Let me suggest that as a legislature, your
chief job is to ensure that my taxpayer
dollars in this state go toward making sure
that people like me and people with whom
I disagree get to speak in places like
college campuses and not toward regulating what speech
you find good and what speech you find
bad because it's a really dangerous business. And
there's speech I don't like, there's speech you
don't like. But if we can't agree that
there is a difference between speech and violence,
we're not gonna be able to have a
free state, let alone a free con.
Because we're losing a lot of people because
of the Internet. And we have to do
something. We have to go see Bill Gates
and a lot of different people
that really understand what's happening. We have to
talk to them maybe in certain areas closing
that Internet up in some way. Somebody will
say, oh, freedom of speech. Freedom of speech.
These are foolish people. We have a lot
of foolish people. And I think you should
get a one year jail sentence if you
do anything to desecrate the American flag. Now
people will say, oh, it's unconstitutional.
Those are stupid people. Those are stupid people.
The the direct and contradictory is The United
States foreign policy. That's it. The secretary of
state has a charge on the secretary of
state. We can serve a national security threat.
When you're on campuses, they say and I
hear the freedom of speech. Freedom of speech.
Can you say the movie theater you're on
fire? Can you slander
somebody's burger? Freedom of speech has limitations. But
when you go to college campus, you incite
protesting
and locking down and taking over buildings and
and damaging property and handing out leaflets for
Hamas, who is a terrorist organization.
Coming to this country either on a visa
or becoming a resident alien is a great
privilege. But there are rules associated with that.
You might have never get away with that
stuff in the last administration, but you won't
under this message.
Welcome to the daily wrap up, a concise
show dedicated to bringing you the most relevant
independent news as we see it from the
last twenty four hours.
Thursday,
March thirteenth twenty twenty five. For those in
the podcast, I'm laughing because I was it
seven shows in? I still can't seem to
figure out this ridiculous stream start StreamYard setting
that causes that to happen. Probably all my
fault. But thank you for joining me again
today. I actually think I mean, I've I
think we've said this a lot in in
recent times, and I I really do when
I say this, I'm not just kind of
it's not some marketing thing. You know what
I feel about marketing. But I feel like
it's a very important show. And it seems
like that's happening a lot lately, and I
think there's a reason for that. But today,
in general, it's not just this show and
it's this topic.
This is obviously important, and I think everybody
even, like what's interesting is even people who
are, like, vehemently disagreeing with what I think
is the most basic stance in this conversation
still also think this is very important. So
it's interesting to see that this is a
very important inflection point in this country's history.
We're watching
and that's why I framed it the way
I did in the title today. This is
not a left or right dynamic, guys, and
we need to stop playing this childish game
with the people that draw you into it
on purpose. That's very, very transparent.
It's a the US government is playing a
game to get you to accept the removal
of your own rights. It's been going back
and forth like James Corbett just highlighted.
It's a it's it's foundational.
From one administration to the next, they push
the boundaries, and it continues. And they use
the other administration to act like they're responding
to to go back and it keeps going
forward. You know, every single time, it's a
response to something before pushing back on the
things they're trying to steal from you, and
it just cements more control over your life.
And even if they actually think they're doing
what they're we can see the outcome.
We can look back as the administrations go
forward. We can look back from from Obama
to Trump to Biden and watch how it
continued to go in this direction. And if
you can't see right now that's the the
stones that Trump's team is putting together in
the same exact direction of all the things
we thought we were fighting, I mean, certainly,
I guess I could be living in some
different dimension and seeing these things that you're
not, but my god, this stuff seems to
be blatant.
And I go I'm not gonna go over
all of you everything. I mean, we are
we even debating that no one agrees with
the mRNA injection or the technocracy? I mean,
all these different things. So freedom of speech
is a foundational
idea, and this is what's so important that
this is not just to Americans.
This is such a central point to this
conversation, and what they're trying to do is
drive that wedge between us, between the people
that have been built to this idea that
feel that this country and this I'm not
even saying this good or right or wrong,
good or bad, but that this country is
the pinnacle of western civilization. There's a lot
of things in some ways I would agree
with that. Some ways I vehemently disagree. The
point though is that this line has been
drawn to where it only applies to this
and anybody else. You have to earn that
right. And, sure, these are fee things that
we could discuss.
The problem, though, is a lot of these
statements
immediately and verifiably
contradict what we, the people making those arguments,
think they're pointing to, which is the constitution,
your rights.
And these are inherent god given rights for
people.
And we're gonna make this very clear for,
I don't know, the fourteenth time on this
show that you've read the constitution, any person,
it says, in every one of these context,
the fifth and the fourteenth amendment, over and
over, not only Americans or apply even that
you read the entire document. It doesn't at
any point say this is only for people
in this country. The reality is you stand
back and look at the document, it becomes
very clear that's the case, but then let's
go forward.
Roundly, repeatedly, you have supreme court rulings that
find that that is the case. Now there
are, as I've always pointed out, nuance to
it. There are exceptions in certain context. You
can obviously take it very extreme,
and then and it would make sense. And
that's why they're trying to play this game
today, trying to conflate very flimsy things, things
that were said with groups that you can't
even verify today that aren't even him saying
things, and that's the best they can do,
to argue that somehow he represents this idea
that's dangerous.
Well, then you just hear Ben Shapiro telling
you that it's a slippery slope to to
conflate violence with words. Yes. Funny how he
used to think that or rather probably never
actually did. At least he made the argument
when it suited his interest. Like, we've talked
about them circling the country, talking about woke
ideology,
and then literally doing the same things today
with a slightly different narrative.
That's the woke right, guys. It's the same
thing, and that's the point. It's not left
to right. It's no government trying to keep
you corralled in the direction of going, I
want that to be taken from me. I
want you to step on those things. I
want as long as the other side's the
one you're doing it to. Make them look
dumb, and then
20 I mean, you know, right away, time
goes forward. Sometimes even in the same administration,
it broadens out to just about anybody.
Now today, what we're gonna be highlighting obviously
is Mahmoud
Khalil, but the larger conversation of how this
applies. And, again, the foundational point to start
is even if every single thing they've said
well, oh, I should take that back because
the reality is things that they're claiming are,
I I mean, ridiculously not true in a
lot of context. We've already gone through it.
We'll go through it again today. You're watching
this show. You know that I'm not just
gonna make statements like that without giving you
things to look at for yourself, source material
for you to verify, or the evidence that's
available, which shows you that they don't know
it either. But the point is that when
you're calling somebody a terrorist,
you damn well better have the evidence to
prove that in a court of law. And
what green card, Visa, or even a legal
alien in most context have the right to
due process, and this is one of those
context. You don't just get to label someone
a terrorist or violent or Hamas supporter and
therefore deport them. Even if every one of
those things are true, they still have the
right to due process.
Isn't that what we all pretend
we believe? I believe that. The idea that
if you're gonna be leveled a charge if
someone levels a charge at you, especially and
most importantly the government, that you have a
right to see your accuser and see the
evidence.
The idea that we can just go you're
this and you're gone because you weren't here
originally is disgusting, and it shows you the
kind of reality we live in. And I'm
not saying disgusting because
immigrants,
because this is a foundational point no matter
who it is. You, your neighbor, somebody from
another country. It undermines the things that keep
us safe within a statist society if you
even argue that's what's happening. And that's, as
always, another conversation about what if we should
even live in a society that is a
statist society with a government and whatever else.
Whole different conversation. But when we are and
we are in that now, the constitution
is what keeps, in some way, some kind
of balance to the situation.
And as we can clearly tell, it's not
all encompassing because we're rapidly falling into some
kind of an authoritarian control if we already
haven't been there for quite a while. And
I obviously think that's because of a lot
of other government's influence and a lot of
different things that are happening in a global
sense. Either way,
this is an important fight.
This is something that everybody who believes in
these things left or right and really sees
through the game that all is, it's time
to stand up and make a very principled
stance about this. It's not about whether you
believe in what Khalil believes, Mahmoud Khalil, or
or any of that.
It's about your belief or our collective belief
in this country that he has a right
to think those things, whatever they are. As
always, it is not the easy speech that's
defend that needs defending.
You agree with people. You don't need to
fight for their right to say those things.
It's the hardest situation. It's the worst of
the speech that needs to be defended because
otherwise, it's all meaningless because the government can
turn around and go, oh, you wear red
hat? You're a terrorist. Get out of the
country.
And that you realize that that's a very
short step away from Americans included, and especially
since his executive,
his antisemitism
executive order.
I mean, we went over this. So did
a lot of people, had a very obvious
carve out for how that could be applied
to Americans.
But even then, let's just say a red
hat, somebody was here on a green card,
been here for twenty years, fourteen, five, a
year, doesn't make a difference. The rights are
there. And what we're seeing today,
to get into the reality of what happened,
is them now going as far as to
try to manipulate the situation to make this
case,
lying about different associations, making conflations that aren't
there. I haven't seen any evidence supported yet
to make the allegation that he's a paid
agitator, that he's supporting Hamas, that he's working
for Hamas, that he's a terrorist. None of
these things have been fleshed out at all.
The best they can do is claim that
this one post that was from a group
that he claimed he supports or is associated
with, and there's overlaps for sure in this
massive protest idea,
that they say because they wrote that on
this, but you can't by the way, you
can't find.
They might have deleted it, or maybe it
was never there to begin with, or maybe
it's all the point is everyone's pointing to
a screenshot, a la Twitter files. Gee. I
wish it's almost like we saw that coming.
And now they're going, see? The the tweet
that shows he's a and it's actually a
tweet from a group that you can't prove
is theirs at this point who made an
argument about all western civilization. And then making
out that that that made his ideas and,
therefore, that he wants to destroy all of
this country, which by the way is still
an idea that you still have a right
to feel regardless of whatever the screeching woke
right has to say,
and removing you based on the idea that
you are connected to what they said.
I mean, if you can't by now recognize
how absurdly dangerous this is,
I believe you're the enemy of what's going
on. And I really believe that even if
it's stupidity that's stopping you from seeing it.
It's a dangerous reality, but never would I
argue that you should be attacked for not
knowing something or being stupid enough to not
recognize you're hurting the country because that's your
right, to think and feel and say what
you want.
When you act
violently or otherwise, guess what, guys? There's already
laws for that. And if you're gonna act
violently and you break the law, you're deported.
Oh, wait. I'm I'm mistaken. Right? There's due
process. You have to go to court, and
you have to prove those crimes. And the
evidence is presented even if you're an illegal
alien, but god forbid we have an honest
conversation about this in this partisan mania.
So let's start today, before we get into
all of that, with a couple of overlapping
points that I thought were really important
for follow ups of a few different things.
And, actually, one is sort of a quick
overview point that I'm gonna get into in
a coming up show that we've actually talked
about few times. And, again, it's one of
these examples of demonstrating our value of how
far ahead we seem to be on most
of these stories, and it's not because we're
psychic. It's because we're doing our work, putting
it in, talking with people, trying to find
it. And we don't hit every single bell,
but it a lot of the big points
you'll see, we're talking about. We're flushing out.
And if you're following this platform, as many
people will talk about, you feel prepared
for some of these most crazy manipulations.
Now this
is something we just or a a show
or an interview I just have with Vanessa
Bailey, which I find really important. I really
thought it was necessary not just to cover
this on the show, but to have Vanessa
on. I I reached out to Kevork, but
he's very busy as well. I'm hoping to
get him on. I've only reached out once.
I need to follow-up with him. But you
should definitely be following following Kevork, following a
lot of different people out there, Syrian Syrian
analysis that are doing great work covering,
I argue objectively, but you can decide for
yourself, what's happening in Syria. I mean, it's
probably one of the most obvious conversations seeing
as how it's all very readily available that
they were terrorists, thirty even the overlap of
them still being declared terrorists while they're being
told, you know, that they're I forgot the
turn in the actual interview. Was it a
woke jihadist? What did they say? Oh, diversity
friendly. Now I remember it. They literally called
this guy diversity friendly jihadist. I mean, we
are in clown world. That is or I
don't know if there's a world word as
you make it up for how crazy that
is. This guy is
a US Israeli backed terrorist.
Literally, the actual use of the word, a
person who is being paid to commit violence
for political reasons. And he is
turned into on a dime the guy wearing
a suit that's gonna change Syria. Now the
reality of this this interview is to get
into
the ongoing ethnic cleansing, not just of Allah
whites, but of Christians as well. I mean,
a lot of different people who just happen
to be in the wrong area, which is
exactly what a lot of us saw coming
because of the people they're supporting and the
same things that happen in every location that
they tend to do this in Israel, The
United States,
UK.
But I'm bringing this up so you guys
can check it out. But I also wanted
to highlight some following up into today or
yesterday and today. Here is Daniel McAdams sharing
this
disgusting
roadside view. If you can see it in
the screen here, just dead bodies strewn all
about the side of the road, all the
way down the road. This is this is
Syria now.
Seems feels a lot like Gaza, doesn't it?
Now Syria was not like this, not even
remotely. Syria was a very, very
it has the third largest Christian population of
all the Middle East before the West, rather
The US and Israel and Europe started destroying
it for their own purposes.
All the narrative about the terrorists and Muslim,
that's all coming from the same maniacal,
disgusting, bottom of the barrel, lowest common denominator
people it will point to today.
Like many we mentioned before. The ones out
there trying to tell you that Muslims shouldn't
be in congress because they all think the
same way. Like, that's just blatant, basic, disgusting,
lowbrow racism.
Like, the worst of the worst of the
worst. Anybody making those arguments, it's the same
as saying no Jew should be x, y,
and z. No Christians should be allowed in
congress. No. Blah blah blah. It's it's all
ignorant
as always. It's a broad stroke, and we
need to call people out for stuff like
that. My point is for those going, yeah.
That's that's Syria's always been no. It's not.
Middle East has always been, no. It hasn't
been. It's an ignorant argument that people are
trying to force in. It's like pretending that
Palestine was nothing before they it's a lie.
And they need those lies because otherwise, you
go, my god. Look at the horror that's
going on there.
Who's responsible? Instead of going, well, they're just
in a transition from
Syria's new killing fields courtesy of Jelani's Hayat
Trail Sham affiliates. Daniel McAdams says mass slaughter
of innocent sponsored by the US government.
The Cradle was reporting, as we've been telling
you as well, this is from the eleventh,
Israel bombed South Syria as war chief for
Pete's threat of indefinite occupation.
Who didn't see that coming? They're building bases,
deploying troops, as I said before. I mean,
are you okay? I conservatives out there. Are
you okay that our governments left and right
continue to fight this war in Syria for
Israel to jump in, occupy, build bases, and
deploy troops, which was the plan since we've
been fighting Israel's wars as long as it's
existed,
hope you can call it out because they're
take I mean, even if you think that
that wasn't the plan, aren't you angry? They
just swooped in and took all the credit
and every. They're taking the territory. They're taking
the resources. They're taking the it's everything.
It's ridiculous.
Now they made a deal with the Kurds
and the troops. That's this is Israel and
The United States. They are now reaping the
benefits of this occupation even though they are
committing mass terrorist atrocities.
As well,
WikiLeaks put this out. This was in the
twelfth. Hillary Clinton emailed '23 07/23/2012.
Israeli intelligence says the collapse of Syria will
spark a Sunni Shiite war that will benefit
Israel.
What do you know?
It's it's all the crazy thing, this has
been talked about before. This is public information.
It's been there since 02/2012, and you could
look it up for yourself. And as I
said, info like this has always been there.
If you are just willing to look beyond
the partisan screamers
every now and again, recognize that neither side
is willing I got two typos in that
for crying out loud. I don't believe that.
I'm a conspiracy theorist. Recognize that neither side
it willing to tell you why this is
all happening.
The reality, guys, is the information is there.
It's always been there if you look. I
shouldn't say in this context.
There are people out there, neither side of
it,
of the fake partisan dynamic, is willing to
to
show you the self evident information that Israel
is behind a lot of this.
Why do you not see that if you
haven't yet? It's all right there. Now it's
an only Israel, guys. Obviously, our own government
has done a whole lot of things for
their own interest that I would just as
equally call out, same with The UK. The
point is, right now,
you have both sides trying to make an
argument about Syria.
Neither side is accurate, and both sides
progress the agenda in a little different way,
though, so they can keep pretending like they're
battling each other. And many of them might
bet you don't even know that they're wrong.
This is how this works.
Now another important thing I wanted you to
see, Derek Bros put out a fantastic short
documentary. It was sixteen minutes, I believe. And
this is completely produced by Derek, put on
conscious resistance. I want I asked him if
he wanted extra reach on it, so we
put it on TLAB as well. But this
is completely produced and written by Derek Bros.
Donald Trump, Peter Thiel, and the technocrats.
Now it's it's a little bit of an
overlap of an article he wrote for, for
us recently about the technocratic
acolytes, I believe, in the Trump administration,
but he adds a bunch to it. And
it's a great and the documentary is him
narrating the entire thing. It's a great it's
worth your time. And the reality is
it's obvious, guys, and it's the same thing
a lot of us have been calling out
for a very long time. Just wanna include
that so you can check it out for
yourself. Here's I put it out on the
Substack as well so you guys can check
that. Here's the original article link to his,
the conscious resistance website. Make sure you support
that as well.
Now another thing I wanna show you before
we get into the meat of this is
really something I'm gonna come back to, but
I just wanted to see it because it's
really we've been talking about it quite a
long time, guys. This is new. Orwell sent
me most of these today. I think oh,
actually, all of them. 03/10/2025,
unregulated tech tests. Peter Thiel, Sam Altman and
co want Freedom Cities. Now isn't funny how
you got this weird overlap between like, you
know, on the on the face of it,
it's like Altman and Musk are angry at
each other and they're battling, except not when
you very clearly see that they're overlapped in,
like, three different business ventures, most tying back
to Thiel, and they're all interworking in the
background. I think it's all part of one
thing, and a lot of what we see
today is is, you know, not in the
extra conspiratorial
mindset that's all theater, even though I largely
believe a lot of that is is actually
happening. My point is
a lot of what we see today is
just kind of a construct. Like, they present
to you what they want you to think.
And just think of it like politics. They
do that all the time. Their speeches they
read, what they get they know how they're
gonna present when they come out. So the
idea is that these people are working on
a larger agenda behind the scenes while giving
you the presentation that there's more of a
divide so you can essentially choose, I guess.
And then I would argue the ones that
people lean toward, they're gonna act like, oh,
that's the one even though it was all
it's the two party illusion. False binary. We
talk about it all the time. Nonetheless, the
point is about freedom cities.
We've been talking about this for a while.
Now the idea
overlaps with what we have mainly pointed out
when we when I when I first really
caught attention, my what caught my attention was
this technocratic nightmare that was funded by Peter
Thiel that was built in Honduras On the
back of an illegal US regime change during,
I don't remember which one. It it it's
it's spanned all the way through multiple administrations,
Trump's included. But I forget I think it
was Obama that it started on. I forget.
I don't don't cite me on that because
I remember the I don't remember the exact
date of the starting. It's been a minute
since I focused on this. The point, though,
is that a US illegal regime change in
Honduras, and this is a very documented point
today, removed the power structure
because the structure was resistant. Well, I shouldn't
say it like that. But the at the
point, the restructure
the leadership there, the rulership, was resistant to
them doing this. Basically, a special autonomous zone
right out of the sustainable development goals. Guys,
don't miss that.
And they wanted that so they could start
their own little libertarian city, and it's not
even remotely libertarian. That's they are using those
words to trick conservatives today. This is a
technocratic nightmare. Now what they did is they
took over the area, and even right now,
they're encroaching on small areas next to them,
absorbing more territory. I was talking about this
last time. That's not in any way what
they're pretending they are. Secondarily,
they had to remove people from peep of
judge positions in order to get this to
pass so they could even get this. Now
there's a new leadership that's been there for
a while that's already revoked that status, and
they don't care.
She spoke up recently and said they're trying
to overthrow her right now with the help
of the US government. It's all right in
the show and one of the ones that
followed up. Now if you the that's a
quick overview. There's so much more to that.
They're suing them. They're trying to actually, through
legal, financial means, trying to, like, bankrupt the
government so they can just take control of
all their assets. It's wild.
This is a technocratic takeover of the country.
I think it's a trial balloon. Now my
point was, this is a freedom city overlap.
It's the same kind of dynamic they've been
putting forward in other contexts. So all of
a sudden, now they're going, hey. We want
these new freedom cities. Not a brand new
conversation. I I haven't actually, I didn't check
this one to see if it was in
there. They all seem yeah. Right there. They
all seem to reference this. This is what's
so important. There's already been a freedom city
since 2020, guys.
Prospera in Honduras.
What did I tell you? Nobody's been nobody
connected those two things back when I was
talking about this. They weren't claiming it was
the it was a freedom city. It was
just two separate things. Now they're literally going,
there's the first one. That's the Freedom City.
We want more of those in The United
States.
As Trump recently said again, we're probably gonna
annex Greenland. He just said it again today,
well, once, I believe,
which is wild because that wasn't that a
joke? Weren't we being trolled? Maybe we're still
being trolled until it literally happens. No. That's
the that's the North North American Union. That's
the new world order dynamic.
My point, though, is that freedom cities
are
part of this larger game.
And it's concerning to me when you recognize
this is the rapid reduction of your rights
under the guise that it's, you know, libertarian.
Now look. I'm all for a no no.
See, this isn't a nongovernment situation.
This is a centralized technocratic government, which is
far more alarming, which is what we're always
talking about, and they're trying to pretend that
is somehow in a libertarian direction. More libertarian
would be less of that entirely. But see,
they're acting like, look. You don't have any
laws, any of this, and that's not really
the same picture. I shouldn't say laws, but
I'm trying to skip over it reasonably quickly.
I'm gonna go over this in a in-depth
coming up show. Here's another one. March 12.
What are Freedom Cities? Billionaire CEO's plan could
reshape America.
As it says, any another organization pushing for
the concept is Prospera, which is supported by
Peter Thiel and and and Andreessen. Surprise surprise.
Thiel already has close ties to Trump administration,
supported JD
Vance, in his in his run for Ohio.
Now here's, Wired. It says tech execs are
push pushing Trump to build freedom cities run
by corporations.
Again, it says the Freedom Cities Coalition
is a project of Niue Capital, a company
that has been centrally involved in the development
of Prospera.
What do you know? So literally, Prospera,
a teal backed technocratic nightmare that's been overtaking
a country that doesn't want them there, is
now literally starting a thing called has started
a thing called Freedom Cities Coalition. Now you
don't really see anywhere explicitly on here that
it has to do with them. I want
I wonder why. Obviously, because I don't think
they want it connected to this thing that
I think a lot of us have called
out. But either way, lot of these articles
are are showing you that this Freedom City
Coalition so a coalition trying to get these
things built in The United States and elsewhere
is is a comp is backed or a
project through
the central backing of Prospera, a private, quote,
free market, crypto friendly enclave in Honduras.
It's like it's like they just put all
the buzzwords out they thought would drive people
to believe that it was anything other than
a centralized government technocratic nightmare. Prospera was made
possible by a special regulatory setup dubbed the
Special Economic Zone or ZEDI.
Guys, this is straight out of the things
conservatives think they're fighting. And the crazy thing
is, like I said, it was done through
illegal means. They illegally overthrew this government. They
and even then, they were able to go
through the court system, and they had to
remove judges. And even then, it still came
back around where the current system doesn't want
them, and they revoke their ability, and they're
not going anywhere.
That's not what it sounds like. This is
a a legal occupation. This is expansion. This
is globalism. This is technocracy.
Then it goes on to say, seeds are
allowed for private actors to essentially move into
geographically
partitioned areas and write their own regulatory and
judicial rules.
Prospero is also put has is also part
of something called the network state, an anarcho
capitalist ideological movement backed by tech billionaires. You
know, because typically, tech billionaires like libertarian,
anarchistic mindsets. Right? No. Just it's a it's
a capitalist, technocratic
overtaking
that seeks to create privately run cities with
native cryptocurrencies.
This this is crazy.
It really is. Now look. If you were
in your own free area and you had
it wasn't taking from somebody else, a la
Israel style,
then sure. Start your own little society. I'm
all for that.
Certainly, plenty of other governments are proud or
some structure of the world would probably try
to stop you like our government has done
to people within this country. But my point
is, I'm not stopping people from doing something
they want with their own territory or that
people want to do it. What we're seeing
is them overtaking territory that exists. That's not
any concept that relates to libertarianism
libertarianism, in my opinion.
And then you can read more on this
for yourself. Cities without limits. American manufacturing is
moving offshore. Housing price. Freedom cities are the
solution. Right? So sell out to oligarch technocrat
billionaires. Let us buy your country from you.
Kinda seems what's already happening.
But I'll come back to this. There I'm
gonna I plan on I already have been
building more in the background since I've done
this show. There's a lot more to get
to. I'll include this. I'll include Derek's follow-up.
So remember the timing on this. We wrote
this in sep September 7 or did the
show 2024.
Derek wrote 10/28/2024,
election '20 '20 '4, Zionist technocrats versus Zionist
technocrats.
Then November 30, I wrote new I did
the show, the new Trump administration and the
technocratic Zionist coup of the United States. I
mean, it's it's been building, and we can
see this building. Now you come all the
way back around and see that, like, freedom
cities, Prospero was the starting point.
It's kinda hard to miss how all that
comes together.
But please, guys, take the time to look
into this because it's very important.
Now
on the note of technocracy, I thought it
was interesting to point this out.
We talked about digital twins. Right? I may
I've been making points about this for a
while. Steve and I talk about it often.
Gen AI, digital twins, and data privacy, assessing
health care transformation trends and imperative in 2025.
All this is locked is in the same
vein of conversation because this is where it
all goes. The health aspect with Larry Ellison
and Altman and and SoftBank and Trump and
Opera and Stargate. That's where all this is
heading in that direction. The AI
efficiency
health care discussion using digital twin digital twins,
which people like Musk and others have already
nodded to.
Now we're gonna get more into this as
well. This is just a broad overlap, but
this is where it's going. Drug discovery led
by general
AI
that we want. I mean, that's not working
well for us right now because all that
means is the power structure basically using that
inputting information.
Digital twin technology will drive personalized medicine.
That's exactly what it sounds like. Whoops. That
is
digital twins. That's using your data on some
kind of server database to basically act like,
play out what you would be doing using
that data in some kind of SimCity dynamic.
Real world data and AI will accelerate and
optimize clinical trials. Great. So, like, for Pfizer
and Moderna and stuff like that or other
trials,
but now using AI.
Data privacy compliance frameworks will become more robust.
Health care cybersecurity
gets a booster shot.
Great. Investors in personal investments in personalized precision
medicine and mRNA will soar.
See? It's not what we want.
K? This one's on Amazon
cloud. It's Amazon.com, which is basically like a
AWS, basically. It says bio
q bio creating the first digital twin platform
for medical analysis, like a study. It says
q bio is building a digital twin platform
that will propel the world into a future
where a regular checkup with a doctor is
no longer subjective. It is data driven.
Right. But if somebody is able to manipulate
that data or some, you know, larger data
a government led idea is able to manipulate
what we see the outcome of that data.
I mean, guys, we just went through a
worldwide
medical fraud.
I don't know why we would ever want
that to be centralized with data points where
they could basically go, you're all sick. Or,
you know,
our
water treatment readings say you're all gonna get
sick in a week, which is what they've
already been trying to get to, the pre
medical precrime. That came out during Trump's last
administration.
Now continuation on that, the role of blockchain
to secure Internet of medical things.
August 2024.
Right? The Internet of bio things, the Internet
of bio nano things, the Internet of I
mean, it's all over the place. This is
blockchain to secure the Internet of medical things.
So it's the same it's one aspect of
the internal biodynamic
where you're having medical things, including nanotechnology,
operating with your body that's connected to a
larger network. That's this is where but using
blockchain is the problem.
Seven c's made this point recently as
the, Ramaswamy
called to use blockchain for everything,
which I said at the time, I mean,
there's there's points you could make about transparency
that might be a a a benefit to
us. My problem is that this is
not what I'm saying is something for, like,
public where governments were required to essentially post
things in these locations where we could all
look at it, not necessarily using blockchain the
way that they're arguing for it. See, there's
there's a difference. But, honestly, my opinion with
a lot of this stuff because of this
has been where I'm like, none. At least
right now, nothing. I don't want any directional
change in regard to technology as long or
mRNA or any of this stuff. And maybe
that's, in the long run, a detriment to
our health. Who knows? I don't agree with
that. My point is that I'm willing to
take that chance because of how problematic it
seems right now. Like, there's doctors out there
that say mRNA could still be applied in
positive ways. Maybe they're right. I'm like, I
don't care at this point. I don't want
any movement until we, as a society, feel
comfortable with what they're doing or where it
goes. And if that's never, then good.
Isn't that supposed to be how this operates?
We don't we don't we don't pretend we
live in an oligarchy, right, where the central
people sucede for us, but that's what we
do live in.
CoinGeek points out UAE blockchain powered carbon tracking
trading platform seeks to achieve net zero emissions.
I mean, you realize that whether you play
the left right game, all of these including
the current administration,
has been going in the same direction. I
already showed you on this on The USA
spending. There's been multiple contracts
for car for carbon related dynamics, climate change
related since Trump came into power.
I went over it in two different shows.
This is just about it's it's really it's
not about carbon tracks. It's about using these
things to get you where they want you,
whether it's woke or DEI or climate change
or some other dynamic that's, you know, some
racial dynamic or Israel support. They whatever it
is to drive you where they need you
to be. They'll take what they can get.
Forbes,
artificial neural networks for blockchain.
Then lastly, breaking news, BBC Today. UK Prime
Minister,
Keir Starmer, scraps NHS England.
Sounds familiar. And takes management of health service
into, quote, democratic control
to cut bureaucracy.
Oh, well, that's that doesn't that sound familiar?
You know, it's almost like we we shouldn't
just assume he's just saying that to take
control of something for his own benefit and
and fainting to cut bureaucracy and fainting to
reduce,
you know, democratic control.
It's like saying for freedom
and then killing freedom. You know? I mean,
I'm not who knows? Maybe he'll run it
out and change everything for the better. We
shouldn't assume one or the other. My point
is if you can't see the overlap
I mean, right now, our conservatives are going,
yay. Good. That's exactly what we're gonna do.
Good. Do that. Or are they going, wait.
He might be lying about that. It's interesting
overlap, especially since Kurt Starmer is not necessarily
on the same political wavelength.
My point is, guys, everybody should be questioned
whether Trump or Biden.
Now if we have time, we're gonna get
into a point about Doge at the end
of the show today. And if I don't,
I'll do that tomorrow.
But it's about the same things we've been
discussing, the overwhelmingly obvious problem that we can
see of lack of transparency, of centralization of
power with no ethics pledges, and now these
direct connections to problems with with foreign governments
and everything else.
Now look. I am the first to argue
that a lot of these things should be
completely removed.
But if we're simply going through these motions
in order to cement a new problem, then
we have to be aware of that, cognizant
of the possibility.
And and still, if say good thing happened,
now we we wait and see if something
it's it's a very simple dynamic. The problem
is that people are pretending because they say
something that this has now happened and then
acting like we're one. It's over. We're same
thing happened with last Trump administration, and I'm
not saying that's the majority. I don't think
it is. But a lot of very influential
people are doing that. My point over here,
guys, is this seems like a trend. They're
using what you think like, it's as simple
as that. We want less government. We want
more you know, whatever you call for, they
go, okay.
Then we'll call it this. Here's your Patriot
Act. You're a patriot, right? Here you go.
Freedom.
Yeah. We all know that the Patriot Act
way very wasn't patriotic, was it? It was
the death of Patriot. It it it destroyed
at least one of the first steps destroying
what we're seemingly
seeing the death throes of right now, the
constitution.
Now I shouldn't be that dramatic. The point
is I very I I'm at the point
now where I think that they don't care
about it at all, but they feel like
they have to to not lose that illusion
that they care.
But either way, this is the same thing.
The same step of the same idea of
trying to reduce this or, you know, cut
bureaucracy,
but he's taking control and centralizing
power.
Now if Keir Starmer is actually the was
really gonna do that, does that make it
good?
Right? I mean, take any other concept, and
you say that there's a person who genuinely
wants to change,
and in doing so, what he does is
strips everybody of their freedom and rights and
then make sure that life is great for
everybody. And then, you know, in a year,
we'll bring it all back. Okay. And let's
just say he genuinely means that and actually
does that. Is that okay with you? I
mean, I know it's an extreme example, but
is that not the same thing?
You're allowing somebody to step I mean, even
people are making these arguments today saying that
they are basically, you know, over lacking transparency
and and breaking the law,
remove ignoring your rights in order to save
us from the other side and eventually give
it all back. Well, that people are making
those arguments.
The problem is that's never okay.
It just because it it's just like using
executive orders
that can only be turned back over,
which means it's never actually cementing change. Even
if you liked what happened, it's not the
way to do it because it will never
remain. And that's by design, in my opinion,
so it keeps this teeter totter never stopping.
Now one other point on this, as we
recently talked about RFK Jr and his shocking
MMR vaccine hypocrisy and his startling attack on
free speech and his anti semitism direction, which
now seems even more obvious with what's happening
today.
I wanted to highlight two things on that.
One one continuation of this conversation and two
positive things,
which was this was somebody sent this to
me from Brian Hooker, by the way. It
was Hooker. I I couldn't remember if it
was Hooker Hooker. Brian Hooker PhD. He would
he he goes back to the actual vaxxed
conversation to the CDC. He's the whistleblower showing
you that they burned information and so on.
Alright. Am I
it's been a while in that. I can't
remember conflating him with the other well, either
way, the point is he's been he's been
highlighting the information about the MMR vaccine and
then just general childhood vaccine schedule problems for
a really long time.
He put this out on 03/03/2025
very recently, and it's on children's health defense.
It says MMR vaccine and measles fact sheet.
I just think this is interesting.
Of all places on children's health defense after
he comes out and basically changes direction with
that, and you can read it for yourself.
It's all the stuff that you know RFP
knows that you know as well. Autism problems,
seizures, side effects, encephalopathy,
MMR contradictions, reported death. I mean, he's just
listing all the stuff off. You can read
it. It's it's scathing. I mean, there's a
lot of problems with this like we all
know. So read it for yourself. That should
make you uncomfortable with even somebody going like,
you know, with the way that went forward.
Now two good things that I saw that
I wanna point out. Because I I to
be honest,
I have seen very few things that I
argue are
clearly positive steps. I've heard like, for example,
the one that he's and still, it was
executive order, so that'd be my that and
the fact that he's rolling out mRNA shots
for children still, different conversation.
So the executive order could be rolled back,
but the action in regard to women's sports
for children. I thought that was good, obviously.
That's but if they come and roll it
back, next administration, well, then I'll go, see.
That that was why it should've been done
the right way. Nonetheless, that that's a positive,
but I haven't seen that many
that I that I where I've argued these
people. Like, what do you see that's happened
that you feel is a tremendous obvious not
in in the process of, not the cutting
things that we're all debating, which we'll get
to in the end if we have time,
definitely tomorrow, which is that that's not really
happening.
The the the numbers do very clear in
fact, it looks like the overall spending to
this moment has actually increased.
That that maybe will change next month and
the month after that. But the point is
at this moment, it does not seem to
be and a lot of that has to
do with the funding overseas and a lot
of different
points. I just don't I mean, give me
in the chat what you think. Like, give
me one very clear, here's a a positive
thing they've done with no counterbalance, no up
in the air still.
Right? I mean, if the slashing from the
USAID point, I still think is a is
a step in the right direction, they didn't
remove the group. They're still doing it. And
overall, all they're doing is moving money around.
Because look, I mean, just because they're slashing
contracts, we're not verifying that money. It's not
just going somewhere else for the same purpose
through NED or whatever else.
The bottom line is that they're still using
it for regime change. So it's just a
change of of the guard as as far
as I could tell. Anyway,
I'm this is an example of what I
think is a very positive thing. Even then,
though, it hasn't happened yet, so it's in
the same vein of saying the positive things.
But if this were to actually happen,
I would say it was one of the
best things I've seen so far. RFK Jr
to change FDA rule that allows companies to
hide food ingredient safety data.
Now if and when that happens, that would
be a huge, huge positive step. I'm sure
they would just find new ways to hide
things. But if this is going on, that
would be a positive change.
So we'll have to wait and see if
it happens. But this is the kind of
thing they're talking about. Like, real change, material
change to actually things that are affecting your
life. Not words, not hype, not what we'll
do tomorrow, not for the you know, the
dunking on Democrats as if that somehow affects
your life currently.
Now another one, RFK June, this is just
what he said out loud. And these, I
do I do appreciate these things despite the
fact that what he just did some sort
of counterbalances that. He says it would be
better if everybody got measles. I agree with
that. It's a very basic thing to understand.
I mean, the reality is, especially looking back
at our history, like, with chicken pox and
the others, which that's closely related, it is
I mean, like, Steve joked about that, Brady
Bunch clip. I mean, it it's it doesn't
mean that that proves anything. It's a clip
on a show. But the point is the
mass understanding at that point was that it
wasn't that day. We know it's not that
dangerous. It's really actually not. And it can
be like a lot of things can.
This would argue within the idea of germ
theory that you would get natural immunity. And
most people, it would diminish, like, not because
of some dangerous shot that was already given
after was already declining, which is easy to
look up, but because people were already becoming
accustomed to it.
But we'll have to see what happens because
he's already promoting the vaccine schedule. He's already
said operation work for him is a positive
thing.
He said he would endorse the current childhood
schedule despite
diametric opposite statements from the poor the past
or the MMR vaccine would given to would
be given to his child versus him in
the past saying he wouldn't do
that. See, it's it's hypocritical.
And if you think he's doing it just
to get in the position, he's already in
the position, and these things are gonna hurt
people. We know these things are bad. So
it's about trying to be objective about all
this. But saying that that's the case, which
will influence people's decisions, I think that's absolutely
a positive thing. I'd like to see a
lot more actual action on the ground.
Now one thing I wanna highlight here, I'm
gonna reference this as we go through a
lot. Now it's Mark Twain, Voltaire, different you
know, as always, these quotes are sourced all
over the place, but this just the words
are what matter to me.
It ain't what you don't know that gets
you into trouble.
It's what you know for sure
that just ain't so.
And it's a really important thing, much much
more insightful than you you take a sec
when you only take a second to think
about. You know? Because the problem is that
there's a lot of people out there that
know plenty of things. Right? And and it
it also it was another quote that actually,
what was that one?
Oh, that's what it is. Hold on. Let
me find this one too.
This is one of my favorites, actually, Bertrand
Russell.
The whole problem with the world is that
fools and fanatics are always so certain of
themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.
This is kind of where my mind was
already going with that is that ultimately, you
know, people out there that are, you know,
objective and and and balanced and and willing
to consider they could be wrong and, you
know, just intelligent people. They're the kind of
person that's gonna go, well, you know, I'm
not I'm not completely sure yet. Whereas the
fools and fanatics are the ones that rush
over the top because they heard on a
show, you know, or they saw one documentary
and they think they're experts and they ultimately
kind of
dominate the conversation.
So the problem here is this not what
you know
to get you in trouble. I mean, that
that is their that's part of it. Right?
Things if you know the wrong things today,
especially, you you know exactly what I'm talking
about, people will attack you for it. But
it's what you know for sure that isn't
actually true, and that is everywhere.
People that believe something to their core that
is actually false.
I don't even need to give examples because
it's just about it's not about the debate.
It's about understanding
and questioning whether you might be wrong and
always doing so. That's where you'll become balanced.
It's where you become
you know, it's where you grow up. It's
where you realize that you're not just this
fanatical child that's rushing into whatever you enjoy,
but really, especially in this field that you
are considering that you could be wrong. When
we're talking about such important things in the
world, this isn't about some sports conversation. This
is about people's lives. We're talking about major
developments in the world. We're talking about free
speech that undermines our right. I mean, these
things are paramount.
So it doesn't behoove you to go, you
know, maybe I'm missing something.
Always.
It's what you know for sure
that just ain't so.
Include that one for you too. Bertrand Russell,
the whole problem with the world is that
fools and fanatics are always so sure of
themselves,
and why are people so full of doubts?
Now
this is something I'm glad I just I
saw earlier because this is what I was
referencing before. Remember when all the members of
congress were all repeating the same thing? Yeah.
Which is ridiculous, and we should all make
fun of them. Shows you how bought and
paid for they all are and not one
side of the paradigm. Because my point was,
obviously, if you remember, that it is we've
seen things like this constantly, whether it's that
clip we play in the beginning with that
it shows Fox and CNN all around CNN,
but local channels. Fox and other locals, all
left and right.
That's a threat to our democracy, all saying
the same thing. That was more of a
Murdoch company. There's there's left and right channels.
Or more so,
the influencers
who just repeat
the exact same sentiment. Now this one is
more of a broad,
like, sentiment like, we all just share the
same thing, but we've seen it,
especially with, like, the Epstein overlap where they
all just post, like, the exact same thing,
but it's constant. It's not unique to left
and right. That's the point. As I said,
well, this is,
free prints saying your favorite influencer isn't thinking
they're reciting.
That just shows you this thing about the
eggs and the prices. Total inflation lower than
expected. Trump gas prices to do four year
low. Egg prices down. Egg prices down. Gas
prices down. All of them saying, same exact
thing. End wokeness. Live to TikTok. Eggs price
down. Gas prices down. Exactly the same thing.
This is what you voted for. Promises kept.
Promises kept. Like, same thing. Kevin Sorbo. Gas
prices down. Egg prices down. You're welcome.
You know? And it's just it's like it's
there's it's not even worth this is such
a these these low these conversations and things
like this are frustrating because it's such a
silly, stupid thing. It matters for plenty of
reasons, but the conversation about how and why.
Right? I mean, he came into office and
things skyrocketed. And he was like, well, Biden.
Okay.
Well, maybe. We did kill a lot of
chickens. That does make a difference, but then
all of a sudden, now it drops even
lower. And now it's now I'm the one
that did.
Okay. Maybe. I mean, the point is that
if every single time something happens, it's easy
to just throw it off somebody else. And
then if the positive thing happens, now it's
on me. Like, there's times where you can
see that it's obviously, like, Biden did the
same thing. That was very clearly something that
Trump did before he came into office, and
they claimed to take all the credit for
it even though you knew it
wasn't. This is just what they do. My
point is that this stuff is manipulated from
a government level. It's not a partisan game.
If the the the the culling of chickens
led to them giving them a a bird
flu shot for bird flu.
But as long as you're happy about the
prices going down, let's ignore the real issue
that they're giving them shots. They're making mRNA
bird flu shots for you through Moderna that
they already paid for, that Biden and Trump
high fived about tag team. Now it's coming
to you. But, yeah, prices are down. I'm
sure they'll go back up in thirty seconds
after that wore off.
It's just it's just these are the people
that keep you looking away from the ball.
They keep your eye off the ball. That's
what they do. My point was that they
share and circulate the exact same points. But
I said, weren't all these exact people just
screaming about how the left does this, which
they do, to win Twitter points? So it's
ridiculous.
Anyone with a brain and an ounce of
integrity can see plainly that this is a
partisan thing,
and both all partisan sides do it. That's
really what it is. And it's more than
there's people that aren't partisan that do it
too. It's just it's about dishonesty, but it's
a partisan
thing more than anything.
Now this was interesting in that same conversation.
Thomas Massie has been somebody that,
I mean, even I pointed out. And Steve
and I talked about where, you know, I
you know me. I'm
I don't know if I'll ever be able
to just go like, I'm gonna believe in
this member of congress or politician.
I've learned I I've seen far too much
and start far too much cons I mean,
like, 99.9%
consistency in regard to politicians and government lying.
So I'm that's that's probably that ship has
sailed. But I'm open to it, and if
it happens, I'll point to it. But I'm
not gonna be the one that goes, oh,
I believe. I just that's I I just
will not fall for that again in my
opinion.
But Thomas Massie has been saying things that
I agree with for a long time
in a lot of ways.
Few things that concern me. There's money points
that I think are interesting that come from
groups tied to Israelis. Points you could make.
Right? That I and I'm that's why I'm
just not of the person that's gonna go
this. I believe in this person or trust
them. I don't you know, in even the
voting conversation, you know where I stand on
that. I think we're always being manipulated. And
if he's in that game, then he's part
of that. But my point is regardless of
it, I could be wrong, he's saying things
that are very important. You know, not just
odd at the fed, but how about we
end the fed? You know, like we all
actually talked about. Not this half measure where
you can keep using the problem
or all the different things he's pointed out
that show that these people are half truth,
truth light, not real.
And maybe that's in the interest of getting
to think he is and he's not. I
mean, who knows? But this is important because
he's been putting these things out that resonate
with conservatives
more than anybody,
with with liberty, freedom minded people.
And all of a sudden, Donald Trump comes
out and goes crazy after him.
I think I think it's because he makes
them look fake.
I mean, that's one of my first opinions,
but who knows? And you tell me what
you think. He says and this is on
true social. You could it's like I think
it was pinned to the top of this
thing a minute ago. Congressman, in quotes, because
Trump is a petty person. I mean, it's
just that's just so small, isn't it? Like,
he's a fake congressman? I mean, of all
people,
congressman Thomas Massie voted to delay the debt
ceiling bill from the Biden administration to the
Trump administration from September before the election to
June after the election without getting anything for
this horrendously stupid move. Well, is why is
it stupid? Because it's not what Trump wants.
Massey had very logical reason for the you
know my opinion on a lot of this
stuff. The the the debt ceiling in general,
like, I'm I'm always of the mind. Let
it shut down. Don't raise the debt. I
don't. The consequences
are only the consequences because of this fiscally
irresponsible
long succession of government or rather just your
government continually doing the same things
or the ongoing trillions of debt that never
they only continue to grow. These people know
what they're doing.
Now Massey, if you listen to it, we'll
talk about the reality of why maybe not
new maybe not agree that we should
not raise it and deal with the consequences
or not let the government shutdown and deal
with the consequences, but he voted in the
way he believes.
Trump attacks him for it because he didn't
get benefit from the Republicans.
Well, is it at least possible out there
that he doesn't care about your game of
left right politics, but just wants to do
what's right? Now I'm not saying I believe
that. I'm just saying that this is an
important consideration.
Like like, the reason I said that is
because of what I said in the beginning.
I don't want you to think I'm yeah.
I am never gonna be like, I believe,
but, nonetheless, it's worth considering. Right? Just like
it's worth considering that Trump is doing the
right thing. I don't believe that based on
the evidence, but consider all the points.
And he says, when Republicans could have gotten
everything they wanted. No. Who in what you
mean all Republicans?
Oh, not those rhinos.
Not the ones over there that are saying
the wrong not the anti Israel ones. Just
the ones in Trump's little circle. Right? So
it's Republicans what they want. Well, Massey's a
Republican, and he clearly didn't want the same
things. So all he's trying to do is
get a bull rush bully tactic to get
people to come over and attack Massey to
get him to bow to what they want.
This is basic Trump tactics, guys. It's same
thing he's doing in foreign policy. It's childish.
Now he says he additionally voted to delay
the current budget disaster from the Biden administration
to the Trump administration.
He says, I was running for office at
the time doing my thing. And when I
heard this about this, I was it was
quite simply hard to believe. A catastrophic mistake.
Well, maybe. I mean, maybe maybe that's the
truth. The point is he made his mind
and his own decision, not based on what
the party wanted, not based on what Trump
told him to do. He did what he
thought was right. At least that's how it
appears to me. And it says now, and
virtually on every other vote, he's very simply
no. Again, because you're you're mad he doesn't
do what you want, Trump.
And it says he can't even approve a
continuing resolution when he approved them many times
during his career as congressman. Maybe because he
doesn't want what you're putting forward. Like, just
realize how wildly off this is exposing
the game to people who
believe in Trump, but recognize that Thomas Massie
was probably the best example in congress of
people that at least feign or maybe they
do he believes it in the direction of
freedom and liberty.
It continues during his career as a congressman,
again in quotes, Thomas Massie is a grandstander.
A grandstander?
I mean, imagine somebody who talks as loudly
and as long as Trump with saying so
little and calls Massie,
who speaks quite eloquently with a lot of
information, a grandstander.
Accuse that of you accuse them of that
how do I I can't say that right.
Accuse them of that which you are guilty
seems like a very good moment to add
that at.
Apparently, I can't talk today. To add that
into the conversation based on what we're talking
about in the foreign policy sense,
and it says, and the great people of
Kentucky, and this is why I think it's
wild, are going to be watching a very
interesting primary in not too distant future.
So are you suggesting that you're gonna spend
money to remove him because he doesn't do
what you want, Trump? That's what dictators do.
On top of that, how about he actually
means that Israel's gonna remove him, which they've
been trying to do for a long time?
I actually think that's what he means. I
think that he knows that they're already going
after him, and he knows because he's tapped
into the same
not America First structure.
That's pretty wild. Now watch as APAC goes
after him, and then this will be a
chilling point to look at.
Who is he working for if he's calling
out these interests? And I simply said, well,
isn't that telling? Trump attacking Massey for not
towing the line. As always, yes. That is
what you it is towing. It comes from
a race analogy about putting your toe on
the line, not towing a boat. But
I think that's incredible.
Now DC Drago, of course, doing his his,
you know, diligent follow-up and parroting what he's
told to say. He says, what if I
told you there was a GOP congressman in
office for twelve plus years who has never
passed a single bill? Well, I I believe
I didn't believe there was an election fraud
in 2020. Loves Mitch McConnell raised by his
debt ceiling and is against term limits. You'll
never guess who.
And he says and then David Knight follows
up and says, what if I told you
there was a controlled influencer with quotes, runs
influence interference for Zionists and the Epstein files
that shows who Trump really is? Yeah. DC
Draino.
I just think it's funny. I mean, these
these guys I mean, this is the same
guy that went after Massey vital like, you
know, on Twitter, but, you know, like, out
of control
because he said the wrong thing. I mean,
it's it's the same way they went after
Kyle Rittenhouse for pointing out the obviously
valid point about Trump's second amendment contradictions.
They just they they're a cult of personality,
guys, and they're not in this for the
truth, apparently.
Where's the Epstein files, DC?
Thomas Massie responds on the eleventh
and says, POTUS is spending his day attacking
me in Canada.
The difference is Canada will eventually cave.
Good for him.
Now
this is what keeps happening.
Howard Lutnick gets put rolled out to do
the rounds, comes out, and, basically, Trump's gonna
be eliminating taxes, lowering costs, and blah blah
blah blah blah blah. Maybe. Yeah. I love
when you make these interview
screaming point. A lot of what you said,
Lutnick, right in the beginning turned out immediately
not to be true. Maybe because you didn't
know, maybe because you lied. Who knows? The
bottom line is when people like this, when
politicians
or billionaires or oligarchs or technocrats, if people
in power step up and go this, this,
this, and this. Okay. Fine. I look forward
to it.
That's it. End of conversation. Until things happen,
this is nothing but propaganda.
Because the reality is right now, there's a
lot of reason to be very uncomfortable with
what's going on. But, hey. We're gonna no
taxes for everybody. Well, good. That's how it
should be anyway. But if it happens, I
will be very happy about that. And I
think that's a good step for everybody
in any context if if this actually happens.
But I find it really hard to believe,
And that's why until we see it even
beginning to happen, we shouldn't be screaming about
it. But right now, this is getting all
the attention in a lot of circles because
it's makes you feel good about what's happening.
Now Carrie, Carrie Wedler says,
MAGA went from free speech and slashed the
debt to there are limits to free speech.
And if you don't support more spending and
debt, you're a hypocrite and traitor almost as
fast as daddy Trump sold himself to Israel.
Always love for work.
True. Now the clips we play in the
beginning, we'll go we'll come back to you
in a minute. And that's important because the
reality of those, even right up to the
current borders are, is literally and and that's
why we've had that conversation before
about fire in a theater.
You see where this goes? You see how
that now gets used as a incremental step?
Well, you couldn't say that, so now you
can't say this.
Well,
this is why we need to hold hard
to these things. Now, look. Fire in a
theater, that that point got lost a long
time ago. I don't know why. It still
feels like an obvious violation of the conversation.
It's on the people who respond, not you.
You know, either way, I'm gonna get to
that in a second. I wanna I wanted
to always it's such a fascinating conversation because
there's valid points we made on either side
of it.
But the point is about free speech,
not
limits,
not in some context, but just free speech.
Inherent, god given. That's the reality of this
stuff. When you say something is free, it's
not accepted in this context. That's not how
that works.
There wasn't any caveat in the constitution, so
it doesn't apply because
the borders are suddenly says we decide. That's
not how this works.
We'll go into it a minute. And, I
mean, I look. I'm sure there are people
out there that disagree. So if that's the
case, we can have a amicable conversation, but
you need to be honest that you want
limited speech. Because that's the reality, guys, and
we have to be real about this. That's
when you start calling out.
Now we talked about this
reasonably in-depth on the March 10, the Zionist
driven attack on free speech. That was about
Mount Mount Kaleel.
At the time, the the information was still
see what's again, hey. On that same note,
by the way, March 10, we were talking
about this, which seems to be dominating the
conversation over the last few days
ahead of it. The point though is that
ultimately,
we it was still developing. Right? And there's
some information that's come out since I think
is very valid and very important.
Overall, it's the same conversation,
as I said in the beginning, and we'll
go through it all again right now. There's
the show if you wanna check it out
from the tenth.
Sal the Agarest makes a very good point,
and this is how this tends to work.
Right?
It's that same meme that somebody kind of
made it for the podcast into actually look
like a Trump cartoon where it shows the
guy putting his hand up, so, like, kind
of a no, and the other one's going
yes with his hand finger out. First one
says arrest pedophiles on the Epstein list. He's
like, no. Next one says arrest campus students
for antisemitism, and Trump's like, yes. That's the
one. I mean, it's it's I mean, it's
just wild how fast we just what happened
to that list, guys? Well, I was on
Pam Bondi's desk, and it's all coming your
way. Right? And then nothing.
Big shock. I'm shocked.
I mean, the problem is, guys, that still
may come out later. But, I mean, what
are we supposed to pretend is happening right
now? How can you even pretend for one
second that they haven't altered something, hidden something,
chained, altered,
blacked I mean,
it's a it this has been this has
been so obviously been I mean, whether it's
the Zionist pact
tax force or the administration, people that are
vehemently against anything that's get bad for Israel
and are all very clearly, all these conversations
tie right back to Israel, and that's not
an opinion at this point.
And then they wait this long. And then
they well, first, they release a
binder full of blacked out pages. You didn't
hear DC Drano tell us that. They clearly
were towing that line. And then when people
push back, they were like, yeah. I was
shocked too, Pam Bonny said on that probably
that conversation.
Yeah. You're real shocked. We were so shocked
that you waited until we pointed it out
to make an issue about it. Right?
God. It's just so lazy. The problem is,
guys, that they're all part of the same
thing. You don't realize by now that's why
this is happening. It's the government.
Not one part or the other, the the
boogeyman democrats and the evil right. No. They're
all doing the same thing. They're getting their
underlings to think that they're different, so they
battle each other and ignore that they're stealing
their rights for right arm under their feet,
but they're the same thing. It's the government.
Now Charlie Kirk and a lot of others
did the same thing. They always do this.
They just like we showed you, there's the
partisan talking point, and it consumes the day,
and they all share the same thing. A
lot of them just kind of share what
the Kirk say. Like, there are people that
follow him. Just kind of copy and share,
copy and share. But you'll see the same,
you know,
sycophants circling people like this around this kind
of structure. They all with all their own
followings, and they all just pair it the
same sentiment, which
this one was about the claim that he
wants the end of western civilization. Newmontage.
Going down the list of what things that
were just parrotted by people, even on those
talk shows that they didn't even know where
they came from.
Oh, he's a paid agitator.
Oh, yeah? Who said? I didn't ask.
Wow. These are people directly tied to the
Trump administration. How embarrassing.
Or what's his name? Benson. Like, literally embarrassing,
like, to the point to where he's making
CNN look good, if that's if that's even
possible.
Where they ask point blank about what's the
evidence. He goes, well, he's obviously a radical.
Nothing else. End of sentence and then waits
for the follow-up. Like, what? That's that's your
response to what's the evidence? And then he
even pushes further and says, well, they're hating
Jews and the the protests were violent. Is
that what he did?
Like, this is insane
with how far this has gone already and
how blatantly
they don't have anything to back it up.
They are using pure force.
So here's what he said
on the eleventh.
One million views is, so who exactly is
Malcolm Khalil? And by the way, just so
it's clear, literally nothing to back this up.
It's text on Twitter because that Twitter file's
for you. These people have built themselves into,
like, their own source. Like, if I put
it there, everyone believes me that have been
stupid enough to fall into this cycle where
they just buy what Charlie Kirk says.
A lot of them out there. Or maybe
not. Maybe these are all bot run nonsense.
It's all theater for all we know. Because,
I mean, I'd like to believe that. I
have to be honest. I didn't say in
the beginning I was wasn't I didn't want,
but I'm I'm gonna it's in my mind.
It's a this whole thing is actually problematic
for me. Like, very much so.
That it's been difficult for me. I it's
I'm usually pretty good. Like, I get passionate.
You know, I I get worked up. I
get passionate. But there's few things that get
me, like, emotionally,
like, angry or or or, you know,
boil my blood. And this conversation,
surprisingly enough, out of all the things I
mean, obviously, plenty of times throughout what's going
on with Israel. It's that's more than enough.
But
this is something
in in in particularly
the way that people are out there
screaming
violently against people who are just going, well,
isn't that a violation of the first amendment?
And then just finding ways to mental gymnastics
to argue against things that are like, you're
you're arguing for your own subjugation.
And, like, just this, you know, the same
kind of, like, petty, dismissive,
like, just this gross partisan dynamic where people
are just screaming. And right now, you got
the left and the right both with false
arguments coming back. It's the same way every
time, and it just kinda weighs on you.
You go through it. You just get exhausted
the moment you look at these you open
the page. So I I just wanted to
point that out, that this stuff is it's
it's frustrating
because it is so important, and you got
people like this that my opinion is they
know what they're doing.
They either don't care at all about the
constitution,
rights, freedom, liberty, or they don't care when
it comes up against what Israel wants
or what Donald Trump and their circle decide
they want for whatever reason you think that
is.
It's it's unnerving, and it really does. It
it wears on you.
But in, you know, in saying that, let
me this is my point. Nothing.
All these million you know, it could be
all fake, but the point that you look
at the chat, there's plenty mostly, it seems
people going, you're done. That's wrong. That's crazy.
You're
he goes, who exactly is this guy? Khalil
was roughly 30 years old, a former Colombian
graduate student with no shit. I mean, anyway,
it says in the world of the New
York Times, Khalil was the public face of
the protest against Israel
in the words. Excuse me. And it says
he has acted as a spokesman for the
anti Israel pro Hamas students. Right there. These
people like, just just wait until we get
to the New York Post or or the
Gateway Pundit article. It's if anybody that can
even pretend for a second this isn't
journalism,
I just I'm embarrassed for you. Like, blatantly
propagate like, opinionated statements like radical, dangerous women
that don't deserve to even be on the
campus. That's not what a journalist writes. That's
what an activist writes. We're watching right wing
woke right activists who are screaming to shut
down what's happening. We'll get to that in
a second, but it's a similar kind of
thing.
Pro Hamas. That's not true.
I mean, the the it's certainly possible for
anybody that somewhere that they sync with the
point is that's not what he says.
You can't just keep conflating pro Palestine or
pro Hamas and be expect to be taken
seriously by intelligent people.
But they do this constantly. They're constantly conflating
these things.
It says, c u a d. Ah, okay.
Well, is that is that Khalil? Is that
him? No. It's not. It's a group that
he overlaps with in this protest movement.
And on top of that, what he cites,
there's no evidence for. The only thing they
have is a circulating screenshot
and a link they claim where it was
that's no longer there. Now I looked into
this as quick as soon as I saw
this stuff, and it's that it's deleted or
if it was ever actually what that was.
My point is no way back machine. I
was looking all day today. And overall, the
point I'll make in a second is that
it's largely irrelevant because what they're showing you
is what the CUAD, if that's even actually
what they said, by the way, because my
point is we can't prove that. But what
they're claiming is that group on that one
screenshot,
not some larger point, said that.
How in the world do you think that
can then become that's what he said to
the point to where he should be removed
from the country?
This is why they don't go in front
of a judge or pretend there's due process
because this would get thrown out by basically
anybody with integrity.
I mean, even I argue even radically politically
motivated judges on the right would go, my
come on, guys. I'm gonna get
tarred and feathered if I because this is
blatant
core constitutional
right stuff
or the or just, like, burden of proof.
So he claims he's fighting for the total
eradication of western civilization. Okay. And, again, what
I just said is is where the evidence
is.
But the point remains.
They do not get to dictate what you
believe.
If you're okay. Look. And this is the
where we have to have this conversation with
an honest con you know, an honest conversation,
which is impossible today with the way our
structure is in the in context of government.
But realize that, okay, if you wanna argue
that people are not allowed to hate this
country,
or how about just all of western civilization?
Okay. Well, then you should make a point
and say, okay. Well, you're not allowed to
have these ideas. And then that would very
clearly open the door for government to say,
okay. Well, not this one either. Well, that
one's national security. Well, you're not allowed to
say this out loud because that it's it's
not just slippery slope. I believe we're already
sliding down the side, and that's the point
is that this
is already opening that door.
But aren't you allowed to have ideological opinions?
Like, let's just say your idea of eradicating
the West is about political stuff, about changing
the political dynamics. So the West as a
culture is suddenly shifted to what they that's
largely what they're actually talking about. Either way,
let's just even even if your mind is
about destroying everything. Until you actually take a
violent step and do something against the law,
you're not breaking the law. You have the
right to say and think what you want.
Now, yes, the argument could be made that
you're
there saying, kill everybody. Do this. Like, there
there's a level where the law does come
into play, where you're threatening. Right? There's threats
can't be
a crime.
That's not what they were doing. My point,
though, is that even to that extent,
the point is that we have to realize
there's a line that has to be drawn
where you have allowed to say and think
what you want. Now that's not what's happening.
They're taking somebody going free Palestine
who's next to people saying this that we
still can't prove if they even actually did
on that tweet or that Instagram post and
saying that this is what he means or
they said that, therefore, it's violence. That's not
even remotely close
to anything that can be taken seriously. Because
what they're trying to say is this guy
is a terrorist group or is working for
a terrorist group or is national security threat
because he has dangerous ideas.
Sorta sounds like when they said you're wearing
a red hat made you a Nazi, doesn't
it?
Honest people
already see that.
You're if you're out there who are on
the fence, that's because you're an honest person.
You need to recognize people like Kirk and
Lou Lumer and it was Instruction Barbie and
Elon Musk and Trump the rest of them.
They are playing you, or they're too dumb
to know they're wrong. And what they're doing
are creating a situation where we will be
I mean, look at it like this.
Let's just say Democrats get elected next time,
and they take it even further. Isn't your
aren't your guys' belief that they're the ones
destroying? Okay. Well, why would you set this
up for them? Why would you create a
circumstance where because they'll censor for Israel like
everybody will. Or any conversation. How about next
time they come back around, they go, well,
now you can't say transgender people are bad.
Is I I don't know why anybody with
a brain can't see how obviously that connects.
So I'm over here, like anybody honest, and
going none of that should apply. They can't
tell you what you're allowed to say.
He says, CUAD believed that October 7 was
a moral military political victory. Again, not him.
But on top of that, realize that that
is an opinion.
Like, think about people that wanted to okay.
How I mean, the idea
if you're talking about people in this country
that wanna see a change in the way
civilization works,
don't we pretend we live in a democracy
where we can express these opinions and try
to evolve things for the benefit and we
can push back? No. What the what you're
seeing this radical woke right do right now
is argue that no no one's allowed to
have different opinions. Acting like somehow everyone in
this country has the same belief of how
it should go. That's not true. And somehow
that if you come from a different country
and you think you don't believe what I
believe, you should get out of the country.
You should be deported. They're all saying that
in that woke right maniac Republican teams from
politics side, not all conservatives.
And that's very dangerous
because that is the opposite of what we
of what this country even was founded on,
by the way, but secondarily, your constitutional rights.
Then he goes on, justified October 7 by
declaring violence is the only path forward.
A still,
just on a screenshot tweet that nobody can
verify. Do you think that Charlie Kirk verified
that?
He didn't link to anything, and at this
time, it was deleted as far as I
can tell. He is simply repeating what he
was told because that's what they do
and gets a million shares for it because
that's what he does it for. And says
Khalil was a negotiator on behalf of the
students who started a tent city in Columbia's
campus. Then he goes on who illegally took
over a campus building.
Well, there's a whole conversation to have about
what is illegal in protesting. We've seen this
countless times on the right and the left.
I mean, think about how dumb it is
to come from Republicans
who are arguing January 6 was not an
insurrection, which I don't agree. It wasn't. It's
wildly manipulated. And but, you know, it it's
just it's always a game. The point is
in a protest,
which is protected in this country, and they
go inside of a building to protest, or
let's say we've seen on the right in
the same way, different speeches, different context, and
they protest, or they're in the way. Whether
you agree with it or not, it is
a protected act. If they weren't going if
did they break in the building? No. Did
they did they steal anything? No. So, technically,
they didn't actually break the law. But if
you wanna try this is in regard to
US law.
But the tent city itself and everything else
was a legal reality. And the top of
that, he was he was a negotiator because
there was a back and forth.
And so the reason this all came about
is because they weren't able to use the
law to shut it all down like people
were pressuring to do. And so the White
House stepped in and said, arrest him. You
know why? Because Batar US, a
disgusting,
dangerous, terrorist terrorist level Zionist organization that ties
all the way back to Jabotinsky,
who was a dangerous person from the twenty
nineteen twenties,
have been circulating
his name to Rubio, to Trump, to Pan
Bondi. And so ask yourself why you're not
alarmed that a Zionist organization tied right back
to Israel in this country is threatening people
with pagers
and is going get this guy get this
guy get this guy and then Trump goes
up and gets that guy.
Nobody else.
There are there's a lot of violent people
on that day, mostly Zionist, but the point
is why why just him? Because they asked
for him. That has to scare all of
you that he's responding
to national security threats or using that argument
because somebody else from a Zionist organization
asked for it.
Khalil distributed pamphlets, he says, of Provo Hamas
propaganda. No. We didn't.
They released information about their protest, about October
7, about things that we've all covered. Charlie
Kirk's been lying about these things, including the
atrocity propaganda
to this very day.
But because they just claim it's Hamas propaganda,
which is one of the core lies, they
claim that he's a material support for Hamas.
That's wildly dangerous.
Because you realize that won't apply to anybody.
The argument that, well, an American who is
given material support for a terrorist organization, even
though it's not what this is, could be
charged with a crime.
You don't realize how alarmingly dangerous this is
to pretend that sharing information that you agree
not not because Hamas says so, but because
it was illegal act of armed resistance. Because
what happened I mean, there's a lot of
points like that they call Hamas propaganda. They're
they're wrong.
Just be it's it's like pretending that if
you say Russia didn't do that because we
can prove they didn't is not Russian propaganda.
It's the same game.
The problem here is that this is going
to overlap with Americans. It's already happening.
And on top of that, the things that
we're talking about in this are actually provably
correct.
And it says Al Asqa flood is the
Hamas' code for the October no. Their code.
Al Asqa flood
was the name of their operation. It wasn't
a secret.
Secret code for Hamas. He is
playing on the ignorance of apparently his lowbrow
audience. Now it says Khalil was in a
group that disputed a Columbia class, it disrupted,
excuse me, on Israeli history to attack the
country
to attack the country
and the professor,
the country,
for normalizing genocide. It's it's it's just I
you you I'm sure you get the point
by now. These are broad, hyperbolic, propagandized points
based on a complete lie to start.
All of these actions violate the rules that
allowed Cleo to come as an immigrant. Now,
again, did you prove any of these Charlie
Kirk? Is there any evidence presented? Did he
get due process? Did he go in front
of a judge? No. So no, they did
not. None of these have been proven. We
don't even know if it's accurate. Most of
it we could actually see already is wildly
exaggerated, if not completely false.
He had a right to due process as
an immigrant, an illegal immigrant, a Visa card
holder, a green card holder, all of those.
We'll get into that next. I'll make that
point for the hundredth time. This is what
they are afraid to get into because they
know it undermines the entire point.
American citizens have strong freedom of speech, but
there is zero reason, he says, that America
should be welcoming in foreigners from abroad whose
chief occupation, again,
you don't know any of these things, will
be agitating on behalf of American enemies. Oh,
so now he's advocating.
His chief op occupation is to advocate on
behalf of American enemies? You mean Israel?
Inserting a joke. Not really a joke, but
point is
he went there to school. He was protesting
against an ongoing genocide, and you wanna argue
his chief occupation is working on behalf of
American enemies? No. That's you, Charlie, and the
rest of you who are advocating for Zionist
overtaking of this country and going after people
who have every right under free the constitutional
rights to stand and protest an ongoing genocide
that you clearly support,
who murder women and children as their primary
strategy. Are we talking about Israel here? What
are we talking about? Because, really, the people
that you're talking about were killed largely by
Israel through the Hannibal directive. And even the
Biba's family were killed by Israeli bombings, which
is a verifiable fact.
This is all I mean, guys, the father
still maintains. It's crazy that we can't have
an honest conversation about this. Khalil does not
want to live in America because he loves
our land. Oh, now Charlie wants you to
what he this is what he knows because
he wants to tell you what Khalil thinks.
This is this is partisan journalism for you
guys. He wants you to know what he
thinks and feels because somehow Charlie Kirk knows
what Khalil thinks and feels.
He love he he wants to be here.
He does not wanna live here for our
land, our people, our values because he knows
that.
Khalil wants to live in America in order
to contribute to its destruction and eradication.
Isn't that kind
of almost laughable,
seeing as how what we're watching take place
is the weaponized destruction of this country by
the very people that Kirk probably gets paid
by? And I'm only saying it like that
because these people are influencing funding across this
entire mainstream alternative field.
Overall, he is supportive of the Israeli government
and the ongoing genocide.
They are literally claiming these people are doing
what we're watching take place, And then they
turn around and point to the same immigration
that they're funding, driving, and point back to
the immigrants, point back to Muslims. He's pointing
to Syria and saying, look at immigrants and
Muslims are bad. That's Israel and The United
States. I even believe to bet you he
knows that and doesn't care.
Staying in America isn't a right. It's a
privilege. No. It's a right, bud. And you're
dumb. So he goes on to say, and
Mohammed Khalil threw his privilege away.
God. That's stupid.
These people are there. They have a green
card. No. They've got rights. You don't get
to say the wrong thing, get thrown out
of this country unless you're acknowledging that we
don't live in the country we think we
do. And I'm saying both points, actually.
Khalil needs to go home and thousands need
more need to go home with him. Think
about that.
This 30 year old terrorist sympathizer.
I mean, like, you could argue that's borderline
slander, guys.
And I'm gonna show him I mean, sympathizer
is the reason I say that. If somebody's
calling him a terrorist, he should sue all
of them. That is slander. There's no evidence
to present any of that. People like Lumer
are screaming about how all Muslims are bad
right now, all across this platform, which he
has right to. And I have a right
to say she's one of the worst people
alive.
Like, one of the worst, most disgusting, vile
people on this platform, and I'll show you
why.
I said it's almost too obvious these days
how there is a partisan focus for the
day and the partisan talking point, and all
the shameless grifters blindly repeat it. Today is
what Kirk is recurgitating below despite it being
false.
Now all of that aside, before we go
through the first event part, is the is
to say that even if what they say
is true,
it still would have to be proven in
a court of law because he has the
same rights that you do, especially
as a green card holder.
But this is what's important because
they're telling you
that he's not even breaking the law.
So
you have to realize that people like the
Kirks and the rest of them out there
who feign to be fighting for freedom and
liberty and the constitution
are do are right now engaged in one
of the most
problematic
law I would argue
damaging, potentially,
attacks on free speech that I've ever seen
in this country. Now I'm just talking about
my personal experience. I'm sure you can go
back in history and find other examples. They've
already in fact, it's also good to point
out the deportation of people in this context
is not actually unprecedented.
It doesn't change the fact that it would
be is unconstitutional if it happened at any
con actually, I'll go through some of those
in a minute.
The point though is that people like that
are right now destroying
for a foreign government, in my opinion, but
either way, destroying in every way what we
are all fighting for while they pretend they're
trying to fight us back from
destroying America.
The ICE detention of a Columbia student is
just the beginning.
This is from the free press.
It says, Donald Trump warned that Khalil's arrest
would be the first of many to come.
Indeed, a White House official told the free
press that the basis for targeting Khalil
is being used as a blueprint for investigations
against other students.
This is a witch hunt, guys. I mean,
this is terrifying. You realize it's not about
crimes. They're making this clear. I'll read in
a second.
It's about ideas.
You're not allowed to you know, they're pretending
it's all terrorism violence even though none of
that is actually happening. It's ideas. It's not
terrorism to have an idea. It's not violence
to have an idea. Didn't you hear Ben
Shapiro? I'll play that again in a second.
Little Benny Shapiro making him I mean, the
thing about right now what's going on about
how many things he's been saying over the
years that right now are being put to
the test, and he is failing, which shouldn't
be a surprise.
The idea
is that clearly
they're going to build a background here about
how to go after people and set the
precedent through a unjustified, unconstitutional reality
and force it through because we're long I
mean, guys, we're every moment right now, I'm
moving away from what this country at least
pretend that it was.
And it says Khalil was a, quote, threat
to foreign policy and national security interest of
The United States. That's what he says that's
what it says, said the official, noting that
this calculation was the driving force behind the
arrest. And he says, quote, the allegation here
is not that he broke the law or
that he's breaking the law, end quote.
That's a Trump official that said that on
the record. So the reality here, guys,
they're telling you there's not it's it's just
it's about national security. Okay. Fine. Let's just
even say that that's the truth.
Prove it.
Present your case
in front of a judge. Because otherwise, you're
breaking the law, period.
And And the reason they're trying to play
this national security idea is because we've already
gone down this road. Bush,
and really left and right, to be honest,
have driven us to a point to where
they can simply go national security and send
people to Guantanamo Bay. That was never what
we believed in. They just kept it trying
to secret until it eventually came out, and
it was a big stand in our reputation.
It never stopped. They just went somewhere else.
Yemen took torture camps. Israel's still doing the
same thing. It's what they do.
So the problem is that's never been something
that aligns with the constitution. That's the reality.
So So now there's we're going right back
to that point. Might makes right, guys. Get
ready.
It says, quote, he was mobilizing support for
Hamas. No. He was not. And spreading antisemitism.
No. He was not. In a way that
is contrary to the foreign policy of The
United States. Well, guys, this is what's so
crazy.
If he carried out an act that was
a crime, then arrest him. If he said
something that I mean, even that the point
is you can't say spreading antisemitism is a
crime. Even they said he wasn't breaking the
law. So they're being they're being clear
that he did things that are not crimes.
We just don't like them.
So just for sake of ex for mental
experiment,
remove those terms.
He was mobilizing support
for Judaism. He was mobilizing support for
the settler movement in Israel to make it
not a not a religious because that Hamas
is not a religious point. I mean, in
the context of, like, you know, like their
religion versus their religion. So a group versus
a group. Okay.
Mobilizing support for the settler movement in Israel,
which are packed
with extremist maniacs who are raping and torturing,
all on the record, by the way. It's
been proven by their own media.
Okay. He was mobilizing support for the settler
movement and spreading hate against Christians.
Kick him out of the country.
Would you agree with that? Now I'm arguing
there's probably people out there that will go,
yeah. Bad person. Get them out. And you're
also part of the problem.
Even if you agree with they're bad people,
which they are, the point is you have
to draw the line with your integrity, your
principles.
Stop letting your emotions
drive the conversation. That's what people like Kirk
bank on.
The reality is that mobilizing support
is a a way to make it sound
like he's taking action. He was not. He
was protesting against a genocide in a way
they claim was support for Palestinians, which they
claim means Hamas. That's the best you can
do.
And and he goes on to say,
noting the administration reviewed intelligence that found Khalil
was a national security risk. Okay. Let's see
that intelligence. I'm willing to bet you that
intelligence is those sentences right there. The way
we feel about what he's doing. That's what
it is, guys. There's not some investigation intelligence
showed. That's just the way they're making it
sound like there's some file somewhere where we
knew he was secretly plotting bomb threat. That's
what they want people to assume.
The evidence does not exist.
And it says the Trump administration needs to
contend with a federal judge in the Southern
District Of New York who, on Monday afternoon,
blocked the deportation of Khalil, who is being
held at ICE detention in Louisiana.
Now I'll get to another article why that
is. They moved him.
The point quickly is that they argue that
there was a oh, no. I'm sorry. This
oh, I thought it was right there. It
is in the other article. They moved him
to a location where they thought he would
be less likely to get removed.
A judge that's more angry against immigrants is
the point.
That's how this government works.
He is expected to appear in court Wednesday
morning.
Now this was written on the tenth, so,
arguably, yesterday, should have been in court.
Thinking, you know, we're like in this blacked
out scenario. It's like what Israel does to
their military. We are we we are watching
the
reality, the mask being torn off. If you
can be taken, whether green card holder with
rights or an American citizen with the same
rights and be just
disappeared. Your wife can't find you. Your lawyer
can't speak to you. Both those are real.
You're moved to Louisiana without being told, and
nobody even I mean, that's
stuff, guys. That's secret police. We are in
a
the moment that we've all been fearing.
They're showing you this is coming. Now this
is when we need to stand up and
push back harder than ever because it's always
possible we could push this back. He is
expected to appear in court Wednesday morning. The
deportation of a lawful permanent resident such as
Khalil generally requires the approval of an immigration
judge.
Khalil's case has thrown in dramatic relief debates
over the limits of protected speech and what
constitutes a legitimate response to the explosion of
antisemitism, which is not what's happening on campuses
across The United States.
I mean, I've proven these things 45 times
over. We can see the actual protests and
the people in the center
of what they claim was a hot span
of antisemitism,
and it was put on by Jewish voices
for peace, and there were Jewish people there
protesting and chanting along holocaust survivors and Muslims
and Christians. That's what it was. There's endless
video of it, guys.
It's actually insane to me that even people
that are writing articles that are somewhat critical
of what's happening are still claiming it's just
not true.
And then you find out that they used
every Palestinian flag to claim 400%
increase. That's what they're pointing to right there.
October 2023, the explosion of antisemitism was Palestinian
protests. They got caught. They basically admitted it.
It goes on to say, I don't think
anybody who is fomenting pro terror, not what
happened, anti Semitic, not what happened, Anti American,
not what happened rhetoric. Who isn't a US
citizen? Has any inherent right to be here?
Well, yeah. In fact, he does since he's
got a green card.
But you guys don't care about rights apparently.
But the real reality is
pro terror
to them means Palestine.
Anti Semitic means Palestine.
Anti American means Palestine.
Because remember remember, the only thing they're using
to claim he's anti American is the end
of Western civilization, which is not just America,
and it's also not what he said. I
said it the very first show because it
wasn't
true. It's a screenshot. If it ever came
from anyone, it was the group of the
screenshots,
the what? C c u a d, whatever
the group is called. That, by the way,
the post is actually talking about a Bangladeshi
protest. It's not even talking about what they're
doing. Nonetheless, it's a screenshot that nobody seems
to be able to prove. Even if it
was what they said, it's not what he
said. In what world can you be held
personally accountable for what a group posted on
their own Instagram page?
That's insane, guys. That's how flimsy this is.
It says, in a statement on Monday, Trump
reiterated that pro terrorist,
anti Semitic, anti American activity will not be
tolerated. The reason he said pro terrorist is
because they want you to pretend that it's
violent.
You know?
I mean, the the best way to frame
it. Because the bottom line is, guys, pro
terrorist means whatever they want it to mean.
I mean, they're called I mean, this is
the same point, and I don't know why
honest conservatives don't scream this.
They were calling you terrorists. Israel, the ADL,
your own government were saying you're a terrorist
because you wear a red hat.
Just because you think that's only one part
of the government, it doesn't change the fact
that it's the same conversation. They could if
you believe this is okay, then it would
have been just as logical for them to
go, you're deported. You have a green card,
you wear a red hat, you're deported.
Are you okay with that? If you are
not, then you're a hypocrite right here.
Pro terrorist
is Palestine support. That's all he's saying. It's
not a crime to support Palestine. It's also
not a crime to support whatever you want
inside your head or verbally.
That's the reality as much as that may
be difficult for some of these radical partisans
to think to think.
And he goes, noting that many protesters are
paid agitators. So this is what this is
how this goes. Trump floats a baseless claim
saying many of them are, not even pointing
to him. And that cascades onto Fox News
next to Jennings, and that guy goes, he's
a paid agitator.
And they they ask for evidence, he goes,
How what in what world do you think
you can go on a show like that,
make a claim like that against a person,
which is technically slander,
and then not have anything to back it
up?
The reality is there's zero evidence.
If
we'll get to the general I mean, as
far my research shows nothing, and I'll show
him some points in a second. Do you
not think if they had evidence of paid
agitation from Hamas or wherever they wanna claim
or or that he was doing something even
remotely connected to terrorism or that he ever
said any of those things. Don't you think
they will be spreading that everywhere right now?
Because they are being attacked everywhere, rightly so,
for doing something unconstitutional right now from left
and right. So if they had it, it
would be everywhere.
This weekend, secretary of state, Mike, Marco Rubio
posted that the state department would be revoking
the student visas and green cards of Hamas
supporters. There you go.
Oh, you mean the Hamas that Israel funded
in October 7? Okay. So if you're claiming
Hamas supporters need to remove the okay. What
about all the Israelis that support him that
are support the funding rather support the current
government that's funding them since October 7 or
up until?
It's very simple. I mean, if you're still
out there and you don't know that by
now, I don't know how what or what
rock you're living under. It's been publicly discussed
even on BBC and CNN for crying out
loud. Barack,
Igor Barak, former prime minister, went on these
shows and openly discussed it. Former head of
Shin Bet says the same thing. It's a
provable fact. Netanyahu said in his own meeting
that we have to keep funding Hamas in
order to keep them from a two state
solution.
Since we don't have to play the clip
every single time, I'll just grab this tweet,
and I'll include it. From Harrettes, by the
way, two days after October 7,
October ninth. Anyone who wants to thwart the
establishment of Palestinian state, you know, exactly what
he pretended they didn't want. The opposite of
what they said they were fighting for. But
it's always them that don't want two state
solution. Oh, yeah? Liars.
Endless, endless liars.
So the point, obviously, is if you're gonna
tell us that supporting Hamas is enough to
get your greet your for you to ignore
their constitutional rights, which is what it is,
then does it matter that Israel funded them
into that position, doesn't it? No. Of course
not. It's not about that or any of
them. It's about finding ways to suppress what
you say about Israel
or really anything, but right now it's about
Israel.
Since for starters, and this gets into some
of the Supreme Court setting, rulings,
Turner versus Williams. Supreme Court case from nineteen
o four
set the precedent that aliens can be deported.
This is in regards to some of the
past examples of getting rid of aliens or
people, you know, green card holders, Visa holders
in regard to some kind of situation like
violence.
Set the precedent that aliens can be deported
if they're engaging in specific dangerous activities. That
seems kinda broad again. Or if they have
certain dangerous views that those, quote, who hold
and advocate them would be undesirable actions to
our population. Now it's important to understand how
the system works.
The reality of this is about the the
this it's a I mean, it's largely a
precedent based system,
but there is inherent constitutional law and constitutional
rights. So if and what I'm gonna go
through and show you is the very clear
volume. The bulk of the rulings have always
gone, and I'll go and I'll go you
right right to the law sites and the
and the basic,
AI you know, I'll I'll show it all
to you where the it's obvious that that
is how it applies. My point is showing
you is that there already been examples in
the past where you had cases like this,
some of which were later overturned, by the
way, where they did do something like this.
But remember, even Mabry versus Madison, which was
before this, argued that if it was repugnant
to the constitution, it's null and void. That's
in regard to making legislation. The point though
is that if it's repugnant to the constitution,
it is not valid
even for a ruling. But that's why these
things go through. That's why the checks and
balance system works or in some way is
effective in some context.
That's why as we if we get to
it today, the point about Trump and all
the judge rulings and then we're trying to
remove all the judges is just I look.
I'm the first to tell you that they
all have political leanings.
That's why the system is somewhat set up
to have the checks and balances because of
that. Obviously, you can see the authoritarian direction
of the current administration or the ones before
it.
So they it it in some way checks
itself like that. The problem is they're gonna
try to go after people that don't let
them do what they want, acting like that's
freedom.
But this is at least one example of
where that's happened before. Now this but, again,
the main point is dangerous activities
and what it says,
who hold and advocate
things that we've got. Like, so right now,
if you're protesting against the genocide, if you're
protesting for Palestinian people, none of that applies
unless you wanna pretend that doing so therefore
means something violent, and that's what they're trying
to do because they know these are the
only ways they can make it happen.
Under the Immigration and Nationality Act
passed in 1952,
a Visa holder, not what we're talking about,
he was a green card green card holder,
but in this case, a Visa holder who,
quote, endorses or espouses terrorist activity
or persuades others to endorse or espouse terrorist
activity. That's what they're citing, guys. I'm telling
you. They they they have their people. They
looked into this to try to find how
they could do this for Israel, and they're
trying to say, well, let's just say Palestinian
support is terrorism, and then we'll just say
terrorism from now forward. That's what they're doing.
Same way they go after people that say,
Zionism is a political organization. No. You're racist.
You're antisemitic.
No. I was talking about a government, but,
you know, if you wanna conflate those things
to mix to press my speech, then then
have at it.
That's what they're doing.
And your government is facilitating that. Biden did
the same. Trump does the same. They've always
been, quote, fighting antisemitism. And what are they
doing? Going after criticism of Israel.
Trump has cemented that in his own executive
order or rather
softly laid it down with executive order that
will be turned around. The point is clear.
They're all going in the same direction. And
that's why. Because they're trying to pretend that
you're
supporting terrorism,
especially when they call everything they don't like
terrorism. But either way, that's not what he's
doing in any context.
Make sure it's the same one. Yeah. Okay.
So
oh, and so the main point I wanna
remind myself about
is that
due process is in a very important part
of this. So let's just say all of
that is true. Right? Everything all that or
whatever they're saying about is true in the
context of, you know, supporting Palestine equals terrorism.
The point is you have to still present
the evidence. Now he's still apparently gonna go
in front of a judge. We'll we'll have
to wait and see what happens, but that's
up in the air right now. My point
is you should not be the way that
they've already handled this, even regard to the
school, has shown you that they're acting first,
due process later, which seems to be Trump's
thing.
But it's hopefully still gonna happen in some
context. But we realize they're already telling people
just
they're just rushing through this process and trying
to move them to a place where it
will be better executed.
If the evidence is presented and we don't
get to see the process, then that that
is a secret court system, and that's also
a violation of a rights.
So when this gets presented, we need to
call this out because the evidence, as I've
already told you, is very transparent. They're just
gonna make their case. They already have. Him
doing that is a national security risk. It's
not a crime,
but it's a risk to our national security.
So you'd argue that an honest judge would
say, we'll lay out your case. In what
way is it a threat to national security?
I'm willing to bet you they're gonna claim
national security.
That's how dumb this is. Let's say, well,
we can't get into it because national security.
And maybe the judge,
that's why they went there. I hope I'm
wrong.
You know, they went to the place where
they kinda got they knew that would what
they might get.
Brian Grimm says,
the lawyer for Khalil at today's hearing
said that she has been unable to speak
to her client once.
So that's what that was that was my
point.
I mean, there may be do there may
be a point when which he sees a
judge, but right now, he's been denied his
rights. As of right now, they're going Guantanamo
Bay on this guy. They're acting like this
is some kind of a post world a
post patriot act
war on terror situation where they could just
yell terrorism and throw you in a cell.
Thanks Obama. Thanks Trump. Thanks Biden. Thanks everyone
that's continued that same thing from whatever NDAA
it was. I forget. Where they can arrest
and detain American citizens without charge. That's that's
still there. All of them have continued that.
See, it's funny how we don't get the
Kirk talking about that. Right? Of course not.
He says, does any of this sound like
the America you were taught about growing up?
A legal permanent resident kept incommunicado
with no charges
specifically for his speech?
It's terrifying.
Now just quickly looking this up, and I'll
give you sources directly from legal aspects and
so on, and directly right from our constitutional
rights.
Simply asking,
constitutional rights, do they apply to illegal aliens?
Simple answer, yes. Constitutional rights do apply to
undocumented immigrants, also known as illegal aliens.
The US Constitution guarantees certain rights
to all people
living within the territorial jurisdiction of The United
States,
regardless of their immigration status.
As always, by the way, when I include
these, they've got
seven links down there, all citing some of
them I'm gonna show you.
The point is there's obviously limitations
that are more so for you if you're
an illegal immigrant because you're technically breaking the
law.
My point though is that as it says,
and this is the right way to frame
it,
it guarantees
certain rights
to all peoples in this country.
Now, yes, there are also some of those
rights when you have the full picture that
aren't applied to some people in some circumstances.
Example, illegal immigrants. The point though is the
certain rights that are guaranteed,
that's what we're talking about today. And that
is freedom of speech, if and others we'll
get into. But the point is freedom of
speech
does not get removed one day because you'd
somewhat broke. I mean, it'd be as stupid
as saying because you ran a red star
or stop sign, then suddenly you don't have
the right to free speech. You broke the
law.
The constitution
was not applied
to only people who are born in The
United States, and that's the point we've always
made. And it's the truth.
God given does not mean only people in
this country.
But
that's it just so it's clear, that is
the provable reality. You can go back to
the founding fathers,
and you can see it right here in
front of you. But or the the presence
of showing you, well, that's the main point.
That was going forward. The Supreme Court has
continued to make that point. So there's really
no air in this conversation. You just have
a bunch of very screaming, dangerous people out
there who are calling for this country to
be destroyed for something else. They might not
even realize it. They might be so so
jazzed up on some jingoistic Trump saving the
world mindset that they don't even look. They
don't even take a second to realize. They're
so, oh, yeah. Bad democrats. They're destroying everything.
So whatever you gotta do, I support you.
It's dangerous, guys. That's why stupidity is very
dangerous.
Here, from Clearwater Group, five rights of undocumented
immigrants simply says, the constitution protects all people
living in The United States regardless of immigration
status. If an individual is physically present in
The United States, they are entitled to the
protections granted by the constitution.
This includes the right to due process,
and most importantly,
and equal protection under the law.
Simple.
The fifth amendment, for example, for many of
them we could point to. I'll show you
one next. States that no person
shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property
without due process of law. Period. End of
sentences.
And how do you misunderstand that? It doesn't
say no American. It says no person
shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property.
Because that was the point. They lived in
a time when people were rapt just because
of the decree of a leader or rather
a ruler.
Seems like we're there now. Right?
And so they made sure, look, no person
in any context shall be deprived of life,
liberty, or property. I mean, is your argument
out there if you're shaking your head that
you do you're okay dictating who is deprived
of life, liberty, and property? And the due
and due process just because they don't have
the right skin color, come from wrong country?
I mean, it's ridiculous. You're ridiculous. It's just
you know, you actually don't understand these things,
and that's what's so alarming.
Here's the fifth amendment. I just what we
just showed you. No no, well, that was
the
was it the yeah. That was the other
one.
It was the which one was
it? Oh, that was the fifth. I thought
I think I have the fourteenth up. That's
what it was.
Or it did. Oh, well. It doesn't matter.
Maybe I closed the other one. The point
was that you can go through the constitution
and see many times
no person excuse me. No person
shall be
held to answer for a capital on the
same kind of point. Crime, infamous crime, unless
no you know, it goes on to say,
nor shall any person be subject to the
same offense, twice, double jeopardy, nor shall be
compelled in any criminal case to be a
witness against his self, nor be deprived of
life, liberty, or property without due process of
law.
Any person.
Law and crime. Back this is 02/2018.
Two undocumented immigrants have the right to have
legal rights under The US law. The four
that's the that's what I was I remember
I had one point on the fourteenth amendment
right there of the US constitution ratified in
1968
after the end of the civil war, specifically
states,
nor shall any state
deprive any person of life, liberty, or property
without the due process of law nor deny
to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.
That's the that's that's the most clear it
could be.
Nor shall any state
deprive
any person of life, liberty, or property without
due process. Any person.
This one says, the court asserted, quote, the
guarantees and this is 1886
in regard to Chinese nationals in San Francisco.
The court asserted that guarantees of protection contained
in the fourteenth amendment
to the constitution
extend to all persons within the territorial jurisdiction
of The United States
without regard to differences of race or color
or of nationality.
You can't get much more clear than that.
All persons within the territory of The United
States.
That is as cut and dry as it
gets.
Then it says, quote, whenever his status under
the immigration laws, an alien is surely or
whatever his status under these laws, an alien
is surely a person, this is one of
the court rulings, in any ordinary sense of
that term.
Aliens, even aliens whose presence in this country
is unlawful,
have long been recognized as persons guaranteed due
process by law of the Fifth and Fourteenth
Amendments.
Pretty damn simple.
In 1993,
justice Anton Antonin,
justice Scalia wrote in Reno versus Flores that
the courts have, quote, well established
that the Fifth Amendment ent entitles aliens to
due process of law in deportation
proceedings. That's justice Scalia.
Please put this in front of people that
need to see it. I don't believe Kirk
cares
or any of the rest of them. This
is important. This is a recent one in
regard to, in particular,
deportation proceedings.
Due process.
Not
right now, if he hasn't yet spoken to
his lawyer, then they are not giving him
due process.
I know I I, in particular, included that
one. Reno versus Flores right there for you.
Now this is interesting, by the way. This
was a clip, or rather it's rather,
audio recording of the podcast from antiwar.com.
Rabble Rausser shared this.
It's important to think about this. And he
basically, they cite what Greg, I always do
that. Glenn Greenwald said,
what they wrote up here first. And you
might you've seen this. I already showed you
this.
The house affair house foreign affairs committee, the
White House, and the state department
shared this and all said, shalom, Mahmood.
Shalom.
I mean, is that not the craziest thing
in the world? That's it's it's they see,
this is what I'm I don't know why
they would do that. And
and I mean, no matter how you look
at it, that's a reference to Israel, guys.
That's what that's about.
And so either that's them making them put
that there, which is just always how that
seems to work, which shows all of us
what's really out, or they're doing it because
they want you to know it's for Israel.
I mean, however you look at this,
that's pretty wild to me. But he simply
says
unconstitutional legal, an attack on free speech on
behalf of a foreign state.
But this was the first example simply showing
you what what, they're saying in regard to
why this is obviously well, more so, this
is about the funding to colleges, but it's
the same vein of conversation.
The restrict they're removing of $400,000,000
of of funding to colleges, which, again, I'm
I'm the I'm I'm I'm the first part
of this. I don't believe any of them
should get federal funding. But the point is
still the same, and he makes it very
clear in this. Glenn Greenwald is a constitutional
lawyer, but the point is that, ultimately, it's
contingent on specifically the kind of speech that
they can and can't say. So it's there's
no way around this. You got a bunch
of dishonest people who either don't know they're
wrong,
or rather I shouldn't if they don't know
they're wrong, maybe not dishonest, but they either
don't know that they don't understand the constitution
or very dishonest people who don't care that
they're wrong and are forcing this in any
way.
I just have to believe that most people
are both smart enough and and
have enough integrity
to be able to say this is a
problem even if you still decide to support
Donald Trump.
Say Israel, he didn't even use the
the the claim of antisemitism,
which he has done in his executive order
to crack down on this, but it's very
clearly this is what he's talking about. So
this is what Stefanik said. She said, quote,
under president Trump, colleges and universities will be
held accountable.
Antisemitism
and anti Israel hate will not be tolerated
on American campuses. Promises made, promises kept, end
quote. So you hear what she said there.
She didn't just say antisemitism, which is the
smear
that they that, you know, the the this
claim that these are antisemitic protests is is
ridiculous.
But she's not even just saying that. She's
also saying they're anti Israel,
and that anti Israel hate will not be
tolerated.
Just completely ridiculous. Just a flagrant violation of
the right to free speech in this country.
And it's on behalf of a foreign power,
on behalf of a foreign country. So Glenn
Greenwald, who everybody knows,
he explained in a video that he posted
on x why cutting federal funding over political
speech and protests is a violation of the
first amendment. Because you hear from people, oh,
it's not like they have the right to
the federal funding.
And I especially hear this, you know, from
being a libertarian.
You know, this is what people always throw
at me.
But what Greenwald says here is important.
So he said and he's a constitutional lawyer
for for those who don't know.
He said, quote, you can take the position
that there should be no federal funding of
universities
or there should be. That's independent of the
free speech point.
Once the federal government or any government decides
to offer a benefit that's optional,
it cannot then condition receipt of that benefit
on your expressing a particular view,
your affirming a particular view, or your refraining
from expressing a political view. This is basic
first amendment doctrine, end quote.
So this announcement from Trump came after a
very bizarre statement from
Very important to think about. Now the other
point to really add that I said before,
but to really think about again,
is that in the first place, these were
not antisemitic protests.
So at the core of the argument,
it wasn't even actually the reality.
They're building on this idea that not just
was it antisemitism, but poor but it was
supporting Hamas for terrorism.
The core argument wasn't even valid.
And this is what we I mean, I'm
I'm probably gonna get to a point where
I'll play those clips again, maybe not play
them a hundred times, but just the reality
of how you can prove
the the the blatant lie of what was
happening on the ground. I mean, not least
of which because it was put on by
Jewish organizations. Like, that's just the and nobody
wants to be honest about that. Or the
fact that they were holocaust survivors and Jewish
Christians, Muslim people, all they were suppressed, celebrating
Passover together, singing Jewish song in solidarity
for Palestinian self determination.
Imagine in pretending that's antisemitism.
It's this is
ADL, APAC, Zionist, Israeli propaganda
that has been overwhelming this country for
decades.
And I look. I I think it's not
this is it's crazy to me that today,
that's not even contentious. It's only contentious in
the circles of people that are refusing to
acknowledge that, who are afraid to call it
out because they'll be attacked by the people
that they're aside with.
Overall, the world has come to terms with
this. So we as Americans need to be
honest about this, and it's not about Jewish
people. It's not even about all Israelis. It's
about Zionism
and their effort to create this, to suppress
your speech as they carry out a genocide
in multiple countries. It's about the simplest thing
in the world today.
Now, Candace Owens, this is the one this
is the point about that image.
This is all they have to make this
argument.
A screenshot.
Twitter files for you, guys. I told you
this this is there's a reason that this
was built.
People are using screenshots to act like they
know that proves anything. Like we can't alter
screenshots today.
It's just insane to me. Now it certainly
could be. The point is the same.
If even if if it is true, it's
a it's a Instagram post from a group
that he was not that ultimately is a
group that post something on Instagram that he's
overlapped with in these protest movements.
Never did he say those things. Never did
he tag shared. It was they said something
over there, and they're right here, and he's
right there, and therefore, he's a terrorist.
And even if he did say those things,
it's still protected under free speech. So this
is the most abstract manipulation I've ever seen.
Like, how do you not see that this
is not in their interest?
Like, they can't even build a real case.
So as always, why would they do that?
Why would they go so far out on
a limb
to go after one person who didn't even
meet even the basic requirements for this knowing
they'd get pushed back unless somebody made them
do that, unless they had an interest to
do so that was not for American interest.
I mean, I don't know how you also
make sense of that.
This is against their interest. This is against
American interest, against the constitution. It's against freedom
and liberty for clearly the one person who
doesn't want you calling out what they're doing
or a group. Excuse me. I I mean,
it's all my opinion, but, I mean, how
else do you make sense of that? Why
would they do this? And let's not forget,
the Qatar US group was going that guy,
that guy, that guy, that guy, Pam Bondi,
Marco Rubio, Trump for weeks.
It's all public. You could look up on
Twitter. They were tagging him going, get this
guy. That's the one. That's the guy.
And then they just so happen to go
after that one guy
to their detriment.
Candace says, Caroline Levitt
just gave a press conference. She says, Mahmoud
Khalil distributed pro, promos propaganda.
Same old talking point. You realize this is
only eleventh. It's now the thirteenth. I haven't
seen anything other than that random screenshot circulating.
All they do is go, he said Hamas
talking wiser to material support,
and that she has the materials on her
desk.
Yeah. I'd love to see that.
We already know what it is. I mean,
we've seen people in these protests know what
we was being circulated. It was a it
was a discussion
about what they're protesting for
and all the things we've said on this
show, which are factually correct and not pro
Hamas.
Why? Because Hamas is funded by Israel. Why
would I support that? Overall, I still keep
the mind open in regard to what might
be shifting in all these context, and it
still, regardless of Israeli support, was a protected
act under the Fort Geneva Convention of International
Law as an occupied territory with armed resistance.
Always so simple if you just have a
brain and are open to interpret or open
to, you know, understanding the information
as opposed to just diving into the propaganda.
But so she's gonna show you if they
ever show you anything,
flyers that say they had a right to
do what they did, which they did.
Then, ultimately, what happened
was due
to decades of oppression, which it was.
These aren't these aren't homos propaganda points. They're
just true. It's the same way when you
talk about things around 09:11 or whatever else,
it becomes some other talking point. You're spreading
pro Russian talking points when you're talking about
Syria not committing chemical attacks. Oh, you're Russian
shill. No. It's just the truth.
And they use some other name to get
you to distract yourself, get one half of
the paradigm to ignore it.
She says, would it not be prudent to
release these materials, dissuade public outrage? Yeah. She
knows what she's doing, that they're not going
to. She's making a point that that's why
we have a right to see this and
so does he.
This guy, who you know already, is a
long term
screaming, foaming at the mouth Zionist propagandist,
goes, this is what she's defending and gives
you the screenshot because that's what they're supposed
to do. Now
Candace points to Mel who says that's a
fake.
Now it says she goes, how do you
have so much time to garner support for
your position?
There's she Mel says this is fake, saying
the statement came from a group called the
Columbia University Bengali Student Association, which it did,
but it does point to both Columbia and
Bangladesh.
It says it was printed in Mondawise, which
it was. And she there here's the actual
headline. I went through it, but it wasn't
as,
you know, I think I might even have
it somewhere.
I I don't wanna try to find it
right now.
The point is in Mondawise oh, it doesn't
really add much to it.
Here. It's right here. I'll include it.
Basically, what this shows you is
this on same kind of 08/04/2024.
And what they're doing is is they're posting
what it says here. And what they're showing
you, it comes from this other group.
And as far as I could tell, is
is basically just a
you know, like, it's a they're it's specifically
about Bangladesh, but it overlaps with the fight
against, you know, whatever the I forget the
term they use.
Where was it?
Anyway, I can't the bottom line is that
this I I can't verify any of this.
So it's up for you to decide that
the thing the the thing is gone right
now.
My point is the same regardless, which is
why that this is just, like, sub subtle
point is that it does he did not
say these things. He does not claim to
think those things.
So you can't just pretend he's guilty of
something else that somebody else posted that I
can't even prove is there right now.
On top of that, it's not against your
rights to think and say those things.
It's just really silly where we are. But
the point is she's claiming
that it was printed in Manda Wise on
the August 4 and is much longer essay
expressing solidarity with the student movement in Bangladesh.
On August 8, the IG accounts called Jewish
Jews in Schools and Antisemitism Today posted this
picture claiming it was from CUAD's
page after a Twitter user named
this, whatever that says, stress
stress studio posted the MondoWeis article to his
x page.
And it this is the evidence of radicalism
all all the Zionists are using to attack
him. Now, again, I mean, what I'm showing
you is that I can't I I've I
can't be I can't flush it out. All
we have is a screenshot. She's claiming that
it wasn't actually that post. If you click
on the link, which you could find,
somewhere down here, it's gone. It just says
not there. So I tried to use the
Wayback Machine. Every single one of them would
load. To
me, it's irrelevant at this point because it
doesn't it's even if he did say it,
it wouldn't be a violation of his constitutional
rights, and he didn't say it because it's
clear. Not even they're claiming that. They're just
simply saying that he's guilty by association, basically.
Aren't we already aware of how this works,
guys?
Oh, yeah. And I'm right myself. So it's
no it's no different.
So think about this.
If Biden decided during his last administration to
deport somebody
on a green card who happened to be
at January 6.
Right? He just but didn't do anything violent,
just happened to be there. Right? Was just
protesting for but, you know, they believed that
they were stolen, or maybe they just believed
that we had a right to be there.
Okay? And there was a group over here,
Proud Boys, you pick whatever you want. And
they were going, into the country. Take down
the White House. Whatever. Right?
And then that person got deported because they
said those things and he was right there.
Are you okay with that?
I mean, guys, it's not very hard to
find an overlap here. I get why this
is easy for some people because you've been
trained to think this is your enemy. The
reality, though, is even if it is your
actual enemy, that's not what Khalil is.
In this context, if you're if you're not
okay with that, a person wearing a red
hat, here on a green card, been here
for ten years, who's go protesting because they
believe we have a right to protest the
government, And another group was screaming, end of
the White House, and then he gets removed
from the country. If you're not okay with
that and you're okay with this first one,
then you're being a hypocrite. It's the same
point. It's important to stand on principle more
than ever.
Now Glenn retweeted this.
First, the tweet is
Shadi
Hamid saying material support, which is what they
keep claiming, which I believe is absolutely untrue,
like, provably untrue. Because material support is a
very different thing than even saying I support
Hamas.
Let alone going free Palestine and then going
wink wink that means Hamas or some other
group saying something. He says, Material support for
a designated terrorist organization is illegal under US
law.
So, if Mahmoud Khalil and that's why material
support's important.
That'd be like giving them arms or something
like that. He says, so if
Mahmoud Malmoud Khalil is found to actually have
support of Hamas,
he should be charged accordingly, right, and the
irrelevant evidence brought before a judge.
That's how due process works. You see my
point? That's not what's happening right now.
He says, I've actually tried to find any
evidence that expressed even rhetorical support for Hamas.
As far as I can tell, he did
not.
Or any other FTO or, you know, terrorist
organ designated terrorist organization in any public statement
he made. I cannot see a single indication
of this because it doesn't exist as far
as I can tell.
That wouldn't even be material support, which is
my point, and would probably still fall under
first amendment speech. It would. But he didn't
even do anything like that, he says. And
he was speaking very frequently given his role.
He was. He was constantly in the public.
This is very crazy and dangerous, guys. This
should be unnerving to everybody who actually understands
free speech and the constitutional rights that we
have inherently,
not because the government doles them out to
you.
The most serious allegation, he continues, that anyone
has surfaced is that he might have been
standing in the same room as some Maoist
posters.
That's the the claim of what they posted
over there. How you don't even know if
he was around them when that was posted
or if he even agrees with it or
anything. And even if he was, it does
not mean he says it or think it.
You can't hold him accountable for that.
It says
or the existence of some social media post
that some other person made and that it
doesn't even seem he was even aware of.
In fact, his many recorded statements are extremely
measured and reasonable and absolutely would fall under
the first amendment.
See, that's what that's what it looks like
to actually look at what he's saying and
listen as opposed to reading what Charlie Kirk
says he said.
That is Twitter file stuff, guys. That is
the way you've been played.
This episode is very revealing of a deeply
high hierarchical and authoritarian
undercurrent in society.
I find it mystifying, he says, that many
people whose public facing identity has been based
around
disinterest,
disinterested defense of political speech
and civil rights very recently are not just
okay with this, but are defending. And that's
what I that's what I was just saying
earlier.
And deriving a sense of of, what does
that say?
It looks like a German word I'm not
familiar with.
Pleasure derived by somebody from other person's distortion.
Totally.
My god. That's a perfect word for this.
How do you say that?
Schadenfreude?
How would you say that? Schadenfreude? I'm sure
I'm mispronouncing it. The point, guys, is that
he's exactly this is exactly what I was
talking about. People that you are screaming that
we have to die fighting for our rights
are not only just defending this, but they're
laughing at other people's you know, they're attacking
other people who are trying to defend it.
It's it's this is a psychological
we're being manipulated, like, not just
propaganda.
Like, even Catherine floats the idea of the
neuroscience level. I'm not gonna get into it
today, but the point is there's something going
on here.
It says it's clear that for many liberalism
for many, liberalism is merely employed as a
tool to achieve other unspoken political object objectives
rather than an ideology whose principles extend universalist
claim. Now here's what's fascinating to me. He's
speaking about this, it seems, as a liberal
from the looking at their side, and this
is my point. It seems as both the
pair that both sides of the paradigm are
so blindly
acquiescing to whatever Israel needs that we have
both sides essentially finding different reasons to accept
this. Like, even Schumer acted like, well, it
is technically wrong, but I wanna see the
evident. Like, it's just a lighter way of
saying the same thing.
And so he is going, yes. These liberals
are just using these things to they don't
believe him. Exactly. Neither do the conservatives
in the team sports side.
There's a lot of liberals and conservatives out
there that are calling a lot of this
stuff out. My point is the team sport
politics, the left and right
high level discussion.
These are just fronts. They don't care about
these things as evidenced by what's happening right
now, and
Murtagh Hussein is correct.
Now Glenn says
actually, first, we'll start with Gabriel
nor Noronha
says, this is a reporter asking your your
revocation of the green card to many is
seen as one of the most anti speech
actions a secretary can take with his powers.
Do you respond?
Actually, I didn't grab this. Let me we'll
just play this since we're here. I was
more interested in what their response was,
but let's play it because I you know,
this I actually deliberately
didn't get a lot of this stuff because
we could go forever
being outraged about how dumb the things are
that Rubio and Bondi and Trump and Elon's.
It's just it's just in it's
almost overwhelming how ridiculous it can get. But
since we're here,
let's play this one.
President Trump appealed to a lot of Americans
during his campaign on free speech arguments and
not suppressing
speech, especially from the government.
But your revocation
of the green card,
to many is seen as one of the
most anti speech actions a secretary can take
with his powers. How how do you respond?
Yeah. When you enter the this is an
important point, and I'm glad you asked this
question.
When you come to The United States as
a visitor, which is what a visa is,
which is how this individual entered this country
on a as on a visitor's visa. He's
wrong, by the way. It's a green card.
He has a green card.
Right? So what's crazy about this is he
originally, they all went with Visa. They all
said that and then all of a sudden,
someone's like, well, he doesn't even have these
green cards. Well, that one too. And then
all of a sudden, they broadened it out
to green cards as well.
But it just shows you that it's just
like, okay. Whatever. That too? Okay. Make it
whatever we need to make it to make
this make sense.
K. You are here as a visitor. We
can deny you that visa.
We can deny you that if you tell
us when you apply, hi. I'm trying to
get into The United States on a student
visa. I am a big supporter of Hamas,
a murderous, barbaric group. He was not. He's
lying. Right? This is a wholesale lie. That
kidnaps children, that rapes teenage
Also a lie, by the way. That takes
hostages, that allows them to die in captivity.
Oh, really? Instead of being bombed by Israel's
bombs or them using their own bodies to
protect the hostages like every one of the
hostages have publicly said and still do.
I mean, this is what's so stupid about
this. These guys
are just
continuing. This the lies that every Israeli media
is calling out. Israel
is calling. Right now, Israelis are calling out
their own government because they're trying to go
back to the war instead of taking their
people home. They know what's happening. And Rubio
stands up and has the nerve to speak
to you, to express to to go after
your rights,
to lie to you about what's going on
that we all know is a, like, for
a foreign government.
I don't know how we don't recognize what's
happening in this country right now. It's terrifying.
That returns bought more bodies than live hostages.
If you tell us that you are in
favor of a group like this, and if
you tell us when you apply for your
visa and by the way, I intend to
come to your country as a student and
rile up all kinds of anti Jewish student,
anti Sema where he's going with this? He's
just one trailing thought to the next with
no evidence, no background. So you're telling me
if he comes to you and says we're
gonna go we're gonna support that terrorist organization.
What the guy never did that.
He didn't do any of that.
Or rile up hatred for Jews or any
of that. Not a single point of evidence
has been presented because it doesn't exist. Because
these people are this is a Jewish organization
that put this whole thing on.
They know that, guys. It's public information.
So all he has is to go up
and go anti Jew, racism, anti Semitism, and
they'll just name that dropping all the buzzwords.
Pro Hamas, terrorism. It's the same thing all
the sycophants on Twitter are doing. It's blatant
lies. Medic activities. I intend to shut down
your universities. If you told us all these
things when you apply for a visa, we
would deny your visa. I hope we would.
If you actually end up doing that once
you're in this country on such a visa,
we will revoke it. And if you end
up having a green card, not citizenship, but
a green card as a result of that
visa while you're here in those activities, we're
gonna kick you out. It's as simple as
that. This is not about That's not how
that works, guys. It's just not how that
works. I mean, we just went over this.
This is not the reality. So if you
are smart enough to see
that there is a legal process to this,
that you still have the right to due
process and in front of a judge and
have the evidence presented, and if they don't,
they can't just revoke you because they don't
like your ideas.
If you're smart enough to see that, then
you must recognize how dangerous this man is,
how dangerous the team behind him is and
the re out or with him and what
they're doing.
It's either that they actually don't know this,
which is almost more terrifying, or they're doing
it for something else, either themselves or another
country. It doesn't even matter in this point
in the context right now. They're doing it.
They're going after your rights. They are actively
suppressing the rights of people in this country
for their own agenda.
We all have to call this out.
Free speech. This is about people that don't
have a we're gonna kick you out. It's
as simple as that. This is not about
free speech. Because it is. It's as simple
as that. That but that's why they have
to keep screaming that because their sycophants will
then repeat the talking point. There's no way
around it. You don't just get to say
it's not. It is. By definition, by law,
by every other point,
Rubio doesn't get to dictate what is and
is not part of free speech. This is
about people that don't have a right to
be in The United States to begin with.
No one has a right to a student
visa. No one has a right to a
green card, by the way. Has the right
to like, the what you what you're beginning
to say that you can also add no
one has a right to be in this
country as an American.
I mean, it's all you're you're it's all
part of the the point is that they
are here, Rubio. They did get a green
card, so they're now here. You don't get
to then say that because we gave you
that, now we can yank it back for
no reason. That's what he's insinuating.
Again, it's actually either wildly ignorant
or very dangerous.
So he got the green card. Okay. So
now he's legally here.
Even an illegal alien has the rights that
are protecting and barred to due process. They
don't care. I just can't stress this enough.
This is so dangerous.
So when you apply for a student visa
or any visa to enter The United States,
we have a right to deny you for
virtually any re Yes. But you gave it
to them. They're already here. You didn't deny
it. They're here.
The game is not because you gave it,
then forever goes on for a week and
revoke it for no reason. That's actually provably
false. He knows that. Reason. But I think
being a supporter of Hamas Not what he
did. And coming into our universities and turning
them upside down Not what he did. And
being complicit in what are clearly crimes.
Nope. Nope. Not once. Prove it. Give me
any evidence. Give me a slice of anything
that shows he committed a single crime in
any context.
They're just they're just broadly they're saying, look
at what that crowd did. He did it.
Well, the reality is most of the things
that you're frame framing right there were actually
even what happened by the result of the
Jewish put on protest in support of Palestine.
Most of what we've later proven, even the
larger corporate media articles covered were Zionist propagandists
that were causing violence. Even Stefani got called
out by the police in a congressional hearing.
The point is clearly that it's all a
construct built to create the idea that we
can do whatever we want as long as
we make you hate that person.
You're being played. Scandalization, complicit in shutting down
learning institutions. There are kids at these schools
that can't go to class. That's not true.
It's the dumbest part of this is how
many times we saw them point to a
guy or a girl standing there going, I'm
so scared. I can't go to class. And
you pan back, and there's, like, 30 feet
on either side that they could simply walk
around.
Or standing there with a star of David
shirt and acting like you're date you're brave
for being when you're in the middle of
a group that's put on by Jewish organization
that's that's half Jewish people, it's just so
stupid.
It is a construct.
You pay all this money to these high
priced schools that are supposed to be of
a great esteem, and you can't even go
to class. You're afraid to go to class.
So even at that point, ones that might
have been afraid to go to class are
probably because they were told they should be
afraid, and they went in their hide in
their room, or they did so so they
could later talk to the news and say
I was afraid and I was in my
room, and probably get paid by some kind
of ad the point is all of that
does exist.
The the point to be made about paid
agitators, for example, or agent provocateurs.
Yeah. A % a real point. But we
also shouldn't just blindly assume that without knowing
for sure. Consider it. Yeah. Any one of
them could be funded by some foreign group.
Of course. We know that's a case with
Israel doing that constantly. We know it's a
case from Soros funding produce. We know it's
the same from the current
Elon hipster Soros version. They're all doing the
same thing. That's the real point.
What they're trying to do is use what
they do to cement your rights or rather
remove them and die. Because these lunatics are
running around with covers on their face screaming
terrifying things. If you told us that Is
that a crime?
Pretty sure it's not a crime. That's what
you intended You're welcome to America Twenty Twenty
Five. To do when you came to America,
we would have never let you in. Oh,
great. So if you were a if you
were a face cover and scream things they
don't like, we never would let you in.
Great. I mean, there's really no air in
this conversation, guys. This is dangerous.
So Glenn says, just by the way, independent
of all the other censorship justifications offered by
Rubio here, what is the basis for claiming
Mahmoud Khalil is a Hamas supporter?
I know some believe that any opposition to
Israel's wars justifies that accusation, but anything beyond
that?
Obviously not.
Now Haroon says, great question. There's a ton
of video of him out there, so let's
just get to the bottom of this. I'll
give a thousand dollars to the first person
who can produce a video of Mahmoud Khalil
either directly harassing Jews on campus or openly
supporting Hamas.
I'll wait.
Good luck finding that, seeing as how it
literally doesn't exist. And you know as well
as I that these screaming Zionist cry babies
out there would be constant they will be
posting it everywhere. And I'm not talking about
just anybody in that category. I'm talking about
the ones online that we're talking about, the
ones that are vicious and deceptive and constantly
framing, pretending people aren't starving, pretending like it's
a bastion of freedom, and they're swimming in
swimming pools in Gaza. Like, it's gross.
You won't find a single example because it
doesn't exist.
This is what I just look at. I
didn't see this before, but it's the same
point.
We should listen.
Endoculate students to join the pro let's let's
let's see what it says.
One second. Grabbing
it. This would be a good good exercise.
I've I've heard this.
I haven't seen this before.
I think you know I think you know
what we're gonna find.
Where is that?
Here it is.
As you said, you have seen sorry. It's
really low.
He's right. I don't know if you can
hear it, but he's basically just saying that
regardless of whether they're armed or not, Israel
always finds something to attack. True.
To international law, but again, Israel is trying
to do it is,
terrorism.
We've tried BDS. I mean, guys,
I'm shocked. It's exactly what I thought it
would be, which is ultimately that he's basically
saying they violate international law. I mean, he
talked about armed resistance. It's guys. It's exactly
like, this is the point. If you did
your due diligence at all the only reason
I grabbed this so far is because I
didn't notice that one wasn't there the last
time I looked. And that's what we do
on the show. For all I know, that
could've been exactly the point that didn't that
screwed that showed you that he was what
they claimed. But we're honest on this show.
It's about trying to find the truth. The
point is that everything else I found about
him speaking publicly, which I did look up
and try to find, was just like that.
It was measured. It was bound. It was
about the actual information. And what's funny is
this is at the the the group discussion
where there's multiple people, there's multiple entities.
This is when you're talking about the protest
movement.
Right? There's a lot of groups out there.
He was like the front man for kind
of negotiations about it. They're just trying to
make him guilty by association for a group
that I can't even prove actually said what
they're claiming at this point.
Overall, again, the point, guys,
you have it. You have a video of
him harassing Jewish people or supporting Hamas
and not
what they did was legally
active armed resistance under national law. That's the
fact. Whether you support them or not, that's
a legal fact you can prove.
Supporting Hamas,
especially in a material sense, which you won't
or post it below, you'll get a thousand
dollars.
Obviously, you know the point, guys. If they
had, this is March 12. It's March 13.
This has come this has been going on
for three day. You know there would be
information about this by now.
These people are scouring
everything they can, and the best they came
up with is either a fake screenshot or
a deleted one that wasn't even about him.
That's the best they can do.
So back to Charlie Kirk. Who exactly is
this guy? Right? So I'm pretty sure we've
gone through enough evidence to demonstrate that what
he's saying are pro Israel talking points that
are based on things that were thrown out
there.
And Charlie Kirk gobbled them up and regurgitated
them back at you as absolute facts and
gets benefited wildly for it. Seeing us out
with a million views and all of these
they're they're making a lot of money. I
also don't know because I the the Laura
Loomer overlap was suggesting hundreds of thousands, which
for all I know, she was lying, but
that's insane. And they're making this stuff monthly
on this platform
simply by towing the garbage line.
Propaganda and Co says, where are the sources
for all these CUAD quotes?
Same point. You already know where it is.
It's a screenshot. That's the best you're gonna
get, a fuzzy screenshot that we can't prove
is there.
Nicholas Fuentes says,
if, quote, agitating on behalf of foreign regime
that murders women and children as grounds for
deportation, when does Ben Shapiro get arrested?
Exactly. I mean, guys, there's no more obvious
example of
a group,
foreign government or regime, or end it murders
women and children that's actively paying people to
manipulate this country. I mean, the ADL is
that. APAC is that.
Literally bribing politicians to four it's not even
a secret.
But then you've got individuals on these platforms
that are being funded and given trips, and
it's everywhere. Now I'm not gonna say that's
unique to Israel, but it is a wildly
obvious,
huge red flag of violations in this country.
Oh, and that's actually yeah. He got oh,
no. He didn't.
I bet you at one point it was
ratioed.
This person said ratio. But
in regard to the people speaking out,
then the ones you might expect.
Insurrection Barbie comes out and says, Malorie Khalil's
deportation isn't just a legal formality.
It's a line in the sand. Right? Because,
see, it's not about facts and liberty and
and rights. They wanna make it a an
emotional point. Right? We gotta stay on the
line for our freedom and make it about,
like, a a battle. Well, okay. What facts
are we talking about?
Right? Don't worry about whether we actually did
the thing. Just call the terrorist, and we
have to do it because all the other
terrorists are coming. That that's the central point
of this.
It's a blazing signal to every American hating
agitator, it says. Is that what he is?
Did you prove any of that? In fact,
you can actually avidly prove that what he's
doing is more in the interest of the
American culture than anything you're doing.
He's calling for things to be like, if
you listen to him,
international law calling about the reality of those
crimes that are being committed, largely including the
United States government, but people like this don't
care.
Right? If you actually want something to change
in this country,
the last thing you should do is let
them keep doing what they're doing.
But what they're doing is undermining people that
call it out.
American hating agitator based on that one screenshot
that I guarantee she didn't even see but
heard about and talked about. Or if she
saw it, didn't care to check it because
you can't.
It says the green card holder, this is
this so called activist. You gotta love stuff
like that. Do you have any evidence that
he's not? Are you presenting something? Who cares?
Right? Has spent time in Columbia University not
building a future, but carrying ours down.
This is supposed to be we are the
media now.
Right? Also, with, like, 2,000,000 followers. This post
alone got 500,000.
The point,
he hasn't spent time in Columbia despite obviously
doing so and going to classes in debt.
But, no, but tearing ours down.
How?
Please demonstrate how exactly he did that other
than a screenshot that you've been, like, built
built narratives around.
It's actually insane to me.
It says accused of cozying up to Hamas.
Oh, at least you say accused.
Funny how that's your entire premise around this
is that he gave support to Hamas and
you say accused of cozying up and you're
willing to build your entire thing, a seven
paragraph post based on accused?
Great.
We are the media. I blindly accept what
I'm told and make big narratives about it.
A terrorist group that wants nothing less than
a destruction of our allies and the destabilization
of our way of life. Well, actually, you
can easily prove that's not even remotely what
they're calling for.
Also, Israel funded them into creation, and they're
still I mean, obvious same point.
They don't don't care. It doesn't matter. I
posted it under her so many times. They
don't care, guys.
They know that's the case. They know the
reality of what's going on October 7. They
don't care. They just don't.
You either have to acknowledge that there was
a group that was funded to October 7
by Israel, which is I've just gone over
a hundred times.
Or acknowledge that what they're saying is not
what you're claiming. What the only thing they're
calling for is the I mean, the fact
they're even saying, look. We'll step aside.
We will back down from the government if
you give them a state and stop bombing
everybody.
But then she wants you to believe they
wanna
overtake everybody's way of life. No. That's Israel.
That's very clearly or the Azov movement. Right?
Or The United States and marching around occupying
territory destroying civilizations.
Not the group that has done none of
that and says they don't want that. But,
you know, wink, wink. We know. Right? Because
that's how they operate.
Then, you know, same you could read all
this if you want. I mean, it's, you
know, the Democrats are terrified because they know
the truth. I mean, it's just it's
emotional
garbage.
No evidence, no facts, just screeching narrative. And
it says, they'll cry free speech. Ah, here
we are again. Until they're blue in the
face. But this isn't about words.
It's about actions.
You gotta love that.
These people actually think that they're intelligent, I
think. They actually have this mindset where they're
like the leading people.
Okay. What are the what are the actions?
Point it out for me.
What exactly are you claiming he's done that
is under my that actually removes his right
to free speech? It's not about words. It's
actually
literally about words. You absolute clown.
That's what they said. They even said, he's
not breaking any laws. It's about support for
Hamas. It's about for antisemitism. It's about hate
for Israel. You understand, Barbie, those are all
words. Right? Those are all sentiments.
But no.
It's about the action that hasn't happened that
you claim. I mean, god, why do people
listen to these morons? It says, Khalil's not
a martyr. He's a warning.
Deport him now and let every would be
destabilizer
know you don't get hate hate America and
call it home.
Right. So no more free speech.
That's what the free speech team is fighting
for. You're not allowed to hate this con
okay. What if tomorrow,
Trump decides to turn this place into a
technocratic nightmare? What if tomorrow, he makes a
deal with China and all of a sudden,
it's all red communist stuff? Can you hate
the country then? Can you stand up and
go, I don't want that. Oh, you're deported.
Barbie, you're out.
You see how dumb this is? Of course,
that'll never happen, says the children in the
room.
Well, look back in history if you care.
I mean, think about how dumb that is
to argue you can't I mean, hate, you
can call it hate. You can call it
attack. The point is it's about ideas. It's
about claiming you want a different thing. Now,
sure, you could argue that's a detriment to
national security, or you could realize that that's
the only reason that in many cases, our
conversations can hold the authoritarian thing at bay.
Just think about it for a second. If
this country suddenly turned into a communist hellscape
under Trump or anybody else, it's still called
America, or you are you then allowed
to hate it? Are you then allowed to
call for a different type of civilization?
If you're gonna say yes, then you're a
hypocrite because you're calling it's obviously two different
things. I mean, this is not that hard
to do, guys. I mean, three or four
points a day like that that are
night and day. That are it's it's they're
black and white. They're very easy to see.
You either agree with it or you don't.
It's principle. But that's why these people didn't
side with principle. They went with the lesser
of evils, and that seems to be their
worldview today.
Now, same point.
Power of the People simply says, we intend
to fully vindicate not just his first amendment
rights. That's his lawyer speaking, by the way,
but the first amendment rights of all Americans
who wish to speak out.
Very simple, right? Who can disagree with that?
But because they've been weaponized to think this
guy is their enemy,
it's almost like they've been weaponized to attack
their own free speech rights. I mean, it's
what's happening. This person says,
Katie Pavlich, which has 1,200,000
followers, not familiar with who she is,
says,
it's not he is not an American.
This isn't about free speech, deport.
See, these are the ignorant people leading this
conversation.
I don't know if she's,
like,
like, deliberately
deceitful.
Maybe she believes what she's saying. That would
that would then mean she doesn't know what
she's talking about, influencing millions of people, which
is her right. She can say whatever she
wants.
But it is about free speech. It's literally
the most obvious point about free speech that
I think we've ever had a conversation about.
This is cut and dry.
Whether he's an American or not, he has
those rights. Even if he's illegal, I'm an
alien, and they don't even know that or
they don't care. You are literally
paving your own path to terror totalitarian government.
That's
crazy.
Now Jimmy Doar comes out calling right.
This is,
I'm not sure who Madison is. Just basically
pointing out, and this is what's this is
always how this works.
Susan Sarandon
standing out there supporting the whole thing. Right?
Rather, I don't know if it's specifically him
or just the idea of these arrested and
and violates the free speech. But, of course,
because she's a big famous known democrat,
that alone,
read the comments,
causes some of these child minded people out
there that are rah rah MAGA who come
out and goes, no, because Democrat's bad. It's
over.
Who cares about the rights? Who cares about
it doesn't matter whether Susan Sarandon agrees or
not.
So even even a broken clock could be
twice right. It's a right twice a day.
Right? That's how this my point is, there's
plenty of things that she stands up for
that I believe are correct. There's plenty of
things she stands up for that I don't.
Be your own person. Stop following the crowd.
The reality is that she's correct. It is
about free speech. Jimmy simply says free speech
is for everyone. It's not for everyone. If
it's not for everyone, then you're not for
free speech. That's very simple.
He says it's for speech you hate, speech
you like doesn't need protection.
Good on Susan Sarandon.
Of course, you know, you're a democrat. That's
where this that's at least where this fake
conversation of bots on Twitter has evolved into.
But this person, this is where I find
this so interesting. Now, again, these could be
bots. These could be people that don't care.
They just wanna get everyone worked up. But
it's worth considering the conversation
because this is this platform is overrun by
stuff like this. This person says, we don't
owe free speech to noncitizens.
God. So you see, right out of the
gate,
I feel really bad for people if they
feel if they this this is decades
of, like
what's the right word for it? Like, de
education or whatever you would call it. Like,
decades of our broken system teaching people that
they were given rights, not that they are
inherent or god given right out of the
words they use in this document that they're
given.
Because that's what Trump and Rubio and then
that's what they constantly insinuate. Right? So when
he says, we don't owe free speech, you
don't owe or give it to anybody. It's
an inherent right.
So right out of the gate, he's showing
that they don't understand this.
We don't owe free speech to someone on
a visa. You do though. We don't owe
it, but they have that right. Who despise
our country? Well, he doesn't despise this country.
He's actually speaking in ways that are fighting
to make this country not where it seems
to be going. He says, want it destroyed
and would never extend freedom to speech to
you? Oh, yeah. You know what he thinks
and feels?
You see, this is an emotional argument built
on the back of another dumb emotional argument
free from people like Barbie. Interaction Barbie and
the rest of them because that person is
simply saying what is going around. We don't
owe them that, and they hate this, and
they're evil terrorists.
I don't even know why he can respond
to that. This seems like I mean, it's
embarrassing.
And it says, before they enslave us under
Sharia.
See, this is just racism.
Do you even know what his beliefs are?
I mean, I mean, I I'm I haven't
looked for that because to me, it's not
relevant. Whether he's a Muslim or a Jew
or a Christian does not change the fundamental
principle of the point. If you think it
does, then you're obviously part of the problem.
I mean, look. Obviously, it's worth pointing out
that your religion can obviously influence what you
might think.
Is that happening?
Look at the points.
He's not saying what they're claiming. He's not
calling for some revolutionary
divide. He is simply saying what they did.
You can look. It's everywhere.
That what they did was a violation of
international law, that what they had to do
was legally correct. Even if there were it's
the same stuff we're talking about.
She says, this
is Alinsky rule number four. Make the enemy
live up to its own book of rules.
She Jimmy says free speech is not a
treat we give to people like good for
him. It's a value we cherish and protect
and spread to everybody.
This person says, if an Israeli wanted to
go to Gaza and organize pro Israel protests
where they take over and vandalize buildings,
that should be fine. Right?
God.
Like, I don't even know where to start.
Like, I don't wanna even waste time on
how I mean, think about the this is
a grasping effort to try to make it
about the evil Palestinians that won't allow that,
by the way, even though that's not true.
Even though you can easily prove that Christians
and Jews and Israelis were that before they
did, what they did was actually part. I'm
not talking back to, like, before the occupation
of Palestine. I'm talking about in that location
before they forced all the Jewish people to
leave claiming it was all because of the
evil Palestinians. You can look this stuff up.
The point is, Jimmy says, Israelis went to
Gaza and blew up hospitals, libraries, schools, and
slaughtered tens of thousands of children, most aged
between one and nine.
Mic drop. Right? Like, what are you talking
about, man? So if Israelis wanted to go
to Gaza, which by the way, they already
actively control and organize pro Israel protests, why
does that even even come close to making
sense in this conversation?
But this person points to this.
It says, So Mahmoud Khalil, a self proclaimed
Palestinian who was born in Syria, but holds
Algerian citizenship, moved to The US only in
December.
During his first year in America, he found
the love of his life, got married, and
received a green card.
He spent his next entire two years in
America,
and they go on to say, agitating and
organizing anti that's not what happened.
I mean, you look for yourself and you
tell me if you argued any of these
things. It is in the spirit of what
this country has always claimed to protect. It's
your beliefs not fighting to bring down and
you could look for yourself. The only reason
they're saying all that is because of the
end of Western civilization
screenshot that's from another group, if real at
all.
But it goes,
oh, that seems odd. Don't you think?
Gross.
So a completely evidence free claim that is
made to make you think, oh, gross, evil,
Muslim. That's what it's all about.
You know, 1,600,000
views.
I just really hope that's not an indicative
of what people actually believe by majority. Because
that I mean, if that's the case, I
don't even know what I'm doing here.
The point, guys? So somebody moves to this
country,
finds somebody he falls in love with,
gets married, and by default has a green
card because of that, and then goes to
school and fight and tries to learn. Yeah.
What a terrible isn't that called the American
dream? Isn't it funny how the very same
people who are screening why that's why they
all wanna rush to this country and then
point they go, there's a terrorist because he
did that.
Because they just don't like his opinions.
It it's actually I mean, the more we
go through this, it's I'm I'm just floored.
I can't even believe we're talking about this
right now. Another comment.
This person says, you can support free speech
and still deport Hamas supporters.
Another ignorant comment. Probably bots though. Like, I
mean, this kind of stuff just I don't
even I I find it hard to believe
I shouldn't say that. I know there's dumb
enough people out there that don't know these
things, but I find it hard to believe
this much of it's there.
This is they they can have their free
speech in Palestine. It's just
I don't even need to engage with these
things. It's so stupid. And it says, Jimmy
loves these terrorist sympathizers.
He'll he'll take anyone who's willing to s
h I t all over America. You know
you know why they say that? Because Jimmy,
like myself, calls out the accurate representation of
what the US government
has done. If you listen to Jimmy and
myself,
we're not talking about the the country should
be torn down and the peep we're fighting
for those people. What we're talking about is
the government that pretends to fight for liberty
and freedom is not, and that is as
simple as one plus one equals two. Look
it up. Their own documentation.
I mean, they often point back to their
own crimes to make points for today. It's
all there,
but that's what you get.
He never speaks against Thomas. Well, actually, I've
heard him make comments about it. The point
is that we're making similar points. It's all
the same thing. These people are screeching about
anything that makes it seem like we have
to stand with this
authoritarian administration or government rather because it's both
sides. This person says, the constitution protects free
speech for citizens,
not aliens. You're incorrect.
He's even got his little freaking coffee mug
thing because he thinks he's so smart. You're
wrong, bud. You're very, very wrong. But he
got a hundred and six likes because people
lean in to what they want to believe.
The reason should be glaringly obvious. Enemies would
just waltz in as Khalil has. Oh, he's
an enemy now. Okay. Without without any due
process. Got it. Call for America's final destruction,
which he didn't do, and commit other crimes,
which he didn't do, likely with other foreign
governments.
Funny how you go that direction even though
there's no connection, but there very clearly is
to all the people you probably support. The
point, guys, is yes. They do obviously have
their speech free speech,
constitutional rights,
and just waltz in. I mean, you don't
just get handed me. The reality is clearly
what they're talking about is this guy had
a green card.
And, yes, even for illegal aliens as we
talked about.
When you're talking about just waltz in
and do those things, guys, what he's suggesting
are crimes.
Violent destruction?
Yes. Well, who cares? It doesn't matter what
you're if you're a citizen or a green
card or visa, you still will get arrested
for those things. It's like these people can't
grasp that there's already laws in the books
for all the things they think are happening,
but they need to deport a person who
has rights because
those things are
I mean, it's just illogical.
It just it gets infuriating to have to
even make sense of these things. Here's Ricardo
saying, sorry, Jimmy. Green card holders don't have
the same protections. Yes. They do. Yes. They
do. You know why he says that? Because
Grock said. And look at what they cite.
The Patriot Act.
Great. So your freedom loving First Amendment free
speech government right now,
where, you know, one of the people in
that are the ones that are pushing out
fake information on Grock apparently, wants you to
know that because of the Patriot Act, you
don't have rights.
As it applies equally, guys, you realize green
card doesn't matter. I mean, if it applies
to all, it applies to none if the
argument they're making stands.
We are in a dangerous position right now.
Michael Tracy says this completely predictable assault on
free speech would be much easier to take
if we hadn't just gone through an entire
2024 campaign in which dopey podcasters and RFK
acolytes
adamantly argue that restoration of Republican executive power
was necessary
to restore free speech.
I mean, look. The the if it's not
clear, Michael Tracy is very partisan.
I'm I'm there I mean, I can't remember
how many times I called out some of
the nonsense he put out during COVID nineteen.
So just as always, as I demonstrate for
you, it's not about the person. It's about
the content.
It's not and it doesn't mean I agree
with everything Michael J. Says. The reason I'm
making this point is because you remove the
name from the and the account. The content
is what matters, and that is accurate. They
just spent years pushing the idea that they
would fight for all these things and win
it back from evil Democrats, and the first
things they're doing are destroying all of that.
This person says, so he's here on a
green card actively fighting against our government and
way of life, which is not true.
If this was a US citizen, but this
is someone who agreed to follow rules when
they so did we, by the way. It's
called the law. I I mean, I I
I'm just I'm done with these. It's just
what this guy had a the guy the
point on this one is that he had
a good he did a good job of
battling this guy back. When somebody said there's
no term of anyone's green card that says
you can't protest the warmongering of a foreign
state.
Candace says
well, I'm just I'm feeling like I wanna
skip all of these right now just for
time and because I'm getting mentally exhausted from
dealing with all these things. But the point
on this one was simply, Candace, I didn't
agree with you what she said mostly
or in some way. People hate to hear
this, but, alas, I must speak it. She
says there were many students who engaged in
recorded harassment and broke the law while protesting
on both sides, very clearly. Right? The Zionist
people were caught constantly. They were charged for
it. The people in the Palestinian protests were
often accosted like in the middle of the
night and then held accountable like they caused
violence. But the point is accurate that there
were examples of violence on both sides. That's
true. There were plenty of students who were
rightfully arrested, which is also true we don't
talk about.
But he goes, why didn't Trump DOJ simply
choose one of them?
They actually carried out violence and got arrested
for it because it wasn't about that. It
was about what Israel wanted.
The skies, you understand, Betar US is directly
tied back to Zionist organizations in Israel. They're
calling
for that guy for weeks and Trump follows
suit.
She says the arrest of Khalil is a
PR nightmare for the Trump administration,
an unforced error which will do absolutely nothing
to make Jewish people safer on campus.
He says she goes on to say,
it will increase anti Israel sentiment in America
and across college campuses, which is what Israel
wants, rather what Zionism wants. They want that
so they can rationalize why they have to
exist.
I mean, that's very prominent conversation today.
Orthodox Jewish organizations all around the world screaming
about this. I think I have one of
these tweets included.
It will increase the perception of Jewish supremacy.
It will all as she says, it will
all it will be used in rhetoric against
Republican Party candidates in future elections. This is
my point earlier. There's literally no benefit to
them at all.
Have to ask why they would do that.
It's not it's it's not correct. It's not
legal. It's not in line with our rights,
and it's against their interests.
You getting the point, guys? This is for
somebody else.
It says arguing whether or not a green
card holder
can have their residency revoked at any time
for any reason.
I don't I don't know what she means
exactly. It's playing chess, not checkers. I was
trying to think how she meant to apply
that. The point is obviously that it's not
in our interest. But it says it would
have been an easy been an easy win
to just deport a student who had been
had a criminal record. It would have been,
and it would have even assuaged some conversation
about it. It might have even made the
same threat.
But she goes, the Republican party position is
supposed to be tough on crime, not tough
on the speech we don't like.
We we protect speech, all of it. Speech
we don't like, speech we don't agree with.
Speech we don't like is not violence. Violence
is violence.
Exactly.
It's really not that difficult. This person says,
you're right to appoint
speech that is against our national interest by
a green card holder is not to be
tolerated. You see? These are ignorant people. They're
wrong.
What they're doing is trying to carve out
an area where they can then say, well,
we don't like what you're saying today. First
green card, then Visa, then Americans, guys. That's
how this works. And either way, that's my
point, is it's the same. If you remove
the the protect if you claim that your
inherent rights don't apply for a green card
holder, that applies to you right there. It's
about any person in this country. They're right
now trying to make that point.
This is visitors should not have the same
protection. It's just ignorance.
Same point, Candace says. This person says, also,
it's important to point out that anti white
sentiment has been normalized at universities for years
now, which is true. And no school has
lost funding over that. It goes to show
you who's really in charge. So here's what's
interesting. This is a point coming from within
the republican argument who, right, who who in
in some ways might even agree, but ultimately
is pointing back to the reality that, well,
this is coming from another country. It's not
even America. It's not America First.
Now whenever you think about anti white hatred,
you have to acknowledge that that has been
allowed by everybody.
Like, it it has been this the it's
just simply hypocrisy to say you're allowed to
say one thing and not the other in
any context.
So why? I I argue it was more
of a means to an end. I think
it drove these people into the hatred that
they're now espousing for people like Muslims. But
either way,
he makes an excellent point. And what she
says is, this is my point. It doesn't
even satisfy the Trump base who have dealt
with discrimination on campus for supporting him. That's
what I keep saying. They called you racist
for wearing a red hat. How come those
people don't go but this is my point.
Candace Owens is calling out Israel in this
conversation.
She goes, we want nothing here. I calculate
exactly zero upside to this debacle. At least
that's how I read it. Either way, leaving
out the person she thinks is driving it,
she's making the point that this is being
done for something other than American interest. So
easy to point out, not America First. And
wokeness, of course, comes in and says, we
shouldn't be giving green cards, visas, or citizenship
to people who despise the West, civilization and
assimilation.
It's just it's it's amazing to me that
in today's world, in some people, that's just,
like, basic that go, yeah.
And don't even realize what they're saying undermines
what they actually believe in. I'm willing to
bet you people like end wokeness and live
TikTok know that and don't care.
The point is
despising the West,
like I already made the point about, is
your ideological
right.
Civilization in general?
Right? I mean, how you know you know,
it wouldn't be a far stretch for them
to end this right here, say people who
despise the government,
civilization, and assimilation. Well, guess what? I despise
the government. I think government should exist. Am
I a terrorist?
That's a really short line right there for
them to make that argument.
Probably already have in some circles or some
intelligence apparatus. The point is that clearly, it's
about your your freedom
to think what you want.
Express what you want. As I've said before,
don't you think NWOPENESS would be screening that
we have to fight against a common like,
let's just even say not even include China.
Let's make it about Democrats.
Let's say
Biden
administration literally, whatever that looks like, just declares
as a communist nation. Okay? Starts changing all
the rules.
Okay. We're still called America. Right?
Don't you think they would fight that? Don't
you think they would despise what's happening and
fight against that civilization?
They would simply just split hairs and be
like, it was not America because they changed.
It's just the same point, and these people
are hypocrites.
They're trying to suppress what they don't
rather, they're okay with suppressing it if they
disagree with it.
It's juvenile.
And what's even more embarrassing is here's Ben
Shapiro.
Before, right, before we got here, the leader
of the woke riot, it seems, screaming of
this exact point back when it was in
his interest.
Let me suggest that as a legislature, your
chief job is to ensure that my taxpayer
dollars in this state go toward making sure
that people like me and people with whom
I disagree get to speak in places like
college campuses and not toward regulating what speech
you find good and what speech you find
bad because it's a really dangerous business. And
there's speech I don't like, there's speech you
don't like. But if we can't agree that
there is a difference between speech and violence,
we're not gonna be able to have a
free state, let alone a free country. Thanks.
Isn't that interesting?
Just including that.
Just put it out. This didn't age well.
I mean, guys, it's you can't this is
this is simple hypocrisy.
Right?
I mean, it's only words. That's that's why
they're so desperate to make it action and
violence because they know it's not. It's words.
And so if you're gonna pretend there's any
kind of logical consistency here,
well, yes. I agree that Ben from 2016
or whatever it is, that this is ultimately
a conflation of violence and words. And we
yes. It is a slippery slope.
He doesn't care. He's I mean, whether this
has always been a game to do this
for Israel or whatever he's fighting for or
he did change his mind, it doesn't matter.
He's a hypocrite.
It's obvious.
And it says, deporting people because they disagree
with you is the ultimate form of woke
cancel culture. What what happened to universities not
being safe spaces?
Oops.
Well, this is important overlap.
This is Trump from two different examples
calling you stupid and foolish for caring that
what he's doing is
provably
unconstitutional, or rather, I should say clearly what
he's suggesting
would be unconstitutional,
and he says you're stupid for saying that
or foolish for saying that.
It's no different. I don't know why we
can't see the continuity here. And then I'll
play the clip from the current borders are
telling you that there are limits on your
speech. And maybe you agree with that. And
if you do, then be honest about it.
We're losing a lot of people because of
the Internet, and we have to do something.
We have to go see Bill Gates and
a lot of different people
that really understand what's happening. We have to
talk to them maybe in certain areas closing
that Internet up in some way. Somebody will
say, oh, freedom of speech. Freedom of speech.
These are foolish people. We have a lot
of foolish people. And I think you should
get a one year jail sentence if you
do anything to desecrate the American flag. Now
people will say, oh, it's unconstitutional.
Those are stupid people. Those are stupid people
that say that.
I mean, obviously, the only way reason he's
doing that is because he wants people to
get emotional. You know? So people that follow,
they look to him for their marching orders.
They oh, that's okay. That's dumb. We don't
say that. The truth is that you can
easily prove that obviously shutting down the Internet
would be a obvious violation, but the flag
is even more obvious.
Supreme court has roundly ruled that that is
and Ron Paul have many times has made
eloquent arguments in the congress about why the
it's clear. Now if you want it to
change, well, then make the argument. But for
him to simply say that you're dumb for
thinking that shows you that either he doesn't
know he's wrong, which again is scary, or
that he's trying to shout you down from
knowing that
for his own political interests.
It's this is just dangerous, guys. That last
clip was very recent. It was either right
before he got elected or right after. Forget
the exact time, but it was this last
recent conversation.
Now here is that clip.
ICE acting director oh, wait. Wait. I thought
he was the borders. Oh, he is the
yeah. His borders are. Acting director as well,
Tom Homan,
comments on specifically Mama Cleo. Now this clip
is really bad. Just the audio is really
low. I won't speak. I'll so I'm gonna
give it a second. Turn your audio up
so you can hear it. He's simply saying
that you have limits to free speech. And,
again, it's it's not like a this one's
not cut and dry.
Plenty of people argue the flyer in a
theater point. We'll we'll discuss it after, but
listen to the point.
We can serve a national security threat.
When you're on campuses, they say, you know,
I hear the freedom of speech, freedom of
speech, freedom of speech. Can you say the
movie theater on fire? Can you slander
somebody's burger? Free speech, I believe. But Sorry.
When you go to college campus, you incite
protesting and locking down and taking over buildings
and and damaging property and handing out leaflets
for Hamas, who is a terrorist organization.
Coming to this country either on a visa
or becoming a resident alien is a great
privilege.
Whether on rules associated with that. You might
have been able to get away with that
stuff in the last administration, but you won't
in this message.
Okay. Sorry. I didn't mean to speak up
in the middle of that. I forgot I
was not muted.
It's the same point, guys.
The you'd realize how do you realize how
alarming it is that every single member in
this every him, Rubio, Bondi, Trump, every they're
all
saying the same things that we can prove
are lies.
Every single one of them. Hold on. I'm
gonna see, that's why I use these topics.
I forget the points that we go through.
We
consider them a national security threat.
They consider them a national security threat. Same
point. Based on words. When you're on campuses,
they say and I hear freedom of speech.
Freedom of speech.
And you gotta love that. The same thing
like oh, freedom of speech. Freedom of speech.
Sounds familiar, doesn't it? It's what's funny about
it is there it's it's not like they're
saying, you know, I get your concerns, but
it doesn't apply here. That would be like
an expected, even politically,
like, appropriate response. No. Free of speech. Free
of speech.
That's how they respond when you're bringing up
a valid concern. Even if you wanna argue
that it's nuanced, that shows you that they
have no respect for your belief in the
constitution. They do not believe in your rights.
They They don't have a right to remove
them. It's inherent, God given. They're always there,
but we know they don't care. This is
evidence, but realize that every time we're free
of speech,
they're making fun of it. They they'd think
they'd laugh about it. That's the sense I
get. Can you say the movie theater? They
say and I heard the movie theater.
Can you say the movie theater got fired?
Okay.
Yes. You can. Now
I would love to put that to the
test. Like like
a real world experiment because it's interesting to
think about. Right? In what what what's the
I mean, despite the kind of rhetoric and
the long term sentiment,
what's the actual crime being committed? Like, what
if you actually thought there was a fire?
How would you ever prove that?
I'm willing to bet you that there's no
way we could actually get that to stick
today.
Right? I mean, because, like, you're sitting in
a theater.
First conversation, you've maybe you smell smoke and
you go fire.
Right? Okay. Uh-oh. You may be wrong, but
maybe you genuinely thought that. Okay. So everybody
then does what they do.
Either they decide to look around or maybe
the one guy gets up and tears out
of there and breaks his neck. Okay. Is
that your fault?
I mean, this first case is when you
maybe thought there was actually fire. Obviously not.
You were you were even trying to warn
everybody because you maybe thought there was actually
a fire. But that guy acted like an
idiot and got up and scrambled out of
there and broke his neck. That that maybe
because he was scared.
That's not your responsibility.
In any case, the the moment we ever
got to a point to where you could
claim somebody else's actions were your responsibility,
not and I'm I'm not talking about I
mean, you could make arguments about some kind
of coordinated, like, you gave orders. But in
this context, someone you don't know, who's not
even there with you, makes their own action
because of what you said. That's their choice.
That's their discernment. Now, yes, I understand why
the logic applies because you scream that and
people get hurt. Arguably, it's your responsibility. Right?
But my point has always been, if we're
going to draw a line,
like a principled line, we have to draw
it. We have to say you the moment
you allow that, you get this. Well, you
can't say that, can you? Therefore, deport.
That's crazy. So we draw the principled line,
and we go, no. You're allowed to say
what you want. People are allowed to respond
how they want. Crimes apply. If you commit
a crime, you get a charge for a
crime. If you you know what I mean?
That's how that has to work.
Now, back to the point is, you know,
if you actually thought there was a fire,
how in the world could you be held
accountable for that? And maybe you didn't. How
would they ever know that you didn't actually
think there's a fire? So I don't see
how you could ever be actually charged with
that. Somebody could probably try.
People responsible for their own actions.
Yes. There is a potential detriment. Yeah. There
could be a jerk that does it to
scare everybody. But don't you realize there's, like,
a hundred examples like that in the world?
What about I mean, try to get one
that's not technically a crime. I was gonna
say, like,
swatting somebody, but that is a crime. Right?
Because you're you're the point is it's deemed
a crime because you're
it's more of a fraud. Right?
I'm trying to I mean, my point is
there are examples out there where people play
pot practical jokes that potentially cause harm to
somebody.
My argument is that has always been a
stepping stone into removing that from the problem.
They don't want to have to deal with
your constitutional rights.
But this goes even further since we're not
even dealing with that. We're dealing with something
that wasn't about fire in the theater. This
would be like saying that because somebody in
the other theater that you know
posted about screaming got a fire, that somehow
now you're responsible for violence. You're now you're
deported, or you have to go you're arrested.
That's how dumb this is.
He's not the one that said anything or
even claiming he said if they even said
it at all. They're just and then then
he goes on to make all the same
lies. Can you slander
somebody's burden? Yeah. You can. And it happens
all the damn time. Now, yeah, you could
try to sue somebody for it. Do you
realize how common I mean, we right. What
you're doing is slander.
Think about that. What they're all doing is
claiming he's a terrorist Hamas supporting radical.
He's none of those things as far as
we can tell based on the evidence. So
you guys are literally proving your own point
backward right now. You're slandering him. Police do
have limitations.
I don't believe it does. When you go
to college campus, you incite protesting
and lock him down Incite protest. Did you
hear what he just said?
You see, they are they, like, detest your
rights.
Incite protest? Think about what he just said.
And lock him down and take a protesting.
And when you go to college campus, you
incite protesting and locking down and taking over
buildings. Okay. The locking down is not what
they did. Taking over buildings is a bit
of a stretch even of itself. They went
in and sat down and protest. Happens all
the time. And we can disagree with that,
but in most of these college campuses, that
has been something that has been almost
relished.
Like, as far as I could tell, this
is the first time in this college's history
or rather, no. I I mean, take it
back. The first time since the Vietnam protest
where they actually called the police in to
stop one of these protests.
There's not it's not there's a reason for
that, guys.
So what he's doing is cementing the path
that is away from everything we believe in
based on lies even. And and damaging property
Damaging property. No. They did not.
Now just to be clear, by the way,
did Khalil do any of those things? Or
are you saying that a group did? And
then if they did, then even prove the
group did first of all, then show me
that he was somehow involved with that. That's
what this guy is doing. Handing out leaflets
for Hamas. No. They were not. He was
not handing out leaflets for Hamas. He was
handing out information about their protest that you
are
just pretending or some from Hamas' website because,
well, look, they said October 7, and they
said the same thing. Therefore, they're terrorists. That's
as flimsy as this is.
Do you realize that these people are they're
all,
they have access to these flyers they were
sharing because it was all part of the
protest.
These people are not presenting a single thing
to you. They're using emotion
and and
I mean, I guess emotion. I mean, I
can't even what that's all they're basically using
your fear emotion around this conversation or your
willingness to basically blindly follow aside for your
political beliefs. That's it.
Who is the terrorist organization?
Yeah. A terrorist organization that Israel funded until
October 7. I guess we'll just leave that
out. How does this contribute to either on
a visa or be covered? Say it's all
the same point. This is that's the best
you're gonna get, guys. That's all they have.
Again, ask yourself why they would do this.
What is in their interest?
I don't include this, by the way. Just
all these different threads. I'll hide that one
too, by the way. Just the beginning of
it, anyway. We will remove the jihadist sympathizers
and Jew haters. We're gonna remove the Jew
haters.
It's just as simple as it's it could
not be more clear. I've gone through these
a hundred times. All of these clips do
the same thing in diff slightly different ways,
including the one that literally says that Israel
has a right to control congress. That's what
he says point blank. It's not out of
context. I don't know why people can't acknowledge
this.
Now
today or rather, I think this was
yesterday, but the point is updating on the
conversations as last we covered it, Trump administration
says it actually intends to deport him, alleging,
quote, serious foreign policy consequences. That's
That's all you get. Broad national security, secret,
secret, top secret. You don't get anything. They
don't have anything.
They're just planning to get rid of him
for a foreign country. Now here is what,
Alan McLeod
found out, which I find very relevant, which
I'm sure is gonna be very uncomfortable. I'm
sure they're probably gonna ignore it. You won't
find this on Charlie Kirk's website or his
Twitter feed
that the professor at the center of this
conversation who's helping them deport this man is
an Israeli former Israeli spy and also a
friend of Hillary Clinton.
So fantastic. So right now, you write the
right leaning supporters out there, there's interest in
Barbies and Kirks and all them, you're now
working for a Clinton lackey.
Good times. But it goes on to say,
the professor at the center of the Columbia
University deportation scandal is a former Israeli intelligence
official.
Mohammed Khalil oh, so Mahmoud Khalil, a recent
graduate of the university university's school of international
public affairs. So, by the way, they keep
pretending like he went there to do this
and didn't go to school. He a recent
graduate, by the way, of the university school
of international public affairs. So, yeah, he was
there secretly doing terrorist things while he was
getting a degree that most of the people
screaming about him don't actually have. How funny
is that? Was abducted by Immigration Customs Enforcement,
ICE, Saturday, for his role in organizing protests
last year, by the way, against Israel's attack
on Gaza.
Khalil's Dean, Doctor Kiran Yari
Milo, Head Of The School and intern and
and excuse me. Head of the school of
international and public affairs is a foreign Israeli
military intelligence officer. Former. Excuse me.
And official at Israel's mission to The United
States. God, you know, I'm sorry. Yeah. I'm
always gonna I don't wanna mention this, but
I don't know what it is about the
black.
Everyone seems to think that's easier on your
eyes. This kills me. When it's the when
it's the black website versus, like, the white
background, you know, the dark versus the light.
I it's weird. It does it kills my
eyes.
Not that I don't make mistakes really all
the time, but this is just weird. Anyway,
she's also, for the podcast, is a former
Israeli military intelligence officer and official at Israel's
Mission To The United Nations. So the bottom
line is she's actively working and advocating for
Israel. So are we starting to see how
clear this all is?
Yaro Milo played a significant role in drumming
up public concern about a supposed wave of
intolerable antisemitism
sweeping over the campus, thereby laying the groundwork
for the extensive crackdown on civil liberties that
has followed the protest. Now, in case it's
unclear,
this has been done even by, like, human
rights organizations,
by any number of both mainstream and alternative
peep like, it's been roundly shown
that this wave antisemitism was almost, at the
very least, half lies.
And,
the other half was mostly Palestinian protests and
Palestinian flags.
It says spooks that are missed. It says
before entering academia,
doctor Yari Milo
served as an officer and an intelligence analyst
with the Israeli Defense Forces.
After leaving the world of intelligence,
she worked for Israel's permanent mission to the
United Nations in New York.
While there, she met and married her husband,
Israel's official United Nations spokesperson. Of course of
course it is. Right? So isn't it funny
how you're over here going, this guy moves
here, Khalil,
meets his love his wife and marries and
gets a green card and then goes to
school.
Doesn't that sound suspicious? Right? Yeah. Sounds super
crazy. Over here, you've got this person responsible
who literally used to be a spy or
rather Israeli intelligence and works for Israel at
the United Nations, then marries the spokesperson for
Israel at the UN.
Nothing to see over here, though. And it
says although she is now an academic, she
has never left the world of international seek
security,
making the subject
making it the subject of her expertise at
the school.
Rather than speak out on the issue as
activists have demanded, she instead chose this week
to invite Naftali Bennett, of course, prime minister
of Israel, former, I think yeah. From 2021
to 2022 to speak at Columbia.
Students protesting Tuesday's event were condemned by university
authorities for harassing her.
See my point? So these people are protesting
the fact that she's continuing to support these
genocidal leaders, and they called them harassing her
for simply protesting that that was happening. So
you see how easy that is?
You look up the this specific no one's
claiming this was violent. They're just simply saying
by doing so,
probably spun up by Nick Folly Bennett because
they or anybody against them is immediately racist,
they call it harassment.
So now in their mind, protesting is harassment
if it's against the wrong group.
This is as simple as it gets, guys.
It says Columbia was the epicenter of a
massive protest movement across university campuses nationwide last
year. And don't forget,
most of them were put on by Jewish
groups, specifically Columbia. It says, and anyone you
ever saw, and I went over all these
at the time, were there were Jewish people
there with them protesting, holocaust survivors. It was
never what they claimed. That's not to say
the same as that there wasn't any violence
or maybe even a person there that was
racist. It always exists,
especially on the Zionist side. My point though
is that it's not the picture they're presenting.
They're lying to you.
It says it is estimated that at least
8% of all American American college students participated.
That's a lot.
8% of American college students pro took place
in these demonstrations,
denouncing the genocidal attack on Gaza and calling
on educational institutions to divest from Israel.
The response was equally fast in its scale.
Well over 3,000 protesters were arrested, including faculty
members themselves,
all for simply protesting.
The nationwide movement began at Columbia on April
17 when a modest Gaza solidarity encampment was
established.
Protesters were shocked when university president
immediately called the New York police,
as you as where I was referencing, the
first time the university had allowed pro police
to suppress dissent on campus since the famous
1968
demonstrations against the Vietnam War.
Mahmoud Khalil was among the leaders of the
movement. The Syrian born Palestinian refugee, which is
why he cares, was willing to well, as
a human, frankly, we all should care about
the suffering going on,
was willing to speak calmly
and cogently, which is every video I've ever
seen of him talking, to the press about
protest goals.
And you could listen to them. None of
what he says is about end of civilization
or violence of any kind. A permanent resident
of The United States, he was abducted by
ICE on Saturday.
There's the again, there's the White House version.
Shalom, Mohammed.
We're proud that we did this, is what
they say.
Khalil's eight eight month pregnant wife was initially
told that he had been taken to a
facility in New Jersey.
In fact, he had been moved halfway across
the country without her being told to Louisiana.
Journalist Pablo Marquez
of Migrant Insider explained that ICE often goes
immigration judge shopping by putting detainees in detention
centers under jurisdictions of court that very rarely
decide in favor of migrants. Sounds a lot
like Israeli courts.
The very high profile attempt to deport the
holder of a green card because of political
speech criticizing a foreign government has left many
civil rights lawyers deeply worried.
Alec,
Carac
how do you say that? Caracastanis,
for example, stated that, quote, I've never seen
a more clear cut first amendment violation
or a more flagrant government declaration of intent
to violate black letter law.
The government does not claim he committed a
crime. They don't. It's very public.
Just that he held views that the government
doesn't like about Israel.
Bone chilling.
That's what's so crazy about the insurrection barring
post about saying that this is it's not
words. It's actions. It's like, my god. They're
just lying, just point blank, or they're that
uninformed. Probably both. Columbia's billionaire pro Israel backers.
That that section just basically highlights how the
college basically bowed to
a a a a smattering
of the very vocally pro Israel
supporters who gave them hundreds of millions of
dollars, and then all of a sudden, they
just followed suit. I mean, that's how this
works today.
There were also voices from within the university
clamoring for the violent suppression of the student
movement.
Assistant professor of business management, Xi Davita, for
example, denounced the protesters as Nazis and terrorists
and called for the National Guard to be
set upon the encampment,
obliquely,
obliquely
referencing the Kent State University massacre where they
shot protesters
while doing so. That they they they alluded
to that. It's crazy.
Davidi, of course, is an Israeli American and
served in the IDF and has publicly expressed
his pride in doing so. It's not hard
to see how this connects.
Now long time readers of the Mint Press
news will be less surprised than many to
hear that the Israeli military intelligence officials
hold such important positions in American life. Previous
Mint Press investigations have uncovered giant networks of
former Israeli spies working in top jobs in
big tech and social media companies. We recently
talked about this.
Spied working at Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Twitter.
It goes on to say,
and even TikTok, often labeled as a Chinese
spy app, has hired former Israeli spies to
run its affairs. Surprise, surprise. And in October,
we revealed that former Israeli spooks are writing
America's news with multiple former agents working at
a top US outlets like CNN, Axios, New
York Times. The point is this is your
operation Mockingbird two point o, if you will,
or however many, 45 o. Same article here.
I'll include both those so you can reference
them. This is from 2024.
Perhaps then the fact that the dean of
the various school at the center of a
worldwide media storm is a former Israeli military
intelligence officer
and
worked at the UN for Israel and then
married the UN Israel representative
would be such a shock. But it remains
a stark reminder of the level of extraordinary
institutional bias in favor of Israel displayed across
The United States.
I just think that's hilarious, by the way.
Not only that, but that she's a, an
associate of Hillary Clinton. Like, can you imagine
any of this and it was Biden doing
it? Like, any of this. Like, it's just
it's or any Democrat. I mean, it's just
it's so simple to see how dishonest these
people are today.
Charlie Kirk here says it's worth emphasizing that
our own director of national intelligence,
Tulsi,
our top intelligence official says the number one
threat to The US is not white supremacy
but radical Islam.
Interesting how she kinda turned on a dime.
Right? Right before,
speaking about how the war on terror and
the foreign policy was the biggest problem, and
now she's like, bad Islam.
I mean, it's ridiculous.
Now the reality is it's neither, guys.
To pretend that white supremacy is the largest
threat in this country, it's a construct created
by the government. To pretend that Islam is
the biggest is a construct, it's all the
same conversation.
That's what they're doing. That's the false binary.
Look, there's extremism that is
extreme ideology is a problem. Whether Christianity, Muslim,
Jewish, if it's extreme, it's the premise. If
it's then it's a problem.
Simple. Right? It's called being objective and having
logical consistency. The point is, if you're gonna
talk about radical Islam,
then you have to talk about how Israel
and United States have been funding the most
radical elements of Islam for decades.
Like Hamas, for example, like any number of
things, the moderate rebels or anywhere else, they've
been funding the very groups like Hayat Chir
el Sham in Syria.
See, it's so embarrassing for these people to
act like they still have some kind of
clout. I don't they have sycophants in their
circles. The reality is the evidence is everywhere.
You can't pretend like that's a problem unless
you're gonna acknowledge that they're the ones that
put them there. Now on the other side
of it, the white supremacy point is also
the same idea.
They've created an a construct where they're pretending
that you and your red hat are marching
down the street saying, we wanna kill the
Jews. Well, who does that support? It's the
same agenda. And they're also being funded a
minute. I'm not saying only Israel, but they're
playing a central role as we can all
see. The point is it's your government
playing you. Well, you wanna now now she
dances between the two because now this is
the new agenda. They're all playing their roles.
Senator Cruz, of course, says promises made, promises
kept. Very original. Antisemitism
has no place anywhere in The United States.
Well, it's an idea, so, yes, it does.
You're a moron.
Everybody has the right to think what they
want. Anti Muslim, anti Christian.
So you're allowed to be anti everything except
Israel in this country. That's what they're telling
you.
This never would have been possible without Trump
and AG. Well, great. Thank you for pointing
out that the destruction of the constitutional right
belief structure is being destroyed because of you
guys.
I said, if the promise was destroying The
United States for Israel, then you're absolutely correct.
Antisemitism,
even though that is not what they are
actually attacking
or being anti anything for that matter, is
unequivocally
constitutionally protected speech.
And then that's the, APAC tracker, I posted
this earlier. Ted Cruz almost has $2,000,000
from APAC. That's crazy. That's more than most.
I said, which is why he is being
ratioed even on this platform, which he was
at the time. Let's see if he is
now. Yep. Look at that.
I mean, look at this. Senator Cruz has
4,000,000 followers.
APAC tracker
has 263,000.
He gets 10,000 likes. He this person gets
14,000
more and everything. He gets ratioed entirely simply
by pointing out
that he is being funded by an Israeli
entity, which is what it is. It's not
American. I've proven this 50 times over. It's
right in the Wikipedia, for crying out loud.
They changed the name after the JFK assassination
because that was the main point around that.
They were supposed to register as a foreign
agent.
That's why this is happening. Promise is capped.
Well, Mike Johnson does the same thing. He
says, if you are in America on a
student visa no. We're talking about green card,
bud, but let's just keep evolving the conversation.
And you're an aspiring young terrorist. There you
go.
There that's slander right there. You're calling them
terrorists with no evidence to back it up
other than they protested for Palestine. But it
says, who wants to prey upon your Jewish
classmates?
See, it's it's just an imaginary thing. Like,
these people are being paid to do this
or being threatened to do this. How else
do you make sense of this? They're undermining
what we're told they believe in to go
after one thing for one person.
You're going home. That's what he says. We
will arrest you and send you back. Right.
What about due process?
Ah, racist.
Well, as I said, woke left meet the
woke right.
This is
absolutely disgusting.
Like, the the un this is unparalleled for
well, I shouldn't say that, but
the idea that this is being proudly touted,
like, repeatedly
and even as I mean, I I again,
I I really have to believe that this
is, like, algorithmic manipulation or bots or whatever,
because
I don't wanna believe that this many people
are this disgusting in this country.
First of all, Brian Sullivan rightly points out
neither side believes in freedom of speech. Absolutely.
That's the main point. It's not about one
side or the other. Woke left, woke right,
they all are trying to undermine. They're using
both to do so.
But here's what she said. Here's Laura Loomer.
If you are aware of a Muslim student
or of Muslim students
who are in this country on visas, who
have participated in pro Hamas activities,
please send me their names. Let's get them
deported together.
I mean, I I I mean, I actually
see, I my my thing is it's like
I'm trying to think of why this would
make sense. This is
I think she's so stupid that she doesn't
realize that what she's doing is literally calling
out. Like, somebody is clearly wanting this from
her.
But do you not realize that what you're
doing is making the case for us? Like,
what you just said is insane.
Show me Muslim students who are acting constitutionally
protected. We'll get rid of them because they're
Muslims. What about a Christian one, Laura?
Is that one now a problem too? The
reality is clearly,
she is aggressively racist towards Muslims. That's very
transparent. She almost got booted off this platform
for being ridiculously racist.
The reality is that Muslim students or any
other students clearly
can act can protest what they want. And
on top of that, clearly, it was a
Palestine thing, and she's saying pro Hamas because
they're all ignorant or dishonest.
But I just wanna really stress how gross
that is. Like, bottom of the barrel, like,
vile, disgusting,
that she's trying to clamor people together to
witch hunt Muslim students for doing things that
she pretends she fights for, constitutionally protected rights.
Everybody needs to call these people out.
Glenn,
captions,
Ryan Grim.
Lee Fang says, this level of mass censorship
on behalf of Israel is getting insane. I
agree. Beyond any other pattern of speech suppression
we've seen in modern America. I mean, it's
serious, guys. This is insane. It's a huge
step.
Ryan says a theater in Miami
screened the Oscar winning no other land. It's
the one about the Palestinian situation.
And now the mayor is moving to end
their lease.
Right? Glenn says, remember that whole thing about
cancel culture or whatever?
They don't care, guys. The bloomer they're cheering
this on. It's the same as the libs
of TikTok getting people fired for jokes about
Trump. These people are the woke right. Now
it's becoming shockingly obvious because they're going after
free speech
blatantly.
Whether they just follow the Republican side or
they're doing it for Israel, like, this was
irrelevant. They're both doing it for this the
outcome is the same.
So here's Loomer saying, did you know
that every single Muslim who has ever served
at US Congress has openly supported Islamic Jihadist
groups?
My God.
And you know why this moron says that?
Well, because they support Palestine,
Right? I mean, are we are you telling
me that these people are going, I support
terrorism? No, they're not. You're saying that their
support for Palestine is terrorism because you're a
child,
or you actually think that. Muslims are completely
unfit for holding elected office to The United
States Of America. That's what she just said
in 2025.
Imagine somebody standing up and saying, Jewish people
are completely unfit for holding office in The
United States. Christian people are completely unfit for
holding elected office. That's unreal.
38,000
likes.
I mean, it's disgusting, guys. This needs to
be called out. She has a right to
say it. That's free speech. I will always
defend that. The point is we all have
the right to say that you are the
worst person alive. You're a vile, vile person
who is actively fighting for the worst parts
of this country,
or rather for its destruction for somebody else.
The point is Muslims are completely unfit for
holding elected office. You realize she's not saying
that. She okay. She'll she's saying that let's
just even say she's accurate, which she's not.
All four of these people, who, by the
way, I don't know why you then know
for sure what every person who's ever been
in congress, what their religion was.
That's your again, that she is the most
assumptive person on this platform. The point is,
let's say they were all like, I believe
in ISIS. Okay.
Does that then mean that every Muslim forever
in perpetuity is unfit to hold office? She
is arguing that that means,
guess what, guys? That because they're Muslims, then
therefore, they have a special loyalty
to, I guess, terrorism, which is just so
ignorant. It makes me laugh out loud. But,
I mean, point is that her argument is
that they're all terrorists, but she's just so
gross like that. But let's just even say
that there's make it about some specific group.
Right? Like, you know, I don't know, like,
Zionism in Israel. Right?
It's actually insane to me that she doesn't
they think we all don't know exactly what
they're doing right here.
The the obvious conversation of not Jewish people,
but Israeli dual citizenship in this country, which,
yes, obviously, in almost every case overlaps with
them being Jewish, but it's about the Israeli
citizenship.
That's my point, is it was not just
any Jewish person in congress. It's about people
that have citizenship in Israel and or in
congress, like Brian Mast, who's literally part of
the IDF.
That's what dual citizenship is, not just Israel,
but anybody.
Chinese citizen who has Chinese citizenship was in
their military would never be allowed to be
a part in the car. That's the point.
But we somehow allow that for Israel.
Not Jewish people. You see? That's what she's
trying to do right here
very unintelligently.
The problem is that this is just the
lowest common denominator, guys. And And you know
what? There are a lot of people out
there that probably gobble it up, but I
need to believe
that we're better than this.
Politely says, oh, yeah. She post that meme.
Just assistance. I'm just blown away.
Okay. Here's a lot Elon Omar. Now, look,
you guys know my opinion of everybody in
congress or rather just my my lack of
I mean, I I don't trust any of
them, and I think most of them are
selling themselves out for something.
I could be wrong. That's just my general
belief based on history. Okay?
That's to say that I don't support Ilhan
Omar or her counterpart on the other side
of the paradigm. I think they're all deceiving
you. But, again, the point before is it's
not about it's about the sentiment. Right? Here's
what it says. I signed a letter asking
for Mahmoud Khalil's immediate release.
Okay? We will not let this administration trample
our constitutional rights and silent voices they don't
like.
Free Mahmoud Khalil.
Read the letter. I mean, guys, it's exactly
like that.
Can you can you imagine somebody coming in
and going wrong
Because bad we he said things we don't
agree with and acting like that's not the
exact woke left they were pretending they were
they were fighting or, I guess,
thought they were fighting. I don't even know
how to frame that. Laura Loomer says, of
course you did.
So, of course, she signed the letter, I
guess.
Have we ever had a Muslim member of
congress who displayed more loyalty to The US
constitution and American values than Islam?
Yes.
Pretty much all of them, I think. I
mean, look, you can to argue somehow that
they've done anything,
and I'm not supporting these people, to actively
further Islam over what their positions are, the
right they're they're like every other broken pin
from congress fighting for their own constituents and
their own way to benefit themselves at our
expense. That's what I believe. But if you're
gonna pretend that they're somehow out there screaming
about the thing, this is a false narrative
created by morons like this for a foreign
country.
And she goes, no. We haven't because Muslim
immigrants have shown they refuse to assimilate
98%
of the time. I'd love to see where
you grab that number from. They are unfit
for office. Again, Muslims are unfit for office,
she says.
Gosh darn it.
I just insane.
Insane. These are the worst people in the
world. And again, I'd be saying that whether
it was about Jewish people, Christians,
the anything like this, guys. This is dangerous
level. They They have a right to say
it. My point is that it's about what
they drive like, if you wanna talk about
the radicalizing of people, normalization of this kind
of thought will drive people to violence. And
that would be the people's fault that commit
violence, not this moron's fault. But she would
definitely be somebody that we pointed out when
we look back at why it happened.
Still has free speech, though. See how that
works? See how easy it is to be
logically consistent?
Here she go here she's citing the other
one because clearly she's got a mandate here.
It says free Khalil. This is straight out
of the fascist playbook. Criminalizing dissent is an
assault on our first amendment and freedom of
speech. Like, it's just a it's incredible that
we could pretend like this is not basic
run like, right up the line.
Revoking someone's green card for expressing their political
opinion is illegal. They're right. Protesting genocide is
not a crime. She's right. And I don't
agree with most of what she does, but
that is actually exactly correct.
Lorimer Lumer goes right back to a racist
talking point. Every Muslim in congress is proving
they that it's a bad idea to allow
Muslims to serve in congress.
One point two million views. Why are Muslims
allowed to serve in congress when they always
side with Islamic jihadists?
So now he's an Islamic jihadist?
I mean, do you can you see the
extension of how crazy this is? So it
turns out now first, he was supporting Hamas
by protesting for Palestine. Now he's a Islamic
jihadist terrorist.
Has there ever been a Muslim member of
congress who has openly condemned Hamas and Islamic
terrorism?
Yes. Anybody anything else?
Both the Ilhan Omar have always support. No.
They don't.
But see, this is the kind of thing.
Dumb,
ignorant, inaccurate stuff like this is promoted and
celebrated by the Elon circle on this platform.
That's why they let her back on despite
many others who did far less, who got
booted off and never got let back on.
There's a reason, guys. What do you think
it is?
Here she says and this is what's so
crazy. This is see,
this article was out the day before.
She says, why won't they release the name
of Mal McLeo's wife as it as it
was already circulating?
Great journalism, Laura.
We need to find out who she is.
I bet she's more radical than he is.
Why doesn't why doesn't she doesn't wanna be
named, which means she's got something to hide.
We need to name her the case. This
is a child who's been allowed to think
they're a journalist,
an infant who acts irrationally.
Acute I mean, even Candace Owens called her
out the day for doing this.
This is not journalism. This is junior high
BS. You are screaming about somebody you don't
know and flabbing accusations based on the unknown.
You're embarrassing.
More radical than he is, that's slander right
there. You don't even know who she is
or her name.
Why doesn't she wanna be named? Let's randomly
guess at it and get people tracking her
down because you hate Muslims and you're disgusting.
We need to name her for sake of
combating jihad.
Why?
Does she believe that? Do you know? Do
you care?
I mean, it's just such ignorance. It blows
my mind.
And and we're talking about doxxing people? I
mean, my god. This is the kind of
thing that shows you that these people are
undermining
everything
for the interest of I mean, you could
just simply say destabilization to this country, but
you can piece it all together for yourself.
That's absolutely crazy. And what is she saying?
Oops.
Oh, it's opening it here.
Come on. Says wife of detained Palestinian Columbia
student says she was naive to believe he
was safe from arrest.
Read it. I didn't this is the it's
not I get the way back machine version.
The reality is it's very point blank. She's
speaking on the record. It's my name. It's
my husband. You know, the point is
exactly the same story.
Free speech. We were protesting for what we
believed in,
and Laura Loomer wants you to hunt her
down because she's probably a radical.
Now, here's a good point. If somebody hunts
her down and ends up killing her, is
that Laura Loomer's fault?
Well, legally speaking, no. And I would stand
by that because they she didn't commit the
crime. But I'll tell you what, I would
spend the rest of my life making sure
she knew that she caused that to happen
with her disgusting worldview.
That's how that's supposed to work.
It's very simple.
Sally Agres rightly points this out. She says,
I'm an America First. I'm a Zionist.
Just, you know, either doesn't know why that's
dumb or doesn't care,
or inaccurate, rather.
Well, this on this last point, then I'm
gonna I'm actually I'm not gonna get into
the Doge part today since I didn't wanna
go longer than three. We will get into
it. I'm gonna I'm gonna do a show
tomorrow, and it's gonna be one I'm gonna
start with. It's it's important. There's a lot
to get into. And this judge point, which
is completely, I mean, wildly inaccurate, it's the
same point from before, really. Order the doxing
of Doge employees.
Little Nick's order says,
oh, the doxing of of government employees. Right.
You guys are ridiculous.
And the actual document, when you go through
it tomorrow, doesn't even say that. It says
basic on the names, and there it's really
about understanding what they've been doing transparency wise.
They literally turn this into they're trying to
get them all killed. It's emotional manipulation,
and these people are being either used or
are deliberately using you. I know this guy
has that role. He exposed himself in Lahaina,
but built his entire background on this.
You've got he got caught for lying to
his own devour supporters, and yet he's only
grown in support because he leaned into the
partisan circle. It's how it works.
I've shown you 15 things he's put out
that have been provably false.
The bottom line is this is one of
them, and he's trying to ramp up this
argument about why they're trying to get everybody
killed for showing you who is doing what,
which is, by the way, what government's supposed
to do, let alone one that calls himself
the most transparent.
So inner so embarrassing.
We'll go over all this tomorrow and the
legalities around it or the different lawsuits or
the shredding of documents at USAID by Trump's
administration while they try to act like it's
somebody else. It's all very interesting. But here's
what Trump had to say, showing you what
they really think. Actually, I didn't notice this.
Nick sort of let's see what he said.
After forty minutes, president Trump is still going
off on Oval Office. Like, he's laughing about
it. See, this is my point. These are
children.
What he says in this comment is gross.
It's it's it's a well, it's a just
it's basically you could fill in the blank
with whatever ideology or or background,
and I'll do that in the conversation. It's
it is
lowbrow. It is ignorant. It's racist. You're using
a per a group of people that you
pretend you're fighting for in some context to
slander somebody else. And in fact, a Jewish
person. And even saying that they're not Jewish
anymore because they support this.
I mean, it's insulting to almost everybody in
every context except those that are fighting against
all of it like Zionism.
But he goes, what a legend.
They're just sycophants. These are these are these
are people that are in a, like, an
Elvis state of, like, throwing their underwear at
Elvis on the stage. That they're, like, so
obsessed and so like, you talk about Trump
derangement syndrome.
It's right there.
Here's what he said.
And Schumer is a Palestinian as far as
I'm concerned. You know, he's become a Palestinian.
He He said he said that, like, four
or five times now even though there was
major pushback to begin with because I mean,
I think he thinks it's
winning points for him from somebody. Used to
be Jewish. He's not Jewish anymore. He's a
Palestinian.
Okay. Now you realize you could be Palestinian,
be a Jew. Right, Trump?
Or are you that ignorant?
You can be Palestinian, be Christian. You could
be Jewish. You could be money. That's not
that is a nationality.
You see, I forgive you guys for not
knowing that seeing as you conflate all the
others, but
that is insane to me.
And Schumer is a Palestinian as far as
I'm concerned. You know, he's become a Palestinian.
Okay. So
let's just say he's become a, you know,
I don't know. Pick anything.
He's become an Israeli. Would that be okay?
Oh, he's he's not he's not Christian anymore.
He's become an Israeli.
Yeah. You know they probably call me racist
for that or any other context. To call
him a Palestinian
is meant to be a bad thing.
So let let's keep pretending like Trump's trying
to help the Palestinians. Right? Even though you
just used it as a derogatory term, and
then you did it towards a Jewish person
because they don't have the Zionist belief structure.
Now I'm not even saying he doesn't. What
I'm saying is in that moment, he's making
the accusation
that he is not a Jew anymore because
he's going against the Zionist,
at least on the surface argument or here,
let me frame it better. Trump is trying
to insinuate that what he's doing is going
against the Zionist direction even though Schumer in
every way is bowing to everything they can
as much as possible.
It's a political point between the two of
them. My point is it shows you it's
about Zionism, and it shows you that these
people are disgusting,
that they're not fighting for any of the
things they're fighting for. In fact, they're all
funding genocide and trying to tell you that
they're the ones saving everybody.
Whatever whatever StreamYard did, they ruined the settings
in here. It kills me.
Takes extra time. So stupid.
So last few points here, guys. Jonathan Greenblatt,
of course, came just put this out, and
they always blank out the comments now.
October 8, apparently, will be released
in theaters.
I'm willing to bet you they're gonna make
propaganda videos based on that one day for
the rest of their existence, as long as
that may be, hopefully short. The point here
is, guys, October 8
is meant to go, this is what's happened
ever since and ignore, you know, what's actually
happened ever since, which has been the ongoing
genocide of all of Palestine.
Now to be clear, what I want politically
is a two state solution,
which is what Palestinians have been calling for
forever, which is what Israel pretends they want,
which is actively fighting against for their entire
existence. To make point about my joke about
going away soon. The point is whatever I'm
legally speaking, that is accurate.
The only one breaking law here is Israel.
The point though is that any real conversation
should should end with a two state solution
because not everybody in Israel believes in what
they're doing. Not everyone in Palestine. It's obvious.
There are families that have been born there
that in many cases don't like what's happening
in Gaza. I've point to do it. So
then it would be doing the same thing
back. And that's even what some Palestinian supporters
would argue, which shows you that they have
morals. And so at the end of the
day,
even if we argue legally, it should go
back to being Palestine. They're going, oh, let's
make this right and go forward.
Just so that's clear because I've said that
in passing. I don't want you to misrepresent
that as me being, like, anti anything, even
though there are things that I'm very anti.
The point is
October 8 will be released in theaters Friday,
03/14, and you won't wanna miss it. I
mean, do you what do you think this
is gonna be? This is going to be
an attack
on Americans
speaking out against Israel.
It says this important film delves into the
explosion of antisemitism across The United States. So
now you've got an Israeli propaganda an Israeli
produced propaganda film
who's been focusing on Americans fighting against their
genocide. And they're gonna turn this into, as
it's, like, across the face,
globalize the intifada, which what does that mean?
Globalize the resistance against tyranny.
The best they can do. Literally, while they're
shutting down free speech, while they are attacking
your rights, they come out with a film
about your rights being attacked from the other
side even though they're not doing that. They're
protesting against Israel's genocide,
and the only way they can scare you
is to make you think of some attack
on Western civilization. Gee, I wonder where that
screenshot came from.
Hell, look. I'm honored to be featured. Oh,
big surprise. The ADL spy is in there.
What a surprise.
Brian Grim
pointing out the contradiction of what this clown
ADL clean Greenblatt was just saying.
Dropsite Jewish students rally against ICE
at Columbia University.
Okay. This
is March 11.
So we have an entire group of Jewish
people literally fighting protesting
to release Mohammed Khalil.
Kinda hard to miss that it's only if
you look, you squint your eyes just right
and hold up Charlie Kirk's account. Oh my
god. Look. It's all antisemitism. But if you
actually look,
take thirty seconds to stand back and look,
you can see that that's not what's happening.
A group of Jewish students have gathered at
Columbia University just like the Jewish groups that
put on the original Columbia protest
following the arrest of Palestinian student activist, Maud
Kaleem.
They held signs reading Jews hate ICE, not
in our name, Jews hate the ADL.
Look at that.
Look at the comments. Look online. All over,
Ben Shapiro types calling them trash and racist
and hate you self hating Jews. Why? Because
they don't believe in Zionism.
The prominent Jew role Jewish students have played,
Ryan Grim writes, in Columbia protest would complicate
the charge that it's a hotbed of antisemitism
if there was a shred of honesty in
our media or our politics.
Exactly.
On top of that, I I I didn't
I was trying to I was hoping to
get some kind of a follow-up on this
before I went live, but you guys let
me know in the chat.
This is today.
I've I've saw reports already, but I wanted
to see was how Trump and his followers
would frame this. I guarantee it's gonna be
pro Hamas racism.
A group of Jewish Americans
held a sit in in the lobby of
Trump Tower today demanding the release of Palestinian
activist, Columbia, Columbia University graduate, Mohammed Khalil, graduate
again, despite them weirdly trying to claim he
didn't do anything there. Like, it just shows
you how dishonest they all are. Because if
you make it out like he got a
degree, well, then it's kinda hard to say
he got a degree while planning terrorism. You
know? It's it's just so lazy.
Who was taken into custody by ICE? I'm
curious to see what they say.
Because just like Ben Shapiro called them all
trash when they were protesting,
because he's Zionist.
This is Jewish Jewish voices for peace.
In this case, it's a Jewish organization saying
get you're doing something wrong. And because the
Trump Tower, the right is gonna claim it's
a leftist illegal blocking the building. Well, no.
They walked in. The door was open. They
sat down. They're protesting. Now you could argue
they're trespassing if you tell them to leave,
but the point is that's a protest, which
whether you agree with it or not. Like,
I'll be clear. I hate stuff like that.
I hate the ones blocking streets,
but I would never argue that they don't
have a right to do what they believe
is right in their in protesting. Like, let's
let's just say, like, a traffic violation. Sure.
Charge them for a traffic violation. They're still
protesting what they believe. I don't like that.
I disagree with it. I argue there's plenty
of more like, I argue if you're gonna
do it, do it in front of a
government style building. Do it where you're hindering
government processes.
Because in this case, you're still getting in
the way of people that are going to
their hotel rooms. And I I flatly don't
I think that's the wrong way to do
it because you're gonna get people that hate
what you're doing just because you're in their
way.
My point, though, is that you understand that
this is a legally protected act.
It is. If it's in some protected building
where they broken the door, well, that's a
very different situation. That's not what happened in
Columbia.
Dan Cohen says, in the last twenty four
hours, the Israeli lobby pressured Trump
to stop the appointment of a decorated veteran,
Daniel Davis, which they did, as deputy director
of national intelligence. Isn't it funny how they
were just pointing to
Tulsi saying the largest threat?
Well, here's an example of somebody who was
going to be in that state in the
director of national intelligence
who got kicked aside because Israel asked.
Remove they removed the hostage envoy, Adam Bowler,
from negotiations with Hamas
because he said this is about American interests.
I'll show you.
He says The US does not have sovereignty
under Zionism. Dan Cohen's a Jewish person himself.
So here is
Mel pointing out what the ADL said. This
is on the twelfth. ADL says, it would
be extremely dangerous for Daniel Davis to be
the deputy director of national intelligence. He has
diminished Hamas' ten seven attack. See?
Why? Because he says what we're talking about.
He says the reality, and and he says,
under my US support for Israel's right to
defend itself and blatantly denies the grave threat
the Iranian regime poses. Oh, so he's being
accurate about the situation, at least as I
see
it. So ADL says, no, Trump. That guy
can't do that.
He's now been removed.
Says, well, there you go, folks. After Mark
Levin, Laura Loomer, and the ADL, and Jewish
insiders smeared him all day, Davis was just
informed he will not be coming aboard as
deputy director of the DNI.
She says, like I said, this SHIT is
never going to stop with Malmo and Khalil.
That's exactly my point as well.
How do we not see this?
See, people like Lumer and the rest, they're
drunk on their perceived influence and power right
now. And, hey, maybe I'm wrong. Maybe they're
gonna take over. I certainly hope not. The
reality, though, is that they this is not
because of American rights, American interests, American anything.
Conservatives, please stand up and say something about
this. Liberals, say something about this. I don't
care what side you think you're on. This
affects everybody.
Patrick Henningsen, same same tweet commenting on it
says, this has to be one of the
most pathetic hit jobs yet. Unwarranted
defamation
carried out by the anti defamation league against
an American patriot,
decorated veteran, and a brilliant podcaster.
Now here well, you know what's interesting? Right
before I went live, I saw a post
about something somebody's a post saying Elon Musk
called the decorated veteran a traitor.
I I haven't got I haven't looked into
it, backed it up. I just thought it
was interesting. It was like a breaking news
thing that was coming live. Wonder if it's
about this guy. Again, repeated. That's the thing
I saw on headlines before I went live.
Overlapping might be relevant. Look it up for
yourself. Haven't confirmed it. The point's interesting though
because you can see how that would play
out, where they needed me to paint this
guy as somehow against American, when really he's
the one fighting for American interest and the
rest are not.
Here's that clip about the,
Adam Bowler.
Trump administration hostage envoy, Adam Bowler, has reportedly
been removed from negotiations after he said this.
We are The United States. We're not Israel.
We have specific interest at play.
That's not a joke.
If you're a conservative listening out there and
you support what's happening, ask yourself why. Why
would a person be removed
for simply acknowledging that The United States is
not Israel?
I think you know why this is happening,
and it's it's it's we're in your interest
to call this out.
It's not very hard to see because the
reality is this is something that is for
another country. It's I mean, look, if you
disagree with that, at least acknowledge this is
not what America First looks like. It's the
exact opposite.
Stand, why Netanyahu,
Dermer, others might be upset.
I do understand.
I spoke with Ron, and I'm sympathetic.
He has someone that he doesn't know well,
making direct contact with the mosque. Maybe I
would see them and say, look. They don't
have horns growing out of their head. They're
actually guys like us. They're pretty nice guys.
So he doesn't know me, and there are
big stakes. He lives in a country
where if it sets certain precedents, then it
will hurt or help a lot of other
people. So I understand the consternation
and the concern, and I wasn't upset.
At the same time, we're The United States.
We're not an agent of Israel. We have
specific interests at play.
And then he was removed.
It's just
pretty easy to see what's driving the bus,
guys.
And he actually he asked, did the American
people like Donald Trump or Benjamin Netanyahu?
Stop antisemitism reports that
they're deeply concerned by Kingsley Wilson's appointment as
deputy press secretary for the Pentagon.
Says she spreads debunked lies that Leo Frank
raped a child and framed a black man.
He did, and that's very easy to prove.
So this is where you get into the
whole, they use the blood libel about poisoning
the wells.
Oh, do they? You mean, like, this provable
story from Moretz that Loomer shows the military
documents where they literally poison the wells in
1948?
Weird.
Blood libel.
I mean, guys, this has been happening forever.
It's very easy to prove. Now, yes, there's
plenty of claims people make. I mean, like
like, let's for example, like this moron, Lumer,
claiming about all Muslims are one thing. That's
gross, and she's dumb. This is a provable
fact that she'd probably call blood libel. The
reality is a lot of this or a
lot of what she's doing does exist on
both sides of the conversation. What's important to
recognize
is stuff like
this,
stop antisemitism
pointing to things you can literally prove and
saying that's an example of antisemitism,
is a huge problem. Candace Owens is attacked
for all of this. You can literally prove
this stuff, and yet the ADL and all
a lot of the right, no, they all
stand and make the same claims. Like, they're
all claiming that Mahmoud Malmoud Kaloed is Khalil
is a terrorist. They just lockstep and go
right along,
just like the left, by the way. It
says claims Jewish organizations work with the KKK.
They did. I can prove it. I just
went over the ADL going back to the
sixties, marching down the street with the Nazis,
or rather a fake Nazi march. Freemasons have
stopped American Revolution, opposes USA to Israel. So
do I and anybody who cares. So do
a lot of the Republicans right now since
we're what's funny is, like, the cat turds
out there with the accounts are saying, we
should stop all foreign aid no matter what.
And then anybody that puts that question out,
nobody no response. And then you can clearly
see the support when it comes to funding
Israel in other content. So what they mean
is nobody but Israel.
It's very clear.
Pushes the antisemitic replacement theory. See, it's the
same point.
That you see what's the replacement theory stems
back to the rise above movement marching down
Charlottesville.
They will not replace them. Okay. That is
the ASOFT movement arm in The United States.
It's a provable fact that the FBI acknowledged
the CIA
that is funded by Israel.
That's not even the same point, though, just
to point that out. Interesting how clear that
is. The the real point is about how
easily it is to prove that Israel is
driving weaponized migration.
They're literally publicly talking about it. All these
things are ridiculous. Promotes neo Nazi propaganda. Oh,
she does? I'd love to see what you
mean by that. But the point is, how
does someone in a history of blatant '97
doesn't get a role? This is unacceptable, Pete
Hegseth.
How would you wanna bet that this person
gets removed?
They're waging an act they're going after a
guy. That's how this works.
And they've opened the door. Trump and his
team are like the the antisemitism
weapon is out there. They're it's
I've never seen it like this. It's always
been there, but they are beginning to come
after you.
Tom Cotton, of course, says today. This is,
yeah, two days ago. I introduced two bills
aimed at reforming the rotten culture on university
campuses. Oh, I'm sure you know where this
is going. He's not reforming anything. He's using
what's happening to drive in more suppression of
speech based around Israel conversation.
First, any pro Hamas protester,
sure you expected that. It's exactly what you'd
expect. It is suppression of speech for Israel.
That's what Tom Cotton does.
Proposes tax on woke university endowments.
What do you think that's gonna be about?
Now just to wrap up, in case, you
know, we didn't go into much of what's
really going on in Middle East right now.
You know, the the group that's actually making
all this happen and literally turning us against
ourselves to make us ignore what's going on
and then allowing your government to use that
to suppress our speech while we are speaking
out about what's going on. It's not hard
to see what this all connects back to.
Who benefits? Where is the common thread? If
you're honest, you can see it.
And just in case you didn't know what's
going on, here's a few examples.
Rami Abdul, the the chairman of the Euromed
human rights group, point this out on the
eleventh.
This is documented information from a human rights
group. It says inside mass graves that have
been found, they found children and babies with
their hands bound with zip ties
in locations that were that we're talking about
an Israeli location where they buried bodies that
they found when they left.
This photo is from two mass graves discovered
at Nestor Hospital, Southern Gaza in April. After
they left us, they occupied the area. That's
one of the main ones that they used
as that location.
Remember that many of these we proved. They
set up as bases inside these hospitals after
they were accusing everybody of doing that.
During the genocide, the Yura Matt human rights
group documented a 30 mass graves of victims
of Israeli genocide.
Babies that's just it's just unnerving.
Here is a former CIA agent. We just
played I'm I think I think I actually
have both clips. Let me see if I've
got that one. I'll play this one first,
talking about what what's happening now.
Amputations
while they have them in prison that aren't
necessary.
So in other words, chopping their limbs off
for torture.
Doctors reporting back to the United Nations
on the inordinate
number of amputations that are taking place,
among Palestinian prisoners,
unnecessary amputations.
As soon as October 7 took place,
the entire Israeli prison system enacted a new,
regulation
that Palestinians
who are incarcerated
are not permitted to walk.
Meaning,
to get from point a to point b,
you have to crawl on your hands and
knees. And if you object,
if you speak in more than a whisper,
you're beaten with a truncheon
or a piece of rebar, they'll break your
legs, they'll break your arms, and then, God
forbid,
they'll amputate them because they become infected. Human
rights violation
that the entire world is overlooking, they're choosing
to overlook. And criminally,
the US government has elected to just pretend
it's not happening.
Wow.
Well, I'm gonna end, I think, with the
one
of him,
and you'll see what I mean when I
play it. It's one where you're speaking about
what happens to even US representatives while
they're in Israel.
But this is important to see.
Israel's Ex Defense Minister, guess what he admits?
This is on the thirteenth, just today,
that they knew
for fifteen months that the Beavis family were
killed, but Israel's government kept their death secret
while parading their their abduction as a rallying
cry.
See? I don't even need to say it.
I mean, it's it's such a disgusting topic
to make the point about, But how often
we are telling you because we're simply looking
at the facts.
And still to this point, people are acting
like it's not true. We've been telling you
this since December 2023.
Because it was provable.
The evidence was there.
Now we know. They use these children, and
they still are, by the way. And you
still have Zionist screaming the opposite.
And we knew
at that time I knew at that time
that some of them, including
the Biba's kids, are not alive, unfortunately.
Well,
a lot of this, information,
I learned from Yarden Biba himself when I
spoke to him. Uh-huh. And he described everything,
including how
he and
decided to to fight,
and he went outside with, with his, pistol
and,
was falling in the hands of Hamas and
what he learned later on. But,
they were captured
by people that eventually
broke them to the hands
of
a branch that is more radical than Hamas.
That's the or the,
I think I'm forgetting the name now.
We mentioned it last time. It's not Hamas.
It's not it's not even technically part of
Hamas. And so it's it's important to remember
that the Beba's children and the mother ended
up with a different group. The father was
with Hamas. Took
another Moss or maybe a little bit more,
before we learned that, they are not, they
are not alive.
Important.
They use them the entire time. And the
father stands by the story to this day
in regard to what actually happened.
Here
is another example
that no one's paying attention to right now
because we're all distracted by everything else.
But it's nothing new. It's been going on
since day one. Now it's even
at a time when their debate is even
about the rest of the hostages.
As they're doing this, Israel has not yet
brought food for ten days according to the
United Nations.
It's on the eleventh. So as they're screaming
about the peep return the hostages, they're starving
their own people.
That's what Israel is.
Cut the electricity,
and
there's no no convoy getting in for nine
days. Can you tell us what
does Israel government allow to get into Gaza
so far?
Nothing.
I mean, there's been no no goods,
no goods coming
in, no trucks coming in. I've not heard
that,
humanitarian
that people that's humanitarian workers were not allowed
to go in, but no goods have been
coming in. And, I mean, we we,
again,
call on all the parties to live up
to the obligations that they,
that they had agreed to. We want to
see the the humanitarian aid
return,
and flow back and flood back into,
into Gaza. We wanna see the hostages,
the Israeli hostages and other citizens,
that continue to be detained,
released.
Okay. Michelle, then Benny.
It's just the the idea that they could
I mean, just so publicly,
just cut off everything
to even to their own people is just
so grotesquely obvious.
Zachary I mean, here's here's from United Nations
as well. Zachary Foster, nothing to see here.
Just a 49 page UN report documenting Israel's
genocidal acts as their quote in Gaza and
its systemic use of sexual violence as a
weapon of war.
But, you know, UN is Hamas. Right? So
let's just ignore everything.
More than a human can bear is the
title. Israel's systemic use of sexual reproductive and
other forms of gender based violence since October
2023. And this goes back decades, by the
way.
But you realize this is not some hypothetical
report of somebody that you can't see. These
are documented ev we have them debating whether
they're allowed to rape people on their mainstream
TV. We saw a video of them doing
so. We have evidence of them raping women,
children. It goes back as far as you
can look.
And yet all we get is mired in
the conversation about allegations from people that are
in power.
It's hard. It's hard for somebody like me
to have to deal with this consistently. But
I mean, I'm not complaining. This is what
I do. I just want you to realize
that it's it's impossible.
How many people out there are so like,
going back to that that that image, you
know, that it's
Right here. It's funny. It's funny. I literally
just took this down. I never I was
gonna show it more than once, but it
ain't what you don't know that gets you
in trouble. It's what you know for sure
that just ain't so.
I mean, it's everywhere.
It's everywhere.
Lastly,
voice of rabbis.
You
you listen to yourself. It's a couple minutes.
It says, our message is to to all
Israeli leaders. Do not represent the Jewish people.
The Jewish people cannot be viewed through the
lens of an Israeli government. Merging Judaism and
Zionism is antisemitism.
They say they pray to God for all
the rest of the stabilized peace of the
region.
Voice of rabbis, source toward Judaism.
Now I'm gonna end
With that clip of John,
Kiraku
showing telling you what
is
US Representatives
who are there
on behalf of the US government, how they
get treated by the Israeli apparatus.
And then ask yourself how they would be
willing to treat people that they didn't have
a relationship with. I mean, it's just there's
so much evidence, guys, that this is not
even debatable anymore. The reality of what this
is. And that's why the world sees this.
The question is right now whether we're allowed
to let that bat, whatever we're talking about,
run rough shot over this country for the
effort to try to bury what we all
see. And I'm not talking about bury the
knowledge. We all know what's happening about the
ability for us to do anything about it.
Speech is happening right now. It won't be
long until we they're weaponized further than that.
It's obviously building right now. You need to
stand up for that. You need to stand
up for what you believe in, not a
side, but for your principles. It's never been
more important in the context of free speech.
This is happening.
Please stand up and fight for it.
Thank you all for tuning in today. I
love you all. As always, question everything.
Come to your own conclusions.
Stay vigilant.
The guy that I sat next to for
those three years,
he went to Jerusalem along with his wife.
Now because they had been to Israel before,
the CIA decided to declare them as a
courtesy and to say, look, we have these
two people, this married couple. They're not spies.
They're analysts. One of them isn't even really
an analyst. He's gonna go to to graduate
school
while his wife is doing the analysis.
We just want you to know that they're
here as a courtesy
on assignment to the state department.
What the Israelis did over the next two
years was to carry out a campaign of
harassment. And the reason I bring this up
is because it's quite common.
I'm telling you this story because this is
just a normal
thing that happens,
to Americans, especially to American CIA officers, working
and living in Israel.
They went to a party one night, and
they came home. It was a party at
the ambassador's residence in Tel Aviv. They came
home, and all of their living room furniture
had been rearranged.
All of it.
So the message was,
we can come into your house anytime we
want, and there's nothing you can do about
it. Okay. That's
aggravating a little bit, but no damage done.
The next time they went out, they came
home, and someone had
defecated
in all of the toilets in their house.
They had four bed four bedroom house, four
bathroom house,
and people had gone to the bathroom in
all four of the toilets and left it
unflushed.
So another
not very nice message that we can harass
you anytime we want.
The third time it happened,
they came home and their dog
was yelping and laying on the floor of
the kitchen.
Someone had cut its tail off
and then wrapped it in gauze and tape.
Mhmm.
And the third the fourth time it happened
to them, they had
they had done their Christmas shopping. They had
a a tree up in the,
the living room, and they had gone to
the ambassador's Christmas party. And when they came
back,
all of the presents were gone. All of
them.
Thousand dollars worth of Christmas presents.