Freedom Vs Tyranny - Deep State vs Trump, the 6 part Series with Sean Stone (BM263)
|
Time
Text
Music.
All right, welcome to the latest episode of Blood Money Talks.
Today we have Sean Stone.
How are you doing, sir?
I'm doing all right.
Thank you.
Man, I'm very excited to have you on our podcast.
You know, let's just dive right into it.
I mean, let's go right into your film and then we could hear about your background later because this is a very exciting series of documentary films or episodic, I guess you could say.
So tell us all about it, sir.
Yeah, so it's called All the President's Men.
The Conspiracy Against Trump.
And it's a six-part series that'll be coming out on Tucker Carlson Network right after the election.
We started this project actually back in 21 with Rudy Giuliani and then came to this year, springtime, dove into interviews with George Papadopoulos and his wife, Simona, Steve Bannon, Kash Patel, Carter Page, Roger Stone, General Flynn, Tucker Carlson, fascinating characters.
All of them, great.
You know, they have stories to tell.
Our series is really, I would say, a comprehensive story.
Investigation into the conspiracy that was created, essentially.
It was a conspiracy to create the collusion narrative of Russia, Trump, you know, all that, right?
Russiagate.
So it's not the conspiracy of, oh yeah, Trump was, you know, working with the Russians.
It's really the conspiracy by the FBI, the intel community, DOJ. And also potentially some foreign intelligence agencies probably working with it, specifically around the British.
But a lot of these are private intel groups that are like, you know, former MI6 people like Christopher Steele, who put the Steele dossier together.
So it's a pretty thorough series, six parts that goes from the 2016, you know, allegations, the investigation, Crossfire Hurricane, the Mueller investigation, Ukraine gate right the first impeachment, all the way through the election interference in 2020, or I should say the real election interference in 2020 and rig into January 6, and basically looking at everything as it was not what the media told you.
Wow, wow.
So, I mean, you know, one of the topics that is not often spoken about is the effect of British intelligence and the British government or City of London, I guess you could say, on a lot of our issues, you know, whether it's our legal societies,
whether it's, you know, I've heard about, we had this American system of economics that is, sorry, and British intelligence was very, you Efficient in trying to make those individuals that were pushing for an economic system that's American away from it, you know, calling them things like anti-semi.
You know, there's a gentleman by the name of LaRouche that was really pushing this American economic system really so we could be in this like Federal Reserve type system that as we're seeing is not necessarily the best thing for the American people.
Do you want to elaborate a little bit on that for the Viewers that don't understand the effect the British have had on our country, really, since the Civil War.
Sure, sure.
It's a fascinating story.
In fact, LaRouche, you could say, some of his closest associates were mentors for me.
People like Jeff Steinberg, who helped Oversee the writing of Dope Inc.
I think he's a professor now.
He was a great researcher.
So anyway, people like that.
Webster Tarpley was good.
He's turned completely.
I don't know what happened to Webster.
He inverted everything now and is pushing a totalitarian line ever since COVID. On Russia and whatnot, he's totally, you know, pro-Ukraine and everything.
But anyway, a lot of these people that were very intelligent guys and women, too, in the 70s and 80s and 90s, you know, doing great work researching this.
There's also a great book.
I think it's called the American System and the Civil War or something to that effect, but it's also one of these guys that was working with LaRouche.
So yeah, the American System of Economics, you go back to the 19th century, Henry Carey, who was an advisor to Lincoln, Clay, who was a famous congressman, was he from Tennessee, I believe, Henry Clay, and many others were promoting this notion really of, you know, the American system is not, it's a mixture, it's how you say, it's a mixed system.
It's not a state, completely state run, but it's basically understanding that you need certain levels of infrastructure investment.
And it really focuses on these things, right?
Infrastructure investment in order to have development and growth of markets.
And so, you know, against the American system actually was Marxism.
Marx was reading Kerry, and Kerry would correspond with Marx.
And basically, Marx was all about class war.
And the American system was like, no, we don't hate...
The working class shouldn't hate the business class, you know, or the bourgeoisie, so-called middle class, the business owners.
Like, no, there's no hatred.
There's no class war.
It's a harmony of interests, as Kerry called it.
It's this notion that Ford implemented where it's like, I want to pay my workers good wages so that they can then buy my products, right?
That's how we've grown as a society is that people, you know, that wages, you know, basically reflect ability to have purchasing power.
And then, you know, you need your workers because they are your consumers, right?
Yeah.
The imperial model has basically been much more a financial model, which, as I put it, it's like the financier class doesn't care if you are making money as long as you're in debt, right?
So it's like they want you to have just enough to be able to service the debt.
That's the financier imperialist model, is that everyone becomes a debt slave.
The businessman's model is like, no, I want you to be able to have a good life and to be able to buy products.
The financial model is like, sure, you can buy products, but we want you to be in debt doing so.
So that's, I would say, the two systems that have been at work.
And we can, I mean, honestly, this is a whole conversation that would take a lot of focus, but I think that's really the key point to understand.
And in towards that financier model, oftentimes, you know, these elites in the, you know, especially out of Europe and the UK, you know, promoted Nazism.
You know, they backed and supported.
Bank of England was a big, you know, backer of Hitler's rise.
They, you know, and a few people like here, like, you know, Dulles Brothers were doing the deals for DuPont and the Rockefellers and others to have these business relationships with the Nazis, even though even through the war.
And then they also were support, you know, they are also supporters of the Soviet takeover, you know, against the czar in Russia.
And people under, you know, people like...
Who did the best work on that?
I'm blanking on the professor's name.
He wrote a lot about Skull and Bones.
He wrote about our deals with the Soviets.
And how we oftentimes were actually shipping the Soviets like Ford cars.
And this is not even just in the twenties and thirties.
This is all the way into the seventies during the, you know, the sixties, seventies and eighties.
It's like, we basically were oftentimes doing deals with the Soviets because fundamentally it's like, it's a captured economy.
This, you know, this, this communist socialist, you know, this communist capture of the Soviet union of that, of those were probably, you know, the former Russian empire.
And so you think about it like monopoly capitalism.
You know, you can work with, if you're in the elite, you can work with other captured societies because the economy is really about controlling the economy and being able to control resources and whatnot.
And so yeah, there can be bickering and squabbling over, you know, the Soviets and really, you know, We don't like their system.
But at the end of the day, we were doing a lot of deals and working with them, but we would oftentimes fight over the third world countries.
That's where the biggest conflicts, as you know, during the Cold War came up was in third world countries because it was like, well, we want them in our sphere of influence and not in their economic sphere.
So that was where a lot of the conflicts with the Soviets came.
But the idea of a captured economy is not really a problem from the perspective of this elite class, essentially, as long as they have a certain level of influence.
And then, you know, if they don't have financial influence, obviously they want to move in that direction of financial influence and interest.
That's how I would phrase it, essentially.
One is a more capitalistic approach that recognizes this harmony of the business and the working man, and the other is more of a financier capitalism that just wants everyone to basically be in debt.
Yeah, yeah.
You'd mentioned, and we're going to get to the topic of Donald Trump and the attacks upon him, why so, but you had mentioned the Dulles brothers, which for people that are JFK assassination buffs, we just did an episode with Roger Stone, and it seems as though they were integrally involved in the assassination of JFK. Dulles, you know, one brother Having influence within the CIA, the other brother being in Dallas and having influence within the police to help to cover up.
Do you want to talk about that at all?
Well, no, I mean, John Foster was dead by the time of Kennedy's assassination, and John Foster had run the State Department under Eisenhower, right?
So it was really through the Eisenhower years that these guys were the architects of our early Cold War policy of, you know, essentially of the birth of the national security state, of how the CIA was operating, you know, overthrowing governments in the In Guatemala in the 50s, you know, having interventions all over the world, the Middle East and whatnot.
So it was like...
And also actually Vietnam.
Vietnam was very key because the birth of the Vietnam War is the 1950s.
That's when the Vietnamese repel the French colonials, right?
And we basically take over from the French, and especially when it comes to the drug, the opium trade, right?
The drug traffic.
So it really becomes like a CIA operation very early on.
And that ultimately escalates to the place where, you know, we come to intervene basically on behalf of the South, in the South Vietnam.
So when it comes to the Kennedy assassination, look, I don't know the specifics of How Dulles would have overseen the assassination.
I think Douglas did a good book on it, and Talbot did a good book on the Dulles brothers, I think.
But as far as the assassination plot, there's just too many different threads and too many different potentials to say who really was the key architect.
There was an interesting document that was created by our own I think it was a customs agent that put this together.
I think it was called the Torbit document or something.
And it talks about some of the key players that were former fascists, essentially, or pro-fascists in Europe and America.
And the key organization to look at is called Permadex.
So Permindex, Jim Garrison, who was investigating the Kennedy assassination, he was the basis of my dad's film JFK, he recognized Clay Shaw as one of the potential organizers of the assassination because Clay Shaw, who was New Orleans' trademark guy, business guy, had been a former, been OSS, was CIA. The CIA lied and said he wasn't, but he was.
Shaw Had been seen with Ferry and Oswald in New Orleans, you know, in the time before the assassination, and had been basically identified as being part of this plot.
Shah was part of this thing called Permindex.
Permindex was based in Switzerland, and a lot of the threads of the assassination go to Switzerland.
This financial oligarchy, let's say that, you know, There's a reason that no country invades Switzerland.
And I think it has more to do with the financial power there and also the deals that are made, you know, than anything, because it just doesn't make sense why, you know, the Nazis never invaded, the Soviets never invaded, right?
If this country is sitting on as much gold and wealth, you know, as we understand the banking system there, why is it such a hub?
To this day, it's called the Bank of International Settlements, which was established pretty early on by the U.S. and the Nazis and others and the British.
To this day, it's very powerful.
They call it the Bank of...
It is the Bank of Banks.
It is basically the heart of the central bank system.
So a lot of these connections with Permadex through Switzerland...
Is what you have to look at.
And some of the people on the permadex board are critical to understand the assassination.
So Dulles in particular, Allen being the brother who was the head of CIA, who is really the guy that does the Warren Commission cover-up, right?
He's the one that is essentially serving to make sure that the Warren Commission into the Kennedy assassination doesn't follow too many threads, let's say, down, you know, into...
You know, Oswald being a CIA asset or ONI. I mean, he definitely was working with intelligence, whether it was a mixture of ONI, CIA, FBI. He was in that orbit.
So all that had to be, you know, kept out of the Warren Commission.
All the threads and, you know, things that would have led to deeper conspiracies had to be.
So he was very integrally part of the cover up.
But as far as the actual ordering of the assassination, I don't know that Dulles would have ordered the assassination.
I think the orders would have come from a much higher level.
And that's where you go to the central bankers, the real so-called Illuminati, the powers behind the scenes.
Let's talk a little bit about, or let's talk a lot about Donald Trump.
I mean, the way they came after Donald Trump through the mainstream media apparatus, which we know is connected to the intelligence apparatus, was very much like, you know, we're trying to make a foreign...
Bad guy, really blow him up in the news, like a Saddam Hussein or an Osama bin Laden.
You see a lot of those elements at work, and this guy's a bad guy, is a bad guy, is a bad guy, right?
The same thing happened with Donald Trump.
What was going on there?
What are they so scared about, Donald Trump, that they went after him the way they did, including what we've seen more recently with assassination attempts, threats to his life?
Yeah.
I think it boils down to...
In 2016, it was a couple of factors, but the big one with the Russiagate, I mean, look at the Russiagate story.
It was about phobia of Russia, which had to be pushed.
And in many ways, we were already entering a new Cold War phase, which we saw, you know, those of us that were, like, working for RT and whatnot, like, we understood, like, there's been a clear shift in the attitude, you The early days when it was like,
you know, Bush, you know, looked at Putin and saw, you know, saw his soul and saw that he was good, right, to the 2014, the Maidan coup, which we helped to stoke and oversee in Ukraine, the couping of their president at the time, and then the installation of a new government, and then basically shifting Ukraine into an anti-Russia Attitude in the government.
It was key that we pushed Ukraine against its neighbor.
So it would basically be like Russians being involved in a coup in Mexico and then basically putting their intelligence resources, their state department resources, their NGO resources, their financial resources, to moving Mexico into an anti-American attitude.
That's basically what happened in Ukraine.
All of a sudden, imagine, I try to explain to people, I'm like, okay, so imagine the Russians or Chinese are basically doing this in Mexico and shifting the education in Mexico, the attitude in Mexico to say, remember when the United States stole your land?
Remember that the United States is your enemy, actually, and these are not your friends?
Well, you stoke that kind of education and anger.
In the U.S., we worked with the Azov Battalion, which was You know, patently neo-Nazi, you know, frankly inspired by the old Nazis.
And, you know, because there were real Nazis in Ukraine at the time of the World War.
So, you know, this attitude that we pushed in the Ukraine, it's like, I just try to explain to people, imagine that the Russians doing that in Mexico, and all of a sudden, You know, you're getting basically a hostile buildup in Mexico.
And then, you know, then the Russians are saying, hey, we're going to bring Mexico into our, you know, in our sphere.
We're going to start sending missiles and weaponry to, you know, to Mexico.
There might be a problem there, right?
That's what we did with Ukraine.
We basically took them into our psychological orbit, financial orbit, started to indoctrinate, you know, to push a through line.
Meanwhile, the east of Ukraine had...
It has been at war since 2014.
The intention, I think, from the East was to say, hey, we're not okay with this anti-Russia narrative.
We want to have more sovereignty.
And that could have been worked out.
There was a peace deal essentially in place by 2022.
And as we know, Boris Johnson and the West basically scuffled that.
And to this day, Biden has not talked to Putin about peace.
No one in the West has talked about making a peace deal.
So think about that in context of Trump coming in in 2016 in the middle of this whole instigation and saying, hey, we need to have good relations with Russia.
Why can't we work with the Russians?
We've got a lot of, you know, fundamentally like your two great powers, Russia's largest country in the world.
It makes sense.
Let's work with Russia.
And that was the red line for so many people, both, you know, Republicans and Democrats.
Sorry to interrupt you.
Why are they trying to force us into conflict?
I mean, it seems like they're building a conflict narrative like we've done with a lot of different parts of the world.
You know, Vietnam War is an example.
Iraq War, Afghanistan, you know, more recently Ukraine.
We need to go fight this.
We need to give all our, you know, millions and billions of dollars to these people.
Like, why are they trying to start a conflict with Russia?
Yeah.
So towards, you know, towards what we were talking about before, this idea of finance capitalism.
Finance capitalism is always interested in expansion of markets, in the process destroying any competitors, right?
Be a sovereign nation, for example, can be a competitor, right?
Because you want transnational control.
You want to expand your markets.
You want to destroy markets that are in the way or overtake them.
And you also want to put people into debt.
You know, you basically create systems of perpetual debt.
And what does war do?
War, more than anything, it creates huge amounts of spending, right?
And who's paying for it at the end of the day?
It's like, well...
Either the people of Ukraine are going to pay for their debts that they're racking up with the IMF and company, or they're going to have to leverage and sell their resources to do it.
And I think that's really the goal of a lot of these strategies of the finance capitalists.
It's like the same with the U.S. How is the U.S. going to pay for its $35 trillion of debt?
We're going to have to start giving away our resources.
So you're saying this leads back to the international bankers that want us to be debt slaves more or less?
And it's like basically creating more and more debt slaves.
So we're basically trapped within this financial system, it sounds like.
That's the way I perceive it.
Yeah.
Wow, wow, wow.
So tell me a little bit more about your movie.
How many parts is it?
What could people expect?
Is there cliff notes you could tell us about what they would expect when they watch your movie?
I think, you know, more than anything, it's an education.
It's really, you know, people may think that they know the story.
I'm sure there are many that have followed over the years, you know, watching news and interviews and things like this, and they might have seen, like, the Flynn documentary or the plot against the president, which all these are really solid pieces of work.
I think that with ours, we get to a nice big picture of How this went down, how many foreign intel agencies and our own intelligences were involved.
Some of the information that's come out That we put in, you know, it's been as recent as the last few years, right?
Even up to the present, this year itself, when they talk about the intelligence agencies bumping Trump advisors like Papadopoulos, you know, bumping meaning, you know, having other intelligence agents or whatnot, like, you know, approach, try to, you know, try to like suss out if they're, you know, what their intention are, what they know, if they're foreign agents, you know, basically spy on them, right?
And so a lot of this stuff, you know, also the Durham report came out last year.
So we have the evidence in the Durham report of, you know, some of these conversations within the FBI, some of the facts and details that have come out, you know, specifically from spying, you The FBI in particular, they don't have the CIA and the higher levels of spying that probably went on.
We don't have that information, but we do have the FBI agents or assets that were spying on Papadopoulos and Carter Page and whatnot.
So again, we have a lot of information that's only come out more recently, and then we have the big picture of why.
And so through this course of the series, I think you'll understand a very interesting agenda, which we kind of, in the heart of it, we call it like globalism versus nationalism, right?
And what path do we want to take as a country?
When you have someone like Trump who represents a more nationalist approach, which is saying, hey, you know, these wars, we don't need to go into these stupid endless wars that don't help America.
You know, there's no national interest for America to instigate a conflict with Russia.
That might be the agenda of a fanatic...
Elites that thrives off of destabilization, right?
And then, you know, if you destabilize Russia, what's going to be the consequence of that?
Are they going to try to carve it up?
Is that their agendas?
You know, they want to be able to carve up Russia into smaller I don't think that's going to work anymore.
I think we're shifting into a multipolar world and the elites are on a course of self-destruction and they're trying to take us along with them, unfortunately.
Wow, wow.
Alright, so based upon what you learned making these documentaries, could you tell me one to three things that you would change that are the crux of the issue, that are the head of the snake, so to speak, if you had, you know, God-given powers, what are those one to three things you would change about our country in order to change our future?
Yeah, I think what, you know, what Trump's getting at is a lot of it is really true.
I mean, I would get rid of the income tax.
Actually, I would work to get rid of the Federal Reserve System entirely.
As you talked about, you know, a Federal Reserve System that perpetuates debt.
Constitutionally speaking, gold and silver are money in the Constitution.
So we have to get back to some kind of gold and silver backed currency and, you know, to really hedge the inflation and get to more of a...
Congressional, you know, what is it?
Congressional Congress and Treasury.
Well, first of all, I mean, you'd have to separate this corporate ownership of our government, right?
You have to weed that out completely if you want to get back to some kind of honest representation.
But really, if you just get to a place of the Treasury issuing the currency again, Backed by gold and silver and limiting federal spending, literally taking down this massive bloated federal government to a place that's manageable, that focuses on things that we need.
Sure, we need intelligence, we need security, we need defense.
We can have the federal government Helping to promote infrastructure and development across state lines.
That's true.
You know, things like, you know, highways, bridges, you know, traffic with even high speed rail systems and energy systems, you know, power, you know, nuclear power going to a higher evolution of Of technology, not taking us back to windmills and solar panels.
That's what the federal government's currently pushing with their Green New Deal agenda, is actually trying to take us away from a high energy density output.
They're trying to take us back to a population of 100 million or less living with windmill energy, which is really going to kill our productivity or output.
It's not going to work for a growing population.
So these are some of the key things that I see.
And Trump has talked about a number of these, including the need to increase our energy output, which again is in the face of the Green New Deal that wants us to...
Basically, you know, reduce our energy output and just go back, you know, go to a massive wind and solar, which will not give us the energy that we need.
And the amount of input, you know, that goes into those things is also very destructive.
I mean, the amount of resources that we need just to build batteries and the destruction that comes with those processes of extraction, you know, and the toxic, you know, they say like the fuels, the carbon that is emitted just from extracting and creating those, right, is basically more than...
Then you're reducing by once they're created.
Wow, wow.
All right.
So there's a lot of people out there that believe that this entire last eight years has been part of a big plan of taking down this elite that you're talking about that keeps us in wars, that keeps us in financial servitude.
Some of the Q people, which I've never really followed.
I mean, do you Do you think there's been, you know, and I'm not saying, you know, whether to agree or disown this Q concept, but do you think this has been part of a bigger ongoing plan to get us to this point where the people are awakened, they're seeing the problems, they're seeing things like your documentary that really shows where the problem is coming from?
Or, I mean, what's your thoughts about how this entire last year, last eight years has been playing out?
Yeah, I mean, I'm a big believer in the awakening.
Because, again, I see it from a perspective of someone who's been doing conspiracy research, you know, essentially since I was a kid.
And to be able to, you know, to just look on Twitter and see the conversations that are happening and the comments that people are making indicates, man, people are waking up, you know, they're talking about things like America's a republic, we're not a democracy.
Who normalized that concept of democracy was Bush, Bush Jr.
especially, right?
I remember in high school when it was like, you know, the war on terror, the Patriot Act, all that, and it was like this whole threat to democracy, and we're going to push democracy and democracy to democracy.
It's like, well, we're not a democracy.
We're a republic.
We have certain things, and you guys are trying to demolish.
Actually, you know, Bush was part of that whole New World Order agenda, like demolishing democracy.
Our sacred rights of privacy, right, and protections in the Bill of Rights with their Patriot Act surveillance apparatus and, you know, this move towards what, you know, escalated over the years was like this, basically this power of the federal government over us.
And yeah, I think this is key to get back to this notion of, no, the checks and balances within the federal system, but more importantly, in the Bill of Rights, if nothing else.
You know, if the federal system is, you know, If the checks and balances are screwed up because the corporations have bought the Congress people who write the laws and the Supreme Court...
I'm sorry.
I'm not going to leave the fate of our country up to a few old men and women to decide what is the law.
We've seen some decent Supreme Court decisions over the course of the centuries.
We've seen some...
This egregious Supreme Court, you know, Supreme Courts that were very progressive and, you know, basically interpreting laws to basically say, oh yeah, you can even, remember they even allowed people like, you know, to have like, what was it called?
Sterilization, right?
Of, you know, one, two, three generations of retards, something to that effect, right?
The court basically said, you know, oh yeah, you can sterilize because you've had too many, one, two, three generations of idiots is enough, right?
So they've, you know, they've had terrible decisions on the court.
They've had decisions, you know, allowing for forced vaccination of people because of, you know, health crises.
So all these things, you know, that are, to me, it's like you can't leave your anything up to the court or to the government because even as our founders, we're very clear about, you know, humans, men and women are not angels, right?
So if you leave your fate up to someone else's decision, you have a problem.
We've enshrined within our system A bill of rights that really says the powers that are not, you know, these rights are given to the people and should not be trampled upon, or they have been, obviously.
And then, you know, really, these are only the beginning.
The majority of the rights should be left with the people and the states that represent them.
And that's what the Ninth and Tenth Amendments are all about.
It's saying, just because we didn't put the rights specifically in here, like your right to bear arms or to assemble or freedom of speech and press and religion and to be private in your person, all that, great.
We're just giving you some examples.
The rest are really up to you.
Don't let the federal government take that away.
That's really the key of understanding our Bill of Rights.
So there was this thing I heard about called the original 13th Amendment where, you know, we're talking about checks and balances, right?
But you have this reality, which is that the judiciary is filled with what I call bar agents, you know, members of the bar.
And then you have our Congress and Senate filled with about 75% bar agents, aka attorneys.
Could you talk a little bit about that if you know anything about that topic?
Yeah.
Only to a certain extent.
I mean, if you ever notice, you're going like dealing with the court, right?
And Jordan Maxwell was great at this kind of stuff.
You know, he would just sit there and like, look, it's a...
It's a system that you have to have a representative represent you.
You're not alive.
What is the term?
You can try to represent yourself, but fundamentally it's a system that doesn't consider you as valid unless you're a lawyer.
The bar and it's like there's the water gate and then it's, you know, it's all naval.
It's basically it's all maritime legal structures there, right?
And there's like a bank, the bank or the bench, you know, where the judge sits.
And that's like, that's basically the bank, you know, like how do you say that's land.
It's also represents the financial interest because every case is bonded and has money that gets passed through this other, what you could call like a shadow Financial system that exists outside of what most of us understand and are aware of.
But this point is like when you deal with lawyers and whatnot in these cases, it's like the lawyers basically are just arguing the points and the judge is sitting there like as a referee.
And so at the end of the day, the lawyers, their loyalty is to the Bar Association, which does come out of the UK. It is a British system.
I think, I'm not sure if it's originally called the British registry, but essentially the Bar Association is a British system.
And yeah, I mean, good luck.
You know, again, lawyers don't want to be disbarred, right?
That's like, oh my God, I can't practice law without having this, you know, being credited by the bar, really?
You know, I think you should be able to be an advocate no matter what, you know, whether or not you're accredited by the bar or not.
Your loyalty and your affiliation should not be determined by this association.
And as we've seen with people like Giuliani in our story, You know, he was disbarred for taking up cases that were considered unpopular, and now he's being, you know, charged as a conspirator for taking up these cases.
So it shows you the system is really rigged in a certain way.
And that's why, you know, a lot of people have no problem when it comes to like, oh, yeah, you know, if some young black kid gets, you know, sentenced to a death sentence, for example, right?
And then we find out, no, he was, he had no proper defense, or, you know, they basically just railroaded him.
There was no, you know, then there's some exculpatory evidence that comes out.
And a lot of people be like, oh, yeah, I totally believe that, right?
But then it comes to like the higher levels.
And they're like, oh, no, the system is the system is not rigged, or the system is fine.
It's fair.
But they don't see that it's the same system, no matter what the level is.
Essentially, it's very hard, let's just say, to have a really fair trial in this country.
It doesn't matter.
It may have the appearance of fairness, it may look good from an outsider perspective, but within the inside of it.
And that's why you get cases like ours where You have the Papadopoulos who, you know, gets sentenced to, you know, to prison for lying to the FBI. And it's like, well, there was no stenographer.
There was no recording.
There was no like, hey, you know, swearing an oath before talking to anyone.
He didn't have legal representation even when he talked to them.
And so if he misremembered or said things that were inaccurate, that's lying to the FBI and can be prosecuted.
So these are the kind of things you'll see in our story, or Flynn, you know, going, you know, essentially being, you know, they railroaded Flynn on this and that and the other, and ultimately his counsel, Sidney Powell, had actually done a great book about the Enron case, which a lot of us grew up, you know, seeing, oh, Enron's corrupt company, but she actually did a great book exposing how the DOJ people were very corrupt in their prosecution of Enron.
So the DOJ in general is much more, I think, much more corrupt than people realize.
And they think of, oh, the Justice Department, that's the government.
They must be the good guys.
It's not that simple.
Yeah, yeah.
I mean, if you don't mind me sharing a quick personal story, recently I was accused of being a potential third Trump assassin, turned out to be complete nonsense.
I've already released all the evidence and everybody, you know, definitely in our grassroots movement knows that this was It was nonsense.
But one of the comments that this sheriff who falsely accused me on the international stage had said was that, oh, he'll never be able to afford the legal fees to fight this.
And so he made it very clear that there's a legal barrier.
Not that, you know, I don't have the 100% truth.
I'm just on my side, but that there's a legal barrier because of how much it costs due to attorneys that would prevent me from essentially prosecuting the issue because of the bad things he did.
I mean, what do you think about that kind of situation?
Is that evidence that really, we're not really talking about justice, we're talking about the bar of entry being so high because of these legal societies That now we're not in a common law situation where a regular guy could walk in a court, defend his rights, and even, you know, prosecute any issues.
I mean, what do you think is going on there?
Oh, I mean, again, it's the nature of this B system that has become, you know, there are so many codes and so many laws, and I'm not surprised by what you're saying.
I think, you know, people realize how much gets spent on lawyers.
I mean, Listen, I think it's I think I think it's corrupt for lawyers to charge you by the hour.
And, you know, I think we work in, you know, obviously there's many different fields, right?
If you're in a service job and you, you know, let's say you're a nine to five person and, you know, yeah, sure.
Maybe you get paid by the hour.
If a lawyer sits there and reads a book and they say, oh, I read this book and it took me three hours.
They're going to charge you three hours, right?
I mean, that's so corrupt.
The amount of money that goes into these things, as we know, in the Flynn case, it was over $5 million in his legal fees.
I mean, that's just the Flynn case.
I mean, imagine others.
It's incomprehensible how much money is being spent.
And so, yeah, they basically, you know, the DOJ, I think they get about 90% of their cases, you know, they win because they ultimately, most of them are plea deals, right?
They're like, I surrender.
I give up.
I don't want to, I cannot afford any more money, time, you know, loss of ink, whatever it may be, you know, loss of income or, you know, just the fees that I can't afford.
And you'll surrender.
And you'll say, hey, let me make a plea.
Sean, is there anything that we didn't talk about that's worth mentioning before we start wrapping this episode up?
No, I mean, I think so much is in that episode that people are going to find evidence, clues, information.
It's a very thorough series.
And, you know, I approach it as a historian.
So people may say, oh, well, it's, you know, whatever.
It's the first administration.
It's not important.
It is important.
This is an important piece of our history of the last eight years.
Thank you so much, Sean.
You know, I really appreciate you coming on to our podcast.
And for the viewers out there, make sure you check out AmericaHappens.com where we have all of our featured content.