Speaker 1: A Jesse Kelly Show. Let's have some fun on a Tuesday,
Speaker 1: and know what a tuesday it has been. Trump to
Speaker 1: the big press conference today. I'm not going to play
Speaker 1: a lot of that. But there are a couple things
Speaker 1: from Pete hag set There a couple updates on that
Speaker 1: communist op. We will discuss all kinds of immigration talk.
Speaker 1: We're gonna discuss institutional trust, institutions themselves a lot tonight
Speaker 1: on the show. After that, we're gonna tackle everything from smartphones, venezuela,
Speaker 1: left wing, dark money. I mean, my goodness, there's so
Speaker 1: much to get to tonight. It's going to be a
Speaker 1: wonderful night on the Jesse Kelly Show. Now, before we
Speaker 1: get into anything else, anything else, we talked last night.
Speaker 1: You remember about communist ops and how they create them,
Speaker 1: why they create them, and it was about the Pete
Speaker 1: haig Seth killing the Narco terrorists on the drug boats.
Speaker 1: He ordered a second strike, and more than anything else,
Speaker 1: we talked about how important it was that you and
Speaker 1: I do not take part in them. We don't take
Speaker 1: part in them. And it's not because we love or
Speaker 1: hate the target of the communist op. We do not
Speaker 1: take part in them. Because we understand the communist only
Speaker 1: has our worst interests at heart. He means us harm.
Speaker 1: He wants to hurt you and hurt me and hurt
Speaker 1: our country. Therefore, whatever he's doing is bad and I
Speaker 1: should not participate in it. You you don't ever want
Speaker 1: to be Lisa Murkowski of a Last Shocked Us All armed.
Speaker 2: And I think most would say that when you have
Speaker 2: two individuals that are literally floating in the water, a
Speaker 2: second order to kill them all is not something that
Speaker 2: we would consider within the within the rules of water, you.
Speaker 1: Don't do what Lisa Murkowski did. And today I almost
Speaker 1: can't believe I'm saying this, but the New York Times
Speaker 1: printed an article that pretty much put the whole thing
Speaker 1: to bed. I'm not going to read it all for you.
Speaker 1: Long story short. When your liberal and Peggy strolls into
Speaker 1: the Christmas party a week from now and she starts
Speaker 1: talking about how Pete hag Seth ordered Sealed Team six
Speaker 1: to shoot drug dealers in the head as they were
Speaker 1: floating in the water, just know that all that's already
Speaker 1: been shot down. A second strike is the most normal
Speaker 1: thing in the world, meaning you nuke the boat if
Speaker 1: the boat is still intact or still moving. You nuke
Speaker 1: it again, you send another drone, you send another whatever
Speaker 1: you use to get it. You do it again and
Speaker 1: again and again until it's gone. There was no executing
Speaker 1: prisoners as they're bobbing in the ocean. You didn't take
Speaker 1: part in the communist op. And for that I want
Speaker 1: you to reach your arm over your shoulder and give
Speaker 1: yourself a nice pat on the back if you want.
Speaker 1: You could even text a friend let them know you're
Speaker 1: not a moron. You're not part of the low TGP.
Speaker 1: You recognize the communist op for what it was. You
Speaker 1: refused to participate, and twenty four hours later the lie's
Speaker 1: been defeated. Pete Hegsath was asked about it today during
Speaker 1: this big press Compey.
Speaker 3: Just begun striking Narco boats and putting Narco Terrace at
Speaker 3: the bottom of the ocean.
Speaker 1: That is how you answer those questions as well. Now
Speaker 1: I understand based on my emails, you have many, many
Speaker 1: questions and concerns about things like war in Venezuela, and actually,
Speaker 1: in kind of an odd DUC move with everything else
Speaker 1: we have to get to, I want to answer some
Speaker 1: of those just so we can clear this up and
Speaker 1: move on and talk about institutions and institutional trusts. For instance,
Speaker 1: this lady said, I'm confused about what constitutes a war crime.
Speaker 1: And she goes on says a bunch of other things,
Speaker 1: and she says, how is it when the Trump military
Speaker 1: tries to do something make sure the enemy is killed,
Speaker 1: it's called a war crime instead of heroism. So let's
Speaker 1: discuss the idea of war crimes. I think I think
Speaker 1: maybe we should nail this down to it to its
Speaker 1: most basic form. First of all, do you believe it
Speaker 1: would be rules in more? Now? I see it's a
Speaker 1: hard question to answer right away. Right instinctively, you want
Speaker 1: to say yes, well, of course there should be rules
Speaker 1: of war. You shouldn't do this, you shouldn't do that.
Speaker 1: You don't want to use this kind of weapon, you
Speaker 1: don't want to torture people, you don't want to hurt children.
Speaker 1: This is a question right off the bat. Everybody has
Speaker 1: to ask themselves because the answer you instinctively give isn't
Speaker 1: necessarily the answer you want to give. Should there be
Speaker 1: rules and more? Well, I'll go ahead and answer it
Speaker 1: for me personally, I believe there should be rules in war,
Speaker 1: but I should never expect the enemy to follow said rules.
Speaker 1: Now I didn't say what my rules were or what
Speaker 1: they weren't. Why why didn't I specify. I've brought this
Speaker 1: up before anyone who's listened to the show for a
Speaker 1: while and those I love history, But my number one
Speaker 1: historical obsession, it has been for years, in a decade,
Speaker 1: is the Pacific portion of World War II, the fighting
Speaker 1: with the Japanese and the islands and everything else. That
Speaker 1: just fascinated by the whole thing. And I've told you before.
Speaker 1: I mean, you can go watch documentaries on it if
Speaker 1: you find a good one. Marines. Marines were routinely killed
Speaker 1: and maimed by Japanese troops who faked being wounded, who
Speaker 1: faked being dead, who faked surrendering just so they could
Speaker 1: kill more marines and army soldiers. There were plenty of
Speaker 1: army guys there. Eb Sledge, he wrote that wonderful book
Speaker 1: with the Old Breed, talked about how the Japanese would
Speaker 1: tuck a grenade under their arm pits and raise their
Speaker 1: hands up, only they'd have the top of their arms
Speaker 1: close to their body. And when the marine approached, you
Speaker 1: reach out your arms, drop the grenade, You kill everybody
Speaker 1: so if I were to ask you, remember we have
Speaker 1: to have this talk. If I were to ask you, hey,
Speaker 1: should you execute someone who's surrendering, you would probably say,
Speaker 1: like all these people would.
Speaker 3: No, But.
Speaker 1: How many of your friends do you have to see
Speaker 1: die like that before you decide, Oh, there's no more surrendering.
Speaker 1: No no, no, no, no. Everybody gets popped in the head. Everybody.
Speaker 1: The Marines and the army soldiers routinely ran into this
Speaker 1: nightmare because American troops were at their hearts good people.
Speaker 1: They did not want to harm women or children. The
Speaker 1: Japanese soldiers knew this, and so when the Japanese soldiers
Speaker 1: would hide in caves, if civilians were available, they would
Speaker 1: take women they're still nursing, babies and children into the
Speaker 1: caves with them. If you're a marine, you can't go
Speaker 1: into the cave and rescue them. It's not possible. You'll
Speaker 1: die or your buddies will die. You also can't leave
Speaker 1: that cave with armed Japanese troops in it, because then
Speaker 1: they'll come out at night and cut your buddy's throat
Speaker 1: when he's asleep. You have to neutralize it. And so
Speaker 1: the Marines would grab satchel charges throw them in the
Speaker 1: caves and blow it up. Sometimes everyone in there died instantly.
Speaker 1: Sometimes the entrance of the cave would simply collapse and
Speaker 1: everyone in there would slowly starve to death and die
Speaker 1: of thirst in the pitch black. The men, the women,
Speaker 1: the children. Now let me ask you again, what are
Speaker 1: your rules for war? Don't those quote rules? Don't they
Speaker 1: become always situationally dependent? You know, the more powerful fighting
Speaker 1: force is always fond of rules of war. You can't
Speaker 1: do this and you can't do that. Sign disagreement, say
Speaker 1: you won't do that, you won't harm this, you won't
Speaker 1: attack this way. You know why. It's the less powerful
Speaker 1: fighting force that oftentimes violates what you and I would
Speaker 1: consider rules of war necessity. They have to. So let's
Speaker 1: discuss and the chances this is going to offend. You
Speaker 1: are probably pretty strong. Let's discuss the rules of drug runners, terrorists?
Speaker 1: What should be done? How have we been doing it?
Speaker 1: Maybe you didn't watch it on CNN. I'll tell you
Speaker 1: about it. Next, it is the Jesse Kelly Show on
Speaker 1: a Fantastic Tuesday. I remember you can email the show
Speaker 1: you love, your hate, your death threats Jesse at Jesse
Speaker 1: kellyshow dot com. We're going to get to institutional trust
Speaker 1: after we finish up on this little talk here on Venezuela.
Speaker 1: So the question was about war crimes. What are war crimes?
Speaker 1: And I just discussed with you rules of war. Do
Speaker 1: you believe in them? What do you believe about them?
Speaker 1: So let me explain. Let me explain how it's always
Speaker 1: worked and how it will always work. For instance, let's
Speaker 1: say it's Iraq. Let's you get intelligence that there is
Speaker 1: a convoy of terrorists and they're heading towards Bagdad. They
Speaker 1: cross the border from Syria. It's a convoy of terrorists.
Speaker 1: There are bad guys in there. Now, first of all,
Speaker 1: don't ever, ever, ever think to yourself that it works
Speaker 1: like it does in the movies where one guy reports
Speaker 1: to you, Hey, I think there are some terrorists in there,
Speaker 1: and then you and a bunch of helicopters and bombs
Speaker 1: and bullets you roll out and just go kill everybody.
Speaker 1: That's not how it works at all. In the United
Speaker 1: States of America, there is a long chain of command
Speaker 1: for these kinds of strikes that has to be signed
Speaker 1: off on by this commander and that commander. It's not
Speaker 1: a one off thing. One guy doesn't get to push
Speaker 1: the button, is what I'm saying, because he feels like it.
Speaker 1: And by the way, that includes the Secretary of War.
Speaker 1: One guy doesn't get to push the button. Several guys
Speaker 1: have to look at the intelligence, look at what's there,
Speaker 1: and say, okay, boom stamped approved, boom stamped approved. It
Speaker 1: goes through a long, long list, a checklist. Now let's
Speaker 1: go to the nitty gritty, the ugly part of it
Speaker 1: that you may not like because it doesn't remind you
Speaker 1: of Captain America. Once all the check marks have been gotten,
Speaker 1: once the stamp of approval was on the paperwork, everyone
Speaker 1: in that convoy is going to die. And they're not
Speaker 1: all necessarily going to be holding weapons at the time.
Speaker 1: They're not all going to shoot first. In fact, I know,
Speaker 1: I know this violates our comic book sensibilities, but I
Speaker 1: actually don't want him to be armed first, and I
Speaker 1: don't want him to shoot first, because then there's a
Speaker 1: chance he'll kill me. Once I've determined that he's an
Speaker 1: enemy combatant, I want to sneak up behind him and
Speaker 1: put one in the back of his head. Therefore he's
Speaker 1: dead and I'm alive. And so are my friends. So
Speaker 1: how does it work. Well, you send in whatever you
Speaker 1: happen to send in. It happens a variety of different ways.
Speaker 1: I mean, it can be everything from tomahawks to just
Speaker 1: all kinds of different ways. You can choose to nuke
Speaker 1: that convoy, but not only do you nuke the convoy once,
Speaker 1: then you're flying over it at the time and you're
Speaker 1: looking for signs of life. That includes somebody crawling on
Speaker 1: the ground with its legs blown off. And if you
Speaker 1: detect signs of life, if you detect intact vehicles most definitely,
Speaker 1: because there's munitions in those vehicles, you have to assume.
Speaker 1: Then you send in another strike, and another strike and
Speaker 1: another strike until everyone is freaking dead. Because that's war.
Speaker 1: War is ugly, it is unfair, it is terrible, and
Speaker 1: people die. And contrary to what Hollywood would have you believe,
Speaker 1: you don't wait until he shoots for punch, his first
Speaker 1: grid toal weapon and gives you no with the choice,
Speaker 1: but the take of life. You hit first, and you
Speaker 1: hit hard, and you make sure he's dead, over and
Speaker 1: over and over again. That's how war has always been
Speaker 1: done and will always be done. Now I talked yesterday
Speaker 1: about the communists and how they don't care about war crimes. Right,
Speaker 1: none of this is about war crimes. Is it a
Speaker 1: violation of the laws of war. None of this is
Speaker 1: about that. This was simply an op, a communist op
Speaker 1: designed to divide the Trump administration. If they're lucky, take
Speaker 1: out Pete hegg Sath. You understand what it was. We
Speaker 1: already talked about that. As far as the international laws
Speaker 1: of war, I'll be honest with you, I laugh at them.
Speaker 1: And you know the reason I laugh at them, It's
Speaker 1: not because I don't want there to be rules. I
Speaker 1: very much do want there to be rules. Rules. I
Speaker 1: don't want civilians heard, I don't want people tortured, I
Speaker 1: don't want people gassed and things like that. The reason
Speaker 1: I've always laughed about the laws of war is the
Speaker 1: entire history of the world is the second someone's losing,
Speaker 1: they violate the rules in the law because they don't
Speaker 1: care about it at all. You know, there were laws,
Speaker 1: rules against using poison gas and World War One, the
Speaker 1: second Germany decided it couldn't break the stalemate they had
Speaker 1: going out, came the poison gas. There were all kinds
Speaker 1: of rules and laws and this war and that war.
Speaker 1: And well, the second you start losing, the second it
Speaker 1: starts going against you, you throw those things out and
Speaker 1: you do all the things that are against the rules.
Speaker 1: I laugh when I hear college boys in Washington, DC
Speaker 1: do gooders who've never seen combat talk about the rules
Speaker 1: of war and war crimes and things like that, because
Speaker 1: all it tells me is you've never actually been there.
Speaker 1: And of course they'll roll out some air fingers quote veteran,
Speaker 1: and he's almost always some jag Fobbitt who never left
Speaker 1: the line. He never heard a shot fired in anger.
Speaker 1: He never saw an ounce of blood unless it was
Speaker 1: the sliver he got at the chow hall going back
Speaker 1: for his fifth helping of chocolate cake while the rest
Speaker 1: of us were out on patrol. It's the only blood
Speaker 1: he ever saw in the global war on terror. And
Speaker 1: now he's, of course a democrat, and he's talking about
Speaker 1: Pete Haig said in the Rules of War, and I'm
Speaker 1: not really comfortable. Hey, bb b b BBB. And these
Speaker 1: are the subversives that have me greatly concerned about potential
Speaker 1: war with Venezuela. I'm going to give you one more
Speaker 1: thought on this and why I'm concerned, and then we're
Speaker 1: moving on. We're going to talk about institutional trust. Hang on,
Speaker 1: it is the Jesse Kelly Show on a Wonderful Tuesday,
Speaker 1: talking about rules of war. Now, finally my final thought
Speaker 1: on this, because I want to talk about institutional trust.
Speaker 1: There's a story out from the FDA that maybe went
Speaker 1: by you. Maybe you don't care. I very very much
Speaker 1: do care, and we're about to talk about it before
Speaker 1: I get to that. Venezuela. I don't know what's coming,
Speaker 1: neither do you. There's all kinds of saber rattling, if
Speaker 1: you will, there's I don't know what's coming, but I
Speaker 1: will say this, and I'm sure the Trump administration is
Speaker 1: well aware of what I'm going to say, so I
Speaker 1: don't want to act like I'm educating them about something.
Speaker 1: We no longer have a Democrat party in the United
Speaker 1: States of America. We have an anti American communist party
Speaker 1: in the country. You see it every single day. But
Speaker 1: what's the difference. Well, Democrats may push for leftist things,
Speaker 1: there's no question about it. But once you go full communist,
Speaker 1: then what you are is a subverse of trying to
Speaker 1: hurt the country. You could argue when nineteen eighty five,
Speaker 1: Democrat was doing things that hurt the country. Hey, I
Speaker 1: didn't like that policy. I didn't like this policy. You
Speaker 1: could argue that all day long. But as a whole,
Speaker 1: the party itself wasn't designed to hurt the country. Hurting
Speaker 1: the country may have been a byproduct of bad policy,
Speaker 1: it wasn't designed for that. With the modern day Democrat
Speaker 1: Party being a subversive communist party, we have to consider
Speaker 1: something that maybe you haven't considered. Think about this. Let's say,
Speaker 1: just for the sake of argument, let's say we go
Speaker 1: full on, boots on the ground regime change in Venezuela.
Speaker 1: I'm going to set aside the politics of trying to
Speaker 1: sell that to the American people and stuff like that.
Speaker 1: We've already discussed that. I'm not getting into it tonight.
Speaker 1: Just say it's happening. Trump says, the Marines are going
Speaker 1: in the air strikes, begin the works, right, all right?
Speaker 1: How many people in the Central Intelligence Agency can be trusted?
Speaker 1: How many people inside the National security apparatus of the
Speaker 1: United States of America are there to bring down the
Speaker 1: United States of America. How many people in the Democrat
Speaker 1: Party would work hand in hand with the media the
Speaker 1: Central Intelligence Agency, every other part of the system to
Speaker 1: actually try to get us to lose that war so
Speaker 1: the Trump administration would look bad. How many How do
Speaker 1: you prosecute a war like that? It's not that wars
Speaker 1: have to have universal support from everyone back at home
Speaker 1: in order to be successful. That's not the case. In fact,
Speaker 1: that's rarely the case. I'm not saying that you can
Speaker 1: have people who are against the war for the war.
Speaker 1: Oh that's fine. But what if you have one of
Speaker 1: the two major political parties and they'll burn this whole
Speaker 1: place to ash in order to hurt Donald Trump's approval numbers.
Speaker 1: How do you fight a war like that? What? How
Speaker 1: does that look on the ground. Okay, well, let's just
Speaker 1: game this out, shall we, and then we'll move on
Speaker 1: and talk about institutional trust because this is actually going
Speaker 1: to tie directly to it. The Trump administration right now
Speaker 1: they're doing things like nuking drug boats and closing the
Speaker 1: airspace over Venezuela. Well, these are policies that generally Americans
Speaker 1: are okay with. One. We don't have any strong like
Speaker 1: of narco terrorists, so when you watch an internet video
Speaker 1: of some getting blown up, you don't care. But that's
Speaker 1: only part of why you're okay with it. You're okay
Speaker 1: with it because no Americans are being harmed. In fact,
Speaker 1: there's not even a real risk of any American being harmed.
Speaker 1: The Biden administration took a brutal, brutal hit to their
Speaker 1: public approval numbers when thirteen warriors died at Abby Gate,
Speaker 1: and everyone kind of knew it was their fault. The
Speaker 1: American people will tolerate a certain amount of foreign adventuring
Speaker 1: right up to the point where they're burying troops. Then
Speaker 1: they start to get upset. This is not new. The
Speaker 1: FDR administration was gravely concerned about the casualty numbers at
Speaker 1: Ewojima before we got into the Japanese invasion because they
Speaker 1: knew the American people were sick of it. They were
Speaker 1: really worried about it, and justifiably so. The American people
Speaker 1: do not want blood. Now, let's say you're just hypothetically
Speaker 1: a United States senator from Michigan. Let's say you have
Speaker 1: deep ties to the Central Intelligence Agency. Let's say there
Speaker 1: are a bunch of people in the CIA, just for
Speaker 1: the sake of argument, who are actually committed communists who
Speaker 1: would love to burn America down. Let's say you're this
Speaker 1: senator kind of agree and the very least you don't
Speaker 1: care if America burns now. Let's say you have knowledge
Speaker 1: of the location of a ship off the coast of Venezuela.
Speaker 1: The Venezuelans don't know about a ship that if the
Speaker 1: Venezuelans knew about it, they actually had the ability to
Speaker 1: take it out. How hard do you have to work
Speaker 1: to slip that information to the Venezuelans. So a destroyer
Speaker 1: gets nuked in the water, and you wake up tomorrow
Speaker 1: morning and find out four hundred American sailors are at
Speaker 1: the bottom of the ocean. What happens to Donald Trump's
Speaker 1: approval numbers? If four hundred American sailors end up at
Speaker 1: the bottom of the ocean. And you know for a fact,
Speaker 1: I don't mean you have to try to convince you.
Speaker 1: You know for a fact every elected Democrat in Congress
Speaker 1: would happily hand over that information in order to hurt Trump.
Speaker 1: You know, these people have proven there's nothing they won't
Speaker 1: do in order to get Trump. Shoot. They tried to
Speaker 1: freaking kill him, framed him for crimes. You think they
Speaker 1: won't kill some sailors? They don't care about means nothing
Speaker 1: to these people. I am worried about our ability to
Speaker 1: prosecute any war with anybody with a subversive party like
Speaker 1: this inside the United States of America. And I'm not
Speaker 1: talking about being against the war. If there was a war,
Speaker 1: That's not what I'm discussing at all. All kinds of
Speaker 1: people and probably you are going to be against actual
Speaker 1: military action like that. That's not what I'm saying. I'm
Speaker 1: not talking about run of the mill against the war.
Speaker 1: I'm talking I want to burn this country down. Trump
Speaker 1: is hurting the revolution, and if I can kill a
Speaker 1: bunch of American troops, then I'll do it in order
Speaker 1: to further the revolution. And that's the kind of Democrat
Speaker 1: party we have. Now. How quickly do you think Jasmine
Speaker 1: Crockett would hand out critical pieces of intelligence to the
Speaker 1: enemy if she thought it would help the revolution. She
Speaker 1: wouldn't even hesitate, wouldn't even hesitate at all. Think about
Speaker 1: that all right? Now? That brings me to something that's
Speaker 1: completely unrelated, but I'm going to go off on it
Speaker 1: because it matters. It matters a lot. We're going to
Speaker 1: talk about institutions and institutional trust because I got this
Speaker 1: email about Venezuela. Although we're done with Venezuela. Jesse. I
Speaker 1: was listening to the opening of yesterday's show about commie ops,
Speaker 1: and the key part is using corrupt institutions to give
Speaker 1: the op credibility quote seven sources, the CIA, Harvard, etc.
Speaker 1: It's tough for people who still trust the media in
Speaker 1: these institutions not to fall victim. Even when I listen,
Speaker 1: I can feel a twinge of angst, thinking, oh, that
Speaker 1: does sound bad. So we're now this is going to
Speaker 1: take a while to walk our way through this, but
Speaker 1: we're going to discuss another danger of where we are
Speaker 1: as a country right now, and that is we don't
Speaker 1: have institutions that are trustworthy. We have pulled our trust away.
Speaker 1: They have proven to be untrustworthy. How do you march
Speaker 1: forward as a country when the people themselves feel as
Speaker 1: if the contract with their institutions has been broken. Let's
Speaker 1: discuss that much. It is the Jesse Kelly Show on
Speaker 1: a Wonderful Tuesday everyde If you can email us your love,
Speaker 1: your hate, your death threats Jesse at Jesse kellyshow dot com.
Speaker 1: So we're gonna get to all kinds of things, but
Speaker 1: you're gonna have to buckle up for a few because
Speaker 1: this might take me a little bit. We're gonna have
Speaker 1: a discussion we've talked about again again and again and again,
Speaker 1: and we'll keep talking about it because it is so important.
Speaker 1: It's everything institutions and institutional trust. All nations are built
Speaker 1: on top of their institutions. The institutions hold up the country. Now,
Speaker 1: let me let me break this down in a way
Speaker 1: that I haven't before. Medical institutions, because that's what we're about
Speaker 1: to We're about to discuss that in a moment. But
Speaker 1: medical institutions, even if you're a small village, it is
Speaker 1: so important that you have someone someone there who can
Speaker 1: provide some kind of medical care when people get sick
Speaker 1: or hurt. Now today you're thinking about doctors and nurses
Speaker 1: in medical school and things like that, and we'll get
Speaker 1: to that in a moment, But even in a small village,
Speaker 1: there has to be a medicine man or something like that.
Speaker 1: But not just the medicine man. You see, he has
Speaker 1: to have people training underneath him. The recipes and things
Speaker 1: they use, they come down from generation to generation to generation.
Speaker 1: The medical man, the medical institution of that village must
Speaker 1: be there because the people in the village, the people
Speaker 1: in that tribe. They have to know, Hey this itches,
Speaker 1: Hey I broke my leg, my tummy's upset, my wife
Speaker 1: is pregnant. They have to know there is a place
Speaker 1: they can go to get accurate medical care, accurate efficient
Speaker 1: medical care. They have to know. And the institution of
Speaker 1: it is everything. Religion, media, entertainment. These institutions are pillars
Speaker 1: that hold up societies. There has to be for media,
Speaker 1: for example, in the media, now this is going to
Speaker 1: be laughable because of the disgusting media we have in
Speaker 1: this country. It's critical because you're busy. You have a life,
Speaker 1: you have a job, you got school, you got this,
Speaker 1: you got that, you got everything else. You don't have
Speaker 1: all day long to pay attention to the news and
Speaker 1: to dig through archives here and archives there and listen
Speaker 1: to the police scanner. And you know you don't have that.
Speaker 1: What do you have. You've got fifteen minutes thirty minutes
Speaker 1: time when you're working out, maybe at work, to tune
Speaker 1: into somebody to try to get accurate information on what
Speaker 1: is happening in the world, in your country, in your state,
Speaker 1: and in your community. There has to be an institution. Therefore,
Speaker 1: in your country that train people to give out accurate,
Speaker 1: unbiased information so normal people can be informed. But we
Speaker 1: don't have it here, and it's devastating. Now. I know
Speaker 1: that we have options, you and I we both have
Speaker 1: options now because of social media and all the different
Speaker 1: podcasts and shows, and there are all kinds of places
Speaker 1: you can go now, go that are outside of tradition.
Speaker 1: But we lost it, and we lost these institutions. I'll
Speaker 1: get to the medical ones. We lost these institutions not
Speaker 1: by accident. We lost these institutions for two reasons. The
Speaker 1: first reason we lost our institutions is it just it
Speaker 1: just seems to happen with time, meaning countries, especially large,
Speaker 1: powerful countries like ours, over a long enough period of time,
Speaker 1: for a variety of reasons, the institutions will eventually be
Speaker 1: taken over by evil, selfish, corrupt people, and they will
Speaker 1: ruin the reputation of the institution by taking it over
Speaker 1: and doing evil, horrible, corrupt things. And once that institutional
Speaker 1: trust is gone, once the people think it's a joke,
Speaker 1: then honestly, you might as well bury the institution because
Speaker 1: it no longer serves a purpose at all. I almost
Speaker 1: laughed when I heard this lady. Her name is what
Speaker 1: is it? Katie Turr is her name. She's been a
Speaker 1: communist activist pretending to be a journalist for years and
Speaker 1: years and years and years and years. She is with MSNBC.
Speaker 1: This is what she said. Listen to what she said.
Speaker 3: People don't trust us, they don't believe us, and it
Speaker 3: makes me wonder if this job, as I'm currently doing
Speaker 3: it is effective, but if it's doing more harm than good.
Speaker 1: Katie terror sought out journalism because Katie Turr wanted to
Speaker 1: move the communist revolution forward. She didn't seek out journalism
Speaker 1: because she wanted you to be informed about the news
Speaker 1: of the day, the weather, the crime, the economy. That
Speaker 1: that never crossed her mind. And you know how you
Speaker 1: can tell what crossed her mind. She actually dropped the
Speaker 1: word in there that was so revealing. Did you catch it?
Speaker 1: I'll play it again. We'll see if you can catch it.
Speaker 1: It's one word. It tells you all you need to
Speaker 1: know about how she views her job as a journalist.
Speaker 3: People don't trust us, they don't believe us, and it
Speaker 3: makes me wonder if this job as I'm currently doing
Speaker 3: it is effective, but if he's doing more harm than good?
Speaker 1: Effective what do you mean by effective? If you saw
Speaker 1: yourself as a journalist whose job it was to inform
Speaker 1: people of simple facts, the truth, why would you ever
Speaker 1: be concerned about being effective. You would only use that
Speaker 1: word if you saw your job as being something other
Speaker 1: than the truth and the facts. You see, these people
Speaker 1: are everywhere. Brian Stelter's another great example. What is this
Speaker 1: all about?
Speaker 3: Is this just about controlling the narrative.
Speaker 1: To legitimize the media? I would say, is to delegitimize
Speaker 1: the media, Jessica, And this media bias monitor is being
Speaker 1: produced at taxpayer expense. A He's worried about the Trump
Speaker 1: administration delegitimizing the media, but the media delegitimized itself. It
Speaker 1: was conquered by corrupt, evil, selfish people who saw their
Speaker 1: job as being something other than informing the public. And
Speaker 1: now the trust is gone and they can lament it
Speaker 1: all day long, but they did it, which brings me
Speaker 1: to our medical institutions. Get to that in a moment.