All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 13, 2024 - Blood Money
01:05:14
United Sovereign Americans Path to Saving Freedom with Harry Haury
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Today on Blood Money we have a very special guest, Harry Howrey from United Sovereign Americans, telling us how to reclaim our freedom using our God-given rights.
All right, so welcome to the latest episode of Blood Money.
Today we have a very special guest.
Harry, how do I say your last name?
Harry? Howry.
Howry, howry. Alright, let me try that again.
Harry, how are you doing, sir?
I'm doing very well. Thank you.
You know, it's great to have you here because one of the things that we've been concerned about on the Blood Money podcast is the deprivation of our rights.
I mean, we've noticed, in fact, we just had Thomas Renz on talking about how the Constitution doesn't really exist in most of our courts.
It's as if it was never written.
It is as if we live in a different country.
And a lot of people have been trying to find solutions to that problem because we have certain God-given rights that we are You know, having stolen from us.
So you seem to have a solution organization.
So let's just dive right into it.
Tell us what you've been up to. So the effort started by Marlee Hornick and her massive group of 2000 volunteers in New York investigating black letter law and hard violations of various statutes regarding the conduct of elections.
In my own situation I helped with a number of the legal challenges in the 2020 election.
I spent two months in Washington DC with a lot of other patriots trying to figure out what in fact is going wrong with the elections.
One of the issues though that we you know and this is a consultation by many people but there's basically three ways to challenge elections legally.
The first is to challenge outcome.
We saw that with the Cary Lake lawsuits and filings, the Trump challenges in various states.
Those didn't go very far.
There's a specific reason for that.
I don't think it's a legally valid reason, but the judicial system tends not to want to interfere with elections.
They view that as the purview of the legislative branch.
And generally they've decided that they don't have jurisdiction until you can show materiality.
Well materiality when no one's willing to investigate is very hard to prove.
So there's two other types of election challenges.
The first is a challenge under the law.
Either federal or state law doesn't meet the U.S. Constitution or the state law doesn't meet the federal law or also Constitution.
So you can challenge in federal court on that basis.
Depending on the type of challenge, it may go quickly to the U.S. Supreme Court or it might not.
There's a third type of challenge that Most people, for a variety of reasons, have ignored, and that is challenging misconduct.
Most people don't realize it, but the primary challenge in Bush versus Gore in the year 2000 was an election process misconduct challenge.
Basically, the way that ballots were being qualified and counted both in Miami-Dade and Broward County were challenged against In both federal and state law, the federal courts decided that the Bush case was warranted for using a different procedure for counting.
And then after the count yielded a different result, no longer showing Gore winning Florida, but showing Bush won Florida, the Supreme Court in an equity decision.
Overturned certification, but it didn't start with a challenge to the certification of the vote.
It started with a challenge of the process and procedure being used in Florida.
So there are a lot of election laws.
We hear about it every day.
Somebody being fined or even put in prison for, you know, five or 50 fake ballots.
The penalties are quite severe for election misconduct because our assumption is that elections are a right, maybe the most important right that we have.
The jurisdiction over the government or the control and sovereignty is why we use the word sovereign is that in our democratic republic, the voters are sovereign over the government.
The government is sovereign over the bureaucracy.
Somehow we've Started to reverse that and basically it's a violation of our civil rights.
There are only really a couple of pieces of federal legislation that are directly what you would call election law.
The Voting Rights Act of 1965, which forbade discrimination primarily on race, which was a step forward.
But then the HAVA and what's called the Help America Vote Act.
And the Motor Voter Act, or also known as the National Voter Registration Act, both went toward trying to ensure that we were having good, open, and fair elections.
The National Voter Registration Act primarily was oriented toward making sure everybody that wanted to vote and was eligible to vote could vote.
The Help America Vote Act was a registration or a recognition that Something had terribly gone wrong in the year 2000 with dimpled ballots and hanging chads.
So right or wrong, there was a decision made to go to ballot scanners that has, you know, gone from simple scanning and tabulation to all sorts of electronic management systems.
We can get into that, but those are very deep and complex subjects.
What we're focusing on instead is black letter law.
That's law that's already settled in courts.
It's well known. It's been adjudicated often all the way to the Supreme Court.
And we're challenging those situations where we're finding indications.
I mean, what we call them are suspicious activity reports or Or evidence that something is wrong.
We start with a challenge with the election commissions, obviously.
It's the right thing to do to give them a chance to address our concerns and provide redress of our grievances as required and guaranteed under the US Constitution.
But, you know, in fact, most of them don't want to do that.
We kind of label it as three things.
A lot of people, particularly in the conservative side, which I freely admit I'm very conservative, but the fact is we, you know, we yell and scream about the conclusion that the vote was stolen and we have very bad feelings about what's going on, right? But the But the fact of the matter is it has to start with an investigation.
It has to start with evidence.
It starts with suspicion and then you build an investigation from there.
Now fortunately election law is built on civil rights legislation.
Both the NIVRA or the National Voter Registration Act And HAVA, the Help America Vote Act, are based on civil rights legislation.
So this this gives citizens a lot of Tools to use to force the obedience to the law.
Two of the biggest are Title 18, 241 and 242 are officials acting under the color of law, deny a person their civil rights.
This is adjudicated actually under election crimes.
So I'm not trying to accuse everybody of committing crimes.
We kind of view it There's three types of misbehavior.
The first is ignorance.
They just don't know the law.
We saw a very poignant example of an election official just this last week being interviewed or actually questioned on the stand and she had no idea what the law even said.
The second is arrogance.
People that think they're now in charge.
Bureaucrats that think That they have the right to do whatever they want because they're professionals, right?
Or because somehow the arbitration of the law is up to them.
It's not. The law doesn't allow that.
There's no statute that says that an election official without specific authorization of the law has the right to overwrite or change the law.
We saw this In numerous occasions, both in 2020 and 2022, people throwing out signature verification requirements, people abusing the chain of custody on ballots, ballots arriving at all times the night and day without the appropriate guards associated with the laws in those states.
We're not talking about things that look wrong.
We're talking about things that are specifically forbidden.
In adjudicated or determined law.
So our focus is on challenging misconduct.
And so you say, well, what about intent?
You know, everybody talks about election fraud.
And the problem is most people don't understand what election fraud actually is.
Election fraud means that you're doing something that you shouldn't do with regard to the election.
And under a ruling in 1888 by the Supreme Court, which is still good law, An election official has the duty under the law to know the law.
They also have the duty under the law to obey the law.
So ignorance, whether it's ignorance, arrogance, or malfeasance, or malice, it doesn't matter.
It's still election fraud under the law.
This has been adjudicated many times.
You can look at the 2017 8th edition of the federal guidelines for prosecution of election crimes.
It specifically cites these types of election fraud.
We get confused because the word fraud in a civil sense, the word fraud in a securities or financial sense is a completely different word.
In election fraud, it has to do with whether or not the election officials and the individuals that are applying under duty of law to register their name in the voter rolls, whether or not they're obeying the law.
That's all it is.
It doesn't have to have intent.
There is an exception.
If a person unknowingly applies for a personal registration, they aren't guilty of election fraud.
But election officials that are disobeying the law when they decide that signature verification isn't required, when they decide it isn't required to determine if a voter is a U.S. citizen or not.
When they decide that although Nivero requires accurate voter rolls and HAVA does too, when they decide that they only have to clean the rolls every 10 years.
It's complete nonsense.
But the problem is most of our efforts have been directed at More complex issues or things that require a much higher bar under current judiciary standards.
Again, there's nothing in the law that says you have to have materiality, but the fact is that that's what the federal courts have generally decided.
So what we're doing is basically we started in New York.
We finished Vetting our second scorecard yesterday.
We're having our final review tomorrow.
We're working on scorecards, what we call scorecards, which are measurements of violations of black letter federal law in 20 states so far.
We're hoping that that number by the mid-summer is approaching 40 or 50.
We have groups now formed in over 23 states.
All doing research on the voter rolls.
The number of indicated violations are massive.
Examples in Pennsylvania and New York are staggering.
In 2020, there was a discrepancy between the number of votes counted and the number of voters counted of 338,000 people.
In Pennsylvania, I don't remember the exact numbers, but around 150-160,000 votes.
This is insane. So the system is built to be auditable.
It requires maintaining records of auditability.
Some of those records of auditability under HAVA include, you know, ballot box counts, precinct counts, and then all of a sudden when people do an audit in a particular state, all those records are missing.
This is complete disobedience to the law.
Now, are we going to out overthrow the election in 2020 or 2022?
No, I mean, that's not our primary goal.
Our primary goal is to do something that nobody's been doing, which is to hold election officials and the people responsible for conducting elections in general, responsible for obeying the law.
One of the things we say internally is just obey the law.
Now, Can the law be improved?
Are there problems with the law?
Do we think there should be voting machines?
These are all very complex issues.
What we're trying to do right now is deal with what we can affect by 2024.
So we want to have these challenges in place in the next month, month and a half, three months at the most.
And we're going to do our best to adjudicate And force the courts to tell us that it's okay for election officials to disobey the law or force the election officials to obey the law.
If the courts decide that they're guilty of crimes or need to be sanctioned, that's up to the courts more than it is up to us.
What we're going to do is make it clear that we've observed what apparently is misconduct.
We filed already in New York suspicious activity reports of millions of violations, and that number is millions of potential violations.
We're asking the Board of Elections in New York to review those, not with their usual hand-waving saying, well, this happened, this happened.
It's all okay.
Don't look behind the curtain.
We've given them all five million plus, almost six million records that were apparently in error based on our reading of the law and based on the data that they gave us.
We're not inventing law.
We're not inventing theory.
We're not inventing evidence.
It's their own evidence.
Now some of it's just simple mistakes, but those mistakes are not allowed either.
They have to get rid of them.
So we're going to force them to get rid of them, or at least we're going to do our best.
And to the degree that we can uncover malice or arrogance that's affecting the result, we'll try to force prosecution of that where possible.
The rules are quite extensive.
We can talk about it. You know, I have particular opinions about, you know, the voting machines and cyber security and all these types of things.
But the trouble is most of that litigation is not going to achieve any result by 2024 unless it's already well underway.
A lot of this requires courts to do the right thing, and the issue that we've seen is that the courts are not doing the right thing.
How do we address that?
Even though we go by, you were saying black letter law, which sounds fascinating.
What is your concerns regarding how the judges behave and how juries are put together in jurisdictions and that sort of thing?
The interesting thing is we're attacking federal law, which gives us the right to file our lawsuits.
In any federal district court in any state in the country.
So not to be silly about it, but we have the right to put it in in courts that we have a better probability of getting a fair hearing.
That's first. Secondly, the courts have been overruling jurisdictional issues or standing mostly on challenges to the result.
There hasn't been very much of this in terms of throwing out, you know, challenges to election conduct or misconduct.
The one exception to that would be the fights that are occurring over the machines.
We've seen some recent victories, particularly in Georgia, where courts are granting standing to challenges as to how the election machines are being used and run and certified, whether they're even being certified.
Again, what we want to do, though, is we want to return to a baseline.
And that baseline includes proper certification of the machines.
I mean, so I'm not trying to argue about whether or not the machines work.
I mean, not at least before 2024.
I mean, I have been involved in some of the machine-related fights because I'm a cybersecurity guy, but that's a different issue.
This is not about... The Dominion machines or the ES&S or the Hart Civic or any of the other systems.
What it's about is whether or not you follow the law.
One of the laws that applies to machines, for instance, is under the Federal Information Security Modernization Act.
In the declaration by Barack Obama that elections for critical infrastructure, there's a required process under FSMA to certify any kind of critical infrastructure.
In addition, there are specific codes of federal regulation that prohibit the purchase of this kind of equipment or software from foreign entities, particularly ones that are considered adversaries to the United States.
So the fact is these have been totally ignored and these lawsuits have not focused on these simple violations.
And again, I'm not saying that you can't use a machine.
I'm not saying that it isn't possible to construct a barrier around the machine that would maintain security.
It's possible. I used to work for the NSA in the Information Assurance Directorate.
Our job was to secure federal systems.
So this is what I did as a career for almost 30 years.
And the fact of the matter is you can secure very insecure things if you put them inside of Faraday cages and you don't let anybody touch them.
But the fact is that nobody's paying any attention to it.
We have people on film walking through the operational security boundaries on the machines with thumb drives.
Nobody even knows they're there or what they're doing.
These things are not any kind of rational security protocol.
Around the machines and so FSMA actually requires a FSMA risk assessment as the first process of a certification.
We're not just talking about HAVA certification, we're talking about federal information security certification, which is now required by law and is not being done.
So it's not a primary focus for us, but it is an issue of black letter law violation.
You have a clear law.
It says to do this.
They're doing that without any permission under the law.
It's election misconduct.
Wow, wow, wow.
So what are, I mean, what can we envisage being like the next steps over up to 2024?
Like, what do you think is going to happen?
What do you think is important to exercise, steps to take?
I mean, could you give us, you know, plot the plan forward?
So what we're doing right now is we're building our scorecards which are a measurement essentially of are the voter rolls accurate?
Do they violate the law?
Can you measure that inaccuracy?
And then how inaccurate are they?
Then did people that are currently not legally registered and what I mean by this is not that they aren't legal citizens or that they aren't legally entitled to vote.
The registration is the key.
The key to entering the voting booth, the key to mailing in a mail-in ballot or absentee ballot, if you haven't complied with the law and the registration, you simply don't know who the voter is.
The Constitution requires you to know who the voter is.
You need to know where they're a citizen.
You need to know that they are a citizen.
And so the first place to start is the national voter registration system.
It's actually state by state, obviously, but the rules are slightly different because it's left by the Constitution up to the states to determine time, manner, and place of elections.
But there are certain rules.
You can't discriminate or violate certain basic premises under the U.S. Constitution.
Secondly, after we do that, we're looking at how many people voted that do not have legal registrations because those themselves are violations.
There's another thing people say or use this word and they don't understand what it means under federal law.
They call them illegal votes.
They are illegal votes.
Those are illegal ballots.
It doesn't mean they shouldn't be counted.
It means that when they were entered, they were not legally valid.
So we want legal validity on the ballots.
And there's something called a provisional ballot system and another thing called an adjudication system.
Depending on the state, the rules and jurisdiction of adjudication and provisional ballots, we're not talking about excluding people.
We're talking about making them go through a process of validating Whether or not that person lives where they say they live and validate whether or not they're a U.S. citizen as required by the Constitution.
Then after that we look at other things that are highly anomalous like the voter to vote discrepancy.
The auditability of the system is obviously impaired or destroyed if the number of voters counted going into the system or ballots counted going into the system doesn't equal the number of votes.
Every state in the country has significant precinct variations and sometimes large statewide variations in the number of votes counted.
And oh, by the way, it's almost always more votes than voters.
Are those illegal ballots?
Are they fake votes?
Are they double counting ballots?
We simply don't know.
But under US law and under specific state law in some states, and certainly inferred in almost all states, There should not be a discrepancy between the number of votes counted and the number of voters counted.
You can't have more votes than voters.
It's simply not okay.
So as I said, in New York in 2022, with the great work that New York Citizens Audit did, They found 338,000 votes that had no associated record of a voter or a mail-in ballot associated with them.
It's simply preposterous that we think that's okay.
It's not okay.
It exceeded the margin of voting victory for a large number of federal offices in 2022.
Which means that, do I know who won?
Not from that data.
I don't know if Biden won or Trump won, but I do know something.
I know that when they certified the vote, they were lying that it was accurate and compliant.
It was neither accurate or compliant.
And that's against the law as well.
So do I want to throw out the certification?
I mean, we're in the last phases of the Biden administration.
It's such a difficult bar to meet and it would cause such chaos.
You know, there might be other equity solutions.
I'm not trying to get into that.
What I'm trying to say is we have to have a fair, open, honest election in 2024.
And the only avenue open to us is using existing predicate.
I mean when a person can be put in jail for 50 fake ballots, can't they be put in jail for 300,000 fake ballots?
It seems to me that they should be.
Now is it a systematic Fraud?
Is it an error in the system?
It doesn't matter.
The fact is you're supposed to certify who won.
You can't certify an election if you can't certify the intent of the electorate in that election.
Can you measure it or can you not measure it?
So what we're planning to do is we are referring these after the election officials do nothing or after they start harassing You know, the volunteers trying to bring this to the attention.
We're filing suspicious activity reports, essentially criminal complaints of potential violations of the law with the state, you know, police in the particular states with the FBI and Justice Department.
And now, do I think that they're going to investigate it?
They didn't investigate anything in 2020.
Why would I expect them in 2024 to do it?
We're going to sit in front of a judge before the elections in 2024 and we're going to file restraining orders.
That is what's called for under NIVRA, the National Voter Registration Act.
We're going to file federal injunctions forcing them to obey the law.
And we will win in some places, we will lose in others.
Frankly, we don't care.
And you might say, why don't we care?
We want a diversity of jurisdiction because we want to be able to force it all to the Supreme Court.
If New York throws us out and Texas Rules in our favor, it creates an automatic difference of opinion that can be taken up to the Supreme Court if it's based on universal, if you will, federal law.
So our goal is to get this to the Supreme Court if necessary before the 2024 election.
In addition to that, we're taking a look at very serious and deep Statistical analysis.
We now have some tools and data sets and ability to look at some other things that are quite dramatic.
I don't want to talk about them yet because they're not really ready for release, but we're seeing some other indications that can be statistically proven.
And people say, well, they don't listen to statistics.
That's not true. They do listen to valid statistics.
So a lot of times we talk about statistics, but we don't draw evidentiary predicate around those statistics that will hold Weight, both from a provenance perspective on the evidence and also meet the legal requirements for statistical proof.
We have started studies across the country of statistically valid means of measuring what the actual error rates were in the election.
I don't want to talk about it at length, but this is what we're going to do.
One of our cooperating groups in Maryland, if you've not seen it, Kate and her people have done great work, you know, based that study largely on discussions that United Sovereign Americans had with the Maryland people, and they found just exactly what we knew they would find.
We've done one of our first statistical studies in New York, It's showing the same type of extremely high error rates in terms of who actually voted.
Finally, what we want to make sure of is that there's some sort of solution.
We think that one of the problems is the judges are looking at this problem, but they shrug their shoulders because they don't Many of them, and it's not meant to be offensive, election law is a very niche specialty.
It's very complex, has a lot of history over 200 years, and we need to offer legal remedy.
So one of the things we will be offering through the TRO process are remedies for making sure that these things happen and what happens if they don't.
We believe that there are basically five areas that we have to concentrate on and and for all your listeners if you want to volunteer to participate in offering solutions we need your help.
We ask you to you know go to our website which is uniteforfreedom.com and volunteer.
If you have a solution to offer we'll listen.
We're trying to design solutions that can fit into the current technology, the current processes But force the obedience to the law.
We're basically looking at five areas.
The end-to-end traceability and auditability of the election.
It's preposterous in this day of age that we can't track and reconcile the vote and the voters, where they came from, when they were counted, what precincts they were in.
Most people don't understand that.
There's thousands and thousands and thousands of variations under required record keeping and everybody just shrugs their shoulders and says, But the fact of the matter is there's other large processes that are every bit as big as elections.
One is managing check processing at banks or item processing in different types of systems.
And they don't have error rates even close, even close to what we have in our elective systems.
You know it's not uncommon for bank systems to have a you know one in 10,000 or one in 100,000 item error rate.
That means any error at all on the item and if they can do that for checks why can't we do it for elections?
Second piece is we have to come to grips with the fact That mail-in ballots have destroyed the provenance between the ballot and the voter and the election counting system.
We need to implement some sort of system that makes sure that the citizens vote, if it's going to be mailed in by absentee or mail-in ballot, that it meets the requirements that somebody knows that actually came from a valid and eligible voter.
We think the technology already exists for this.
If they aren't willing to do this, we need to get rid of these technologies.
It's simple as that. We also need the legitimate required certification of the machines.
CISA has adopted a policy of writing waivers on the technical solutions without any real authorization under the law.
We have to stop using machines that can't be certified as secure.
The answer is not to waive the requirement.
The answer is to have secure systems.
The fourth thing is we have to have an open, honest, accurate vote.
And so there's a lot of things associated with that, but one of those goes back to the first item.
We have to have a way of measuring whether or not the result was accurate.
And to do that, we think that there's a number of ways we can implement traceability within the voting system that maintains full anonymity and still tells us whether the votes were registered properly.
We would also like to see citizens that have mailed in their vote being able to validate whether or not their vote was received at the counting station and how it was counted.
And we think those technologies exist.
We're going to offer some pro forma solutions.
We ask volunteers, we ask companies that might have good solutions for this to come forward.
We're looking for things that are cheap so that we aren't putting a lot of burden on the system and that can be implemented quickly as in before the 2024 election.
Wow. And then the last thing we're going to ask is, we're going to ask in the TROs, just obey the law.
If you aren't qualified under the law because of your ignorance, because of your arrogance as a bureaucrat that you don't think you have to obey the law, or because you're a governor that thinks you can wave your hands and change the law, we're going to insist that you obey the law.
We're going to put in our TROs that you have to obey the law.
And that you don't have the right to just wave your hands and change things.
So we'll monitor this closely in 2024.
We'll have the TROs in place ordering the executive branch, the bureaucrats, to obey the law and enter them for violations in contempt of court if they don't.
So I mean in a nutshell that's what we're doing.
We're measuring Black letter, suspected black letter law violations.
We're reporting them appropriately.
We can't claim to know exactly what happened.
All we know is that when we look at the data that they provided, it clearly doesn't make sense under the law.
Some of them are simple clerical errors.
Some of them are malice.
And we got to get rid of all three.
Ignorance, arrogance, and malice are not an excuse.
Not if we're going to protect our democratic institutions and our constitutional republic.
Yeah, yeah. I mean, you know, you have definitely an old school vibe.
I mean, what do you think What has happened in this country?
Did you see this coming?
Did you see this sort of travesty when it comes to tyranny invading our rights?
I mean, tell me from the point of your generation and how you grew up and what you saw coming down the pipeline.
What's your point of view on all this stuff?
So I'm old school and old at the same time.
No disrespect, but as a compliment, because you've lived through a lot more than I have, and I'm just wondering, I've seen that kind of march towards tyranny.
I definitely have certain theories, but you've got a few ears on me, so I'd love to hear from your point of view.
So my theories are...
Exactly that. They're mostly theories, although I've seen a lot of things in my life, particularly in my association with the intelligence community when the word intelligence was not an oxymoron, which it seems to be more and more.
But the fact of the matter is that there was a time when everybody acted as patriots.
You know, we would never have seen US corporations building factories in Russia in 1966.
And, you know, taking, you know, essentially large economic subsidies from the Russian government.
Now we see this every day in China.
We see people cowing to, you know, propaganda requirements.
You say the wrong thing in front of the wrong people, you get canceled.
You see weaponization of prosecution.
I'm not saying that there weren't bad things done at J6, but you look at the Antifa and the BLM rioters, They hardly got their hands slapped, that burned down, you know, tried to burn down, you know, court buildings and churches.
And then the J6 guys, some of them are going to jail for years for simply walking through the Capitol Rotunda.
I'm not trying to decide whether or not they should have been prosecuted.
I think there are some extenuating circumstances that need to be considered.
But the fact of the matter is what you see is a weaponization Of our intelligence community and our law enforcement system.
You see it also with a certain level of tyranny.
And I think it's mostly motivated by greed, actually.
Power as well.
But, you know, we saw it with COVID. Mainly because of my statistical background in cryptography.
I can look at medical studies and tell you pretty quickly when they're a fraud.
A lot of the NIH grants were frauds.
The reports were out and out frauds about ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine.
I'm not saying that that proved that they worked.
What I'm saying is that the studies that they say proved it didn't work were a lie.
A lie. And so you see this kind of thing.
I think it's like piranha.
We have a wounded a wounded uh you know animal in the in the amazon and the schools of fisher are circling or you have a wounded scuba diver and the black tip reef sharks are taking a bite one at a time.
I don't know that there's a single kind of monstrous conspiracy out there and we could talk about it maybe from a spiritual standpoint but from an individual standpoint I think a lot of people are acting on their own they think well this is only five votes i'm getting fifty dollars for it i need you know i need that money and it's not going to hurt anything but when you have 10 000 people doing it all of a sudden it hurts like like almost like what i hear when you say that is almost hear how uh
the military was compartmentalized they call it compartmentalization which i think is just this association with what's really happening hence you can't see the greater whole What is happening?
You think, oh, I'm working on something over here.
It's this little thing. But when you look at it as a whole, it's a mass conspiracy.
So one of the reasons I left the NSA was I saw more and more the FISA process being abused.
So what was happening was that there was a process put in place under the Patriot Act, as everybody knows.
You know, when 9-1-1 happened, I was one of the first in line to try to put tools together to find terrorists.
But then these tools started getting turned on the US citizens.
And I mean, before that, they were turned on other people in the world, sometimes to steal technology, steal money.
You know, steal power and the fact of the matter is that's not what the United States is aspirationally or legally and it has to stop.
I mean, we no longer have this kind of common vision of who we are.
As a matter of fact, we've got clearly competing versions of who we are that differ fundamentally with each other and somehow we have to fuse that back together or we fail as a nation state.
We can't We can't have fundamental brokenness within our systems, but compartmentalization is a little different than what you characterized it as I worked in the compartmentalized world for a long time.
What compartmentalization means is everything inside the boundary is secret from everything else.
What this leads to is a lack of integrated view.
You're right about that, but it isn't because the people inside the boundary Lack of worldview.
It's because there's no way to get a worldview because all of these little compartments are isolated from each other.
So you're doing all sorts of things in the dark, so to speak, you know, in the in the classified space that that is hidden from each other.
How can you possibly tell what needs to be done about something if the critical information that would alter your decision is hidden in a compartment somewhere?
And so this compartmentalization was one thing.
The second thing was the decision to overrule our rights.
And we see it over and over again.
We put somebody in prison or we're putting somebody in prison right now for writing an anti-Hillary Clinton meme.
This is preposterous.
If you look in the 1700s and the early 1800s, At the memes that were directed at the presidents, you know, at Andrew Jackson.
They're monstrous in comparison even to what we see today.
They may not have the vulgarity that you see now, but they were clearly more insulting.
It's been a history in our country to be able to yell and scream and denounce our politicians from day one.
And we have to return to that.
We can't prosecute people for screaming.
You know, we can prosecute them for violence.
I mean, that doesn't mean that we should tolerate violence.
I mean, we can't have people burning down court buildings and those types of things.
The other problem you've got is you've got government officials that are being persuaded by bureaucrats that the bureaucrat knows better than the entire population of the country knows.
So we have COVID lockdowns.
We have vaccines that don't seem to work quite the way that they We have people dying of, you know, vaccination injury, but it's clear that the statistics are being manipulated to make it look like less of a problem than it is.
And now we have climate change.
I'm not saying that there aren't problems with pollution.
I'm not saying that we should emit more carbon than necessary but I do know that China and India are not going to stop emitting carbon and our carbon output is going down and all this current declaration by Biden is going to do is force us to throw more jobs over to China which as we position ourselves in a geostrategic competition with China I can't think of anything worse frankly than increasing Our dependence
on the CCP. I love the Chinese people.
There are many, many great Chinese.
But, you know, the government has significant issues.
Would be a start of that discussion, which we could have at another time in greater depth.
But the fact of the matter is, you know, we've started adhering to the idea that experts outweigh the citizens, and they don't.
Our country was set up with the idea that the citizens in a collective sense would make the right decisions.
And it was possible for experts to become corrupt.
And the more you concentrate the power, the higher the probability is of tyranny and corruption.
And we see that everywhere.
More and more power going to the federal government.
Less and less power going to the people.
And we're going to keep getting climate change and COVID and, you know, other types of massive reassignments of wealth.
Again, I'm for clean air.
I'm for clean water.
But, you know, the fact of the matter is moving my coal burning from, you know, Nevada to Hongjo makes no sense at all if I'm worried about carbon content in the atmosphere.
And besides the fact that Chinese coal-fired plants are less efficient than U.S. plants, which actually makes it worse.
So we think we're getting rid of carbon in our economy.
We aren't. We're actually increasing the carbon worldwide when we push our carbon emitters over to China, to India, to Malaysia, to places that have no effective control over their technologies at all.
And of course we've allowed them to, you know, I mean, it's just simple analysis.
I'm an engineer. I'm also an energy expert, but I could explain that at a different time too.
But, you know, we've chosen wind and solar, which the Chinese government has basically invested to the point that they control the technology.
Why aren't we doing like geothermal where we have outstanding technology or advanced heat recovery where we in America have outstanding technology?
We make better turbines than the Chinese do.
Why aren't we using things that need high efficiency or ultra high efficiency turbines?
We can get rid of a lot of carbon.
Not that it's necessarily necessary.
That's not what I'm talking about.
I'm just saying about any common sense look at what they're doing tells you that it's not being done for the reasons that they say.
It's being done for profit.
It's being done for power.
It's being done for whatever reasons they choose are important to them.
It's not for the people.
So how do we stop it?
First of all, we get fair elections.
Ones that where we can actually elect the people that we choose.
You know, the parties have a problem, you know, in this too.
They're not sufficiently open to, you know, populist candidates and those types of things.
When did, when did ever get written into law that the RNC can't tolerate or the DNC for that matter can't tolerate populist candidates?
You know, the populism tends to rip down the walls, change the way that things are decided.
It's not always a popular thing or a thing, but it makes people think.
And right now, they're insulated in these boundaries where nothing changes and is under tight control.
And we've got to stop that.
We just have to stop it.
Wow, wow. What do you tell to people in terms of how they could get involved, what they need to do, what are the actions they need to take for the viewers out there?
Well, for us, you know, we have many different cooperating groups on a state basis, but for us, our United Sovereign Americans website is Unite4Freedom.com and volunteer.
Give us your suggestions.
We need people to help with solutions.
We need lawyers that are willing to work pro bono.
We also need money for those lawyers that are not willing to work pro bono.
98% of the work we've done with regard to analysis has been by volunteers.
Marley and I are taking no salary on anything related to United Sovereign Americans or New York Citizens Audit.
The fact is this is a citizen's reaction.
You have a chance to stand up right now.
We're reaching out to other patriot groups that are trying to insist and try to get them focused on black letter law violations and prosecuting or correcting election misconduct.
You can volunteer.
You can donate. We need a lot of money.
I would be lying if I said otherwise.
Although we have you know dozens of Of lawyers and, you know, paralegals right now helping with research.
The fact is we need hundreds and a lot of them are going to charge for their work.
If you're willing to volunteer as a lawyer or a paralegal, volunteer tomorrow.
Volunteer tonight. We need you right now.
We're intending to start filing lawsuits in December.
Middle of January latest and we're going to fight in as many states as we can afford to fight.
So Marley and I both are easily accessible.
We like to talk about these things.
Invite us to your programs.
If you have a citizens group, a religious group, a progressive group that wants to have fair elections, we'll come talk to you.
You may have to deal with the conservative bias that I have, but the fact of the matter is I want fair elections.
If the US citizens want fairly and openly to vote in a communist government, that's actually constitutional and I would have to say okay.
But it's not okay to vote people in without a legally valid election.
Frankly, our elections are Not legally valid.
Maybe you don't want to go to the point of saying lawless, but the fact is there are many millions and millions of black letter law violations that are prosecutable as election crimes.
And we're going to try to force penalization, sanction, and as appropriate prosecution of those crimes.
Amazing, amazing work.
Thank you so much for showing up to the Blood Money Podcast.
And for the viewers out there, make sure you check out AmericaHappens.com where we have all of our latest episodes, including the Blood Money Podcast, HN News Live, Conspiracy Truths, and all of our other shows.
Thank you so much for joining us for this episode of Blood Money, and I will see you on the next episode.
Thank you. Unfuck Your Mind News with Mr.
Disco Ball Head. Every week on Unfuck Your Mind News, we get to see what so many batshit crazy earthlings have been up to.
Self-destructive earthlings, commie and woke crazies.
Angry White Females, Beta Soy Boys, Today's Woke Wankers, with Mr.
Disco Ball Head. This is Un-Fuck-Your-Mind News.
In this week's Un-Fuck-Your-Mind News, we visit Clark County of the satanic city of Las Vegas, where an activist that is trying to save the penises of young boy earthling children from the scissors of crazy femalist liberatis have this to say.
Why are we telling little boys that they can be girls and girls that can be boys and they can't?
Because actually, that's when these kids tend to have the highest suicide rate is after they do all this surgery.
Instead, they get used like a little Gucci bag so their mom gets attention and they get to say that their child's trans.
None of it is based in science.
It's all based in liberal ideology.
And these statistics represent two-parent households.
The single-mother households are where these violent, crazy kids are coming from.
Of course, all the honesty and statistics made the communists go nuts.
Send her out. Send her out.
Statistically speaking, a single parent is right.
If you are not leaving, we're going to ask you to leave.
Unfortunately, this made a very large black woman lose her mind.
Bring your ass outside!
Are you violent people?
Bring your ass outside!
Are you telling me you're violent?
You always have been!
Take that shit!
Take that shit!
Another mother was recently attacked by a large white woman, a teacher in the satanic city of Las Vegas.
I don't love Nazis, go f**k yourselves.
And that is a teacher teaching your kids.
And I don't need your consent to record me.
You don't have consent to record me.
I don't need consent.
This begs the question, why do earthlings give their children to the sacrifice of mentally unstable communists who hate freedom of speech and facts?
From our observations from Planet Disco Ball Head, when you replace a black father with an angry large black woman, this happens.
And this happens.
And this happens.
But while this brave and smart young woman with the unusual color hair is defending the truth and the honor of men, where are the men?
It is clear that the earthling men are suffering from Pisidus Complexus.
In other news, it is clear that the earthling people like killing their babies.
The people of Hamas are killing the babies of Israel, and the bombs of Israel are killing the babies of Gaza.
And the Christian peoples of America are wanting to kill the Palestinian babies so that all the Jews, who they say are their friends, could all go to Israel, so most of them could be blown up and killed as well, so that God comes back.
Anyway, in other news, it seems as though this young man who's dressed like a girl seems to be having some problems because his rights are being violated.
Let's watch some video he put together about this issue.
He's having a nice piece of holiday.
She, she, she, her.
I use she, her pronouns.
I'm not sir.
Oh, so you're sir?
I mean, I'm so sorry.
I apologize.
I don't need to be called ma'am.
I just need to not be called sir, you know?
Could we please find another planet?
I'm depressed. I can't sleep.
I'm getting fat. The water here is making me grow tits.
I need to get the f*** out of here!
The man playing Joe Biden of Communist America has stated his desire to start World War 3 with his girly army.
All while, the borders of America have been open, letting in millions of military-age men.
Michael Yon has stated, they are here to kill you and take your homes.
By the way, you have my ship ready, right?
For when these earthlings go crazy?
It's all filled up so we get the fuck out of here?
Michael Yon was very frustrated in his interview with America Happens.
He had this to say. For instance, that we're going into race wars.
That's crystal clear in my paradigm, right?
But it takes guts to say that because people don't want to be called a racist.
Earthlings, I know this information you hear on America Happens must be a little shocking.
Are there evil people out there that want to cut off the penises and breasts of your children?
Unfortunately, yes.
Have many of these evil people taken over your courts and schools?
Unfortunately, yes.
Are they spraying your skies with chemicals and trying to kill you?
Unfortunately, yes.
Are they trying to inject you with things that will kill you?
Unfortunately, yes.
Will a nuclear bomb go off in the world before the 2024 election?
Most likely, yes.
But look at the bright side, Earthlings.
What is important to remember...
At least I don't live on this planet.
R2-D2, let's get the f*** out of here.
Thank you for joining us for this episode of Mr.
Disco Ball Head presents Unfuck Your Mind News.
Truth in Media is not free.
If the corrupt corporations run the media, then all we get is a pile of lies.
So please support Truth in the Media by donating to AmericaHappens.com by simply going to AmericaHappens.com, clicking on the support tab, and entering a generous donation.
Thank you so much. Thank
you. Check
out the America Happens Network, because Fox sucks now.
Truth in Media is not free.
If the corrupt corporations run the media, then all we get is a pile of lies.
So please support Truth in the Media by donating to AmericaHappens.com by simply going to AmericaHappens.com, clicking on the support tab, and entering a generous donation.
Thank you so much. We're
good to go. Thank
you. Thank
you. Check
out the America Happens Network.
▲
Export Selection