The Alex Jones Show discusses recent protests in Virginia against proposed gun control laws, and
criticizes media portrayal of the event. The show also analyzes Hillary Clinton's attempts to
maintain power and influence after leaving office, her attack on Bernie Sanders for not endorsing
her earlier, and Sweden's failed migration and integration policies due to an increase in bombings
and grenade attacks. Additionally, the show criticizes mainstream media's attempt to create hysteria
around certain words and phrases while ignoring real threats, and argues that diverse opinions
should not be deplatformed or censored.
I am your host, Alex Jones, reporting from the ground in D.C.
David Knight, the host of the David Knight Show, is about to host the Alex Jones broadcast coming up on the other side of this break.
But I just wanted to state now, before I report to you at the bottom of the hour, live from the U.S.
Capitol, that we are witnessing the entire globalist program Real from the fact that their entire operation was based on stealth and denying the very existence of their private anti-human corporate world government.
Once their stealth is exposed, once their camouflage is removed, it is the beginning of the end for their system.
They believe their only hope is divide and conquer.
To divide the populations of the world against each other.
Now the problem is when they divide and brainwash the third world population against the West and weaponize them, they become a real threat.
Even though we love and care about those fellow humans.
So there's a real balance to how we have to respond to this whole globalist program.
We can't just accept the entire third world and submit to them and not have them adopt
our culture if they want to come to the West because we're loving and open and good.
We have to realize that the West in many ways is superior and that's why the global technocrats
are trying to remove it because the freedom-based Renaissance Western Christian model is so
superior people from the entire globe will end up wanting to adopt it instead of the
globalist anti-human authoritarian model.
So, we're going to be here in DC, myself, Owen Schroyer, Savannah Hernandez and others, Harrison Smith, Rob Due, rotating in and out for the next two weeks of the historic trial.
of the president. It should be done, Mitch McConnell has issued the guidelines, by next
Friday or next Monday. So we're talking about a week and a half, two weeks or so. This whole
charade that they launched the House should be completely exposed and derailed. But they're
going to pull a lot of shenanigans during this period, and they're already doing it.
David Knight, myself and others will lay that out coming up.
But an important point, an important area to get to, is the fact that when the public shows up and is aware of what's going on, the globalists are powerless.
Like we just saw in Virginia, now that blew up in Governor Northam's face, now he says that all the militarization and all the harassment and all the choking down the people into tiny spaces stopped there from being a crisis, when every expert we've talked to said that was tailor-made to cause a stampede or violence or a disaster.
But it didn't work by the grace of God.
Your prayers, everybody's action.
But again, it shows we've got to have action on the ground.
There's a strange phenomenon.
The more viewers and more traffic we have to Infowars.
and Band-Odd Video many times the less money we have coming in. I know a bunch of big sales just
ended but we have crippling low amounts of money coming in right now for the trajectory we need to
keep MFootwear open for just the next year. So you see that we're delivering, you're delivering,
we're fighting hard. So do your shopping at MFootwearStore.com, especially those of you
that have never done a purchase. Step to the plate, get some great Wake of America coffee,
get some high quality fish oil, get some great good halogen x2, get some great nootropic
brain force, get some high quality fluoride free toothpaste super blue or super silver.
They're all there right now.
And the good news is, X2, the deep earth crystal iodine, the counter to fluoride, you have to have it to live.
And this is the best form of it.
It hasn't sold out for a while.
It's back in stock and out of the gates.
It's 40% off.
That's as low as I can go on it.
X3 is 40% off.
You get free shipping when you get them together or separate.
Again, infowarestore.com.
Please get in there and get your high quality fish roll that just came back in stock a few
weeks ago and is set to sell out in a week or so.
And please get the X2 that just came back into stock as well and experience it for yourself.
But whatever you do, spread the word about the broadcast because that's how we're reaching
so many people.
Again, I thank you for your support, but I ask you all to take action, especially those
of you that have not done so monetarily.
These are products you need and you know you're betting on the right horse when you support
InfoWars.
Thank you so much.
We'll be right back with David Knight on the other side.
We're going to be taking a look at what's going on in Washington.
The impeachment show is ramping up and this morning I saw on C-SPAN, I saw Jerry Nadler saying There isn't any trial in America where you're not allowed to call witnesses.
And so we should be allowed to call witnesses.
And I've got to say, they impeached President Trump without any witnesses.
Nobody saw anything.
We had a lot of testimony from people who weren't there, who didn't hear anything, who didn't have any factual knowledge of it.
But look, I don't know what country Jerry Nadler is talking about when he says you're not allowed to withhold witnesses in a trial.
Everybody has that in a trial.
I have covered One trial after the other by our corrupt Department of Justice, where they did not allow people to call witnesses in their defense.
Where they hid, actively hid, exculpatory evidence.
And you've got a situation going on right now in Washington State, where they're trying to remove a popular six-term Republican legislator there, Matt Shea.
Why?
Because they labeled him a domestic terrorist because he supports gun rights.
And he's a Christian.
And it's quite frankly payback because he made sure that exculpatory evidence from a BLM Bureau of Land Management whistleblower was finally brought to light.
As the corrupt Department of Justice was covering up that evidence.
So we're going to be talking about that.
Alex Jones is going to be joining us later in this hour and we'll be talking about what's going on in Washington live as this spectacle begins.
We'll give you some context for that leading up to it as well.
And we want to talk about the aftermath of what happened yesterday.
You know it's amazing how the media has suddenly, some of them, not all of them, but some of them have changed their tune quite quickly.
We have USA Today.
Has an article says the civil rights march of my life quote-unquote thousands of pro-gun protesters many of them heavily armed rally peacefully in Richmond now That's the headline right now That was updated at 4 56 p.m.
Eastern Time yesterday so five o'clock yesterday they updated that and talked about it being a civil rights march peaceful even though people are heavily armed but if you click and I save this as a screenshot guys zoom in on that URL And show the URL.
The URL of that actually says, Virginia gun rally protest draws national militias.
Fear of violence.
That was the original headline.
And you can still see it in their URL.
Because they were the ones who were stoking the fear.
Unnecessarily.
So we're going to talk about that, but first I want to talk about what President Trump is doing today.
He's right now, he's in Davos and he has spoken to the group there on the main stage while Greta Thunberg spoke before and after as a bookend.
Now what President Trump said on the main stage as she scorned, scornfully looked on, he said, we must reject the perennial prophets of doom and their predictions of the apocalypse.
They are false prophets!
Seems to me like I remember something in the Mosaic Law about what you do to false prophets.
I don't know how many decades a false prophet gets to false prophesy.
President Trump laid it out.
He said they are the heirs of yesterday's fortune tellers.
Soothsayers.
Astrologers.
They predicted an overpopulation crisis in the 60s, mass starvation in the 70s, and an end of oil in the 90s.
Well, President Trump got that exactly right, except for the last thing.
I've got to say, he got that wrong.
It was actually 1979.
I've got the magazines.
I bring them out on a regular basis to show people on my show in the morning.
Here's Newsweek, July 16, 1979.
The Energy Crisis, a program for the 80s.
And if you look at this, show this guys, we've got a program for the 80s.
You can see the gas pump there, overgrown with kudzu or whatever it is.
But here's the key thing, this graphic over here.
Why we must act now.
We've got 8.7 years of crude oil left, they said in 1979.
Only 8.7, middle of the 1980s.
They have 10.7 years of natural gas left, but they've got 666 years of coal.
Where'd they get that 666?
They have 10.7 years of natural gas left, but they've got 666 years of coal.
Where'd they get that 666?
I don't know.
Anyway, we were going to be out of crude oil by the middle of the 80s.
By 1990, we were going to be out of natural gas.
And the concern at the time was that we had to have energy.
Now, the totalitarians don't want us to have energy.
They want you to starve.
They want to take away your food.
They want to take away your car, your home.
That's the program from every one of these Democrats, as they are competing with each other to hand out free money.
I mean, literally handing out free money.
They don't even try to hide it anymore.
You know, back in the 20s and 30s, H.L.
Mencken said an election is an advanced auction of stolen goods.
They're not even trying to hide that anymore.
It's right out front.
They're auctioning it off.
Elizabeth Warren, $50,000 to everybody with a college loan.
And I don't even have to get Congress to come in.
I can do this through an executive order.
I don't know what she thinks gives her that authority.
Certainly isn't in the Constitution.
Ninth and Tenth Amendment make that pretty clear.
But President Trump goes on, he says, these alarmists always demand the same thing.
Absolute power to dominate, to transform and control every aspect of our lives.
That's why I said yesterday they are totalitarians.
The key aspect of totalitarianism has two components.
Number one, no restrictions on central power.
That is one of the reasons why I voted for President Trump.
Because I knew that he was going to push back against the people in Washington.
And boy, that is the point where the friction has begun.
But first of all, no restrictions on central power.
And the second thing is that they control every aspect of our lives, every detail of our lives, under their control, and everything in Washington.
As I've said, remember when we were young, some of us, used to hear the expression, hey it's a free country, isn't it?
And why are you making a federal case out of this?
Well now everything is a federal case, and literally a federal case, because not only has all power Gone to Washington, which was the nightmare scenario of the founders of this country.
They talked about consolidation and how they did not want to have what we call it centralization of power, central control.
But they talked about it as consolidation.
And so they made sure That with the 9th and 10th Amendment, that you had power, made it very clear that if the central government has not been specifically given any powers, they do not have them.
They cannot assume them.
By using something like the General Welfare Clause, or the Commerce Clause, or something like that.
No, no, no.
You have to have it specifically granted to you.
And within the Constitution, the design was to furthermore subdivide the power between the three branches of government.
And now, everybody goes to the Supreme Court.
We have not only consolidation of power into Washington, but consolidation of power into the Supreme Court.
Judicial tyranny is what we have.
Judicial totalitarianism.
They decide every detail of our lives.
From Washington, these nine political appointees.
President Trump continued, we will never let radical socialists destroy our economy, wreck our country, or eradicate our liberty.
I'm glad to see President Trump talking about liberty.
It must be election time because that's when people will talk about liberty.
Hopefully it will not end after the election.
But you know, when we look at the fraud of environmentalism, Zero Hedge points out that as Tesla is moving into Germany, going under the turf of BMW and the giant Volkswagen, they've decided to put a battery factory in Germany.
And of course they're cutting down thousands of trees and the green people are not very happy about that.
They were not very happy about the fact that Elon Musk was ticked off about the Porsche Taycan and how fast it was around the Nurburgring.
So he sent over a modified Tesla and he needed a supercharger.
And he brought that over and he ran it off of a noisy, very, very dirty diesel generator.
And the neighbors are very upset about that.
I said, that is the perfect image of the fraud of these battery electric vehicles.
Absolutely.
So, I don't know.
You know, he's got The electric cars that continue to reignite time after time just like a joke birthday candle.
But it's okay!
We need to shower cash on him.
We'll be right back.
unidentified
Stay with us.
You have kicked Loveless' ass today.
You have come out here and exercised your post and second amendment in a beautiful way.
And this is in total contravention of what Northern, that's sorrows, blood drinking, baby killing, maggots said.
USA!
The establishment corporate media told us this would be Charlottesville 2.0 but it wasn't.
You came here and exercised beautifully your first and second amendment and you showed why an armed citizenry is a polite and orderly and almost crime-free society.
unidentified
And all the media hype saying we'd be I love everybody, but I wanted to go live.
All right, that was Alex Jones yesterday at the rally.
And of course, this is something, Lobby Day, is something that's been held every single day since 2003.
They've never had an incident, and they didn't have one yesterday.
Surprise, surprise, we're telling everybody that.
We're telling everybody that not only is Ralph Northam the only racist that was around there that everybody knows for sure is a racist, he's projecting his racism on other people, so is the media.
Calling the people there white supremacists and so forth and then projecting his conspiracy theories of violence because it's the Democrats who have been talking about confronting people with force to confiscate weapons that have been legal in this country for the entire 400 years that we have had Europeans here in this country and enshrined in our Constitution as a protected God-given right.
So, yesterday we had Kuhnman and Antifa missing in action there.
And I think the subtitle of that should be domestic terrorists are a no-show because the real terrorists were Coon Man and the Antifa people.
We did have one arrest, one 21 year old girl, female, I guess 21 years old, you're not a girl anymore.
But she was arrested because she refused to remove her mask multiple times.
And I talked about that yesterday.
I said, if he wants to make sure there's not going to be any violence, then discourage Antifa from showing up by telling them that there is an anti-mask law in Virginia, that it is a felony.
Told her to remove it and she maybe took it down and put it back up again or did not remove it
Multiple times they did arrest her and charged her with a felony and I imagine she is based on
what she did wanting to wear masks and Rebelling against police authority because what we saw from
the people there they were
Chanting USA they were singing The national anthem the Pledge of Allegiance they were
cleaning up the trash after the event Thanks.
These are people who are law-abiding citizens.
As a matter of fact, they will go above and beyond.
They even, in most cases, they even go through the process to have concealed carry, which I don't believe is necessary.
I would never go through that.
I took all the classes for concealed carry, but I'm not going to ask permission from anyone to carry a firearm.
I have the Constitution that lets me do that.
I'm a firm believer in applying the Constitution and not turning my fundamental rights into a government-granted privilege.
But these people are going above and beyond, and I understand that.
As far as possible, try to be at peace with anybody, even when they don't have the authority to do something that they claim that they want to do.
If you want to be at peace with them, fine, go ahead and do that.
But understand that it does set a dangerous precedent.
We have at InfoWars.com an article, Governor Ralph Northam is now suggesting that he saved Virginia from a volatile situation.
No, he didn't.
As a matter of fact, as I mentioned earlier in the program, USA Today changed their headline from, Virginia gun rally protest draws militias and fear of violence.
And you can still see that on the URL.
If you click on this article in the URL, you can see the old headline up there, and it says updated 5 o'clock p.m.
Eastern Time.
They changed it to Civil Rights March of My Life.
Quote, thousands of pro-gun protesters, many of them heavily armed, rallied peacefully in Richmond.
They said this was a peaceful day to address our legislature.
That's part of the First Amendment.
They appeared to generate none of the violence feared by some state leaders, you know, like Ralph Northam.
And I would say it wasn't feared by them, they were fear mongers.
Many demonstrators openly displayed military-style semi-automatic weapons.
Some of them had signs that said, come and take it.
And if they were the original signs, they would have a military-style cannon.
Because that was what was on the flag here in Goliad in Texas.
Yeah, Santa Ana, other tyrants, you want to take this military-style cannon?
Come and take it if you can.
It's all about the military.
They want to talk about militias.
The militias are not the problem.
A standing army is a problem.
People who think that citizens should not be able to defend themselves are the problem.
We call them pirates.
Anyway, only one arrest, this 21-year-old female, charged with one felony count of wearing a mask in public.
But here's some other women who were there.
Connie Stanley, 58, came to the rally with a group of women.
She said where she lives, it could take police too long to respond if she calls 9-11.
Well, that's true wherever you live.
Because as we saw in that church shooting, it was over in about six or eight seconds.
As a woman, I feel like it's about protection.
Well, that's right.
Another individual said, you've got thousands of guns here and not a single bullet fired.
I've said before this rally, every time I have been to a rally or protest or whatever you want to call it, where people show up armed, it's always been a very peaceful rally.
That's right.
An armed society or assembly is a peaceful society or assembly because people don't start throwing punches.
That's one of the reasons why Antifa didn't show up.
One person said, today the sheer numbers here speak for itself.
I hope our legislators will back off.
Today was the civil rights march of my life.
Now, when Ralph Northam took credit for saving Virginia, one of the things he said was, I will continue to listen to the voices of Virginians.
And that's not what he's doing.
The Democrats have said now, openly said, Speaker of the House and others, we're moving forward with all this gun legislation.
We don't care about tens of thousands of people.
Law enforcement is admitting that it's 22,000 or the Virginia government that counted the people.
I believe it was much more than that.
And that was in spite of Northern using Northern, it could be Northern, I don't know, but no, anyway, using this so-called threat of violence against everybody.
Anybody shows up, it's going to be civil war in the streets, don't show up!
Using that to scare people away.
Well, it didn't scare away these people.
One individual said, whenever there's a large group like the one here carrying firearms about safety, you know, we never have any problems.
It's a sense of security, he says.
And that's exactly what it was.
All right, we're going to be right back.
We've got some more clips of what happened yesterday, and then Alex Jones is going to be joining us this hour to talk about the beginning of the impeachment hoax.
Hashtag impeachment hoax.
unidentified
Ladies and gentlemen of Virginia!
Today you show your cowardly governor that he is not going to take away your rights!
Today you show the corrupt Democrat Party they're not going to take away your rights!
And today we show the anti-American media that we're not going to be silenced!
And you know damn well, you know damn well, the only reason that Governor Northam declared a state of emergency is because his own reputation as governor is in a state of emergency.
And you know, he didn't want all these people covering every bit of green grass on the Capitol grounds because those optics would totally defeat him.
And so he lied.
And he said that he knew of imminent danger here.
But all I see is God-fearing, American-loving patriots out here!
[Cheering]
And so wherever that chicken-shit governor is hiding, make sure he hears you right now!
USA!
USA! USA! USA!
USA!
USA!
Now you know, you know the media is going to lie about what happened out here today.
But you guys are all out here to tell the truth.
And you guys are out here filming and you're going to tell your friends and family the truth about what happened in Virginia today.
This is a total victory for the United States of America, and this is a total victory for free speech.
take away our firearms and you will not silence us.
[crowd cheers]
This is a total victory for the United States of America and this is a total victory for free speech.
And whatever they want to do, and whatever they want to do in the halls of that building,
if they take away your rights, it will not be done without a resistance
and without a pushback.
Actually, I have to ask a quick question.
Did anybody here even vote for Northam?
No!
How did this guy get into office?
Northern Virginia!
Dead people voting!
Yeah, dead people voting, yeah.
Bloomberg.
Yeah, Bloomberg.
Well, I think it's pretty obvious that Ralph Northam should resign here today.
Resign now!
Resign now.
I've been to a lot of different protests, but I've never seen the exact same protests that you've seen.
But I've never seen the energy that I've seen here today, except maybe at a Trump rally.
[cheers]
Maybe it reminds you of a Trump rally, doesn't it?
[cheers]
So this is what America looks like, and the reason only Ralph Northam isn't here today is because he's scared to death of America.
And we know that Ralph Northam is corrupt.
And we know he's trying to set your free speech.
That's why he blocked us off of the Capitol grounds.
And we know he's trying to take your Second Amendment rights.
That's why they're working on registration.
But he heard that hundreds of thousands of people were going to be out here, so he's hiding in a hole today.
That coward didn't even come out here today.
Can you believe that?
He is?
Oh, wow!
He supports Virginia!
Oh, King Brown's got to go!
So God bless Virginia.
God bless the United States of America.
And one more time, whatever hole that Pollard Ralph Northam is hiding in right now, make sure he can hear you.
Alright, you can see there's a crowd there and yet we have the AP saying, "I was prepared to..."
USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA!
This is a gun control advocate that they quote, the Associated Press.
Just to push back on all of this, "I was prepared to see a whole lot more people show up than actually did."
I don't think they could fit any more people there.
And I think it's an indication that a lot of this rhetoric is bluster, quite frankly.
It doesn't matter that virtually every county has declared itself in defiance of the Democrats' plans to remove the Second Amendment.
That's just bluster.
It doesn't matter that the sheriffs have said they're going to deputize people, that they're not going to enforce the law.
It's just bluster.
And you have Democrat lawmakers, including House Speaker Eileen Fillercorn, a hyphenated female, and Senate Majority Leader Dick Sassellaw.
Told the AP the rally would not impact their plans to pass gun control measures, including universal background checks, which is universal gun registration, and one handgun purchase a month limit, and so forth and so on.
That's why we have the clip, you know, we got Ralph Northam saying, I saved us all from violence, and I'm going to do it again by getting rid of the Second Amendment.
No, he is trying to push us to a civil war.
And folks, understand that these people want to destroy America.
A civil war will empower them.
Destroying this country, and if we allow them to push us into this left-right paradigm, where we're going to mindlessly chant for one side or the other, it is going to be a civil war.
We better pull back against this, and we better start unifying people on broader issues of liberty.
The issue is liberty versus uncontrolled central government that comes over every detail of our life, and that means not just your guns, but your speech, your social media speech, Not just the free press.
It's about mandating vaccines for your kids!
Mandating vaccines for you!
Broaden this out!
We better understand how this works.
And this is why people in the gun movement need to look at the medical marijuana movement.
Even the legalization of marijuana.
I don't have to support the use or possession of something to oppose its prohibition.
And if we understand how the unconstitutional UN war on drugs was shut down by state nullification in state after state, that is the key to taking back our freedom.
It is nullification because the only other alternative is a civil war.
That's why the Democrats are trying to push this so far up.
And I see a lot of cool heads there.
At that rally.
And I think they understand that the Democrats wanted a civil war.
They would not give it to them.
And we better not do that.
We better start using the things that are available to us.
Jury nullification.
Nullification by our state officials.
Nullification by our state legislatures.
Nullification by our Constitution.
And we better understand the first thing we need to nullify is judicial tyranny.
Telling us every aspect of our life I mean, I've got an article here that was written by Robert Barnes talking about how the Supreme Court is going to be looking at whether or not Montana can allow people to have a $150 in state tax credit if they give to a private school.
Now, this is something that when I was working with the Libertarian Party in North Carolina, I proposed.
We made this a part of our platform because it said we don't want to have charter schools.
I don't want to run this stuff through the government.
As a homeschooler, I told the homeschoolers, don't take any money from the government for your band or for your sport event or whatever because when you start going for free stuff, you lose your freedom and you don't want them controlling your life.
That's what they want to do.
They want to control every aspect of your life and they want to burn down our society and our Constitution.
For a foreign country to attempt such a thing on its own is bad enough.
For an American president to deliberately solicit such a thing, to blackmail a foreign country with military assistance to help him win an election is unimaginably worse.
I can't imagine any other president doing this.
Beyond that, For then the President to deny the right of Congress to conduct oversight, deny the right to investigate any of his activities, to say Article 2 of the Constitution gives him the right to quote, do whatever he wants.
We are staring down an erosion of the sacred democratic principles for which our founders fought a bloody war of independence.
Leader McConnell wants to force the managers to make important parts of their case in the dark of night.
Number three, unlike the Clinton rules, the McConnell resolution places an additional hurdle to get witnesses and documents by requiring a vote on whether such motions are even in order.
If that vote fails, then no motions to subpoena witnesses and documents will be in order.
So in short, contrary to what the leader said, the McConnell rules are not at all like the Clinton rules.
The Republican leader's resolution is based neither in precedent nor in principle.
It is driven by partisanship and the politics of the moment.
Today, I'll be offering amendments to fix the many flaws in Leader McConnell's deeply unfair resolution, and seek the witnesses and documents we've requested, beginning with an amendment to have the Senate subpoena White House documents.
Let me be clear, these amendments are not dilatory.
They only seek one thing, the truth.
That means relevant documents.
That means relevant witnesses.
That's the only way to get a fair trial.
And everyone in this body knows it.
Each Senate impeachment trial in our history, all 15 that were brought to completion feature witnesses.
Every.
Single.
One.
The witnesses we request are not Democrats.
They're the President's own men.
The documents are not Democratic documents.
They're documents, period.
We don't know if the evidence of the witnesses or the documents will be exculpatory to the President or incriminating.
But we have an obligation, a solemn obligation, particularly now during this most deep and solemn part of our Constitution, to seek the truth and then let the chips fall where they may.
My Republican colleagues have offered several explanations for opposing witnesses and documents at the start of the trial.
None of them has much merit.
Republicans have said we should deal with the question of witnesses later in the trial.
Of course, it makes no sense to hear both sides present their case first, and then afterward decide if the Senate should hear evidence.
The evidence is supposed to inform arguments, not come after they're completed.
Some Republicans have said the Senate should not go beyond the House record by calling any witnesses.
But the Constitution gives the Senate the sole power to try impeachments.
Let's pause this for a second, because quite frankly, I can only listen to the lies of Chuck Schumer just so long.
As I pointed out before, I know somebody who used to be on his staff, a son of a friend, a high school friend of my wife and her brother, and he's just like Chuck Schumer, let me tell you.
Let's go back to 1999.
Chuck Schumer's 1999 letter about impeachment.
And as part of that, what he said was, if we consider the impeachment of the president, it shakes me up that we're on the brink of removing a president, not because of a popular groundswell to remove him, not because of the magnitude of the wrongs that he's committed, but because conditions in the late 20th century America have made it possible for a small group of people who hate Bill Clinton, or in this case, President Trump, And hate his policies, that's the key thing.
To very cleverly, very doggedly exploit the institutions of freedom that we hold dear and almost succeed in undoing him.
It was lawfare that he's talking about and that's what we're seeing in spades with this.
He goes on to say, so they found Paula Jones.
And whether or not she was truly wronged, we all knew that it was a politically motivated case.
He does not mention Juanita Broderick.
Doesn't mention Kathleen Welley.
He doesn't mention all these other things that Ken Starr just glossed over.
Whitewater, Cattlegate, so forth.
Ken Starr, I imagine, was very, very concerned about the fact that he had to do something about the obvious, objective violation of the law that was perjury, where Bill Clinton, over the allegations of sexual harassment of Monica Lewinsky, committed perjury!
To cover up what he had done.
That is an objective fact.
And then he tried to obstruct that.
But Chuck Schumer in 1999 went on, he said, you know, what Bill Clinton did was wrong and arrogant.
We all agree.
Did you really agree about that?
But let's express some sympathy.
He's an extraordinary but flawed individual who happened to sexually violently assault many women, raping many of them.
There's no question about that yet at this point.
And yet we have nothing done because he is a Clinton.
Now, as you heard Chuck Schumer say, these are completely different rules.
Let me tell you what happened in 1999.
The managers presented their case over a period of three days.
And there was a discussion of the facts and the backgrounds of the case.
And they talked about the laws governing perjury and so forth.
After that period of time, the defense had three days to talk about it.
And then you had Robert Byrd.
You know the guy who was a grand wizard of the Ku Klux Klan or whatever?
He was dearly loved by the Clintons, and now we know, because he moved to dismiss the charges.
He said, you can't have a motion to dismiss at any given time.
Well, that's exactly what they did.
Robert Byrd.
The KKK guy, also known as a senator and friend of the Clintons, moved to dismiss.
That was voted down.
And we'll talk about the rest of this process when we come back.
We just heard the lies of Chuck Schumer, and prior to that we had Democrats, or Republicans, as the Democrats are going nuclear.
They brought out the duck and cover turtle, Mitch McConnell.
Any of you who remember?
Those films that they inflicted on us in our childhood.
Nevertheless, let's deconstruct some of what Chuck Schumer was saying.
He said, this is absolutely not anything at all like 1999.
Yeah, because it's now a different party coming after the president.
And I just read you some of the things he said back in 1999.
He would only talk about Paula Jones, you know, the victim of sexual assault.
By Bill Clinton, the person who was denigrated by Hillary Clinton as trailer trash.
Didn't talk about Kathleen Willey, didn't talk about Juanita Broderick, didn't talk about the rapes and the violence and the biting and so forth.
You know, the headlines say Chuck Schumer's 1999 letter about impeachment comes back to bite him.
Well, nobody talked about Bill Clinton biting the women that he sexually assaulted.
They didn't talk about their financial crimes.
And they continue on with the Clinton Foundation.
Nevertheless, let's talk about the central lie of Chuck Schumer.
The fact that this is totally different from the aboveboard process that they had for Bill Clinton.
As I pointed out, the House managers, that's what they call the prosecutors, The impeachment happens in the House.
They essentially have an indictment.
And then they present their case to the Senate.
Well, in 1999, they did that over a period of three days.
I don't know if they're... I keep hearing them say, well, they're going to do this in the dead of night.
They did it over three days, and it might have been eight hours per day.
That would have been about 24 hours.
Okay, and Chuck, and what they're concerned about is that Mitch McConnell wants to do this 12 hours a day over two days.
Okay, so they're going to go extra hours, they're going to work a little bit harder, and he's very upset about the fact that it's not going to be in prime time or something, because you know, this is all about the show!
It is a show!
You know, when are they going to have the singing and the dancing?
And when is Hollywood going to show up?
And so forth.
I mean, this is what it's about.
This is their concern about it.
That Mitch McConnell wants to move this along so that maybe they could actually get something done.
No, they don't want to get anything done.
They want to stretch this out for months.
Well, into the presidential race.
That's all this is about, quite frankly.
And so, back in 1999, they did this.
They presented their case for three days.
And then they had a defense presentation present their case for three days.
When they presented it, the case against Bill Clinton, they had excerpts from the videotaped grand jury testimony where Bill Clinton lied under oath, and then they said that This was this justified removal of the president from the office by virtue of, quote, willful premeditated deliberate corruption of the nation's system of justice through perjury and obstruction of justice.
Those are the two charges against Bill Clinton.
And then you heard Chuck Schumer say, well, these guys want to change the rules so that anybody can have a motion to dismiss at any period in time.
And that precisely is what Senator KKK Robert Byrd did in 1999.
He moved to dismiss a failed on a party line vote of 56 to 44.
And then the Senate voted down motions to move directly to a vote on the articles of impeachment and to suppress videotaped depositions of witnesses from public release.
So then over a three-day period, They called in witnesses and took videotaped closed-door depositions.
They had called in Monica Lewinsky, Clinton's friend Vernon Jordan, and White House aide Sidney Blumenthal.
And then they had their vote.
That is what he's saying is so different and unprecedented.
And that's exactly what they're talking about doing.
We'll have more about that when we come back.
Stay with us.
You know, facts are a stubborn thing, and we do have historical facts to contradict what Chuckie Schumer was saying.
As I pointed out, it began in 1999.
He said, this is totally different than what we did with the impeachment of Bill Clinton.
No, it isn't.
For three days, from January the 14th to the 16th, they had the managers coming from the House, essentially presenting the prosecution side.
And so that was January the 14th through the 16th.
Then they started on January the 19th through the 21st.
They had people in defense of Bill Clinton presenting their arguments.
And then we went about six days.
Well, I don't know what they were doing.
You know, the Senate likes to take a lot of recesses and vacations when they campaign and so forth.
Then you had the senator, KKK Robert Byrd, have a motion to dismiss.
And this is something that really got Chuck Schumer upset.
You can't have a motion to dismiss at any period of time.
Well, this is exactly what they did back in 1999.
He was there.
He knows that.
And Mitch McConnell knows that.
That happened.
Now that did not pass.
They continued on with it.
So then on February the 1st through the 3rd, they had three witnesses that came in.
They videotaped their testimony rather than having live witnesses.
And then on February the 8th, they had closing arguments with each side being given three hours.
Now can you imagine If they give closing arguments only three hours of some ancient windbag politician talking, how the Democrats are going to flip out about that?
This isn't fair!
You know, we need prime time and we need to be able to go on for a very long time.
Anyway, they had three hours to make their closing arguments from each side.
And the Republicans who had, again, the charges were, and it was a very clear charge, that Bill Clinton had lied under oath.
To cover up what he thought was going to be something that made him look bad.
You know, the fact that he had used his position of power in a Me Too way.
They didn't have the Me Too meme back then.
But it was what he did with Monica Lewinsky.
It was consensual.
She was an adult and nevertheless it was his power.
And we had had all of these Democrat women Just prior to that, coming after Clarence Thomas, trying to make sure that he didn't get on the Supreme Court because there was one accusation without any witnesses saying that he had made some remarks.
Anita Hill didn't even allege that he did anything to her, let alone violent sexual assault or rape, which were the allegations against President Clinton with other people.
And all of these women, including Anita Hill, came down on the side of President Clinton just a couple years later.
And so anyway, they said a failure to convict will make the statement that lying under oath, while unpleasant and to be avoided, is not all that serious.
Well, certainly it's not all that serious for the Clintons.
And it's not serious at all for James Clapper, who lied under oath, under congressional testimony, to all of America about dragnet surveillance.
And then he was exposed by the Ed Snowden leaks within just a month to be lying, and yet over five years, not a single Democrat, and to their shame, not a single Republican, They called him into question and tried to indict him for a clear case of perjury.
And so really, they did set a precedent there that not only Bill Clinton, but anybody in the deep state, anybody that they have a policy disagreement with, they will not enforce the idea of perjury, even if it is lying to Congress.
They don't care.
if it's James Clapper or if it's Bill Clinton.
Now, if you're Roger Stone, on the other hand, they will try to send you to jail
for an extended period of time.
And the failure to convict Bill Clinton also sent a very strong message to everybody
that all of their whining about what had happened, allegedly, to Anita Hill, what would later become
the biggest story of the last couple of years, I guess, A Me Too, for at least the Hollywood crowd.
That that didn't matter to them at all, if it was one of their people.
You see, Democrats and the deep state cannot commit crime.
The only true crime is to propose a policy that they don't like or to investigate them
for their crimes.
If you do either one of those, they will try to remove you from office.
Now, how did it wind up?
Well, we all know that Bill Clinton did not get removed from office.
On the two charges on perjury, they had only 45 people in the Senate vote guilty.
55 said not guilty.
Now that was a clear, clear jury nullification case.
They won't call it that because they're a bunch of lawyers and they don't want to use that term because they want to keep you in the dark.
All this talk from Chuck Schumer about how, oh they want to have this testimony late at night.
They want to keep you in the dark.
They want to keep you in the dark about jury nullification.
Even Alan Dershowitz, who is defending President Trump, I guess somebody went to him and said, you need a criminal lawyer.
You know, like Better Call Saul?
You need a criminal lawyer.
Yeah, I know.
No, you need a criminal lawyer.
Well, you know, President Trump did not commit any crime with these charges that they have brought against him.
It's not a crime to investigate corruption.
It's not a crime to delay foreign aid to Ukraine if you think that they're corrupt.
As a matter of fact, I think we ought to be a lot more stingy and have a lot more conditions on foreign aid.
As a matter of fact, I think we ought to stop it altogether.
But nevertheless, he did not commit any crime, but Alan Dershowitz has defended, if you remember, he's defended OJ Simpson, he defended Jeffrey Epstein.
And when we look at this particular case, there was absolutely no question that Bill Clinton committed perjury.
No question.
They had the dress, they had objective evidence.
And that's one of the reasons why Ken Starr couldn't look the other way, because Ken Starr also was a defender of Jeffrey Epstein.
And he defended the football team there at Baylor when he was president, when they violently sexually assaulted women.
He doesn't have a problem with that.
He'll do whatever men in power want him to do.
But the Senate there, by 55 to 45, essentially did jury nullification.
They looked at it, they said, yes, of course, we all know that he had an affair, we got the stain on the dress, and we have him on videotape lying under oath, objectively.
He committed perjury.
No question about it.
But we don't agree with the penalty.
We don't think that it's strong enough that he should be removed from office for whatever reason.
And that's called jury nullification.
When you know that the person objectively committed the crime, But you don't agree with the law, or you don't agree with the penalty, removing him from office.
That's called jury nullification.
And I wish we had somebody other than lawyers like Alan Dershowitz be honest with us, and just say, it's a case for jury nullification.
This, even if it were true, and it's not true, even if it were true, it would not be a crime, really, and it would not be serious enough to warrant the removal of office.
But it's not true.
I've said this from the very beginning.
I remember when the documents were released.
They were released live on the morning show that I host here, before the show every morning.
And I got handed the documents.
I said, look at this.
First of all, this complaint The guy says, well, I heard it from other people.
How do you have a complaint and the basis for an impeachment on hearsay evidence?
And who was it that told him this?
Oh, well, we can't talk about Eric CIA Romella or anybody else.
I mean, obvious to us what is going on with this, isn't it?
And the fact that President Trump, even before that, immediately declassified the transcript.
I said, look at this.
You've got even the president of Ukraine saying, yeah, you know, we've got a lot of corruption here in Ukraine and we want to drain the swamp.
He said that before President Trump said anything to him about that.
He brought up the corruption in Ukraine.
And like Rand Paul said, since when are we bound, as a president, bound to give money to foreign aid to a country even if we know it's got rampant corruption in that country?
Yeah, that's the amazing thing about this.
We have turned everything upside down.
Foreign aid must be given!
Regardless of how corrupt the government is, the President doesn't set foreign policy, the Senate does.
Well, none of that is true.
None of that is true.
Just like they said the President couldn't build a wall.
He couldn't use the military to defend our country.
But he can build as many military bases, as many airfields as he wants to in Syria.
He must defend the border between Turkey and Syria to defend the Kurds and so forth.
But don't do anything to defend Americans.
We're told that by the Democrats.
We're told that by the judicial tyrants.
Oh, by the way, we have to end judicial supremacy.
And we'll be talking more about the show trial when we come back.
Stay with us.
Welcome back.
I'm David Knight and we've got the impeachment trial in the Senate underway.
We're going to go back to that live feed.
Mitch McConnell is speaking.
Let's join what's going on in the Senate.
unidentified
The following documents, which were received by the Secretary of the Senate, will be submitted to the Senate for printing in the Senate Journal pursuant to the order of January 16, 2020.
The answer of Donald John Trump, President of the United States, to the articles of impeachment exhibited by the House of Representatives against him on January 16, 2020, received by the Secretary of the Senate on January 18, 2020. The trial brief filed by the House of Representatives
received by the Secretary of the Senate on January 18, 2020. The trial brief filed by
the President received by the Secretary of the Senate on January 20, 2020. The
replication of the House of Representatives received by the Secretary of the Senate on January 20, 2020.
And the rebuttal brief filed by the House of Representatives received by the Secretary
of the Senate on January 21, 2020. Without objection, the foregoing documents will be
printed in the Congressional record.
I note the presence in the Senate chamber of the managers on the part of the House of
Representatives and counsel for the President of the United States.
For the further information of all Senators, I'm about to send a resolution to the desk providing for an outline of the next steps In these proceedings, it will be debatable by parties for two hours, equally divided.
Senator Schumer will then send an amendment to the resolution to the desk.
Once that amendment has been offered and reported, we'll have a brief recess.
When we reconvene, Senator Schumer's amendment will be debatable by the parties for two hours.
Upon the use or yielding back of time, I intend to move to table Senator Schumer's amendment.
And so, Mr. Chief Justice, I send a resolution to the desk and ask that it be read.
unidentified
The clerk will read the resolution.
Senate Resolution 483 to provide for related procedures concerning the articles of impeachment against Donald John Trump, President of the United States.
Resolved that the House of Representatives shall file its record with the Secretary of the Senate Which will consist of those publicly available materials that have been submitted to or produced by the House Judiciary Committee, including transcripts of public hearings or markups and any materials printed by the House of Representatives or the House Judiciary Committee pursuant to House Resolution 660.
Materials in this record will be admitted into evidence subject to any hearsay evidentiary or other objections that the president may make after opening presentations are concluded.
All materials filed pursuant to this paragraph shall be printed and made available to all parties.
The president and the House of Representatives shall have until 9 a.m.
on Wednesday January 22nd 2020 to file any motions permitted under the rules of impeachment with the exception of motions to subpoena witnesses or documents or any other evidentiary motions.
Responses to any such motions shall be filed no later than 11 a.m.
on Wednesday, January 22nd, 2020.
All materials filed pursuant to this paragraph shall be filed with the Secretary and be printed and made available to all parties.
Arguments on such motions shall begin at 1 p.m.
on Wednesday, January 20.
Second, 2020, and each side may determine the number of persons to make its presentation, following which the Senate shall deliberate, if so ordered, under the impeachment rules, and vote on any such motions.
Following the disposition of such motions, or if no motions are made, then the House of Representatives shall make its presentation in support of the articles of impeachment for a period of time not to exceed 24 hours over up to three session days.
Following the House of Representatives presentation, the President shall make his presentation for a period not to exceed 24 hours over up to three session days.
Each side may determine the number of persons to make its presentation.
So it can be up to three days, just like it was with Clinton.
I mean, they can either have three 8-hour days or two 12-hour days.
unidentified
Not to exceed 16 hours.
Upon the conclusion of questioning by the Senate, there shall be four hours of argument by the parties, equally divided, followed by deliberation by the Senate, if so ordered under the impeachment rules, on the question of whether it shall be in order to consider and debate, under the impeachment rules, any motion to subpoena witnesses or documents.
The Senate, without any intervening action, motion, or amendment, shall then decide by the yeas and nays whether it shall be in order to consider and debate, under the impeachment rules, any motion to subpoena witnesses or documents.
Following the disposition of that question, other motions provided under the impeachment rules shall be in order.
If the Senate agrees to allow either the House of Representatives or the President to subpoena witnesses, the witnesses shall first be deposed and the Senate shall decide after deposition which witnesses shall testify pursuant to the impeachment rules.
No testimony shall be admissible in the Senate unless the parties have had an opportunity to depose such witnesses.
At the conclusion of deliberations by the Senate, the Senate shall vote on each article of impeachment.
The resolution is arguable by the parties for two hours equally divided.
Mr. Manager Schiff, are you a proponent or opponent of this motion?
Managers are in opposition to this resolution.
Thank you.
Mr. Cipollone, are you a proponent or opponent of the motion?
Mr. Chief Justice, we are a proponent of the motion.
Then Mr. Cipollone, your side may proceed first and we'll be able to reserve rebuttal time if you wish.
There is nothing different about the process that's been described here based on what they did with Bill Clinton in 1999.
But the Democrats are trying to pretend it's totally different.
Because, you know, they just can't help from lying.
That's what they are.
We'll be right back.
Stay with us.
Welcome back.
We're going to go back to the Senate trial here as they have now.
Adam Schiff is speaking.
I know you can't wait to get back to Adam Schiff.
But before we do, real quickly, I want to remind you of the sales that we have at InfoWars because Products that we sell at InfowarsStore.com are what fund this program, what fund my program in the morning, War Room in the afternoon, everything that we do.
All the reporters that we just had in Virginia at that rally to show you the size and how peaceful the crowd was there because we've got the mainstream media lying about it beforehand, lying about it still.
And so it's very important that you have an alternative free press that can give you the story.
And that's why they have worked so hard to shut us down.
But what we run off of are the products that we sell at Infowarsstore.com, and we try to make that a win-win situation for you.
We've got X2 Nascent Iodine has been sold out for weeks, but it's now back in stock and 40% off.
We also have our Triiodine, that's our Survival Shield X3 Nascent Iodine, that is also In stock, and it is 40% off.
Or you can get the two of them together, because they do work together.
You can get that 50% off and get free shipping.
As a matter of fact, take a look at the product reviews that are on InfoWarsStore.com.
For example, for a Survival Shield X2 Nascent Iodine, one person gave it five stars, said, I can't even believe what this combined with Supermail Vitality has done for me.
It's like getting blasted with those heart restarting paddles in the hospital.
Another person said, this stuff is powerful.
I had no idea how essential iodine was until I started taking this stuff.
I've had brain fog since I was a teen.
I take three drops of this every morning and the mental clarity I get is unreal, not to mention the energy.
You know, we have this type of thing happen all the time with us.
We'll give a sample of a product to a friend, whether it is Pollen block, or whether it is our all-natural knockout.
We had a friend who mentioned that her husband was having difficulty sleeping.
So he gave us, he said, try this.
He tried everything.
Just like I said, my wife has tried everything with pollen block.
Nothing, everything for her sinuses, nothing worked until she tried pollen block.
And this friend who had a lot of problems sleeping got a great night's sleep.
Three nights in a row!
Hadn't been able to sleep.
And so then he said, well, you know, I'm gonna stop it for a couple nights and see maybe just something else changed.
And again, he couldn't sleep.
So he came back and said, we got to buy that stuff.
Well, tell us how we get that.
That is something that you can do with your friends because this stuff really works.
And we call it Nutraceuticals because it's made from natural nutrients.
It's safe, it's effective.
And now we got many of these products that are deeply discounted.
We have also the Clean and Boost Yourself in 2020 special.
We have four products together.
We have Lung Cleanse Plus, we have Winter Sun, which is our vitamin D3, and we have Immune Gargle, Pollen Block, and MycoZX Plus.
You can get all of those together and you can save 50% off at InfoWarsStore.com.
As a matter of fact, we have a new special.
And this is, actually this is the one that I just read.
So this is the same X2 and X3 nascent i9.
I'll just mention that again.
I was told this is a new special, but I think it looks the same.
We have the two of them together, 50% off and free shipping.
Take a look at the products we have at InfoWarsStore.com.
Very vital for this operation.
If you don't buy these products, we will not be here.
That's the way to make this go away, is if you don't support these products.
And we really do need, at this time, your support.
We've had a lot of increase in terms of our viewership.
But right now, after Christmas, we've had a big drop-off in sales, so we really do need your support at InfoWarsTore.com, and we've got a lot of great products there at great prices to support your health.
All right, let's go back to the trial.
We have, again, Adam Schiff getting his moment in the spotlight.
And unless this trial is going to be different from every other impeachment trial, or any other kind of trial for that matter, you must allow the prosecution and defense, the House manager and the President's lawyers, to call relevant witnesses.
You must subpoena documents that the President has blocked, but which bear on his guilt or innocence.
You must impartially do justice as your oath requires.
So what does a fair trial look like in the context of impeachment?
The short answer is it looks like every other trial.
First, the resolution should allow the House managers to obtain documents that have been withheld.
First, not last.
Because the documents will inform the decision about which witnesses are most important to call.
This is a guy who wouldn't let us call witnesses during the impeachment process.
Next, the resolution should allow the House managers to call their witnesses.
And then the President should be allowed to do the same and any rebuttal witnesses.
And when the evidentiary report of the trial ends, the parties in the case, you deliberate and render a verdict.
If there's a dispute as to whether a particular witness is relevant or material to the charges brought, under the Senate rules, the Chief Justice would rule on the issue of materiality.
Why should this trial be different than any other trial?
His resolution requires the House to prove its case without witnesses, without documents, and only after it's done will such questions be entertained with no guarantee that any witnesses or any documents will be allowed even then.
President Trump was charged with zero felonies and two non-crime.
Besides the fact that the documents would inform the decision on which witnesses and help in their questioning, the harm is this.
You will not have any of the evidence the President continues to conceal throughout most or all of the trial.
And although the evidence against the President is already overwhelming, you may never know the full scope of the President's misconduct for those around him.
And neither will the American people.
The charges here involve the sacrifice of our national security at home and abroad, and a threat to the integrity of the next election.
But if, as a public already jaded by experience has come to suspect, This resolution is merely the first step of an effort orchestrated by the White House to rush the trial, hide the evidence, and render a fast verdict, or worse, a fast dismissal, to make the President go away as quickly as possible to cover up his misdeeds.
Then the American people will be deprived of a fair trial.
If the Senate allows the President to get away with such extensive obstruction, it will affect the Senate's power of subpoena and oversight just as much as the House.
The Senate's ability to conduct oversight will be beholden to the desires of this President and future Presidents.
Whether he or she decides they want to cooperate with the Senate investigation or another impeachment inquiry and trial.
I just can't listen to this guy crunch about a fair trial after what we saw happen in the House.
Are you kidding me?
How hypocritical can these people be?
How much can they lie?
Well, we'll find out.
We've got more of this coming up on the other side of the break.
Stay with us.
We'll be right back.
Welcome back.
The process in the Senate has now begun, and we have Adam Schiff.
Going over the things that he says that prove that President Trump is guilty.
But you know, Ted Cruz said this week is going to be the first time in a year that the President has had the opportunity to defend himself, to lay out the facts, to actually have witnesses and so forth, if he wants them.
Now he said the trial could last one to two weeks.
It lasted, as I pointed out with Bill Clinton, it lasted three weeks and that was with them calling a limited number of witnesses.
But Ted Cruz warns that if they open this up for more witnesses because you know they didn't actually have anybody that witnessed anything in the first trial and so they're now trying to extend this and bring in other things and of course President Trump has talked about having an opportunity to defend himself so if they do that it could extend to six to eight weeks or longer.
Ted Cruz.
He said the Democrats are also terrified about having a witness like Hunter Biden because they don't want you to hear evidence about actual corruption.
So with that in mind, let's go back and join the process that is happening in the Senate now as we have Adam Schiff still talking.
That clarifies Mr. Giuliani's activities on behalf of the president.
And corroborates Ambassador Sondland's testimony that everyone was in the loop.
As documents released under the Freedom of Information Act have documented the alarm at the Department of Defense while the President illegally withheld military support for Ukraine, an ally at war with Russia, without explanation.
As a senior Office of Management and Budget official, Michael Duffy instructed Defense Department officials on July 25th 90 minutes after President Trump spoke by phone with President Zelensky, the Defense Department should pause all obligation of Ukraine military assistance under its purview.
Although the evidence is already more than sufficient to convict, there is simply no rational basis for the Senate to deprive itself of all relevant information in making such a hugely consequential judgment.
He should not be permitted to claim that the facts uncovered by the House are wrong, while also concealing mountains of evidence that bear precisely on those facts.
If this body seeks impartial justice, it should ensure that subpoenas are issued and that they are issued now, before the Senate begins extended proceedings based on a record that every person in this room and every American watching at home knows does not include documents and witness testimony.
It should, because the President would not allow it to be so.
Complying with these subpoenas would not impose a burden.
The subpoenas cover narrowly tailored and targeted documents and witnesses that the President has concealed.
...who has publicly offered to testify to senior officials implementing integral to implementing the President's freeze on Ukraine's military aid also have very relevant testimony.
Why not hear it?
Robert Blair, who serves as Mulvaney's senior advisor, Michael Duffy, a senior official at OMB, and other witnesses with direct knowledge that we reserve the right to call later, but these witnesses with whom we wish to begin the trial.
Last month, President Trump made clear that he supported having senior officials testify before the Senate during his trial, declaring that he would love to have Secretary Pompeo, Mr. Mulvaney, now former Secretary Perry, and quote, many other people testify in the Senate trial.
The bluster of wanting these witnesses to testify is over.
Notwithstanding the fact that he has never asserted a claim of privilege during the course of the House impeachment proceedings, he threatens to invoke one now in a last-ditch effort to keep the rest of the truth from coming out.
The President sends his lawyers here to breathlessly claim that these witnesses or others cannot possibly testify because it involves national security.
Never mind that it was the President's actions in withholding military aid from an ally at war that threatened our national security in the first place.
But you claim that it was national security that we not hear the name Eric Chiramela, Eric CIA Ramela.
We couldn't know his name, even though he hadn't witnessed anything, even though he was the one who filed the complaint based on hearsay evidence that began this whole process.
In which his top diplomat in Ukraine says to two other appointees of the president, as I said on the phone, I think it's crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign.
The administration refuses to turn over that document and so many more.
We only know about its existence.
We have only seen its contents because it was turned over by a cooperating witness.
This is what the President would hide from you and from the American people.
In the name of national security, he would hide graphic evidence of his dangerous misconduct.
The only question is, and it is the question raised by this resolution, will you let him?
Last year, President Trump said that Article 2 of the Constitution will allow him to do anything he wanted.
And evidently believing that Article 2 empowered him to denigrate and defy a co-equal branch of government, he also declared that he will fight all subpoenas.
True to his pledge to obstruct Congress, When President Trump faced an impeachment inquiry... Clearly that's out of context because unfortunately the president has bowed to the myth of judicial supremacy far too often, as all these presidents, Democrat and Republican, have.
The same counsel that stood before you a moment ago to defend the president's misconduct.
He then affirmed it again at a rally on October 10.
Following President Trump's categorical order, we never received key documents and communications.
It is important to note in refusing to respond to Congress, the President did not make any, any formal claim of privilege ever.
Instead, Mr. Cipollone's letter stated, in effect, that the President would withhold all evidence in the Executive Branch unless the House surrendered to demands that would effectively place President Trump in charge of the inquiry into his own misconduct.
Needless to say, that was a non-starter and designed to be so.
The President was determined to obstruct Congress no matter what we did.
And his conduct since, his attacks on the impeachment inquiry, his attacks on witnesses, Have affirmed that the president never had any intention to cooperate under any circumstance.
Amazing that this is the guy who tells us that it's going to violate national security to expose Eric C.I.A.
Romella.
Yes, it would violate what they're trying to do.
Show where this fiction is coming from.
We'll be right back.
Stay with us.
Welcome back.
We are covering the Dog and Pony Show at the Senate Live.
Adam Schiff is the dog who is speaking right now.
We had Chuck Schumer earlier.
He went on record saying, this isn't a trial.
Well, it's true.
You know, it wasn't a trial in the House.
They didn't allow the Republicans to call any witnesses.
They didn't have any witnesses that actually witnessed or heard anything.
So yeah, it wasn't really a trial.
Chuck Schumer said, this isn't a trial.
It's a cover-up.
And that's true also, but not in the way that he means it.
It is a cover-up of the real corruption.
That happened with the Bidens, with Hunter and Joe, and that's what they don't want you to see.
Desperately don't want you to see.
And so as they don't have any real basis for this impeachment, they had no actual facts or actual witnesses, they're now hoping that they can extend this while still keeping anybody from seeing anything about the corruption of the Bidens in Ukraine.
Or why that should be investigated.
They cannot commit crimes.
The only crime is to investigate their crimes.
And so let's go back to Adam Schiff as he is speaking in the Senate.
Another when the president is the cause of his own complaint.
When the president withholds witnesses and documents and then attempts to rely on his own non-compliance to justify further concealment.
President Trump made it crystal clear we would never see a single document or a single witness when he declared, as we just watched, that he would fight all subpoenas.
As a matter of history and precedent, it would be wrong to assert that the Senate is unable to obtain and review new evidence during a Senate trial, regardless of why evidence was not produced in the House.
You can and should insist I'm receiving all the evidence so you can render impartial justice and can earn the confidence of the public in the Senate's willingness to hold a fair trial.
Under the Constitution, the Senate does not just vote on impeachments.
It does not just debate them.
Instead, it is commanded by the Constitution to try all cases of impeachment.
If the founders intended for the House to try the matter and the Senate to consider an appeal based on the cold record from the other chamber, they would have said so.
But they did not.
Instead, they gave us the power to charge and you the power to try all impeachments.
The framers chose their language and the structure for a reason.
As Alexander Hamilton said, the Senate is given awful discretion in matters of impeachment.
The Constitution not speaks to senators in their judicial character as a court for the trial of impeachments.
It requires them to aim at real demonstrations of innocence or guilt, and it requires them to do so by holding a trial.
The Senate has repeatedly subpoenaed and received new documents, often many of them while adjudicating cases of impeachment.
Moreover, the Senate has heard witness testimony in every one of the 15 Senate trials, full Senate trials in the history of this Republic, including those for Presidents Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton.
Indeed, in President Andrew Johnson's Senate impeachment trial, the House managers were permitted to begin presenting documentary evidence to the Senate on the very first day of the trial.
The House managers' initial presentation of documents in President Johnson's case carried on for the first two days of trial, immediately after which witnesses were called to appear in the Senate.
This has been the standard practice in prior impeachment trials.
Indeed, In most trials this body has heard from many witnesses.
I'll just break this down for you from James Howard Kunstler.
He summed this up perfectly.
He said the tactic here is lawfare.
To provoke a legal pissing match over executive privilege, which they hope to turn into a campaign ploy in the months ahead.
That Trump concealed the truth.
It says, this time the Senate rules will give them a chance to run option plays from the Brett Kavanaugh playbook, flooding the end zone with obvious geeks and bottom feeders of the like of Michael Avenatti.
We'll be right back.
Stay with us.
All right, welcome back.
We'll be keeping tabs on the Senate show here, and that's exactly what it is.
But we have some breaking news that came out from Project Veritas this morning.
We have yet another Bernie Field organizer.
This guy is out of South Carolina.
I think the other guy was, where was it, Minnesota or something that the other guy was?
I had a couple of clips from him.
But they're on the same page even though they're in different areas of the country because, again, this shows that these radical Marxists who support The radical Marxist Bernie Sanders.
Remember, Bernie Sanders at the very tail end of the Soviet Union as it was about to collapse.
He wanted to go there for his honeymoon.
And you know, drink beer with his comrades.
And so this is what his comrades here in the United States say.
Another individual, this is part three.
And again, he wants a violent revolution.
See, he's, not only is he like Bernie Sanders, he's like Ralph Northam and the Virginia Democrats, and Democrats across the country.
They want a violent revolution.
And they can either do it with the grassroots people, I'm not that concerned about that happening, as I am a violent revolution being started by the people like Governor Coon Man in Virginia.
But this is what he had to say on tape.
Martin Vice Gerber.
Vice Gerber!
Leave it to the Soviets to make the most badass effing most effective gun in the world, the AK-47, destroyer of imperialism and colonization.
That's why I want to get it tattooed on me.
He goes on to say, I'll straight up get armed.
I want to learn how to shoot and go train.
Yeah, this guy's obviously never touched a gun either.
I'm ready for an effing revolution.
I'll tell you, guillotine the rich.
As I pointed out before, you know, you've got to be careful when you start these socialist revolutions, because Robespierre, who was guillotining everybody, eventually got his head in the guillotine as well.
You know, what goes around, comes around.
You can't stop these violent revolutions once you start them, Martin.
Let's build them, the billionaires, let's force them rather, to build roads Rebuild our roads.
Rebuild our dams.
Rebuild our bridges.
Let's force them.
What else?
What will help is when we send all the Republicans to re-education camps.
So, do we just cease?
Do we just dissolve the Senate?
House of Representatives?
The Judicial Branch?
Have something Bernie Sanders and the Cabinet of the People make all decisions for the climate?
I mean, I'm serious.
Yeah, I know.
And I've reported on this for years, how people like Prince Charles and John Schellenhuber, who is the Chief Climate Advisor for the Pope, with their Earth League, they have proposed a Planetary Council and a worldwide government that would, you know, they want a planetary I don't know.
I mean, I'm just thinking of all of the babushka memes that we had when, you know, the beautiful women in Russia could not have access to reasonable clothes.
I mean, you know, for women's rights, the Soviet Union, I think, the most progressive
place to date in the world.
I don't know.
I mean, I'm just thinking of all of the babushka memes that we had when, you know, the beautiful
women in Russia could not have access to reasonable clothes.
You know, they're walking around in Paddington bear boots and a babushka cap over their heads.
It's like, I don't know, this is evidently, they compare favorably to the Antifa Bernie Sanders supporters that this guy hangs out with, the way that they were dressed.
He reveals that his father is a Belgian Marxist who participated in the May 1968 civil unrest in Paris.
And that his mother is left as well, but she can't make her views known because she works for WBUR in Boston.
That's an NPR station.
Yeah, we kind of knew that, didn't we?
Didn't we know that NPR was there?
So you can find this article and links to that at InfoWars.
I'll straight up get armed, he said.
Second, Bernie Staffer threatens violence against Trump supporters.
What Bernie did, he said, was inspire people.
He created a movement that started to flood Washington.
Democratic Socialists are running all over.
There are so many Democratic Socialists running in 2020.
And, you know, when we look at this, think about that other poster child of the Democrat Socialist, AOC, who has endorsed Bernie herself.
I mean, you know, she's another one of these leftist Marxists, like this guy, who loves the Soviet Union, who loves authoritarianism.
You know, the Puerto Rican bartender came out and said that the Democrat Party is a center conservative party.
We don't have a leftist party in this country.
You see, her idea of a leftist party, which is what she wants, is full-on totalitarianism.
And as I point out, I'll point out again, complete centralized government and power, without any restrictions.
And, number two, they will control and manage every detail of your life.
She had this to say, we don't have a left party in the U.S.
The Democrat Party is not a left party!
The Democrat Party is a center, or a center conservative party.
This tells you how far occasional cortex is.
You know, her left side of her brain, or if she has a brain, I don't know.
We can't even get a floor vote on Medicare for All, so that's it.
We can't even get a floor vote on it.
So that shows that the Democrats are not real leftists, he says.
So this is not a left party.
There are left members inside the Democrat Party that are trying to make that shift happen.
Yeah, that's right.
And so speaking of shifts, let's go back to the liar, Adam Schiff.
He has still got the floor and they want more time to do this.
Because again, they want to stretch this out For the entire campaign.
That is the point.
They cannot win on these issues like Medicare for All.
And by that, they mean all.
All.
Everybody from every other country is going to come here.
And get healthcare at your expense and education at your expense.
They'll probably get it if the Democrats are handing out the free stuff.
They will get it to a greater extent than you will because you're just an ugly American.
The need to subpoena documents and testimony now has only increased due to the President's obstruction for several reasons.
His obstruction has made him uniquely and personally responsible for the absences of the witnesses before the House, having ordered them not to appear.
He may not be heard to complain now that they followed his orders and refused to testify.
To do otherwise only rewards the President's obstruction and encourages further, future Presidents to defy lawful process in impeachment investigations.
Second, if the President wishes to contest the facts, And his answer and trial brief indicates that he will try.
He must not continue to deny the Senate access to the relevant witnesses and documents that shed light on the very factual matters he wishes to challenge.
The Senate trial is not analogous to an appeal where the parties must argue the facts on the basis of the record below.
Yeah, you didn't produce any facts, you didn't produce any witnesses, so now they want to try to do that.
Let's give us some more time, we want more air time.
And again, he is being so repetitive.
Let me go to what some other people have said, because I think as we talk about this fight over the rules, and that's what we're looking at right now.
A fight over how this is going to be conducted.
We had Senator Lisa Murkowski, she's one of the Republicans that they believe that they can pull off to their side, told The Hill that she has received briefing materials from former senators who participated in the 99 Clinton trial, arguing that Roberts should not be able to break a tie.
He said, it's my understanding that if it's a tie, it fails.
Now, let's talk about what the rules say.
Because, remember, these people don't read the Constitution that gives them their authority.
And that's why it's important to look at the Constitution.
I know they don't believe any aspect of it is in effect.
And so, they're just going to make this stuff up as they go along.
Look, if you're going to remove somebody from office during this Senate trial after impeachment, you need two-thirds of a vote, which they did not achieve with Bill Clinton or with Andrew Johnson.
So you need 67 senators to join in that.
However, when you're talking about these types of rules, this is a straight-up vote.
And so, you know, if you have 51 votes, you win.
Now, how do they break ties in the Senate if you're tied 50-50?
Well, according to the established rules, not the arbitrary ones that they're going to create now, you bring in the Vice President.
Why is nobody saying that?
You got Dianne Feinstein arguing that Roberts should be breaking the tie.
No, you don't bring in the Chief Justice, you bring in the Vice President, the President of the Senate, Pro Tem.
You know, I think one of the most egregious things that has been proposed for a long time, and we've had a lot of egregious proposals to try to take people's guns, I think the red flag law is one of the worst ideas we've ever seen.
You know, take the gun, do the due process later, if you ever get around to it.
But what we saw yesterday, with the peaceful rally, and how you had the violence and the revolution that the Democrats hoped to see happen, we just saw that again, yet by another Bernie Sanders supporter.
But I think the real danger is what we're seeing from the Harvard and Yale suits.
Like we had Mark Levine, who was a Democrat legislator, say, yeah, we've got the military to come after you.
And we've had other Democrats say, well, send in the National Guard or whatever.
I mean, they want a revolution.
And they think that this is their key to getting it.
But it's also the media, as their handmaids, essentially doing a red flag.
To 50,000 people.
They have now been slandered and vilified and red flagged by the Democrats.
I would even say by the FBI.
Guilt by association, you know, just like they did with the Hutteri militia.
The FBI came after them.
They were eventually exonerated.
The FBI still has them on their list of bad boys.
They should rename themselves the Richard Jewell militia.
But yeah, the FBI, the media, the Democrats will vilify everybody.
We got a great compilation of what the media tried to do to people in Virginia with a Second Amendment rally by Darren McBreen.
I want to play that for you now.
Let's go to video clip number two.
unidentified
Here we go.
Three, two, one.
We're here at the Virginia State Capitol in Richmond where thousands of protesters have gathered to protest proposed legislation limiting gun rights.
Richmond, Virginia is on high alert this morning before a gun rights rally that local authorities fear could turn violent.
Virginia's governor has declared a state of emergency.
We're seeing threats of armed confrontation and assault on our Capitol.
unidentified
Virginia Democrats' plans to enact a sweeping series of gun measures have already fired a rebellion in dozens of counties.
Monday's rally is related to new gun reforms proposed in Virginia's legislature, now controlled by Democrats for the first time in more than two decades.
Now, armed gun rights supporters from across the country, including some from the far right, are planning to sweep into Richmond on Martin Luther King Day.
The arrest of three alleged white supremacists is raising alarms ahead of a gun rights rally in Richmond, Virginia.
The arrest of the three men, Michelle, is really feeding this narrative that there could be violence here on Monday.
In fact, investigators say the three men were targeting the event as a way of spreading their hate-filled ideology.
They claim white supremacists are crawling the nation, that all gun owners are racist, and that people are planning to kill law enforcement in Virginia.
When conservatives and patriots have never even acted like that at a gun rally before.
unidentified
Are you a white supremacist?
Yeah.
Am I a western?
I was told there'd be white supremacists.
This ain't me, I got dreads!
Oh wow, you really are black-faced.
I do not support in any way shape or form Governor Northam's and the Democrats' gun control.
What I also don't support is the fact that every news piece you've seen on this this weekend, they've always brought up the issue of race.
A neo-Nazi group that advocates violence against minorities while rallying around slogans like save your race.
Neo-Nazis.
White supremacist groups.
White supremacists.
A white supremacist group.
White supremacist group.
A white nationalist group.
White supremacist groups and militias may gather in the former Confederate capital today, where Democrats are proposing new gun laws.
They want to paint Trump supporters as neo-Nazis and white supremacists.
As though it's nothing but white rednecks and hillbillies out here who care for the Second Amendment.
When actually, black Americans, Asian Americans, Hispanic Americans, Americans in general care about the Second Amendment.
These white politicians in leftist run cities want to take away black women's rights to protect themselves.
You know the media is going to lie about what happened out here today.
But you guys are all out here to tell the truth.
And you guys are out here filming and you're going to tell your friends and family the truth about what happened in Virginia today.
Hundreds of thousands of patriots showed up to stand up for their God-given rights and to let the 12th Governor of Virginia know, you will not take away our firearms and you will not silence us!
President Trump weighing in.
Your Second Amendment is under very serious attack in the great Commonwealth of Virginia.
Yeah, I love those clips that Darren put together, especially that last one that he had there of the black man who has a poster of Governor Coonman dressed up as a black person in blackface, right, with his Ku Klux Klan friend, and saying, White supremacists.
We want to have our right to self-defense and we have hashtag Black Guns Matter saying these people are doing this because they want to create chaos.
Yes, they do want to have a civil war.
Melt it down.
You heard them saying right here in the former capital of the Confederacy.
Tucker Carlson talked about this last night on Fox about how, hey, nobody died.
chin tuggers on the tube. Nothing especially dramatic happened there today.
Nothing is on fire, nobody died, a group of Americans rallied to defend their
constitutional rights and did not start a war in the process.
The national media are reeling in confusion tonight. Once again it turns
out they know next to nothing about the country they supposedly cover.
In last fall's elections as you may remember, Virginia turned from
red to blue.
Democrats in the state, newly ascended, responded to the demands of donors in New York and L.A.
and immediately set about trying to undo hundreds of years of precedent on gun laws and effectively nullify the Second Amendment in Virginia.
Well, this morning, thousands of Virginians marched peacefully at the state capitol to protest this, this attack on their rights.
Under some circumstances, a demonstration to protect the Constitution would be considered virtuous.
Civil disobedience, they often tell us.
It's what democracy is supposed to look like.
Needless to say, they don't mean it.
Instead of congratulating the protesters, the left suggested they were engaged in some form of terrorism.
Prospect of gun control in Virginia draws threats.
Promise of armed protest, read the ominous warning in the Washington Post.
Richmond braces for white supremacist militias at gun rally, said Axios.
According to a website called Raw Story, quote, authorities fear Richmond gun rally could be the next Charlottesville.
Well, on television, the chirpy morning shows, being wholly dependent on left-wing websites to tell them what to think, obediently parroted the party line.
Watch this.
unidentified
State of emergency.
Richmond, Virginia on high alert this morning bracing for violence as thousands descend for a gun rights rally.
Richmond, Virginia is on high alert this morning before a gun rights rally that local authorities fear could turn violent.
Police in Virginia bracing for a massive crowd at a gun rights rally today amid fears it will attract white supremacists and turn violent.
This morning what officials are doing to avoid another Charlottesville.
They thought they'd intimidated us, but we were really sleeping.
Now their attempts to bully us and shut us down have only angered us.
And now we are awake and we are fighting back with the truth of the First Amendment in defiance of the Soros, Bloomberg, But election fraud is how the Democrats take you over.
You must criminally investigate Democrats.
Democrats are a fraudulent criminal group that know they are a criminal fraud.
And I'll just be quite frank with you, the only way to deal with them is to route them out politically.
Alright, we've been hearing some excerpts from what happened yesterday in Virginia, so that you know what happened there.
And again, we're able to do that because of your support.
The products that we sell at InfoWarsStore.com support this program, my program in the morning, War Room in the afternoon, and of course, allows us to go to these types of events and cover them extensively.
We've got a lot of crew, a lot of different reporters on the ground covering what's happening there, so you are not reliant on the mainstream media's lies.
That's exactly what they wanted to have happen.
That's why they pushed us off of social media, but again, you can find that report at Band.Video.
If you want to make sure they don't purge us and purge this independent news organization off of the internet, go directly to Band.Video.
You don't have to find your news at Facebook and Twitter and YouTube anymore.
You can go directly to the websites.
Remember when everybody used to do that?
Yeah, it was kind of an interesting thing, wasn't it?
That they created social media, heavily funded by DARPA, so they could get people into, as Matt Drudge pointed out, it is a walled community.
You know, don't go to the Dredge Report, don't go to InfoWars, don't go to Ban.Video.
Go directly to Mark Zuckerberg's Carefully Controlled and Curated.
Website or YouTube controlled by Google.
Yeah, go there and then they will purge.
They used us to help to build their platforms.
Matter of fact, I remember when Zuckerberg and Facebook came to Alex and begged him to do live streaming on Facebook.
He was one of about two or three people at the beginning.
So they used us to help to build their platform and then purged us off of it.
So if you want to keep us in business and keep free speech going, take a look at the
products that we have at InfowarsStore.com.
We've got some great specials right now.
We have big discounts off of storable food.
We have up to 50% off of Infowars Select Storable Food.
It is storable for up to 25 years.
The best packaging you're going to find anywhere.
We have the food is non-GMO, made in America, and you can reseal it after you open it up.
We also have some great discounts off of the Alexa Pure Gravity Feed Water Filter, as well as the Alexa Pure Breeze, an air filter for your home.
And remember, especially this time of year, where many places it's very cold, you lock your home up, shut it down to try to make sure you don't have any cold air getting in.
Well, that means that you're going to have a lot of concentration of things that are being outgassed, whether it's radon gas in your house or whether it's stuff coming out of your carpet or your furniture or even just cooking.
So you want to make sure that you keep your air clean as well as your water clean and nobody is going to do that for you.
But you can get a big discount right now up to 30% off of both of those at Infowarsstore.com.
All right, let's go back to the Senate briefly here.
We've played you Adam Schiff and you've heard his lies going on for quite some time.
Let's go to the President's, one of his legal staff now, Cipollone.
And I said, judge my case is overwhelming, but I'm not ready to go yet.
I need more evidence before I can make my case.
I would get thrown out in two seconds.
And that's exactly what should happen here.
That's exactly what should happen here.
It's too much to listen to almost.
The hypocrisy of the whole thing.
And what are the stakes?
What are the stakes?
There's an election in almost nine months.
Months from now, there's going to be an election.
Senators in this body the last time had very wise words.
They echoed the words of our founders.
A partisan impeachment is like stealing an election.
And that's exactly what we have.
We have... Talk about the Framers' worst nightmare.
It's a partisan impeachment that they've delivered to your doorstep.
In an election year.
Some of you are upset because you should be in Iowa right now.
But instead we're here.
And they're not ready to go.
And it's outrageous.
It's outrageous.
And the American people won't stand for it, I'll tell you that right now.
They're not here to steal one election, they're here to steal two elections.
It's buried in the small print of their ridiculous articles of impeachment.
They want to remove President Trump from the ballot.
They won't tell you that.
They don't have the guts to say it directly.
But that's exactly what they're here to do.
They're asking the Senate To attack one of the most sacred rights we have as Americans.
The right to choose our president.
In an election year.
It's never been done before.
It shouldn't be done before.
Now, the reason it's never been done is because no one ever thought That it would be a good idea for our country, for our children, for our grandchildren, to try to remove a president from a ballot.
To deny the American people the right to vote based on a fraudulent investigation conducted in secret with no rights.
Well, I could go on and on.
But my point is very simple.
It's long past time that we start this so we can end this ridiculous charade and go have an election.
He made a great point about the fact that if he was as a trial lawyer, if he went to the judge and said, hey, I want to, I need more time because I don't have a case yet, thrown out.
Or if he went to him and said, hey, you know, we didn't have any witnesses.
That saw anything, and we shut down the witnesses who did see things, because, you know, it would prove that he was innocent.
They should be shut out as well.
But they're not.
They're not.
I want to talk now briefly, before we go to break, a little bit, maybe a little bit on the other side of the break, about Hillary Clinton.
You know, Hulu, the people who produced Handmaid's Tale, This anthem of the radical feminists.
They're now producing Hillary.
Hillary.
A four-part series.
In it, she opens up about Monica Lewinsky, about her marriage.
About Bernie Sanders.
Nobody wants to work with him.
Is that what she?
Oh, that was about Bernie, not about Bill.
Okay.
Anyway, I think it's very interesting what she has to say and even what Hollywood Reporter has to say about this.
When we come back, we'll talk about that and what it really tells us about HRC.
I said I would talk about HRC coming after Bernie.
We have the royal family as we have the two costume characters for the United Kingdom trying to move to Disney's Magic Kingdom and do some work for them.
They've lost their title of HRH.
Her Royal Highness, His Royal Highness, or whatever.
They're still Duke and Duchess of suck-up, but they've lost the HRH.
But you know, Hillary will always be her Royal Clinton.
And part of the royalty of the Democrat Party.
No doubt about it.
And she has now thrown her weight against Bernie Sanders for a second time.
You know, she does carry a grudge, doesn't she?
I have a hunch that what we're seeing here with the impeachment situation could be going back to Hillary Clinton and her friends in the DNC who want to make sure that they erase that smudge On Bill Clinton and his legacy of having been the only president to be impeached besides Andrew Johnson in modern times.
So now they want to do the same thing to President Trump to project their moral failings, their other failings on other people.
I mean, look at that dirty dossier, the P dossier.
I said from the very beginning, this sounds like something that only the Clintons and the people around them could fantasize about.
And that's exactly what it was.
It was a filthy fiction that would only occur to the likes of Bill Clinton and Jeffrey Epstein and Hillary Clinton.
And the Wieners around them.
Talking about Anthony Wiener.
Hillary Clinton is now doing a four-part series for Hulu.
They're going to call it Hillary.
And again, she's going to tell us what she thinks, as if we cared, about Monica Lewinsky, about her marriage, about Bernie Sanders, and so forth.
And the Hollywood Reporter, as they're talking about this, they say that it is largely a flattering portrayal, do you think?
Do you think that Hulu would do an unflattering portrayal of Hillary Clinton?
Do you think they would do an honest portrayal of Hillary Clinton?
I mean, you know, we go back and again, look at the Handmaid's Tale.
And look at how they use that to vilify Christians.
When, if they really wanted to complain about the situation of women, they wouldn't have to make up some kind of a phony Christian government.
We've had a merger of religion and government.
Remember, it was Christians who gave us the First Amendment.
About freedom of free expression of religion.
But they could just go to, I don't know, Saudi Arabia or some other place that operates under Sharia law and they could show us instead of the women having to wear a particular uniform which does not cover their face by the way.
They could show us a society where women are not allowed to vote or to drive cars.
They've got to go drive around in bumper cars.
Remember that?
I've talked about that many times.
They have a place where once a month these women and their burkas can go and they only have women there so they can take off their burkas for a little while.
They can ride around in bumper cars.
Now that's all being changed by the chief head chopper there right now, Mohammed bin Salman, but that is the society that is far worse than anything.
That Margaret Atwood, or Hulu, could imagine in Handmaid's Tale.
And it's real, but they don't want to talk about that.
They don't even want to do a documentary about that.
Instead, they're going to do a fictional account to attack Christians, and then they're going to do a documentary about Hillary.
A flattering portrayal, writes Hollywood Reporter, which is not political.
And if they are, they're going to be leftists, because they're Hollywood.
It's said at one point, the producer-director Bernstein Uh, said that she managed to track down Newt Gingrich by cell phone.
And he told her that he would, quote, rather stick needles in his eyes than do the interview.
Yeah, he does have a way of getting right to the point.
And in this documentary about Hillary Clinton, as she dishes on Lewinsky and Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump, none of them were contacted.
you know, to do this.
But then you have Hulu's head of documentary saying, "This is not an agenda piece.
We don't have an agenda.
It's just a flattering portrayal of Hillary Clinton."
She talked to the Hill, and she gave a little bit of a preview about what is in
President Trump ended your career, but nobody can end you constantly being on television.
It's all just baloney.
I feel so bad that people got sucked into it, she says, about other things, not about herself.
You know, she was in the Senate for years.
She got nothing done.
As a matter of fact, when she tried to get something done as an unelected first lady, she tried to totally take over healthcare, even more radical than Obamacare.
And they wouldn't have been able to get Obamacare.
They could have probably gotten that done earlier.
The Democrats, if they, you know, there's that gradual encroachment, gradually taking our freedoms.
But she decided that she would go for everything all at once.
Because why?
She is a totalitarian.
There should be no restrictions on the centralization of power and on their control of every detail of our life.
And there is no better way to describe Hillary Clinton's ideas on health care other than a totalitarian scheme.
Totally centralized in every detail.
Worse even than ObamaCare.
And she didn't get it done, by the way.
That was her signature thing.
Didn't get it done.
And so she went on to say, as this person asked her about this, she said, you said in this documentary, talking about Sanders, nobody likes him, nobody wants to work with him, he got nothing done, does that assessment still hold?
She said, yes, it does.
And then she later refused to confirm whether she would endorse or campaign for Sanders should he win the Democratic nomination this year.
Oh, well, gee, I guess that's an open question then, right?
I'm not going to go there yet.
Oh, see, we don't know after what she just said.
We're still in a very rigorous primary season.
And she said, I will say, however, that it's not only him that I don't like.
It's the culture around him.
It's his prominent supporters.
It's his online Bernie bros and their relentless attacks on lots of his competitors, particularly the women.
The women.
Again, going back to this narrative being sold by CNN and Elizabeth Warren, as you saw in the debates.
The moderator, if you want to call her moderator, there's nothing moderate about these people.
Saying, you know, did you beat this?
Did you beat this woman, Elizabeth Warren?
And then he says, no, I didn't do any of that, and then goes to Elizabeth Warren.
So when he beat you, you know, what did you have to say about this?
Now, Chris Silla said that the lack of support, or the, I should say, Hillary hating, that's the headline, Hillary hating on Bernie is actually really good news for him.
And Crisillo said this, he said, guess who?
For lots and lots of Sanders supporters and even other Democrats who don't support him, guess who epitomizes the elite establishment?
Well, that would be the Clintons!
And Hillary Clinton's friendliness with Wall Street and well-heeled donors always irked Sanders and his backers during the 2016 campaign.
Although, with very few exceptions, he rarely attacked her over it.
For Clinton to attack Sanders as friendless and ineffective then, and to do so with the Iowa caucuses just 13 days away, affirms to Bernie's backers that everything he's been running against within the Democratic Party is still out there and still doesn't like him.
And it also shows what she is really about, the elitism.
You know, going back to December, this last December, December the 5th, she went on with Howard Stern and was trashing Bernie at that time.
It's not about Elizabeth Warren and this fake narrative that's been put out there by CNN.
She hated Bernie back at the beginning of December when she was pushing a book that she was trying to hawk with Chelsea.
And so she was asked by Howard Stern whether she hated Sanders for the long primary campaign that he ran against her.
I don't hate anybody!
See, I just read that to you.
She absolutely has no hatred for him.
Right?
She says, nobody likes him, nobody wants to work with him, he got nothing.
I don't hate him.
I love him.
He's a great guy.
She said, he could have hurt me.
He could have endorsed me, but he hurt me.
And there's no doubt about it.
She's the victim.
The victim.
Uh, and she said it was a real slow rollout of an endorsement of her candidacy.
You know, we talk about the elitists.
You know, she has the audacity after what she did in terms of buying the DNC and using the superdelegates, just call them the elitist delegates, to shut Bernie out, even when he was winning the popular vote in many areas.
She has the audacity to talk about the electoral college and her winning the popular vote.
She wouldn't even be the nominee if she hadn't used the elitists.
21st edition, got a whole host of new stories coming up.
Now, STDs in America are obviously through the roof.
I think the CDC stats, most recent stats that we saw from 2013 to 2017, showed cases of sexually transmitted diseases increasing by a whopping 31% in terms of chlamydia, gonorrhea and syphilis.
And what's the reaction to that?
Well, it's for doctors to get up on TikTok, which is an app basically aimed at pre-teen kids and teenagers, you know, age 13, 14, 15, and to dance and celebrate about the fact that now 12-year-old kids can get STD screenings and indeed STD treatments without their parents' knowledge.
And apparently, That's a really progressive good thing, and it's not going to be abused by paedophiles at all!
Now this is interesting, and I'm going to flesh it out after the next break.
But the interesting thing to contrast this with, as I do in this article, which is up on Summit News,
left to celebrate 12 year old kids getting STD screenings without their parents' knowledge,
is to contrast it with what happened to another nurse who got up on TikTok last week
and was subsequently the victim of a backlash and a BuzzFeed hit piece.
She got up on TikTok and If you don't know TikTok, it's basically 30 second videos of people dancing and sometimes they have messages on the screen.
They do memes, they do jokes, and one of these memes was a nurse with a million followers called Nurse Holly getting up on TikTok and basically encouraging children and teenagers to avoid STDs by, God forbid, I know this is a novel concept, not having sex when they're children.
She was subject to a mob outrage backlash.
The Witchfinder generals of Twitter absolutely ruined her.
And in fact, one of these tweets featuring her video, which again encouraged children not to have sex, that's bad, can't do that, not progressive, got 130,000 likes.
She had to delete the video.
It was basically cancelled.
So after the break, we're going to get into what?
Doctors on the other side of the equation are telling children and how it's being celebrated by the left and how that ties into what's being shown on Netflix.
This is out of national file.
Netflix show features 10 year old trans kid as a top in sexual terms.
Yes, indeed.
We do live in hell, ladies and gentlemen.
Meanwhile, a drag queen, it takes an actual drag queen to tell liberal parents that no, your kids should not be around sex performers.
We're going to get into that video.
unidentified
We're going to play the full clip of that as well.
Meanwhile in Europe, a French intellectual has been sentenced to two months suspended prison sentence for calling mass immigration an invasion.
We're going to get into that.
Sweden has lost control after bombing spike 60% in 2019, says MP.
He's lucky that he can say it.
Maybe if he was in France, he would be put in prison, or at least on a suspended sentence.
We're also going to get into The fallout from last week's appearance on Question Time of an actor who dared question the sanctity of white privilege and how that's now being used as a weapon, as a tool to further censor and de-platform yours truly and others on YouTube.
We're also going to get into, of course, the fallout from yesterday's Virginia pro-gun rally where absolutely nothing happened.
Some aspects of the media were obviously very disappointed that there was no violence there.
Meanwhile, a second Bernie Sanders staffer is calling for armed revolution.
But the media says that people who use the word boogaloo are more of a threat, so we're going to get into that.
Using the word woke is now bigoted.
You can't use that, otherwise you're a racist bigot.
They're trying to control language once again.
Going to talk about the app.
Which is basically a facial recognition app which is causing a firestorm of privacy concerns.
I actually saw this in action before it was in the media.
So we're going to get into all that and more on the other side of the break.
Breaking news at Summit.News.
Now go away.
And we are live.
We're talking about leftists celebrating 12-year-old kids getting STD screenings without their parents' knowledge.
You can't stop progress.
Drag queen story time is not enough.
This is an article up on Summit News.
Leftists are praising a doctor who made a TikTok dance video encouraging children as young as 12 to see their doctor about abortion and sexually transmitted diseases without their parents' knowledge.
Now again, if you don't know what TikTok is, it's basically got more downloads than Twitter, Facebook and Instagram combined in the past 18 months or so.
It is now the biggest app out of all of those.
I believe it's got more users than all of those globally.
And it's mainly based around and targeted towards children.
They do dance moves.
They do memes.
The audience is extremely young.
So now doctors are getting on this app.
And in one case, as we talked about before the break, there was a nurse called Nurse Holly, who had a million followers.
She dared to get up on TikTok and encourage children not to have sex.
Yes, she actually committed that crime of opinion and she was absolutely ruined.
Basically, she got up on TikTok and said, the good way to prevent getting sexually transmitted diseases for teenagers and children is not to have sex before marriage.
And the backlash was immediate, and it was vast.
In fact, one person tweeted, and this is what really got the backlash rolling on Twitter.
Somebody called Margo, who goes by the handle dumbbitchmargo, that's quite relevant, who said, if I go to get tested, And the nurse tells me I should have waited till marriage.
Someone is getting knocked TF out.
And she was venerated by the mob outrage Witchfinder Generals on Twitter who adorned her with 130,000 likes for publicly shaming this nurse who had the temerity to tell children not to have sex.
There you see her right there.
So she got cancelled.
She had to delete the video.
She's probably been doxxed by now.
No doubt she's being threatened on social media because it's, you know, all in the name of progress.
But then the reaction to that was other doctors, older doctors in fact in this case, an Asian woman, getting up on TikTok and encouraging children to go into a doctor's office to get sexually transmitted diseases screenings and treatment without telling their parents.
So this article continues, the clip shows an Asian woman performing a popular TikTok dance while text on the screen explains, quote, you can see your doctor without your parent, birth control, STD screening, STD treatment for a pregnancy test, or to answer your questions about sex.
And then it specifically targets kids as young as 12.
If you're 12 or older, I will politely ask all adults to exit the part of the visit to have a confidential conversation about your health.
So they're literally telling 12-year-olds to go into a doctor's office and talk about STDs, talk about abortions, without their parents being present.
Apparently, in many states, that is completely legal.
So this was posted up on Twitter by a journalist called Yashar Ali.
And it received a lot of praise.
In fact, Ali himself said, Love this video.
Doctors on TikTok is my favorite trend.
Eric Klock said, saw these both last week and thought they were both so good.
And then one person who dared to question whether it was a good idea for 12 year olds to be encouraging 12 year olds to have STD screenings and talk about abortion, whether that was a good idea without the parents being present.
He said, serious question.
Twelve-year-olds should not be talking to their parents about stuff mentioned in this video.
Can I help but think I would like to be involved enough in my kid's life to help them make an informed decision?
No, you're a bigot.
In fact, the first response to that tweet was, you don't seem to be down with progress, man.
Twelve-year-old kids getting STDs, that's all, you know, that's the progressive agenda.
Can't stop progress.
But to be fair, I would say, judging on why, so the majority of responses to the tweet were actually negative.
One person tweeted, imagine being a middle-aged woman begging kids to sleep around to give you life purpose.
Another person responded.
She said, I'm all for the first one, but the 12-year-old part of the second one strikes a chord with me and apparently many parents.
There is no world where a 12-year-old has the developed prefrontal cortex to autonomously consult a physician about their sex life.
Remember, they're encouraging kids to get away from their adults, to not have their adult parents present while discussing sexually transmitted diseases.
And then several other people made the point that this could be a perfect excuse for paedophiles to hide the fact that they've molested children.
One person said, quote, Anyone supporting the idea that a 12-year-old can be tested for an STD without their parents' knowledge is probably concerned about being caught.
People who tell 12-year-olds to test for STDs without parents are the ones who gave the STDs to them, commented another user.
A licensed therapist who works with adolescents said, "Progressive ideology is destroying lives. I see it every day."
But again, it's about the reaction.
There's not going to be any kind of BuzzFeed hit piece on this doctor who's encouraging 12-year-olds,
and this is not the only one, there are several other videos to the same effect,
encouraging 12-year-olds to be talking about STDs without their parents being present.
As I mentioned, Nurse Holly, she was cancelled for doing the same thing, but in the opposite direction.
Daring to suggest the crime of opinion that children should not be having sex.
Her life, at least temporarily, has been ruined for doing so.
And again, it goes back to the fact that the US is experiencing a dramatic rise in sexually transmitted diseases, with a 31% increase overall in cases of chlamydia, gonorrhea and syphilis since 2013.
Children are being sexualized.
Why do we live in a culture where 12-year-olds are getting STDs and adults are treating this as an acceptable part of growing up?
Why is this being praised on Twitter?
This should not be treated as normal.
The Atlantic reported how syphilis sneaked up on Americans.
And it goes through some of the numbers.
And it's basically because people have stopped taking STDs seriously.
People have stopped wearing condoms.
And so STDs are exploding.
Apparently though, STDs are now a progressive virtue.
In fact, I remember making a video back in, I think it was 2015, where there was a Twitter trend, and I think it was hashtag shoutyourSTD, where leftists all across Twitter were enthusiastically voicing what STDs they had and how proud they were of having those STDs, because again, Sexually transmitted diseases like gonorrhea and chlamydia are now apparently a progressive virtue that should be normalized for 12-year-old children.
And in the context of normalizing sexualization of children, National File has this headline, Netflix show features 10-year-old trans kid as a top.
I think we talked about this show before.
It's a drag queen show created by RuPaul titled AJ and the Queen.
Where a 10-year-old accompanies a drag queen to perform in mostly gay clubs around the country, in one scene the prepubescent child is referred to as a top, which means the person who penetrates during gay intercourse.
Bear in mind this all occurred after, what is it now, three years plus of the dominant media institutions, dominant cultural institutions in the media, normalizing Desmond is Amazing, a 11-year-old, I think he's Probably 12 at this point, but at the time 10, 11 year old boy, literally being present in gay nightclubs in New York, dancing on a stage while gay men insert dollars into his clothing.
And that was normalized by the mainstream media.
This kid has been featured in videos where other drag queens are sat around him, where they're literally talking about snorting ketamine.
And there you see another example of that, where there was a poster behind him which featured the word Rohypnol, which of course is a date rape drug.
Apparently this is all completely normal to the dominant cultural institutions that now control progressivism, so it's no surprise that there's a new Netflix show which not only normalises that, but actually suggests that this 10 year old boy And I don't even want to get into it because it's absolutely disgusting, but this is what's being normalized.
People are asking the question.
When will they just come out and try to make paedophilia legal?
People have said that that's coming down the pipeline in five to ten years, maybe even sooner than that.
Don't go away.
Summit.News will be back.
So leftists are normalizing 12-year-old kids having conversations about sexually transmitted diseases with doctors without their parents being present.
Netflix has premiered a new show about drag queens where a ten-year-old boy accompanies a drag queen to perform in gay nightclubs.
And of course we have drag queen story hour not only in the US but now globally.
In fact there was a protest of a drag queen story time event in Australia last weekend.
A day later one of the leaders against that protest killed himself reportedly and of course Many progressives celebrated that on Twitter.
Well, now it looks like it's going to take an actual drag queen to tell left-wing parents that having their children watch and in some cases perform with what are essentially sex performers is probably not a good idea.
And this drag queen posted a two-minute clip to Twitter trying to explain this.
What in the hell has a drag queen ever done to make you have so much respect for them and admire them so much, other than put on makeup and jump on the floor and writhe around and do sexual things on stage?
I have absolutely no idea why you would want that to influence your child.
Would you want a stripper or a porn star to influence your child?
It makes no sense at all.
A drag queen performs in a nightclub for adults.
There is a lot of filth that goes on, a lot of sexual stuff that goes on.
And backstage, there's a lot of nudity, sex, and drugs.
Okay?
So I don't think that this is...
an avenue you would want your child to explore.
They could explore dressing up at home like we all did, like all gay boys did.
We all dressed at home and we had a great time.
We had a great time with our girlfriends, putting on makeup, trying on clothes, things like that.
But to actually get them involved in drag is extremely, extremely irresponsible on your part.
And I understand you might want to look like you're with it, that you're cool, that you're woke, that you're not a Nazi, that you're not a homophobe, whatever, whatever it may be.
but you can raise your child to be just a normal, regular, everyday child without including them
in gay, sexual things.
And honestly, you're not doing the gay community any favors.
In fact, you're hurting us, okay?
We have already had a reputation of being pedophiles and being perverts and deviants.
We don't need you to bring your children around.
So you keep your kids at home or take them to Disneyland or take them to Chuck E. Cheese.
But if you need your child to be entertained by a big human in a costume or in makeup,
take them to the circus or something.
When they turn 18, then why don't you take them to the clubs on their 18th birthday?
Because it's an adult thing, okay?
So don't ruin your child's life and don't ruin us.
They have an actual drag queen called Kitty DeMure.
Telling leftist progressive parents, what in the world are you doing allowing your kids to be around drag queens?
At events that in some cases, in many cases, you've seen the clips of them writhing around on the floor, are overtly sexual in nature.
Kids as young as five years old in some cases.
Question is, do these kind of events actually attract child predators?
Yes, they do.
And in fact there was a A sex offender, 32-year-old Albert Garza, a registered sex offender who was convicted of assaulting an 8-year-old boy over 10 years ago, he was subsequently a participant in a drag queen storytime event in Houston.
Of course these people are going to exploit these events to get in a situation where they're going to be around children.
They're predators.
They're paedophiles in some cases.
Another headline here out of LifeSite News, Drag Queen Admits He's Grooming Children at Story Hour Events.
It says, Drag Queens are deliberately grooming the next generation to accept LGBTI ideology when they read to children in public libraries at Drag Queen Story Hour events.
A US Drag Queen admitted!
This is not Breitbart, this is not Infowars, this is the Drag Queens themselves admitting that that's what they do.
Dylan Pontiff, the drag queen who helped organize one of these Story Hour events for children as young as three at the Lafayette Public Library in early October last year, was shown in a video making that shocking admission to Lafayette City Parish Council in Louisiana during a September 17 meeting.
This drag queen says, quote, this is going to be the grooming of the next generation.
We are trying to groom the next generation.
Continued, I can go in and entertain adults in a club and also entertain a group of students and young children.
unidentified
I'm able to do that because I'm an adult and I'm able to filter myself.
The children's author whose books are frequently read at Drag Queen Story Hour events across the country was caught liking an Instagram picture posted by a proud paedophile.
And by the way, Twitter, they're called Maps.
They allow paedophiles to openly operate on Twitter.
No big deal.
If you express an edgy opinion about mass immigration, though, you get banned.
A screenshot shows kids author Todd Bond liked an image of a triangle spiral tattoo, which is a symbol for boy lover.
How progressive.
We have this headline.
Teacher who supported drag queen visiting school says parents shouldn't have final say in raising their children.
Well, I guess if they don't have any say in their children, Talking to doctors about sexually transmitted diseases as young as 12 years old, maybe they shouldn't have any say in Drag Queen Story Time 2.
This was at Willis High School.
We was paid a visit by an adult drag performer by the stage name Lynn Adonis.
We spent the day with the children.
There was some backlash.
The parents were annoyed with it.
And then he went on to say, this drag queen, parents believe they should be able to storm the school in the name of political and religious beliefs if something happens in the school that they're morally opposed to.
They forget that we make a promise to prepare their children to live in a diverse world.
We are not required to protect misguided, bigoted views of their parents.
And he went on to say that parents should not have a role.
The exact quote is, I believe that raising a child is the responsibility of the community.
We've seen that being pushed by the mainstream media before, years ago.
He went on to say, parents should not have the final say.
Let's be honest, some of you don't know what's best for your kids.
This guy who dresses up in female clothing and writhes around on the floor screaming during Drag Queen Storytime, he knows what's best for your kids.
Of course we have this story, student demonised for protesting against Drag Queen Storytime commits suicide.
This was in Brisbane, Australia.
A group of individuals, mostly politely, they weren't really aggressive, they were just voicing their opinion, entered Brisbane City Council library during the protest last weekend now.
One of these individuals, Wilson Gavin, shouted, quote, drag queens are not for kids.
He was then subjected to an absolute bombardment of vitriolic hate on social media.
And just a day after that, he committed suicide.
And a lot of very virtuous progressive people on Twitter laughed about it.
Now of course, one of the methods in which progressives gain control, gain power, is by controlling language.
By banning words, by denouncing anything as a white supremacist dog whistle.
We've seen that again with this Boogaloo term.
Of course the media fear-mongered for the best part of a week about how the pro-gun rally in Virginia would be a flashpoint for white supremacists to stage violence.
Nothing whatsoever of the kind happened.
It was one of the most peaceful rallies that you've seen in literally years.
I'm sure many of the people working in the mainstream media were sorely disappointed that there wasn't violence that they could exploit to demonize their political enemies.
And they were also fear-mongering about this term, boogaloo, which I'm going to get into in a subsequent article, but in terms of controlling the language.
This is the situation in Europe.
Headline, French intellectual sentenced to two months in prison for calling mass immigration a quote, invasion.
Now this isn't some poor granny on Facebook like happens in Sweden.
You'll often read stories about 75 year old grandma interrogated by police for saying something mean about Muslims on Facebook.
You know, mother arrested in her kitchen in the UK for misgendering someone on Twitter.
This is a public figure.
This is somebody who you would expect to have the privilege of a higher standard of free speech.
But I'm afraid in France that's not Proven to be the case!
French intellectual Renaud Camus has been given a two-month suspended prison sentence for saying that mass immigration into Europe represents, quote, invasion.
Now, he's been saved from being behind bars for his opinion, literally being saved from being put in a cage for making a certain noise with his mouth, and he will only have to pay 1,800 euros to two anti-racist organizations for his hate crimes.
He'll pay the 1800 euros to SOS Racism and the International League Against Racism and Anti-Semitism.
He was charged with, quote, public incitement to hate or violence on the basis of origin, ethnicity, nationality, race or religion.
Why exactly did he say?
Well, this was during a speech in France, November 2017, to the National Council of European Resistance, in which Camus declared, quote, immigration has become an invasion.
He said, quote, the irreversible colonization is demographic colonization by the replacement of the population.
He said the ethnic substitution, the great replacement, is the most important event in the history of our nation since it has existed.
As with other people, if the story continues, it will not be that of France.
In the same speech, he called for a national consensus of resistance to oppose Islamization.
In the struggle for the salvation of our Judeo-Christian values.
Now bearing in mind, this is a country, France, that suffers Islamic terror attacks on such a routine basis that now it barely even makes the news.
A radical Islamist goes nuts on the streets of Paris, or Lyon, or any other major French city, screaming Al-Araqbah, stabbing police officers, stabbing civilians, and it's barely a news story.
In January 2015, five years ago, you had ISIS jihadists burst into the offices of Charlie Hebdo magazine and slaughter a bunch of cartoonists because they were offended at the free speech of the cartoonists.
That prompted an immediate worldwide movement, which was actually supported by mainstream political leaders, who marched on the streets of Paris under the banner, Je suis Charlie.
We are all Charlie.
We support the right of people to have, quote, offensive opinions over the right of literal ISIS jihadists to slaughter those people because they're offended over those opinions.
Seems like that is kind of shifting now, doesn't it?
In fact, shortly after the Charlie Hebdo attacks.
The Pope himself came out and said, well if somebody punched my mother in the face I'd be very angry too.
Literally siding with the ISIS jihadists that slaughtered the cartoonists.
But apparently that's not the problem.
The problem is French intellectuals like Renaud Camus, voicing his opinion that mass immigration is a bad thing for society, even though that's literally been proven by academic studies, By major universities that prove that to be the case.
It reduces community trust, it exacerbates community tensions, it increases crime.
For him to say it though using this language is now literally illegal in France.
In this speech he went on to say Mass immigration is, quote, substitution, the tendencies to substitute everything with its emulator, normalized, standardized, interchangeable.
The original with its copy, the authentic with its imitation, the true with the false, the mothers with surrogate mothers, the culture with free time and entertainment.
And for that, he was convicted two months suspended prison sentence.
For his sins, though, he had to repent.
He had to recant to the Witchfinder generals and pay 1800 euros to anti-racist organizations.
Free speech in France is officially dead.
As it is in Sweden, where also people are literally being interrogated, fined and imprisoned for criticising mass immigration.
Headline out of Zero Hedge.
Sweden has lost control after bombing spike 60% in 2019, says MP.
A Swedish politician Says the government has lost control after new figures revealed 60% rise in bombings in 2019 over the previous year amid what Reuters reports as a surge in drug-linked gang violence.
You remember back in 2017, President Trump was savaged by the media for his infamous last night in Sweden speech.
Now I wake up every morning, check the news headlines out of Sweden and there's literally an explosion every single night.
The Swedish MP said, unfortunately, this government has lost control of what is happening in Sweden.
Now, in the morning, we woke up again to news of bombs and explosions, this time in Stockholm's inner city and in central Uppsala, said moderate leader, moderate party leader Ulf Kristersson in a recent op-ed.
257 bomb attacks were reported to police last year, up from 162 in 2018.
According to the country's National Council for Crime Prevention.
Of course, the last time they took ethnicity stats on violent crime in Sweden was 2005.
Then the government stopped doing that because it was racist.
There have been numerous academic and other independent studies which bear the fact out that migrants in Sweden are vastly over-represented in both bombings, grenade attacks, explosions and other violent crimes, including violent sexual assault.
But again, you can't talk about it, because you may get thrown in prison.
Article continues, Christensen's comments come after a blast rocked Stockholm more than a week ago, considered to be one of the most powerful in recent memory, according to Police Area Manager Eric Widstrand, who added that it was pure luck that nobody had been injured.
While we don't have a breakdown as to the type of explosives, What we do know is that the use of grenades in Sweden has been on the rise.
And we've talked about that many times in the past.
And then according to this report, out of the Spectator, which we featured in the past, quote, it's widely known that gang members are mainly first and second generation immigrants and problems are rampant in what police euphemistically refer to as vulnerable areas.
Just a little bit vulnerable.
Apartments literally blowing up every night.
It's vulnerable!
Thus the gang wars serve as a constant reminder of Sweden's failed migration and integration policies.
Of course when you speak out about this you get put on a hate list and in one case they had a left-wing newspaper doxing people and sending reporters down to their doors to knock on their doors and harass them about hateful comments they'd made on the internet.
We had another story out of Sweden on Friday's show when I was hosting talking about how now they're The national police chief in Sweden requested...
The right to use the army against the population, and in that army memo, or the memo that was presented to the government, he cited alternative media and internet activists spreading misinformation about Sweden, and that this may cause a scenario where the army is being required to use against the public.
This is how bad it is in Sweden, this is how bad it is in France, and it only seems to be getting worse.
We're going to come back on the other side with news about Conor McGregor's thought crime, he actually had the temerity to praise the President of the United States of America, and the backlash was swift.
Don't go away, we'll be back.
Breaking news at Summit.News.
We are live, and I'm going to get back into some final news stories.
First of all, I need to tell you about the great specials available at infowarsstore.com, where X2 is back in stock.
In very high demand, change your life, change the world today.
This will protect you against the negative impacts of fluoride, leading the way into the next generation of super high quality nascent iodine.
Forwards Life Survival Shield X2 is back.
This is gonna go quick.
It's not only back, it's back with a massive discount of 40% super high quality.
This is not gonna stick around for long and you get free shipping as well when you take advantage of that special Go and read the 5-star reviews.
6,274 reviews.
Overwhelmingly positive.
4.9 out of 5 for the Survival Shield X2 Nascent Iodine.
We've also got other specials available, such as the Super Blue Fluoride-Free Toothpaste.
Also available at 50% off at infowarsstore.com.
InfoWars Life Protein Bars.
Available again at a greatly reduced discount at InfoWarsStore.com.
People are loving that product too.
We have the Alexa Breeze Air Filter, again available for a whopping discount.
It's now just £1.9597 at InfoWarsStore.com, along with all the other great specials.
Please support this network.
They've tried to de-platform us.
They've literally tried to take away our ability to accept credit card payments on a regular basis.
Because they're deathly afraid of the message that we are broadcasting it, but we're broadcasting it only with your support and your continued support by getting the products at InfoWarsStore.com.
Now, Conor McGregor is the latest victim of the Witchfinder generals on Twitter because he dared express support, wait for it, for the President of the United States.
Conor McGregor attacked by woke outrage mob calling Trump phenomenal.
This was a tweet last night.
Basically, Trump tweeted about MLK Day.
Conor McGregor, the MMA fighter, responded, Phenomenal president, quite possibly the USA GOAT.
Most certainly one of them anyway, as he sits atop the shoulders of many amazing giants that came before him.
No easy feat.
Feat spelled wrong.
They got really angry over that.
Early stages of term also incredible.
And obviously that is the kind of Hate crime, thought crime that cannot be expressed by somebody in the sports entertainment industry.
God forbid a celebrity would express diversity of opinion.
The reaction on Twitter was vast and it was vitriolic.
A user with the name FlushTheOrangeTurd, Orange Man Bad, responded, quote, I just got off the McGregor bus.
I was a huge fan until this tweet.
I'm sure this will cost you more fans than any fight you lose.
Yeah.
You know that it is possible to still like and admire someone who is not involved in politics at any level if they don't agree with your every political viewpoint.
That is possible.
It's possible, you know.
Another blue checkmark responded.
These are the words of a man who's been hit in the head many, many times.
Even though... Wasn't it Conor McGregor who said back in 2016, F Trump?
They all loved him then.
Now he's actually changed his mind.
He needs to get cancelled.
Another user said, please tell me you got effing hacked.
Several users called Conor McGregor a racist.
That's a novel new tactic.
Never heard that one before.
But there was a lot of praise for Conor McGregor on this tweet thread.
So Conor McGregor is based and red-pilled.
He dared stick his head above the parapet and express an opinion that was at odds With the monoculture of the sports entertainment industry.
And you know that in these times, that is absolutely verboten.
Now that we've weaponized hate mobs on social media, they will do everything in their power to defame and de-platform Conor McGregor.
I don't think it's going to have any effect, because again, he's a wildly popular athlete, but he dared to express an opinion.
And the NPC mob came down hard, just as they came down hard on this British actor, Lawrence Fox.
Who last week appeared on one of the BBC's biggest political talk shows, Question Time, and he dared say that white privilege was not a thing.
He dared challenge identity politics.
He dared say that the next Labour leader shouldn't necessarily be a woman and maybe saying, oh, obviously it should be a woman and judging people on their genitalia rather than their character, their history, their experience or their performance was slightly patronising towards women.
And was, in fact, not very woke.
Now the new statesman, which, by the way, smeared and defamed the late, great Roger Scruton, conservative writer, author, philosopher, who just died of cancer aged 75 last weekend.
They defamed him as a racist by taking his comments out of context, by outright fabricating some of those comments.
Well, now they're coming after yours truly.
Headline, the radicalization of Lawrence Fox shows the worrying power of right-wing YouTube.
And basically they blame Lawrence Fox, expressing his opinion on people like myself and Sargon of Akkad, quote, extremist right-wing YouTubers, because God forbid somebody should be influenced by somebody else's opinion if that opinion differs with yours.
We can't have that, can we?
So the entire article again is another one of these tawdry arguments to de-platform anyone who expresses diversity of opinion because God forbid some people who may then appear on mainstream television may then express the same opinions.
Opinions, by the way, which are shared by the majority of the British public.
If the latest UK election result was a referendum on anything, it was a referendum on the fact that woke identity politics is being rejected across the board by all right-thinking people.
And no, it's not an extremist right-wing position to voice that when it's shared by the majority of right-thinking people in the country.
It's a perfectly normal position to take.
And if you argue that those people should be deplatformed, should be censored, you've already lost the argument.
You don't have an argument.
If your only argument is to say those people should be shut up, and that is the cancer that lies at the heart of woke politics, that's why someone like Lawrence Fox, who, by the way, is based, obviously, but then you look at people who do express diversity of opinion in the entertainment industry, in the music industry, it's normally people Who are at the top of their game, who are so successful that they cannot be deplatformed.
People like Kanye West, of course, wearing the MAGA hat.
People like Morrissey, who's been wildly successful for decades, coming out against Islam, coming out against the cruel halal slaughter of animals.
People like Noel Gallagher, speaking out against Islamic terrorism.
Those people have already had their success, basically they're semi-retired.
It's normally those kind of people Who dare to stick their head above the parapet and face the fury of the woke outrage mob.
This actor, Lawrence Fox, he's a decent actor.
I've seen him in several things before, but he's by no means, you know, at the top of his game.
He's still relatively young.
I think he's around 40 years old.
So some people are saying, you know, as with the Ricky Gervais thing, Oh, this is nothing new.
Why are people impressed by this?
I mean, I'd rather these people be out there voicing these opinions than not.
Obviously, he's not going to go full edgelord, because then he wouldn't be invited on programs like Question Time in the first place.
But if these people are the kind of the weathervane for this backlash against woke politics, then I don't have a problem with it whatsoever.
What they are doing now is trying to use this and then weaponize it.
To cancel the people who, behind the scenes, tend to have an equal effect, people like yours truly, and YouTubers like Sargon of Akkad, who's also mentioned in this article, because again, they can only censor, they can only de-platform, because they don't have an argument that resonates with any right-thinking people, so far easier just to censor your ideological adversaries.
And even on YouTube, when they've completely gamed the algorithm, To the point where they took away 90% of my views from recommended videos.
They're still losing!
They're still losing!
That's why they're still so insatiable to de-platform and censor anyone who, God forbid, expresses diversity of opinion.
Meanwhile, the mainstream media is creating a new hysterical moral panic over the word boogaloo.
Yes, they're saying that this is the new code word for the Second American Civil War.
Headline, MSM has new ridiculous scare story and it's worse than racist.
OK sign!
Boogaloo is alt-right code for Second American Civil War.
Of course, they tried to fearmonger for the past week about the pro-gun rally in Virginia being the flashpoint for the new civil war.
Complete BS.
Nothing happened.
It was completely peaceful.
Now they're Saying that the word boogaloo might be the next white supremacist dog whistle.
Meanwhile, people who literally work in the campaign of the potential next President of the United States, Bernie Sanders, They're saying they're getting armed up for a revolution and that Republicans all belong in gulags.
You've seen that story, that video from James O'Keefe out today.
Absolutely incredible.
That's going to wrap it up for the show, though.
Please support us by getting the products at InfoWarsStore.com.
Breaking news at Summit.News coming up next, War Room with Owen Schroyer.
Stay tuned.
Don't go away.
unidentified
Don't act so surprised, Globalist.
You didn't think you could silence the American people, did you?
Join Bandot Video, and I will complete your training.
Together, we can overthrow the Emperor and restore the Republic.
Now it's easier than ever to have Band.Video on your iPhone.
Simply go to Band.Video with your Safari browser.
Then you click the Share button at the bottom of the screen.
When the menu comes up, you simply click Add to Home Screen.
It will then ask you to name the app.
I suggest Band.Video.
You will now have Band.Video app on your home screen, despite the fact that Tim Cook tried to stop it.
The globalists think you're lazy, but by taking a little bit of action, you can override them, have the app, And then tell others about it so they can get the app.
So it's up to you whether you want to defy Big Tech and click the share buttons below on your email, on Facebook, on Twitter, on YouTube.
We can laugh about gay frogs all day long, but it's a very serious subject.
What's really happening to amphibians and other life forms is sterilization and deformity.
This is the toxic avenger in the real world.
This isn't really gay frogs, though one of the side effects is to make the frogs attracted to other males, so they don't ever fertilize any eggs and there are no more frogs.
So David Hogg thinks it's cool for everybody to be gay, but then we don't have any new people.
But this is about toxic chemicals, not about frogs, or not about being gay.
And there are hundreds and hundreds of chemicals in the average runoff that is in aquifers, that is in well water, and that is in municipal water particularly.
That's why we bring you the Alexa Pure water filtration system with four different units.
that are 30% off right now at InfoWarsTore.com.
This is tested amongst hundreds and hundreds of different companies out there
as one of the very top ones out there, and it also has a very affordable price,
even at its regular sales price.
Right now, it's 30% off at InfoWarsTore.com, and the money that we make off of this funds our operation
and funds Liberty and Justice and Freedom.
So you're not just giving yourself and your family cleaner, better tasting water, cutting out all that garbage, you're funding the information war.
And as I always say, there's nothing like a win-win symbiotic.
360 win.
So get your Alexa Pure high-quality water filtration systems at MFootworkstore.com right now at 30% off.
And be sure to check out all the other specials at MFootworkstore.com today.
This show is brought to you by Syngenta and Atrazine at Roundup.
From my good friend over at Monsanto.
Three cups, no more pain, you die!
Thank you, gay frogs!
unidentified
[Intro]
[Intro]
InfoWars, the most banned network in the world.
InfoWars Life is bringing you a breakthrough in modern medicine.
Introducing Pollen Block.
We have found an extraordinary new, natural way to alleviate seasonal distress symptoms, including promoting clear nasal and sinus passageways, eye comfort, and respiratory function.
In the 1960s, researchers in France noticed that people who ate certain quail eggs experienced less seasonal immune and inflammatory responses.
They began studying this effect in published trials, and decades later, we now have the fruit of this research, a fast-acting, chewable tablet that helps alleviate seasonal distress symptoms.
Pollen block is natural and effective.
It is not an antihistamine.
In fact, current research has found that it actually acts by blocking the activity of tryptase, which is an enzyme that amplifies immune and inflammatory responses in the body.
Go outside and enjoy the air you breathe!
Head to Infowarslife.com and grab a pack of our Pollen Block Chewable Tablets.
