is not
particularly I am mister pizzagate. I believe it. But this article,
as we will get into, is clearly a disingenuous reading.
The point of this article is not the title. The
point of this article is not to examine the claims made.
The point of this article is to effectively refocus the
angst of the progressive reading this away from this uncomfortable truth,
this uncomfortable thought that maybe the chuds were onto something
and onto their real target, which, let's be honest, is
those chuts. Yet Otkham's razor has comparatively little to tell
us about grape soda. Fish and Epstein refer to pizza
and grape soda so often and so often together, seemingly
never just grape soda and rarely just pizza, that the
whole thing starts to look like a shibbalthe I'm gonna
leave that there. On March thirty first, twenty eighteen, Fish
texts pizza, grape soda, naf said, a little more than
half an hour later, Epstein replies, go no, the same
expression and expression with which he answered the no one
else can understand message, also about pizza and grape soda.
There the exchange ends, leaving the reader to guess what
happened next. The mystery deepens when you notice Fish often
follows references to pizza and grape soda with emoji depicting
an African American, at least four times that I noticed.
On May twenty fourth, Fish texted Epstein to suggest they
try the pop tarts at Greenberg's Bakery, meaning William Greenberg Desserts.
Epstein textbacks June fourth, and Fish responds, first we get
a slice of pizza with grape soda, then the pop tart.
Epstein responds, wow, Fish sends the black judge emoji. This
is another exchange that seems potentially too weird to really
be about pizza and grape soda. Grape drinks are stereotypically
associated with African Americans, huh, A bit of niche racism that,
in combination with the status of cheese, pizza, and soda
as essentially juvenile foods, invites all manners of conjecture. The
amateur detective might conclude that pizza and grape soda means
black prostitutes, or one Italian prostitute and one black prostitute,
or one black child and one Satanic cabal dressed like
Super Mario. You couldn't know, but you can speculate endlessly.
Then the next day, thick fish text couldn't wait, followed
by an actual photograph of an actual slice of pizza
and actual grape soda cuts through, and suddenly the whole
conversation looks like what it first appears to be. Two
older Jewish men with problematic running joke about their mutual
infection for particular combinations of foods. Go figure, and again,
this is exactly what I'm talking about. Right, there are
millions of documents, between two and a half and three
and a half million, depending on who you ask. There's
endless fodder for narrative creation. Just put a pin in
any one of his claims, because very clearly, as we
get to the back half of this, it will become
clear that this is all motivated reason. It's that actually
concerned with this question. He simply found convenient examples that
support what he already thinks But then there's this to
thrust the reader right back into paranoia. Two Jeffrey. Jeffrey's
email from redacted, Good afternoon, Would it be possible for
Bryce and I to go over to Red Hook and
have a quick pizza meal? Warmest regards? The sender's name
has been redacted in the identity of Bryce is unclear,
but a former New Zealand Army chief named Bryce Gordon
co managed Epstein's New Mexico rams and was interviewed by
the FBI in two thousand and seven. Red Hook is
an unincorporated town in the US Virgin Islands, the least
populated such place, according to a twenty twenty census, consisting
mostly of marinas. There is, as it turns out, a
pizza restaurant there, But why would someone needs Epstein's permission
to have a quick pizza meal to which the financier
was not invited. It's enough to drive a sensible person
to speculation among online conspiracists. Among online conspiracists, speculation had
already won the day again, and the people who bought Petz,
bought into pizzagate are declaring that they were right all along.
This is exactly the section of this article that got
me to do this strength this next one. It is
one of the while the sentences ever written in an article,
especially in allegedly a respectable And I don't know why
I'm surprised by this. I shouldn't be. I still am,
deep down. I think I have some sort of a
battered sense of shame and standards that I really should disregard. Anyway,
this is the section the people who bought into Pizzagate
are declaring they were right all along. They weren't. If
Epstein and his friends did use pizza as a code
word for sex, that wouldn't mean that the original Pizzagate
conspiracy theory was correct, even if it was the case
that pizza was a sexual code word in the Podesta emails.
So basically we see here the shifting of the goalposts
that the conspiracy isn't correct unless it matches up with
the predictions of another conspiracy. Look like, I do not
believe in Kewanon. I do not have the maximal take
on Epstein, But this is a horrible argument. He's basically saying,
even if you're right, well you're not right. I mean,
that's effectively a more concise way to say exactly what
he said it's absurd, and we get some slight chin
stroking next to you to bulk out this argument. But
there's really not much to it. Don't worry. This carries
on from here. A person who stumbles on the correct
answer through incorrect reasoning is still mistaken. Socrates explains this
principle in Plato's Mino Dialogue, in which a servant boy
correctly guesses the area of a two foot by two
foot square four feet, then reveals his ignorance by declaring
the area of a four by four foot square is
eight feet. Socrates argues the boy was wrong when he
got the right answer. He thought you calculated the area
of a square by doubling the length of one size. Anyway,
Socrates was put to death by popular vote. That's democracy
in action. The potential for thousands or even millions of
Pizzagate conspiracists to feel vindicated and therefore empowered by the
preminence of Pizza in the latest bash of Epstein's files
is scary in a similar democratic fashion, evoking the opposite
fear from of the excuse me, evoking the opposite fear
from the fear of elites. The heart of the Epstein
conspiracy a terror of ordinary people. That is the point
of this article. This author, his audience is way more
afraid of the chudgs of you, of the people who
may or may not have been right about their conspiracy
theories quote unquote, than they are of, you know, the
actual collection of blackmailers, inside traders, actual traders, and the
sexual abusers at the center of this that is comparatively
less of a scary or disconcerting thing to them. The
Epstein story is unkillable because it is a vampire story. Huh.
A parable about the power and privilege that wealthy people
wield in the twenty first century. Show me a guy
who believes Epstein traffic children to Bill Clinton and Donald Trump,
and I'll show you a guy who thinks rich people
run the world. He's not wrong about that second part,
but he's probably wrong about the details as well as
a host of other stuff, including but not limited to
vaccines and Jews and lasers that control the weather. I'm
not touching that, and his righteous wrongness. He's become one
of the most terrifying forces in the twentieth century America.
And that's the thing right that you have to be right.
You not only have the goalpost shifted to simply being
factually correct, but you have to be factually correct in
a way that this progressive type believes is appropriate. Look like,
this isn't a real argument. This is a dismissal. It's basically,
you're racist, and so I don't have to listen to you,
even if you're right. This is an essay arguing for
people to just stick their head in the ground. And
this is ultimately why my takeaway from the last several
years politics is as bad as things are. It's worse
for them, right, It's worse for the elite.
Speaker 2: Right.
Speaker 3: Okay, maybe this guy isn't like an Epstein level elite,
but I did some research into him. He's ideallygue educated,
he's an advertising executive. He's a wealthy, well educated man.
But they've lost all self confidence, right, They have seeded
the ground that they are wrong and are now arguing
on well, you're right, but not for the correct reasons
you're wondering. This is exactly what happened to conservatives and
evangelical leaders in America forty fifty years ago. They ceded
the central claim, they held on to their specifics. You know,
they stood astride you know, the great train of progress
and yelled stop. But they lost. So I think that
this is you know, and there's more analysis after that.
But I think that this is a moment for optimism
because of that when millions of people like him find
one another, it can cause Hughes problems. I submit that
the fear of such people is fundamental The experience of
being an educated liberal in Trump's United States listen closely
more frightening than the syndicate of pedophilic celebrities, finance seers
and their urologists, because it operates in greater numbers. So
in this latest batch of Epstein files we find weirdness,
double terror, the sensation that some of the most powerful
people in the world really did commit acts of imaginable
cruelty and perversion, and the feeling that the craziest people
in the world about to get a lot more influential
as a result. There are two conspiracies out there, the
mysterious conspiracy of elites that was the life of Jeffrey
Epstein and the dwell documented conspiracy of morons that is
American democracy. It is possible that we are ruled by both. Well. Shoot,
I honestly thought that you guys seeing that article the
same that I was, well, that's embarrassing, so I guess
you've been staring at my face. I'll put the link
down in the description if you guys want to go
through it. But yeah, there's a lot in that article. Right.
The terror, right, the real fear that they have lost
or are losing, is something you see really throughout liberal
and progressive thought. In my mind, this is why after
Obama too, the left got really nasty. I think that,
deep down, if I could psychologize them for a bit,
there was this fear, this fear that not only was
this great messianic figure of Obama, the reincarnation of Martin
Luther King, the man who would heal the indelible sin
of America, not only did that not work out, not
only did healthcare get more expensive, not only did the
wars not and not only did gay marriage not do
all the things it was claimed to do. But the
chudges were still there, these these this conspiracy of morons,
these you know, these racists who you know prot along
about Jewish space lasers and the like. They didn't go away,
and so the focus shifted, of course, shifted to punishing them.
These figures became sort of a recasting of the Soviet
records for those who aren't familiar. And I don't know
if this is true. It may be apocryphal, but it
stands for this point, when the Soviets were encountering issues,
they couldn't meet quotas, things were moving inefficiently, machines broke. Well,
if the state owns all of those things and it's
not going well as a reflection on the state, the
state cannot be criticized, And so where do they externalize
that blame? Well, externalized didn't on the wreckers. The reason
we didn't make enough pig iron, the reason that this
tank is late, Well, it's not because of any problem
with the proletariat, not with any problem with the state.
It's the wreckers, right, this sort of shadowy force. They
are the reason. And in much the same way the
progressives turned to these evil conspiracy theorists, these racists as
the explanation for why there's sort of heaven on Earth
not materialized. We saw a huge reversion to this in
the aftermath of Donald Trump's first win. I mean, look
the whole modern discourse on I say modern, it's been
a decade on conspiracy theories is basically that it is
cope or why Hillary Rodham Clinton didn't win, right, the
most prepared, the most perfect quote unquote candidate in history,
Why did she lose to this orange O. Well, it's
the Russians, it's conspiracy theorists, that's queue it on. It's
it's uncensored social media, it's anything but me, anything but
the state. And I think you're seeing the exact same thing.
And fundamentally, it seems as if these progressive types are
much more afraid of that than they are of Jeffrey Epstein.
Now also, and this is much more the point of
my article in juneto, which is how I will pronounce
it until someone tells me how to, is why does
the progressive who fundamentally casts himself as a rebel right?
There's a reason they're always, you know, comparing themselves to
Harry Potter or to to Star Wars right, the underdog
fighting against an evil, oppressive system. Why do they feel
the sudden urge to run to the defense of that
same system?
Speaker 2: Right?
Speaker 3: Why are they rushing to defend in the FBI at
DJ there's another article I haven't I have read. I
just haven't read it. On to you guys from the
New York Times by one Daniel Richmond. Huh, the Epstein
file should never have been released, which makes exactly that point, like, oh,
this makes the system look bad and from a progressive
liberal type, well aren't you the underdog? Aren't you fighting
against the system? Well no, we all understand that isn't true. Fundamentally,
these people have the same politics as JP, Morgan, Chase
and Raytheon and them. I five, right, they're not rebels.
But I think a large part of this on ease
is that it is that feeling of disquiet. It is
that feeling that that core central myth to who you are,
what justifies your existence, how you conceptualize yourself politically qua religiously.
It's like, oh, shoot, I'm not I am the institution.
We understand that, right, Brooks the others I mentioned Nick
Lowles as well. If you guys heard me talking to
Dan the other day, I did. I have found that article.
Someone was able to find it for me very quickly.
So I appreciate your guys help with that. These guys
are not rebels. They love to cast themselves as activists.
They love to cast themselves as those who speak truth
to power. Of course, right, it's not true. It's not
true at all. Obviously, they receive lots of money from
the government, as I've said, the same politics as you know,
Fortune ten companies in every government in the West. But
this puts them in an awkward situation. Of course, I'm
going to cut that out. I just completely lost my
train of thought. Anyway, this places them in a very
precarious situation. On twofold, one, they're moral legitimacy internally, right,
This sort of narrative they tell themselves is on fundamentally
unstable ground, which is huge. We referred earlier right to
the self confidence required to rule, and that self confidence
requires this kind of externally externalization of plain Well, if
you're sort of stuck in this situation of realizing one
this central myth I told myself is not correct, and
two my greatest fear really stated that the Chuds have
been justified, that they have been granted moral legitimacy. It's
a very interesting thing. It's sort of an inadvertent admission,
you know, those two things kind of bundled together. So yeah,
I get much more into this in my article for
June too. You should check it out. It's pretty good.
There's a lot more in it than when I went
over here. I pull from another source in that by
the infamous Nick Lols who and that's you know, that
is nice, right in addition to hearing about all these guys,
when you read their defenders, right, when you read those
who seek tokind of miscast and recharacterize these tragic events.
Lulls was, of course reacting to the Grooming gang scandal,
but there are obvious and clear parallels between the two.
This is one of the great things about having a
you know, certain religious belief is that it's like, okay, well,
you know, as a servant of power, right, as a
client ally of the regime, sure, you know, he may
well escape punishment. He seems to be quite wealthy and
have a pretty easy job. But uh, you know that
dude's getting just Kentucky Kentucky fried now, So you know, anyway,
I know this is a little bit shorter and a
little bit different than normal. As I said earlier, it
wasn't my plan. It's just sort of something I had
to pull out of my back pocket. But I appreciate
you guys. Appreciate you guys. That is an impressive illusion
of three words. I appreciate you guys a lot. Thank
you so much for the support. Regularly skeed old episodes
will resume tomorrow. We'll get back to kind of the
normal swing of things. Sorry, I know it's not a
full length episode, but you got thirty five minutes of
me talking, which is basically, if you only listen to
my audio track like a month of the Jay Burden Show,
as long as Carl Doll's not all, we don't count us.
But anyway, guys, I appreciate it. I'll be back tomorrow.
To everyone at home, keep your head up. Good night,