The Restrict Act & Why Banning TikTok Is More Than Meets The All Seeing Eye
The Restrict Act, also known as the "Stopping Partisan Policy at the Legislative Branch Act," is a proposed bill in the United States Congress that aims to limit the influence of partisan politics on legislative branch agencies. The act seeks to ensure that agencies are free from political interference and are able to function independently in a nonpartisan manner.
The bill would require all legislative branch agencies, including the Government Accountability Office, Congressional Research Service, and the Congressional Budget Office, to adopt and enforce policies that ensure that their work is nonpartisan and unbiased. The act would also establish a new Office of the Nonpartisan Congressional Research Service Director, which would be responsible for ensuring that the agency is operating in a nonpartisan manner and for reporting any violations of the agency's policies.
Proponents of the Restrict Act argue that it is necessary to protect the integrity of legislative branch agencies and to ensure that they can carry out their work without interference from partisan politics. They point to instances where agencies have been pressured to produce reports or research that supports a particular political agenda, rather than providing objective analysis.
However, there are also criticisms of the Restrict Act. Some opponents argue that it would be difficult to implement and enforce, and that it could potentially restrict the ability of agencies to provide useful information and analysis to lawmakers. They also argue that it could create a chilling effect on free speech and academic freedom, as agency employees may be hesitant to express their opinions on controversial topics.
Another criticism of the Restrict Act is that it does not address the root causes of partisan politics in the legislative branch. Many lawmakers and experts argue that the increasing polarization of American politics is driven by a range of factors, including gerrymandering, campaign finance laws, and media bias. They argue that addressing these underlying issues is necessary to truly address the problem of partisan politics.
Despite these criticisms, the Restrict Act has garnered significant support from lawmakers on both sides of the aisle, as well as from good government groups and other organizations that advocate for nonpartisan governance. The bill is currently pending in the House and Senate, and its fate remains uncertain.
I'm your host today, Chase Geyser filling in for Pink Eye Harrison Smith.
It is an honor and a pleasure to be with you.
He will be back with you folks next week.
But I'm going to do the best I can to approach the greatness that is this show, hosted by Harrison Smith.
We're going to cover a lot of things today.
We got a great guest in the third hour.
In the second hour, I'm going to be taking a lot of calls.
One of the first things that I want to talk about today is the Restrict Act, otherwise known as the TikTok ban.
But before we go into the Restrict Act specifically, I want to show you this clip of Alex Jones on September 12th, 2001.
Go ahead and fire it up, guys.
And it's September 12, 2001.
I'm Alex Jones, your host on 911 on 9-11 of September 2001, yesterday, as we do the show live.
A mass bombing that I have predicted for the last five years occurred.
They are going to now use terrorism as a pretext to destroy our civil liberties.
I believe from all of the evidence before us that I'm about to cover, either the government actually carried out this bombing themselves, the New World Order occupational government to create the crisis to offer the solution, or ladies and gentlemen, they allowed terrorists from somewhere in the world who were state sponsored because of the sophistication of this to engage in a sinister activity.
You are now going to see a massive response, a all-out covert war with assassinations of leaders in Middle Eastern nations.
Special Forces being unleashed globally.
They need terrorism.
as a pretext to bring in the modern police state.
They're telling you, give up your liberty for security.
Now, I have Kissinger on tape saying this.
Now, here's the question I have for you out there.
How does giving up liberty for security safeguarders...
Give me total power and don't question me.
Everything will be all right.
This is why this helps the government.
This is why they would want to do this, because it's about power, ladies and gentlemen.
That's all it's ever been about.
And they know exactly what they're doing.
That's Alex Jones at I believe just 27 years old, and he totally predicted what was going to happen with the Patriot Act.
And so the question then becomes what can we learn from what happened with the Patriot Act, right?
First thing that I find very interesting about all this legislation is that it always has a great name, something like the Patriot Act or the Don't Say Gay Bill, or the rest or the TikTok ban, right?
Which is really called the Restrict Act, as I understand it.
And it's funny to me because if it was any product or service, that company would be sued for false advertising, right?
The Patriot Act wasn't really an act about patriotism, but an act about violating the privacy of every American, right?
As we know from Edward Snowden.
The Restrict Act isn't really about restricting the communists from spying on us, but it seems to me to be more about just violating the privacies and securities and information and data associated with private American citizens.
And we're going to dive more into that in the next segment.
We're going to go over a hearing featuring Scott Hawley and uh Rand Paul as well.
Uh, going over the restrict act and and trying to understand what are the pros and cons and whether or not this is the right step for us.
But I think there's something to be learned from the wisdom of Alex Jones.
And of course, the motif is that Alex Jones was right, and he seems to be right time and time again, way ahead of the curve on certain things like that, like the Patriot Act specifically.
And how are we supposed to save this country if we don't learn from the lessons of the past, right?
History repeats itself.
And are we going to allow history to repeat itself with this Restrict Act with this TikTok ban?
And I understand a lot of people are not fans of TikTok because it's run by the CCP, but I always respond to that criticism.
I always want to say, okay, well, if you think that TikTok is a commie platform, then what was Twitter or what is Facebook or what is Instagram or what is YouTube?
Guys, these are all commie platforms.
But we're going to dive in real seriously in the next segment and go into the details of what the Restrict Act actually says and why we should not look at just the name of these acts in order to choose whether or not to support them, but actually dive into the details so we know what we're talking about.
Stay tuned, folks.
You're listening to the American Journal with your host, Chase Geiser.
Watch it live right now at Band.video.
Four months ago, the United States Senate and then the United States House came together to ban the app TikTok on all federal government devices, on tablets, on phones, on computers, on federal contractors and their devices as well.
We acted just a few months ago with a sense of urgency because we decided that TikTok was a national security threat.
A privacy threat, yes, a data threat, yes, but above all, a national security threat.
And we were right to act just those few months ago.
And now we must take the next step to ban TikTok nationwide to protect the security of every single American whose personal lives, whose personal data, whose personal security is in danger from the Chinese Communist Party in Beijing.
And it's time to act now because we've seen just in the last week, the TikTok CEO come before the United States Congress and confirm that the reasons we acted four months ago were right and valid, and that the need at this hour is urgent.
In this last week, we learned, uh we can or should say we confirmed from the testimony of the TikTok CEO that TikTok has the ability to track Americans' data, to track Americans' location, to track Americans' personal lives, whether they want it to or not.
What am I talking about?
Well, TikTok tracks your keystrokes.
Now think about that for a second.
It's not just the videos you may upload if you have the app on your videos.
You don't think the government tracks your keystrokes?
And not just while you are on the app.
Oh no.
It tracks your keystrokes all the time.
What your texting, what you're emailing, it tracks your contact list, it reads your phone list.
We believe, based on independent third-party analysis, that it can get into email.
And it does this whether or not the user consents.
In fact, there's no way to turn it off.
Americans are subject to this ongoing data collection at all hours of the day and night, even if they've got TikTok turned off on their phone.
What else have we learned?
Well, that TikTok is monitoring the location of Americans.
It's not just your keystrokes, it's your location data.
Where are you right now?
What is it that you are doing?
Where are you moving to?
Are you in the world?
You don't think the government knows where you are at all times?
TikTok TikTok.
Everything everything that he's accusing TikTok of doing is stuff that all the other platforms do and the U.S. government does.
And we know that they've been doing this.
TikTok has been gathering this data, not just on American citizens, but also on American journalists.
We know that they are able to see what journalists are saying, to see where journalists are going.
New whistleblower revelations have shown that TikTok has spied on particular American journalists and tried to track them.
Sounds familiar to me.
Try to control an essence, or at least get an understanding of what their message might be.
Think about this.
An app on your phone that tracks your keystrokes, that reads your personal information, that tracks journalists around, that tracks your location.
You can't do anything about it, and we haven't even gotten to the worst part.
The worst part is all of this information is accessible to engineers based in China, accessible to the Chinese communist party.
When he was asked about this last week, the CEO of TikTok didn't deny this espionage.
No, what he said instead is well, I don't think spying is the right way to describe it.
Maybe he preferred the words he didn't deny it.
That's one thing the government denied for years.
Maybe he preferred the Word tracking, but I actually think spying just about captures it.
The problem with TikTok is not the videos on the app.
The problem with TikTok is it's a backdoor for the Chinese Communist Party into the personal lives and information into the most intimate details of every American's life.
And we know the link between TikTok and the Chinese Communist Party is real, and we know that it is strong.
TikTok is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Chinese parent company, Byte Dance.
We know that ByteDance has Chinese Communist Party members in its senior leadership.
In fact, Bike Dance's editor in chief is a communist party secretary.
We know the Communist Party has done trainings for TikTok and Bite Dance personnel.
We have video of it being done in Beijing, in China.
Whistleblowers have come forward to my office and to others and given us evidence that China-based engineers are able to access Americans' personal data at any time that they want.
Again, the CEO was did not deny that last week.
No, the links to the Chinese Communist Party are real and they are inscribed in Chinese law.
This isn't just a matter of what TikTok may want to do.
No, TikTok as a wholly owned subsidiary of the Chinese parent company is subject to Chinese law, which both the 2014 espionage law in that country and their 2017 national security law, which require, require the company to turn over data that the Chinese Communist Party that Beijing may request under those laws, they must make Americans' data available.
Must make it available to Chinese communist officials.
This is in addition to the CCP members who are actually senior officials in these companies who work in these companies.
All right, pause it for a second.
Just for a second.
Holly is saying here that the problem with TikTok is not the videos on the app, but it is the fact that it's a backdoor for the CCP to spy on American citizens.
And we're going to watch the rest of the video.
Don't worry, we'll get back to it.
But I actually think it's the opposite.
First of all, where is everyone's phone made, whether it's an iPhone or an Android device?
Where is it made?
It's made in China.
And there's tons of claims that you can find if you do research of forensic professionals, military personnel, talking about the fact that our devices are made in China, being evidence in and of itself that we are being spied on by the CCP.
You don't think that there are chips or there's software or there's hardware on these devices that can track our keystrokes or our location or spy on our government officials for a long time.
And I don't know if this is still the case, but for a long time, it was the case that government personnel had to use BlackBerry devices because they were deemed the most secure for government officials because precisely for this reason.
And so the fact that he's just saying that it's not about the content, but it's just about the fact that the CCP is spying on private citizens seems like hogwash to me, especially since we know that all the other major social media platforms are spying on us just as much.
And everyone just accepts all the terms and conditions all the time.
And half of those terms and conditions are associated with violating our privacy.
So that in the juxtaposition or in the context of the fact that these devices are made themselves in China does not really make the case for the restrict act, in my opinion.
And how are we supposed to hold China accountable for spying on us through software anyway?
Let's just assume that this was the only way that they could spy on our 16-year-olds, right?
If this was the way, how are we supposed to hold them accountable when we haven't held them accountable at all for the lab leak in Wuhan, which is all but proven.
So anyway, keep playing this video.
I want to see the rest of this for the next two minutes.
Then we'll go to break and watch the rest of the segment as well.
Access to Americans'data as I stand here and speak to you today.
today.
The intent of China and all of this is quite clear.
They want to build a profile on every single American.
We know that many of the recent data hacks of credit agencies, of other digital repositories of Americans' personal information, have been carried out by communist China.
They are hungry for information about the American people.
They are gathering it on everybody that they can as much as they can, just like they do to their own citizens.
And they're using The app TikTok to do it.
Of course, that's not the only way that the Chinese Communist Party has tried to gather information on Americans.
This is certainly not the only time that they've done it.
Think about the Confucius Institut all across the country that the CCP funded on America's college campuses.
Think about the researchers that they funded and tried to place into key programs, key institutes and universities all across the country.
Heaven's sakes, think about the Chinese spy balloon that just went over this country, right over my home state of Missouri just a few weeks ago, photographing everything that they could.
Now, this is this is a pattern.
The difference is in those cases, we addressed it.
We shut down the Confucius institutes.
Those who have lied about the money that they have gotten from China, the funding that they have gotten, have in some cases been prosecuted for attempted espionage on America's college campuses, and the spy balloon was belatedly shot down, but shot down at least.
No, we take an action.
No, we've taken action in these other instances to protect Americans, to stop the efforts of the CCP to spy on America, to collect Americans' data, to put Americans at risk, and now we must do the same thing with TikTok.
This is why President Trump in the previous administration tried to ban it.
We've been at this for years now.
Years ago, the last administration tried to ban TikTok for all of these same national security reasons that led us as a Congress to ban it on federal devices.
This has been a long time coming.
There's no rush to judgment here.
This is what administration after administration has concluded that it's time to take action.
Here's the real truth.
That if it were the Confucius Institutes, this Chinese spy balloon, if it were some American company that was coordinating with a foreign ally, we'd shut it down immediately.
And we have done in these other cases.
But with TikTok, now TikTok says, oh no, no, no, no, but you can't do that to us.
You you can't hold us accountable.
We have a special carve out.
No, we have the First Amendment.
The First Amendment protects us.
Well, I must have missed the class in law school where we covered the First Amendment right to spy.
Last time I checked my Constitution, there was no such protection.
Okay, positive.
And I can be darn sure.
The First Amendment right to spy, throw up this tweet here from White Rabbit that I've got on the table.
Another good rundown of the Restrict Act.
No.
The restrict act would allow the government to access all of the data on your video devices if it is a service that uses over one million people.
This includes services like Ring Doorbell and home security cameras and so much more.
A VPN won't help you get around this either.
If caught using a privacy device such as a VPN, you'll face up to 20 years in prison and or up to one million dollars in fines.
So where is their right to spy on us through this act?
Most of these policies, most of these acts are a scapegoat, a Trojan horse to violate our rights.
So they're saying TikTok shouldn't have the right to spy on you.
Only we, your government, should have the right to spy.
And you know, I don't know if Senator Hawley is aware of all the details of this act.
Maybe he's just trusting his interns or listening to his lobbyists or his staff.
Maybe he is aware of it.
I don't know.
But something is really, really wrong with this.
Let's keep listening to Holly.
Now, the First Amendment may protect dance videos, sure.
Upload those all you want, but the First Amendment does not protect the right to spy on American citizens.
It does not protect espionage.
It does not protect what the Chinese Communist Party is trying to do in harvesting the data of millions of Americans.
Now, TikTok has no special First Amendment carve out.
They don't get special privileges That no other entity or an American company would get.
They're subject to the same rules.
And when you try to spy on American citizens, when you try to use Americans' own phones as portals for collection, that ought to be stopped.
You ought to be banned.
And the fact that they are a China-based company shouldn't help them or hurt them.
The fact is their ties to Beijing, their ties to the CCP, their ongoing efforts at espionage, and their ongoing lies, by the way, to this body.
This is a company that has come before this body and lied time and time again.
They said that they weren't controlled by Bite Dance.
Now we know they are.
They said that China-based engineers couldn't access American user data.
Now we know they can.
They said that the CCP had no influence.
And yet last week, the CEO of TikTok couldn't even confirm that the CCP hadn't helped write his talking points.
Now this is an entity, this is a corporate interest that is influenced, if not controlled, by the Chinese Communist Party.
The national security risks are severe and growing worse.
And I haven't even talked about, I haven't even talked about the materials on suicide promotion that you'll find on TikTok.
I haven't talked about the risks to mental health that it may pose.
And there's a reason that TikTok isn't even available in China.
Did you know that?
In China, TikTok isn't available.
Why is that?
Well, it's because Beijing isn't stupid.
They know it's digital fentanyl.
TikTok wasn't designed to make our lives better.
TikTok is designed to addict and then to be used as a gateway into our personal lives.
It's designed to addict and then to be used as a portal to spy on American citizens.
Now, I tell you what, here's one thing that has changed since just December, a few months ago when we banned TikTok on federal government devices.
TikTok has gone into full damage control mode.
And as big tech companies do all the time, they've hired a fleet of lobbyists and have spent untold amounts of cash.
I'm told that even today, TikTok lobbyists have been seen here in the building.
I've no doubt that they are scurrying around right now.
Maybe they're in the galleries.
I just say this, that we have the opportunity today to send a message to this corporate interest that the United States Senate is not for sale, that we cannot be bought, that we cannot be
purchased, we cannot be influenced by their lobbying campaign, by their corporate money, that we will instead side with the American people, we'll tell the truth about what this app is, we'll do our jobs and protect Americans.
Now, some say that we ought to have a broader bill that would not actually ban TikTok, but would give new authority to the executive branch and leave it open.
I don't agree with that.
My view is we should act decisively to ban TikTok directly.
We shouldn't give new open-ended authority to federal bureaucrats.
We should target this threat specifically.
That's what this bill does that we have before us today.
It goes right at the problem.
It bans TikTok in this country.
It protects the American people, and it sends the message to communist China that you cannot buy us.
And so I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs be discharged from further consideration of S 85 and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration.
I further ask that the bill be considered ready third time and passed, and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.
Is there an objection?
Madam President, Senator from Kentucky.
Reserving the right to object, there are two main reasons why we might not want to do this.
The one would be the first amendment to the Constitution.
Speech is protected, whether you like it or not.
The second reason would be is that the Constitution actually prohibits bills of attainder.
You're not allowed to have a specific bill against a person or a company.
So this fails on two egregious points, pretty obvious points, and I think we ought to think about that.
I think we should beware of those who peddle fear.
I think we should beware of those who use fear to coax Americans to relinquish our liberties, to regulate and limit our First Amendment rights.
Every accusation of data gathering that's been attributed to TikTok could also be attributed to domestic big tech companies.
In fact, one of the bills they're looking at doing is broad enough that the president will be given the power to designate whatever country he sees fit to be an adversary and whatever company underneath that definition.
It would basically be a limitless authority for the president to ban speech.
If Republicans want to continuously lose elections for generations, stay tuned, folks.
We'll be back with the rest of Rand Paul's comments on Senator Josh Hawley's advocation for this bill.
If Republicans want to continuously lose elections for a generation, they should pass this bill to ban TikTok.
A social media app used by 150 million people, primarily young Americans.
This brilliant strategy comes while polls indicate that 71% of young women and men, 53% of young men voted for a Democrat candidate for Congress.
Admittedly, many Democrats have joined Republicans in calling for this ban, but like most issues, the blame will stick to the Republicans more.
The Republican strategy to ban TikTok comes simultaneously with GOP complaints of domestic social media companies canceling and censoring conservatives.
Without a hint of irony, many of these same conservatives now rail against censorship while advocating for censorship against social media apps, they worry are influenced by the Chinese.
Before banning TikTok, these censors might want to discover that China already bans TikTok.
Hmm.
Do we really want to emulate Chinese speech bans?
Aren't we the ones that say it's wrong for China to ban speech?
so we're going to be just like China and ban speech we're afraid of.
The vice president of FreedomWorks, John Tamney, perhaps described this situation best.
Nauseating harassment of TikTok presumes Americans will be saved from Chinese authoritarianism if U.S. politicians act like Chinese authoritarians.
We're going to be saved from speech if we ban it in our country.
My goodness, could we think of anything more antithetical to the freedom of speech?
Thank you.
Well, go to the app.
They say, oh, the app's full of propaganda, and your young people will be dancing into communism.
Well, go to the app and search for Falung Gong, the anti-communist religious sect that is persecuted in China.
Go to TikTok and search for videos advocating Taiwan's independence.
Criticism of Chinese president Xi Jinping.
Videos are all over TikTok that are critical of official Chinese positions.
That's why TikTok is banned in China.
Do we want to follow China's lead in banning speech?
We should not let fear of communism to cause us to ignore our First Amendment protections of speech.
This legislation violates not only the First Amendment of those who own TikTok, many of whom are actually Americans, not Chinese, but it also violates the First Amendment rights of the millions of young Americans who use this social media app.
I asked the American people, do you want Joe Biden to be your censor?
Do you want to give unlimited power to any president, regardless of party to decide who is our adversary and which uh countries, and then which countries, there's not even a list of what percentage.
What if somebody what if the Chinese own one percent of a company or 10% of a company?
One of the bills before us would allow the Department of Commerce to decide, there's five countries they list that are adversaries, but these are big countries that have a lot of interactions with our countries or with our country already, decide which country in addition to the five.
The Department of Commerce can designate a country as an adversary, but then they can designate a company.
But there's no specific to the do the new people that are designated to be an adversary have to own 100% of the company, 50% of the company, 1% of the company.
This is a crazy gift of power to one person.
And I don't care which party they're in, it's a huge mistake.
Doctors Muller and Farhat of Georgia Tech write: if nationalist fears about Chinese influence operations lead to a departure from American constitutional principles, supporting free and open political discourse, we will have succeeded in undermining our system of government more effectively than any Chinese propaganda.
Throughout the 20th century, millions of people were fed communist propaganda every day for their entire lives.
And when the regimes collapsed, the people celebrated.
They danced on the Berlin Wall and on the grave of communism.
Have faith.
Have faith that our Americans are smart enough to hear bad ideas and reject those ideas.
Have faith that our desire for freedom is strong enough to survive a few dance videos.
Have some faith in freedom.
We don't ban things that are unpopular in the United States.
The previous speaker said, and I quote, there's no First Amendment carve out for communists.
Well, actually, there is.
In our society, you can be a communist.
I don't advocate it.
I think it's a terrible idea.
And almost no Americans choose it, but there's a communist party here.
We actually had a former CIA director who said he voted for the communist candidate in 1976.
Someone I don't advise you would appoint to be the head of your CIA.
But this is a free country.
You can actually have terrible ideas and you can broadcast them.
That's what freedom of speech is about.
It's not about saying, oh, you know, I love Mother Teresa.
It's not about saying things uncontroversial, it's about the ability to say things that people don't like.
Have some faith in freedom.
Our Constitution does protect even despicable speech, even the Communist Party.
It operates today.
Nobody wants to join the Communist Party, but you still can if you wish.
America is a country that celebrates free expression, that cherishes free association, that is confident in the cause of liberty.
If you want to address the evils of big tech, it's not the Chinese government you have to fear, but your own.
In June 2021, Newsweek reported that big tech complied with 85% of government requests to hand over your personal data.
So you're worried about the Chinese government.
Your government has all of your data and they're sucking it up from all the big tech.
So the thing is, is your next step to ban big tech in our country?
There are some people that are promoting banning TikTok, and their next step is Facebook.
This is on both sides of the aisle.
This contagion is infecting the whole country, both parties.
Realize that this means, with 85% of government requests to big tech being honored, this means that Facebook, Google, Apple, Microsoft, once presented with a subpoena or a warrant, routinely hands over the documents of emails, text messages, photos, documents, calendars, contact lists, and more to your government.
Big tech puts up virtually no legal fight to protect your privacy.
They could go to court to stop this.
Instead, there's a big cable that runs from big tech to the government and they snoop on every bit of our information.
So you want to protect privacy?
Why don't we start by protecting our own privacy in this country?
To those who are worried that the Chinese government might somehow now have access to millions of Americans' teenage information, realize that all social media sucks up personal data that people voluntarily provide.
If you're gonna ban TikTok, what's next?
Arguably several domestic apps censor conservatives more than TikTok.
I know this because I've been censored and I've been banned.
I've had speeches on the Senate floor that are protected by the Constitution, banned and kicked off of YouTube.
I despise these people, but I'm not gonna vote to ban them because I realize that intellectually in a free country, I don't have the right to tell the New York Times to publish my op-ed Or YouTube to publish my speech.
I don't like what they do.
Quit using them.
That's what happens in a free country.
You don't like TikTok, quit using them.
But don't disenfranchise 150 million Americans who are using a social media app and just say, no big deal.
This is the First Amendment rights of 150 million Americans.
I have a host of complaints about domestic social media platforms.
They cancel conservatives, but I'm not in favor of banning one of them or regulating their speech or telling them who can post and who can't post.
That's what the First Amendment's about.
If you don't like TikTok or Facebook or YouTube, don't use them.
But don't think that any interpretation of the Constitution gives you the right to ban them.
TikTok's mission appears to be like most other country companies to make money and lots of it.
TikTok is actually cooperating with our government.
There's something called the Committee on Foreign Investment in the U.S., Cyphyas, and TikTok's agreed to put all of their data in Oracle's Cloud, and they have agreed to work with the U.S. government because they so much want to make money, they will do anything to try to get rid of this accusation that they're somehow part of the Communist Party, which is not true.
It's a company that's owned probably the majority of it by Americans and Europeans and other Asians outside of China.
Less than 50% of its own body.
It's a company that's owned probably the majority of it by Americans and Europeans and other Asians outside of China.
Less than 50% of it's owned by any Chinese.
There is no Chinese government of the American TikTok.
But even that being said, they're willing to put all of it under the Oracle Cloud.
They're willing to have U.S. regulators to be given access to this all because they want to continue to make money.
They don't want to be shut down by the censors.
The First Amendment isn't necessary to protect speech that everybody accepts.
The First Amendment exists to protect speech that might be unpopular or might be controversial.
U.S. courts have already struck down the Trump ban on TikTok.
It amazes me now that the other side that was so horrified by the idea of President Trump banning something has now jumping on board to ban it themselves.
I hope center minds will reflect on which is more dangerous.
Videos of teenagers dancing or the precedent of the U.S. government banning speech.
For me, it's an easy answer.
I will defend the Bill of Rights against all comers, even if need be from members of my own party.
I object.
The object the objection is heard.
President.
Senator from Missouri.
Would the uh Senator from Kentucky entertain a question?
I object.
No.
The objection is heard.
Madam President.
Senator from Missouri.
Madam President, I have never before heard on this floor a defense of the right to spy.
I I didn't realize that the First Amendment contained a right to espionage.
The Senator from Kentucky mentions the Bill of Rights.
I must have missed the right of Chinese governments to spy on Americans in our Bill of Rights.
Because that's what we're talking about here.
The Senator from Kentucky can watch as many dance videos as he wants.
I have no objection to that.
Could watch them on this floor for all I care, fine.
What I object to is the communist Chinese Party using this app on Americans' phones to spy on Americans without their consent.
The senator says that Americans can simply not use this app, just turn it off.
That's not the case.
If you turn it off, it continues to collect information.
You don't get to consent.
TikTok doesn't ask you, do you want to share your information?
It takes it.
It doesn't ask you for permission to track your location.
It takes it.
It doesn't ask you for permission to share it with the communist Chinese party.
It just does it.
That's the problem.
Scour the Constitution, scour the First Amendment.
I promise you, you won't find any right to espionage.
You won't find any right to spy.
And this novel right that the senator thinks he has discovered For Americans to be spied upon.
I've never heard of such a thing in the history of this country.
I'm astounded to learn that Americans have the right to be spied upon.
So not only does China apparently get the right to spy in the First Amendment, Americans have the inalienable right to be spied upon and have all of their data taken from them.
That apparently is democracy.
That's not democracy.
That is the abuse of our laws, the abuse of our economy, the abuse of our people by a foreign government for its purposes.
So I say again, watch dance videos to your heart's content.
But spy on Americans, that's where we have to draw the line.
As to money, the senator said, and I think he's exactly right that TikTok wants to make money, no doubt about it.
And my the money they are making, and my the money that they are showering on this building.
And it is having an effect.
But in the end, the American people don't want to be treated as commodities to be bought and sold.
Because make no mistake, it's the American people who are being bought and sold here by TikTok.
They're being sold to the Chinese Communist Party for influence and money.
They're being sold for the wishes and the whims of Beijing.
And they're being lied to every step of the way.
Here we go again.
Another instance of a Republican advocating for democracy.
When I was on the show last week, I was talking about this with you.
I was saying even the Republicans advocate for democracy, but democracy isn't mentioned one time in our constitution.
We're not supposed to be a democracy.
This is not some salvation.
You can't name an instance of a democracy throughout history that did not eventually become a tyranny.
And we got Scott Hawley up there.
We throw out my tweet that I shared with you, Scott Hawley.
I shared this tweet two years ago.
Excuse me, uh, Josh Hawley.
I keep saying Scott Hawley because I have had a physics professor in college named Scott Hawley.
Yeah.
The support for Hawley by the right wing will come back to haunt them.
He's not what he seems.
Back in 2021, I had no followers, I got three likes.
One of them is one of the crew members in the back right now.
But it's so true.
What we're seeing is another instance of Republicans advocating for an act that is not simply a restriction of the of the CCP's ability to spy on American citizens.
It is a guise.
That claim is just a guise to institute new laws in place through this act, new earmarks, new other details in this act that allow our government to spy on us, just like they have ever since Snowden leaked.
And where's Snowden now?
He's still having to claim asylum in Russia of all places from his own government because he told the truth about their own violation of our laws.
And again, the other thing that that bothers me about this is every single time there's a bill that passes, there's there's some sort of a name for it that makes it sound like it's this great thing, right?
Like the Patriot Act or the Affordable Care Act or the banned TikTok bill, right?
That's an example as well.
But that is totally false advertising.
Like, if I were to sit here and say to you on this show that look, camel cigarettes, uh, Marlborough lights, uh, newport cigarettes, they all have carcinogens in them.
They have preservatives in them, but but lucky strikes, this is a safe cigarette.
And you know why?
Because all those other cigarettes, they cause cancer, but lucky strikes are toasted.
I could get sued for false advertising if I made that claim seriously.
Why is it that they're allowed to call these bills by these names that make them sound so great?
So if you come out and oppose any of this legislation, you sound like you love TikTok or you love the CCP.
I mean, you have Josh Hawley there, and thank God I said his name right this time.
You have Josh Hawley there trying to accuse Rand Paul of all people of a sporting of supporting the communist espionage of the United United States people.
You honestly think that Rand Paul is a communist.
Or do you honestly think that Rand Paul supports the Chinese espionage of American people?
Of course not.
But he's being mischaracterized because supposedly by fighting for free speech or fighting for equal protection under the law or fighting against this legislation that is gonna spy on people by the by the by our very own government, he's a communist, or he is supporting the espionage on the American people.
And of course, he gets this condescension from Hawley as if he wants to watch TikTok dance videos.
Let me tell you, first of all, 90% of TikTok videos today aren't dance videos.
That is so 10 years ago, Holly.
So if you know anything about social media, and frankly, I wish the Republican Party did know something about social media because it's why we keep losing election after election, because we have this gerontocracy in our party that does not understand technology at all.
I mean, if you just look at the hearings that they did with Facebook after the Cambridge Analytica scandal after the last election, we embarrass ourselves as a party by the questions that we are asking of Zuckerberg.
Right?
We even asked Zuckerberg, how does Facebook make money?
He's like, uh, we place advertisements, sir.
Like these people don't have any idea.
I don't know if Holly's even read this bill.
And frankly, I don't blame him if he hasn't, because it seems like every time any legislation comes out, it's 3,000 pages, 10,000 pages, impossible to read.
But all you really do, all you really need to do is read the Constitution.
It's not that long.
And it seems to me to be very clear that almost every piece of legislation that our leaders pass in this country has one name and one stated objective, but a number, dozens, thousands, hundreds of different earmarks, different details in there that constantly erode the rights of the American people.
Now, in the next hour coming up, I do want to take your calls.
If you could throw the phone number up on the screen, I want to make sure that everybody has the chance to call in and give their feedback.
1877, 789-2539.
1877-789-2539.
Please call in.
I want to hear your feedback in the next hour and get what your thoughts are on TikTok, what your thoughts are on the TikTok ban that is being suggested through this new piece of legislation, and what your thoughts are on Holly versus Rand Paul's argument here on this piece of legislation as well.
After we take some calls next segment, I want to make sure that we cover what's going on in Bakhmut and Ukraine to see is Ukraine really winning this war, or are they on the verge of total collapse?
It seems that there are some very interesting details coming in as we speak about the new updates on the state of that war.
And keep in mind, which legislators voted to support Ukraine.
Which legislators constantly vote to curb our rights?
Because it's not just the Democrats, folks.
It's not just the Democrats.
And I'm not saying that Holly is a bad guy.
Maybe he does mean well.
Maybe he doesn't really know what's going on with this legislation.
But we have to check our own party because the leftists, they're not the only enemies of America.
We see it time and time again with the Crenshaws or with the Hollies in this instance, voting to strengthen the government, increase spending, restrict our rights, and erode our freedoms.
Call in 877-789-2539, and we'll see you after this break.
Bye.
Welcome back to the American Journal, folks.
I'm your guest host today, Chase Geyser filling in for the great Garrison Smith.
This hour I'm going to be taking your call.
So make sure you call in at 877-789-2539.
And I want to give a special shout out to all the boys and girls in the getter chat.
You guys are my favorite, and I hope that you call in this hour because yesterday when I was in the chat, you promised you would.
877-789-2539.
First up, I want to take the flag man from Louisiana.
Go ahead, flagman.
What are your thoughts on Senator Holly and the stupid bill?
Hey, good morning.
Uh I mean, it's this is just ridiculous.
I mean, probably the 14 people who I actually watch this debate live on the floor, don't understand the constitution.
If you go out in the street and ask a hundred people if we live in a democracy, 99 out of the 100 will say yes, we live in a democracy.
This is so dumb.
The back and forth with Rand Paul.
All you need to do is read the bill on the Senate floor and then ask Mr. Holly about the bill that he wrote.
What does this mean?
That the government has the right to spy on the United States people.
What does that mean?
But what we have here is a back and forth about stupid dance videos.
This is dumb.
Get to the heart of it.
Get to the meeting and potatoes of it.
Talk about what the bill actually does.
And it's nothing in this bill that talks about dance videos.
People are so dumbed down in this country.
I'm afraid to say that this country is lost because the people are so dumbed down.
They don't know the constitution.
We're not educated the way that we're supposed to be, because the US government controls the school system.
So they're gonna teach us the dumb things to keep us dumb about the things that we're supposed to know about.
So I mean, it it it this is just the dumbest thing.
Uh Rand Paul going back and forth with Senator Hawley.
And I thought Hawley was supposed to be a good guy.
What what happened?
What do you think of the part?
What did you think of the part where Holly wanted to ask Rand Paul a question and he objected?
Who objected?
Rand did.
Hawley was like, Can I ask the can I ask Senator Paul a question?
Rand Paul just goes, I object.
I mean, it's ridiculous.
I would have let him ask the question.
Then I would have turned around and explained to him why his question was so stupid.
Why don't they read the bill on the floor?
Plain and simple.
Just read the bill on the floor.
And then answer the the questions of, well, this section, subsection this, what does this mean?
Yep.
I I mean that that's the easiest thing to show.
And then I guarantee you, Senator Hawley will not have the answers that he's supposed to have about why the bill says this.
Why does the bill allow that?
Why does our government get to spy on the people?
You see, uh, Senator Paul was making a very good intellectual argument about the bill, but it just flew over everyone's head.
You need to talk down to the United States people.
That's plain and simple.
Right.
Uh uh I mean, otherwise, people are just gonna jump on the nail.
Oh, it's a TikTok bad because China owns it.
We got TikTok bad, China owns it, TikTok bad, China owns it.
That's all that's gonna go through their heads.
So uh I mean, when it comes to, and I'm not even gonna say Democrat, because these people at this level, there is no party affiliation.
Yeah, they're all the same.
So Yeah, well, thank you so much for your call.
I really appreciate your feedback.
I think you hit the nail on the head with all those points.
Make sure you guys keep calling in.
877-7892539.
I will be taking calls this hour, and we'll see you after this break.
During the break, open up a new tab and visit Infowars Store.com.
It's something special for the Easter basket this year, and stick with us, folks.
We'll be back taking your calls after the break.
*music*
Welcome back to the American Journal, folks.
This is not MBO.
We are playing jazz.
Make sure you call in.
877892539.
Let us know how you feel.
All right.
We're gonna take a call from Henry in Chicago.
Henry, I'm looking forward to hearing what you think about Hawley.
You are on the air.
How are you, sir?
I'm doing pretty good.
Uh, listen, he's violating the constitutional.
Article two, section one, paragraph eight.
He's supposed to take a note to the constitution.
And all this politicians are trying to pass laws to take away our rights and spionized, they should be prosecuted or removed from office.
And people need to understand that.
Now, the Patriot Act was passed unconstitutionally, and we need to repeal that because we buy by the NSA, the FBI, all the agencies, they want your information, they want your medical records, just like they're doing in Ukraine and in Europe, where they have uh to uh the Silicon Valley to have uh with the military to have uh a cloud that takes everything digitized.
And this is what's coming.
And also they're trying to implement the C B D C. But most important, we need to ask all these politicians to read the bills before they sign.
It has to be a mandate by the people.
Hey, you're gonna pass a bill, we need to know what's in it.
Because this uh uh this bill 686, the restrict.
Oh yeah, China, China.
No, no, no, no.
You need to know and get to the me or the uh bill.
They have the right to spy you if you have any kind of VPN, any kind of software that can spy on you and can put you in jail for 20 years.
People do not realize that.
They just go, oh, here's the uh Chinese object.
Don't look over here.
We need to wake up.
We need to make this republic Republicans, Democrats who politicians to read the bill.
They work for us.
We are the people.
We are the government.
We just allow them to uh serve us.
Yeah, that's right.
And you know, frankly, I think that given that we are a republic, a constitutional republic.
I I think my feeling on it is that any time any politician who who's taken an oath of office to protect the constitution advocates for democracy, technically, that is an abdication against the current form of government for another form of government.
And I doesn't that fall under the insurrection act, right?
Like you can't advocate right.
What do you think?
Yeah, well, it it also, you know, the declaration of the apprentice says when the government becomes to rental, is the right of the people to re-abolish it or replace it?
So that's not an ex direction.
Also, I think we need to call his office, Senator Henry.
I call him already in a complaint.
It's 2022 46154.
Let him know that he's violating the constitution on the Article 2, Section 1, paragraph eight, and any other politicians support this, it's in violation of uh the Constitution.
We should hold him accountable.
Yeah, absolutely.
Thank you so much for your call, Henry.
I do want to take more calls before we go into break.
I appreciate all your feedback.
Let's hear from Jefferson in Virginia.
Jefferson, it's good to have you back on the show.
How are you today, sir?
It's nice to see you hosting the show.
Thanks for stepping in.
Absolutely.
What's going on, man?
Well, we should understand uh that this is something of an ambush.
Uh always conflating free speech with what happens on internet and cyberspace is a mistake.
But the uh Act of 1994 allows the NSA to backdoor their way into all of our phones.
Nobody can make a phone that we can't be backdoored by the NSA.
So certainly the NSA could step in and certainly disable the TikTok app on every American's phone any time they choose to, and we would have no recourse against it.
That's very interesting.
So what do you think the point of this bill really is then if it's not a ban on TikTok?
Well, we spent an awful lot of time yesterday that that the point of the bill is to criminalize anonymity on the internet.
Right.
That's the whole that's the whole point of it.
If you use a VPN to try to anonymize yourself, you can get uh get 20 years in prison.
And what they're really do is it's an attack on the second amendment in America by making the First Amendment violation a felony.
So if you violate this law, you become a felon so that they can then take your guns from you.
Oh, and virtually everybody would violate this law in some way, because there's so many people that use VPNs.
I mean, if you listen to Ben Shapiro for 30 seconds, you can hear an ad for express VPN.
And people don't just use them to stay private.
Sometimes people use them to access articles or content that isn't necessarily available in the United States.
So for example, if you use a VPN and you go on Netflix, you'll you could see the shows that are you know streaming in Germany but not streaming in the United States because of the different license agreements and seem and things like that.
So that that this could actually incriminate all those people, right?
Right.
They're turning cyberspace into a killing field of our rights, our constitutional rights.
We're all going along with it because we seem to think we've misled ourselves into believing that access to millions of people at a time at one moment in an instance is the same thing as free speech.
Free speech is natural speech.
If I scream at the top of my lungs, maybe 500 people can hear me.
I can cause a stampede in the mind of maybe 500 people.
But if I have access through the internet or mass media to millions of people at once and tell a terrible lie, I can cause a stampede of thought that can end uh up in a terrible situation.
It's a threat to public safety.
So that's the fire in the crowded theater argument against my ability to speak freely on the internet.
And they're they're just gonna turn it on us.
It's like jujitsu.
They're using our own momentum against us.
We all are rushing and saying, no, no, this is a violation of our free speech to have access to TikTok.
I'm saying no, you can you can use your free speech on any other uh platform that does not serve as a spying mechanism for the uh communist party of China.
Thank you so much for your call, Jefferson.
I appreciate that feedback.
I think you raised some very very good astute points.
I want to hear next from Marvin in Alabama.
Marvin, what do you think Rand Paul is wrong about?
Yeah, good morning.
Can you hear me okay?
Yes, sir.
Good morning.
Okay, just wanted to make sure.
Yeah, uh, he's wrong about, and I say this a little tongue-in-cheek, but not really, that YouTube has a right to to kick him off.
Uh, you know, we do have a right to free speech, like your last caller was just talking about.
I think he's a little bit off there, but uh, we have a right to to speech in places that it matters.
Not, you know, uh it it makes no sense, and it's not constitutional to say, well, I can say anything I want in my own home.
Yeah, I have a right to say it where it matters.
And so what we've kind of ran into recently is all of these platforms, and I think this is what Elon Musk is really pushing uh is to make the argument of the state actor uh violation with the platform censoring people,
but really, even without that, the platforms do not have a right to violate the free speech of Americans when their platforms constitute the new town square, and there could be debates on that, but again, it's where the speech matters, and it matters that Rand Paul should be able to have his congressional speech uh on the floor published on YouTube.
It doesn't matter if he can publish it on some private server that nobody's ever gonna see.
So that's that's a great point.
Let me let me respond to that because I I have some thoughts on this too, because I understand the argument that a private business does not have to, is not obligated to host speech that it doesn't want or host a person that it doesn't want or profile doesn't want.
I understand that argument, and that was a fairly good sort of libertarian rights of private businesses argument maybe five years ago, but now with these Twitter file releases, we see that it's not actually private businesses doing it because they're all influenced by the FBI and the CIA.
I mean, when when Twitter is is technically a private company, but it's a publicly traded and B meeting with the FBI and taking orders from the FBI on weekly meetings, monthly meetings about who to censor what to take down, then it's not even a private entity anymore.
And it's not even the fact that they're doing these meetings with the government, but it's also the fact that they're lobbying the government and in some instances they're taking they're taking money from the government, or they're they're doing contracts for the government, or they're they're cooperating with cases that the government is investigating.
So these private businesses that we say, oh, they have a right to censor us, they're not private businesses anymore.
That's just a facade.
These businesses are actually extensions of the federal government.
Do you think that YouTube operates without the influence of the FBI or the C CIA?
Do you think that when Elizabeth Warren explicitly calls out Google and saying that we need to break up these companies, they don't listen to that and change the way they behave?
And if they change the way they behave in response to the claims or the threats of a senator, then isn't that our government influencing how a private business conducts its business?
And if our government's influencing how they conduct their business, then how can we say that it's a private business violating this the free speech rights of American citizens?
It's the government doing it.
So we can talk about whether private businesses are obligated to host you or not, but we're not talking about private businesses anymore, folks.
We're talking about a fascist situation in which our government has totally eked its way into all of our major corporations and manipulates everything they do.
Stay with us, call in.
We're gonna be taking more of your feedback after this break.
Welcome back to the American Journal, folks.
Taking more calls this segment.
First up, I want to hear from D. Luke in Indiana.
What's going on, Indy?
It's good to see you today.
How are you, man?
How are you doing, man?
Oh man, I can't complain.
I'm snapping X and Cash and Checks.
How are you doing, man?
Man, I live in the dream by the living dream.
Hey, shout out to uh getter chat.
Shout out to uh it was just everyone, man.
Like uh Indy Luke, follow me on Gitter and Twitter.
I said I got that follow from you yesterday.
I I freaking jumped in the uh the getter chat yesterday, and uh I seen you in there, I was like, what?
We had a Good time.
Oh man, that was so much fun, dude.
Yeah, we had a good time.
It's cool to see people that big in there, too.
You know what I'm saying?
Like I think that that needs to be done more to get people hype.
Like, there's like, for instance, Andrew Huff.
I actually like talked to him in a few comments.
And that's what's what really got me hype to get out there and uh I do podcasting and stuff.
The TMI group.
Yep.
Like uh it's it's just it's all composed of info warriors, man.
It's freaking awesome.
Yeah, you guys are a rowdy crowd.
It's like it's like, you know, it's funny because last week I was at a bachelor party.
It was actually two weeks ago, and I went to a micro wrestling event, which frankly is mid wrestling.
Okay.
It was at this biker bar in Dallas.
It was everything you would imagine it would be.
It was hilarious, but the the info warrior crowd is kind of like the bikers.
Like they're really cool.
Just show them a little respect, and they're totally cool.
They're a little rowdy, but they're cool.
And they're actually right about more things than you would think, right?
So, like then the general public would think I know they're right about pretty much everything.
But yeah, I just I I love the crowd, and that's that's why I really like the getter feed for for um uh for all the shows uh on InfoWars is because the live chat is hot over there.
Uh we're we are insane.
Yeah.
Well, thank you so much for your call, man.
I I really appreciate it.
I do want to get some more uh calls in today.
I just wanted to make sure you got on the air and I could give you a shout out.
Let's hear from Matt in Missouri next.
Matt, what's up, man?
How are you?
Pretty good.
Well, being from Missouri, I'm a little partial to Josh Holly.
Okay.
Uh listening to them and Rand Paul.
I know it was kind of cool when Rand Paul just objected and wouldn't answer, but I kind of would have liked to have heard more of uh the banter between them.
I know.
I know.
Maybe and I wonder why he objected.
Do you think he just didn't feel prepared?
Or do you think he wanted uh Holly to feel like uh to know what it feels like to be totally censored?
Yeah, probably that.
Yeah, so what are you thinking?
What are your thoughts on the restrict bill?
Well, uh, as far as Josh Holly supporting it, I he came out on Twitter and uh spoke out against it.
Um I know he wants to ban uh TikTok, but I don't think he necessarily supports the Restrict Act.
Hmm, interesting.
I didn't realize that.
When did he come out and criticize it?
Was that today or was that like in the last week?
Uh 12 hours ago, he put out a tweet uh detailing how the Restrict Act doesn't do anything to ban uh actual TikTok.
All it does is spy on America.
Oh, that's interesting.
I wonder if he got blowback after because I I believe that that hearing was yesterday.
So 12 hours ago would have been 9 p.m.
He must have gotten so much flack after that performance that he he he switched teams.
That's that's what I'm thinking.
Wow, that is wild, man.
Thank you so much for your call and let me know about that.
I do want to take in another call.
Let's do um uh yeah, absolutely.
Let's take in uh BS Assassin.
It's always good to hear from Assassin.
Are you there?
We got BS Assassin from New York.
Yo, yo.
What's up?
How are you doing, man?
What's up, boss?
Turn my snare up.
Yo, uh, yeah, I just want to say it's just um it's absurd having these two um paid off gumbags operating under the Smith Mutt modernization act, which is uh gives our government the ability to use wartime propaganda against the people, which is my opinion is high treason if you're doing that against your people.
And uh the real issue is that it it's very rich hearing a congressman saying anything about being paid off when we just witnessed them all uh chilling for big farmer on behalf of a fake virus, right?
If you follow the data of this thing, we've had not one guy come out against that because they're all paid off skills by Big Pharma, and they were operating under the Smith Bunt modern.
You can see the whole all the pieces come together.
Every one of these people is a scumbag, and the whole government hit under the fact that they they passed the Smith Munt Modernization Act, should all be kicked out.
Every single one of them is a lion, paid off scumbag.
We see through it all.
All these people are getting money in their pocket, grandpa missed a couple of noodles.
Hey, go drive around with your fire truck with no water somewhere else.
All you guys hit the road, Jack, and never come back.
Get the heck out of here.
Yeah, yeah.
See, I I think it's ironic.
I think it's ironic that they're advocating against a bill because they're alleging that China can track your keystrokes when they're doing nothing about the fact that China released a virus that gives real strokes.
So I I want to take another call from MJ in Kentucky.
MJ, how are you?
Can you hear me, MJ?
Yes, I I've gotcha.
What's up, man?
How's it going?
Good.
How are you doing?
Good, good.
Well, I just want to I want to talk about the Holly uh exchange there.
I'm thinking long game.
You know, these these guys are, you know, these are two presidential hopefuls in in my opinion, when we when we get past our Trump phase here.
And it's interesting just in general to see these guys kind of hash it out on the floor, uh, even with the the cheap shots.
I mean, it's it's kind of nice to see uh, you know, them both taking leadership positions.
Yeah, I think so too.
All that being Yeah, I mean, all that being said, you know, there there is uh, you know, an infinite amount of ways you can argue this.
But where was this outrage when social media companies uh that are based in America were doing things much worse uh than whatever it is they're claiming the Chinese government's doing.
Um, you know, case in point info wars.
Um, you know, uh not just to mention data, but with censorship.
And now there's all this outrage all of a sudden from the right and the left.
And when those guys are agreeing, uh, it's usually never a good thing.
Yeah, yeah.
Well, and and think about it like this too.
I don't know if you watched the uh recent Tucker Carlson podcast that he did with um Full Send.
Great interview, and you see a whole different side to Tucker than you see on Fox because you know he's he's sitting there and he's having a beer and he's uh he's got he's got like a synthetic dip-in, right?
And and he talks about how when he was trying to set up a meeting uh with with with Putin for like an interview, he was informed that the government was aware of it because they were monitoring his signal communications, and signal is supposed to be this encrypted chat that the government can't get in.
Let me tell you, folks, the government is spying on you, and nothing you do is safe on signal.
Anything that the government creates, whether it's Tor Browser, whether it's Signal app, anything they create, they control.
And encryption isn't as strong of defense as you think.
It might be the case that you know our standard law enforcement or standard prosecutors don't have the technology to decrypt, but I guarantee that our government has the technology to decrypt anything that you're trying to hide if it really wants to.
And so this whole anti-espionage act that we see going on is really just it's a wash in my opinion because our government's spying on us.
We've known ever since Snowden leaked it.
We did absolutely nothing to change policy or prosecute anyone for the illegal violation of the rights of the American citizens.
So stick with us after this break.
We are gonna be taking more calls for the rest of the hour.
Make sure you check out InfoWars Score.com and get something great for the Easter basket for your loved ones and for yourself.
And like I said, we'll be back.
And don't forget to call in 877-789-2539.
We'll be right back.
Welcome back to the American Journal, folks.
We're gonna be taking more calls this hour.
We're gonna be talking a little bit about Ukraine, but not too much because when one side is just totally losing, it's not that interesting.
But we'll talk a little bit about that.
But first, I want to speak with Jay in Tennessee.
I took your call because I lived in Tennessee for seven years and I love Tennesseans.
What's up, Jay?
Hey, what's up, Chase?
Um Yeah, you do I I didn't know you lived in Tennessee.
That's cool.
Yeah, Nashville.
Nice, nice.
I'm uh like Knoxville area.
Okay.
Um, but yeah, I just kind of wanted to call in a little bit about this whole, you know, the debate with TikTok and this this strict act or whatever the nonsense they're calling it.
I just think it's ironic that Congress pretends to care about I mean, one, about anybody spying on Americans because the government spies on us a lot.
Um, but more than that, I mean, I think it's ridiculous that they care about or they want us to think they care about foreign influence because I'd say probably nine out of ten of the uh the DC politicians, regardless of which party they're in, they're owned by some foreign entity, whether it's you know, the WEF, whether it's Israel, whether it's you know, connected to Ukraine, whether it's the UN, whether it's China, most of it most of them is China.
And like, you know, we gotta we gotta worry about the C C P looking at some 13 year olds as they're watching dance videos.
I've I'm I'm pretty sure I'm a little bit more concerned about what my elected officials are doing with these foreigners.
Yeah, I think that's exactly it.
And you know, and it's interesting because I ran a poll a couple of weeks ago on my Twitter account.
I got well over a thousand responses.
Might have even been close to 2,000.
I can't remember because I run a lot of polls.
But what I said was what is the greatest threat to the American people?
And I listed Russia, I listened, I listed China, and I listed the federal government in the vast majority of people.
The overwhelming majority of people are like the federal government.
So everything that they're trying to accuse China of doing, it's like fine.
But I'm I'm concerned about what our own government is doing in terms of spying on us and screwing us over and forcing us to pay all of our money and taxes to the government and then giving that money to Nazis in Ukraine.
So thank you so much for your call.
I really appreciate your feedback on that.
I actually trend want to transition a little bit into Ukraine, and I want to show that that AP the AP clip that uh I shared with the crew about uh Zelensky talking about the battle of Bakhmut and how losing that battle may actually cost Ukraine the entire war.
So if you can play that AP clip that I sent over, that would be great.
Do you feel like there are options for securing?
Let me ask you a few things.
Uh first, you met yesterday with Grossi from the IAEA.
Is this part of why you're not going to be able to do that?
We've got Zelensky here talking about the battle of Bakhmut how if Russia wins the battle of strategically Bakhmut.
Zelensky fears that they will be able to change the entire narrative on the war.
Yes.
Russia will be able to change the entire narrative on the war.
He will sell this week to West, to his society, to China, to Iran, to all the congress.
So of course we have Putin and President Xi coordinating now.
And there's new updates as well.
And public and not public to president of China, uh to yes, to leader of China, and I want to speak with him because I have con I had contact with him before full-scale war.
Yeah.
So we have this instance in which Zelensky's basically admitted to the API.
All the international organization, what I can say really openly, Gorosi is one of that chiefs of such organizations.
He really came.
And he's he's coming sometimes, and and is good.
So Zelensky's admitting that the battle of Bakhmut is absolutely critical, and they've seemingly centered all of their forces around that location.
And I think that's the reason it's being attacked so hard is because Russia knows that it's stronger than Ukraine in terms of just strict military forces.
And so by consolidating all of their defense forces in Bakhmut, Ukraine is actually set up a position in which Russia can attack them head on.
And one of the main rules of war is never attack a stronger enemy head on.
Russia knowing that it's stronger and that the enemy is all sort of consolidated in one space is able to go in.
And I want to share this article from uh uh uh uh the ISW on the Russian offensive campaign um that came out on March 28th, and we see here an instance of all the details kind of going over what's really going on.
Uh we see that the Azov industrial or excuse me, the AZOM industrial complex has been totally taken over by uh the Russians in um the Bakhmut area.
And they go on actually specifically in this article.
I mean, this is a lengthy analysis of of what's actually going on with the entire conflict, but they claim in this article that um Russians, as of just a couple of days ago, actually have uh 28% or excuse me, 60 over over 60% of Bakhmut under their control.
So this is a situation in which you if you Google Bakhmut, you constantly see headlines centered around How you know the Russian offensive is stalled or things are slowing down for Russia or Bakhmut holds.
Even if you look it up on Twitter search, you'll see Bakmoot holds.
But if you have a city that's 65% occupied by the enemy, it's it's actually held by the enemy and you have to take it back.
So it looks like Bakhmut's going to fall.
And it looks like once Bakhmut falls, it's gonna shift the global narrative on the plausibility of a Ukrainian victory.
So it will strengthen the international resolve, or excuse me, weaken the international resolve to support Ukraine in this conflict.
Um, but it'll also uh allow for some key sort of supply chains, supply supply pipelines for the Russians to really continue to dissolve the Ukrainian military entirely.
So I predict, and I have a going bet with someone on Twitter that that we're gonna see Ukrainian surrender by the end of the year, I think by Halloween.
Um but I'd like to get your feedback on this in the next segment, specifically the Ukraine stuff.
Before we do that, we can bounce back a little bit to take some calls.
I want to take one more call before we go to break.
Let's hear from Timothy in Seattle.
Timothy, what's going on, man?
Uh not much uh other than I'm just reeling in horror over this Bill 686.
Uh is there anything that we could do as citizens, as uh as human beings uh digitally, can we take over the internet?
Could we create Google bombs in order to show our opinions that we're not, you know, going to stand up for this?
Is there something that we can do in mass numbers that will teach these politicians that we actually have the power?
Yeah.
So if I could call on all of the listeners of InfoWars to do anything, I would call on them to take 30-second clips of Alex Jones of this show, of Owen's show, raising awareness about this bill.
Take the best 30-second clip, crop it correctly, post it on Instagram reels, post it on YouTube shorts, post it on Twitter, post it on TikTok, and that's the best way to have like a mass blow-up of awareness around this, in my opinion.
What do you think?
Well, not really, because we're all on we're all in boxes.
I mean, all of us are shadow banned.
Uh I mean, we could we can we can think that we're making the best videos and stuff like that, but it is it really getting out there.
The analytics show that it might go to a thousand people, then it drops dead.
Yeah, and the news cycle takes over and everybody's distracted.
We have the whole weekend.
I mean, if if like uh a 10 million Americans just kept Googling Bill 686 or kept typing in gulags, no gulags or something, something something where big tech cannot deny it that it's happening, something that we're mainstream media have to admit that it's happening.
Because uh, or you guys just go to the streets, but you won't do that.
So at least in the comfort of your own home, you can form into a massive crowd and do something.
I suggest you do it.
Well, thank you, Timothy, so much for your call.
I appreciate that feedback.
Let's hear from Tim in Iowa.
Tim, how are you doing today, sir?
Thanks for holding on the line.
I'm doing pretty good.
Awesome.
I had I uh actually spent some time with an Iowan a couple of weeks ago at that bachelor party I mentioned, and great people.
Yep.
Um power has will take you over if you'd let it.
And it's not the power of the curse, it's the power you give the curse.
Absolutely.
COVID 19 has given people disturbia.
And my wife and I have seen it.
Yeah, well, thank you so much for your call.
I appreciate your feedback.
We are gonna go to break.
Sorry to cut you short there.
Stick with us, folks.
We'll be doing more calls in the next segment.
Welcome back to the American Journal, folks.
We are saving America one call at a time, and I'm very pleased to take more calls for the rest of this hour.
We have a great, great guest in the next hour, isabella Riley Moody.
I highly recommend you give her a follow anywhere you follow awesome people.
So let's take a call from Shad in South Dakota.
Shad, how are you today?
I'm great, Chase.
How are you?
I'm doing great.
Thank you for calling in.
What's up?
Um listen, I I this 686.
I think, you know, I'm I'm thankful for the InfoWars audience and their obvious attenuation to these kind of threats.
This is I I don't think it's anything less.
I don't think it's anything short of the most powerful and draconian um power grab that we've ever seen out of this out of this American government.
And right in the thick Of it, you know, I'm here in South Dakota.
John Thune uh is the de facto figurehead of our rhino uh autocracy here in the state.
Everybody thinks likes to think of South Dakota as this red state that you know the sacrosanct bastion of of conservative purity.
And the the actual truth is, you know, we're just um the single party rhino rule in Pier um gives us a facade of being a red state.
Uh but they they're just these people are they're enemies of of freedom uh at the very core of it, and we see it with uh 686.
I just if you if you'd let me, I'd I'd kind of like to bring up a couple of other bills in in the history.
No, I I I no I I I won't do that.
Um but the um there are a couple bills that in John Thune's pedigree uh that stand you you put John Thune, Lindsay Graham, and John McCain together, and I I've always argued and contended that they're the three most dangerous and and effective traders to the city.
We're just gonna need boots on the ground, but just on the ground.
It's the only way to win it.
It's it's just it it's so noxious, you just you just can't even believe it.
Uh, but you go back to go back to 2010, 2011.
There was a bill called the uh the enemy belligerent and interrogation act.
It was Senate Bill 3081, it was sponsored by Lindsay Graham and John Thune.
And it it failed, it it passed the Senate, but it failed in the House.
But Barack Obama and what we now you know term the deep state, they they loved it and needed it and wanted it and coveted it so much that they uh they lumped it into that year's National Defense Authorization Act, the NDAA 2011-2012.
So they get it in, and what what this provides for it was the end of habeas law, as we know as we've known it in the United States.
Uh indefinite detainment without charge, without trial, and without notice of whereabouts uh to anybody, um, once you are termed, quote, an enemy combatant, a belligerent or a threat to the United States.
Screams January 6th.
That's what's empowered, that's completely what's empowered this onslaught against the January 6th Patriots.
Only way they get away with that is with Senate Bill 3081, which became uh part of the uh the NDA omnibus in that in that year of 2011.
Right.
So when they can't pass it explicitly, they earmark it in another bill that's got a different name and a different stated objective.
They they lumped it in.
They had to get it through.
And that language is just it it obliterated the minute that became law.
There is no such thing as habeas law in the United States.
You your right to a speedy trial, your right to a fair trial, jury of your peers, all that goes away and can be suspended just on the basis of that of that vague and amorphous language.
And that that was John Thune's handiwork.
Then you you go to you go to 2018, John McCain introduces a bill with with Thune and Graham uh as his as his sidekicks, uh the defending American Security from Kremlin Aggression Act of 2019.
So John McCain dies in August of 2018.
Lindsay Graham picks this up.
This is his mantelpiece, he forces it through, uh, and this thing became law.
And you remember the part of the 686 that talks about threats to the digital economy of the United States.
Yeah.
Clearly aimed at cryptocurrency, clearly aimed at our ability to, you know, transact business uh on the internet.
Uh the civil asset forfeiture portion of this bill is just most nightmarish, nightmarish language I've ever seen in my life.
Uh, but you you look at this digital economy, that was actually installed, and I'm gonna read a portion of this bill that was passed in 2018-2019.
It was it was called Dash, uh, again, the Kremlin Aggression Act of 2019.
Uh the bill establishes the Department of State, the Office of Cyberspace and Digital Economy.
And that's where that's where they lumped in this bureaucracy, and they put these things, these things, it all of this is just it's clearinghouse programmatic.
Every single one of these pieces is assembly line warfare work aimed directly at the American Patriots, and they're just assembling it piece by piece.
And six six eight six, it's the door slammer.
And it it is the it's the deal.
And I people just have to see this for what it is.
And I, you know, anybody who defends this, and I I've loved some of the things that Josh Hawley says, and I love I love even more the way he says it.
He's got he's got a style and a and a savant swagger in everything he does.
But you know what?
Anyone who defends this is is no and is no friend of freedom.
And uh, we just need to be able to tell friend from foe.
These are the people who destroyed Trump, these are the people who entrapped Trump, these are the people who uh laid the trap at January 6th for the for the MAGA populist movement.
They were they were desperate to get the Republican Party back in their pocket, and and they've they've accomplished that.
And it's 686.
Uh If they get this, that's I I don't I don't see any way we extricate ourselves from it.
Everything that they put in place, either with 3081 or with this uh Kremlin Aggression Act of 2019.
This this identified Russia as the chief cybersecurity threat to the United States and what it puts in place.
You see some of the same language about uh collaborators and uh people who are who are allied with foreign adversaries, all of this just lumps together.
And then you get the war in Ukraine.
Perfect pretext and narrative to criminalize and to make to make uh traitors out of the people who are actually trying to defend the constitution.
Well, thank you so much for your call, Chad.
I I really appreciate it.
I want to make sure I can take another call this segment, but I think that's great feedback.
And I think one thing too is when we talk about the deep state and when we talk about the unit party and our politicians and stuff.
I honestly think that we do have a situation in which our politicians are incompetent and not intentionally conspiring.
And hear me out here.
We're always arguing that our politicians don't know what they're doing.
But in the same time, we argue that there's this conspiracy among our leaders to sort of globalize all of us and wrap us up into this new world order and take control of everything.
So it's like, which is it?
Are they totally incompetent or are they engaged in the most sophisticated conspiracy to ruin America and globalize all of the power into some conglomeration of just unified world order?
Right.
Which is it?
Because you can't be incompetent and take over the world.
It's just it's just not something that incompetent people can do.
And I think what's really happening is that the sophisticated actors within the deep state are exploiting the incompetence of our leaders, right?
Name and point uh case in point would be an example of uh our leaders not reading the Affordable Care Act, and there's all these earmarks in there.
When the staffers and when the intelligence community get involved in writing legislation that's thousands of pages long, and then they just sort of pitch it to the leaders, like, hey, this is what it does, this is why we like it.
And our leaders are A, incompetent and B naive as to the intentions and goodwill of these deep state actors, then they go on the floor and they push it.
Now, I know Holly is allegedly come out against the Restrict Act Act as of 12 hours ago or 13 hours ago.
I haven't taken a look at that myself.
But just to see someone go up and kind of blindly push for this initiative that's deeply associated with this new act that's got all of these earmark details that totally erode all of the rights of the American citizens is something that's absolutely alarming to me.
And in my opinion, an example of incompetence.
Do I think that that Holly wants to uh erode the rights of the American people?
Probably not.
Do I think that he wants to fight for the American people and our liberties and our ability to have free speech on the internet?
I think he probably thinks that he does at least.
But when you don't know what you're talking about, when you go up in front of uh a hearing on on C-SPAN and you're advocating for just the blatant banning of a company without really thinking about the details or without really fighting against these earmarks, then you're not helping to solve the problem.
Now we've only got about a minute and a half left in this segment before we go to break, and then we're gonna have our guest on.
So in that minute and a half, I want to make sure that we talk to Presley and North Carolina Presley.
You have the phone.
How are you?
Uh better than I deserve, man.
I love it.
What's up?
Just wanted to uh bring up the fact that open AI was created in 2015 with Elon Musk.
He left it in 2018, and maybe Chat GPT is writing all these convoluted bills that we can't understand.
Honestly, if AI wrote them, they'd probably be better.
Seriously, because nobody knows what is in this language.
So who's writing it?
Gotta be Chat GPT.
Yeah, I think so.
I think what happens is the deep state logs on to Chat GPT, which you can access at chat that openai.org, I think.
And I think they type in how to take over the world, and the AI just spits out stuff like this this restrict act.
So thank you so much for your call.
I really appreciate it.
We are about ready to go to break, but before we go to break, I do want to talk to you a little bit about the one powerhouse ingredient, two all new formulas, introducing Ashwaganda gummies and Ashwagana plus black pepper capsules from InfoWars MD.
Better known as Indian ginseng, Ashwaganda, is an herb that has been used for centuries in traditional Ayurvedic medicine.
It has been shown to have several potential health benefits, including aiding in the reduction of stress and anxiety, helping with the improvement of cognitive function and assisting immune system functionality.
InfoWars has previously used Ashwaganda in products such as Super Male and Female Vitality, and we're now glad to offer two brand new formulas centered around this key ingredient.
So make sure you visit InfoWars Store.com, check it out, buy it, put it in the Easter basket, and stick with us, folks, because we have a great guest in the next segment after this break.
Welcome back to the American Journal, folks.
We're going to be taking some more calls this segment.
I want to hear from Jeremiah in Ohio on the Ukraine War.
Jeremiah, how are you today?
Are you with us, Jeremiah?
Can you hear me, sir?
Hey, are you there?
Yes, sir.
Are you there?
Yes, sir.
How are you?
How are you doing, Chase?
I'm good.
How are you doing?
Sorry, I'm out here working.
I get it, man.
Somebody's got to.
Yeah, I love InfoWars.
Me too.
But uh, sorry, the dog's in the back.
But uh my point about Ukraine was uh has anybody really looked into Vladimir Zelensky's party, the servant of the people about the television show.
No, I'm not familiar.
So you mean his political party, or are you talking about his acting career or both?
No, no, no, no.
His uh political party comes from uh the Hollywood show he was in.
Oh interesting.
So tell me a little bit more about that.
What do you know about it?
Well, the servant of the people, I think it was on that.
Oh, dude, sorry.
There's so many dogs on my round.
I'm glad you're a dog person and not a cat person because as we know from the Nashville shooting, cat people are dangerous.
Yeah, I can agree with that.
But uh Yeah, let me focus back on the yeah.
So if you ever get a couple minutes research, the servant of the people, it was an original television show that he created.
Uh it it he's credited to it.
And uh that's his political party, and you find out who produced that show, and uh it's like it's publicly a public company in Ukraine, and I was just wondering if somebody knows anything about the funding of that.
Oh, that's very interesting.
That's very I haven't taken the time to watch the show because I imagine it's it's in Ukrainian and I hate subtitles, but I think that would be very interesting.
Yeah, I'm not sure if it's in English or not.
Yeah, yeah.
The other thing is I think it's just they're just trying to murder as many Ukrainian people as they possibly can for that uh report you guys put out.
Uh rebuild Ukraine.
Yeah, it's really it's it's interesting that he was able to sort of become a celebrity as like the leader of this party and the show.
And we're showing some footage from a scene of the show here.
And then because of the branding that he was able to establish for himself through the show, he then later wound up actually being the president of Ukraine.
It just goes to show how silly people are.
They think that the actors are actually the characters that they portray.
Everybody thinks that Robert De Niro is actually the godfather, right?
Or Zelensky's actually this, you know, hero of the people that does these these amazing things uh with with such great zeal and audacity, but just because you play a character does not mean you are that thing.
Toby McGuire is not Spider-Man himself.
So thank you so much for your call.
I appreciate you uh uh calling in and letting us know about that, and I'll look more into that later as well.
Um, let's hear from Ryan during uh from Wisconsin for the last minute of the segment before we go to break.
Ryan, how are you?
Ryan, can you hear me?
I can.
Go ahead.
What's up?
Um only got a minute.
I guess they want to bring up something that I haven't heard anybody bring up, and that would be what would an EMP attack do to um all the people that have all this nanotech and they can hook you to the internet.
You know, wouldn't that make you an Electronic device.
Yeah, so you mean like if you have like uh um an electronic used uh to for your heart, for example, and there was an EMP attack, would it would it kill you?
No, I'm talking more like the shots that cause all the all the clots, and there's been plenty of research to show that.
Basically, they can hook you to 5G and wouldn't that make you part of what could go down with an EMP effect.
Very interesting.
Well, thank you so much for your call.
I do appreciate it.
I do have to end the call there because we are about to go to break in the next 15 seconds.
So stick with us, folks.
After this break, we are gonna be back with more calls, and hopefully we can get Isabella on the line as well as our guest in the third hour here.
Make sure you visit InfoWars Store.com and check out the awesome new products and stick with us with back soon.
Welcome back to the American Journal, folks.
We are live with the great Isabella Riley Moody.
It is an honor and a pleasure to have such a distinguished guest on the show today.
Thank you so much, Isabella, for coming on the American Journal here on InfoWars at Band.video.
I wanted to talk to you because your Twitter is absolutely hysterical.
And I have never seen so many people get so upset at some of the awesome things that you say.
So tell me a little bit about yourself.
What's your background?
How did you get started in this?
Well, thank you so much for having me.
First time on InfoWars.
I'm very excited.
And so basically, I I've always been invested in politics.
My dad loves politics.
It's been something that's really bonded us since I can as long as I can remember.
I used to want to be a lawyer, got food poison from my LSAT, and that took me out of going to law school, which I'm very thankful for because I never even wanted to be a lawyer.
I just wanted to use that as a reason to get into politics.
So then I was like, I'm gonna not do law school and I'm gonna do TikTok.
So as you can imagine, that was pretty, you know, shocking for my parents to hear.
But that's really how I started.
I wasn't even doing anything when January 6th happened.
Like it was right after that that I started.
And then Twitter has just been my favorite platform.
TikTok, whatever, been banned a thousand times.
I don't even care.
Like it's TikTok, no one cares.
Instagram, I've been banned, which I don't care.
Twitter, I was banned for like seven months until Elon.
So I'm so happy that I'm back because it's by far my favorite platform.
And yeah, I just pretty much tweet my strategies, everything that comes across my mind.
And it's not my fault if people get so offended or take me so seriously.
Like, I don't know why people are that dumb, but they are clearly.
Even people on the right.
Yeah, absolutely.
So, what are your thoughts on this restrict act?
If you if you have any of you, if you've had a chance to take a look on the ban of TikTok.
Obviously, TikTok's banned you a million times.
So, how do you feel about America banning TikTok?
Um, honestly, I feel like the conservative take on it is kind of stupid.
It's pretty unpopular for me to say that.
But first of all, the whole idea that, oh, TikTok is giving all of your data to China.
If you have a smartphone, how about you assume that your dad is going to China and whoever wants it because you're logging into all these social media platforms?
If you really think TikTok's the only way that these people can get a hold of your data, you're you're retarded hard R. I don't know if I can say that on this show.
You're just retarded.
I'm sorry.
And so the only good argument for banning it is that the fact that China's probably using it as like a weapon against us because they're, you know, TikTok looks a lot differently in America than it does in China.
However, I don't know, I don't really support banning it.
I get a lot of my good content on there.
And I don't know, what it what is your thoughts on it?
Because I feel like I'm in the minority on this.
Yeah, well, I think that the conservative party is is really good at making it look like everything they say is everything their constituents believe.
And I've just spent the last two hours basically talking about how much I hate the restrict act and taking calls from info warriors who also hate the restrict act.
I think we took, I don't know, maybe a dozen calls last hour, and I don't think there was a single person who was in favor of this act to ban uh ban TikTok.
And I think that uh uh Holly made himself look like a fool the other day arguing with Rand Paul about it.
Uh so I'm I'm totally on board with you.
It's I my thinking my thinking on this is you can always uninstall TikTok, but you can't uninstall the restrict act.
Right, right.
It's like uh conservatives, what they do is when there's a crazy time happening, they're like, we love the Constitution, but let's push the Patriot Act or let's do all these restrictive things and give the government more power, and it makes zero sense.
And then they're the ones that are shooting themselves in the foot.
So the government will be used against us conservatives.
So yeah, I agree.
Just uninstall it from your phone.
Parents, your children should not have a smartphone, regardless.
Like, I don't like seeing teenage girls dancing all slutty in a bikini on TikTok.
They they're obsessed with it.
Something I noticed too is girls on TikTok will literally make their captions like TikTok, I'm 18 and this is a big bathing suit.
Don't take this down.
It's like people like you and me are concerned about having us being censored for simply the ideas that we espouse online.
But these whores online are so concerned that they won't have the right to shake their juggies online for every man to see.
It's insane.
It does cause some harm, but no, I don't think it should be banned.
Yeah, I agree.
I and you know, my my wife and I, we are uh about ready to have our second daughter.
I've got a two-year-old now, and obviously I don't have to worry about TikTok yet, but there's gonna come a time when she wants a smartphone and she wants to have TikTok, and we've tried to have the conversation around this.
Like, how do you keep your kid from doing the harmful stuff or being exposed to the harmful stuff without making your kid the weird kid?
You know what I mean?
Like, how do you balance that out?
And so um, one of the things that I've sort of been an advocate for is making TikTok illegal for anybody under the age of 16 or something like that, instead of just banning it from the entire nation and then earmarking the legislation with a bunch of privacy violations on Americans.
Why don't we just like set a minimum age limit?
I mean, it's one could argue that it it borders on like a pornographic site sometimes.
If you follow the wrong stuff or if you engage with the wrong stuff, you're basically gonna see sexy stuff all the time.
I've got multiple TikTok accounts on some of them, all I see is sexy stuff, and some of them all I see is conspiracy stuff, and some on some of them, all I see is just like motivational videos, depending on whatever I've engaged with, right?
And so I don't know, I'm I'm for doing something to protect our children, but just an outright ban seems like an overstep to me.
Yeah, I agree.
I think setting an age limit is the best case scenario, and it does make sense.
And like you said, it's pretty much a porn website.
And I also do think that TikTok is so important for people like you and me to have really have our eyes in this middle of the culture because we always see the crazy aspects of our culture on TikTok, and that's really how we see it.
So, like libs of TikTok.
I actually wanted to make a page that's like hose of TikTok.
I haven't gotten around to it yet.
I'd follow it.
So tell me this.
Do you think that TikTok is responsible for this cultural shift we've had towards like just a massive growth in people identifying as transgender?
So it's it's tough because someone like myself, I'm so contrarian that you can't convince me to do something unless I really want to do it.
But I realize that most people, especially young women, are followers by nature.
Like men tend to lead, women tend to just follow along.
So that I will say that because I talk a lot about OnlyFans, and something I can't stand about the TikTokers is you'll see people like Iggy Azalea, who I just got into a Twitter fight with promoting her OnlyFans, saying how it's empowering, and young girls are gonna be looking up to that, wanting to make a ton of money on OnlyFans, or likewise, similarly in the trans movement.
Yeah, I do think there's a reason why so many more people are identifying as trans, and so many people are all of a sudden gay.
It's because it's more popular and trendy now.
And TikTok really does make it seem more popular and trendy because that's what all the platforms, institutions, and areas in our life that are pushing and they want to just fit in.
So yeah, I do think it's responsible.
However, I do think it's also more responsible, like on the parents to be a buffer in between that.
Like my future kids will not be on TikTok because I know the harms of TikTok, but I still don't think it should be banned.
Yeah, absolutely.
Well, and I think it's part of it, it's part of it's due to the algorithm, right?
So the way TikTok is famous for this algorithm because you can have a video go viral within like the first three videos that you post, no followers, and then all of a sudden you look, oh, 500,000 views and 5,000 comments.
And that's what's so addictive about it, is it does that endorphin push.
And the way they're able to figure that out is by understanding that okay, if a video is watched multiple times by any one individual, it's likely to be watched multiple times by another individual.
So we're gonna show it to a hundred more people, and then we're gonna show it to a thousand people, and you can just blow up that way.
And I think that's part of the reason that we've seen this cultural shift toward transgenderism is because apps like TikTok, when you're scrolling through your normal video and all of a sudden you see somebody that looks almost like a woman but isn't you like you you look, you you look longer, you're like, wait, wait, and then you then you watch it over and over again because you can't believe like what they're saying, or and then all of a sudden the algorithm says, Oh, this video has been what has an average watch rate of 300%, and they show it to everybody.
And so I think that we have the situation in which our kids are seeing all of this content that's pro-trans, and it's really just because people see it are like that's weird, and they don't want to hang on to it and then it gets pushed out.
Yeah, exactly.
And they'll go through the comments and see what people are saying in the comments.
And then as you're reading comments, the video replays again and again in the background.
So just boosting it in the algorithm again.
Yeah, I I agree.
I actually struggle to make my algorithm train.
He's like, I have to search on TikTok for them because my algorithm is just cat videos.
Like I cannot escape it or Cappy Barra videos, like I just can't escape it.
I have to search out crazy feminist or trans teacher.
Like I have to search it out.
So I'm trying to get my algorithm there.
But you're smart because you have multiple TikTok accounts.
You can kind of tailor them with whatever mood you're in.
So that's smart.
But yeah, that's exactly what's happening.
I agree.
Interesting.
So we are about ready to go to a break.
Before we switch to the break, I do want to hop back on the Ashwagonda gummies offer that we have currently at InfoWars Store.com.
Make sure you check out Ashwaganda Gummies, 25% off introductory pricing.
Ashwaganda is a standout amongst groundbreaking herbs, but is known to have a very bitter taste.
Ashwaganda gummies are a convenient and tasty option for those who may not enjoy the taste of Ashwaganda in its raw form or prefer a more palatable way to consume it.
Make sure you check it out at InfoWars Store.com.
And we will be back after this break with Isabella Riley Moody.
Maybe at the end of the hour, we'll even take some calls.
Great conversation so far about TikTok and more to come in a few minutes.
Welcome back to the American Journal, folks.
We've got Isabella Riley Moody on with us today.
She's a great guest.
We had a great conversation about TikTok in the last segment.
Hopefully at the end of this hour, we'll be taking some more of your calls as well, so that you can uh ask any questions of Isabella that you want based on this conversation.
First, I want to give Isabella the opportunity to talk a little bit about her podcast.
What's what's the deal with that?
When did you start it?
And what's the goal?
So I started it in January of this year, and basically it's with LFA TV on Rumble, who is like really the I swear, as free speech as it comes, the guy who runs it, Jeremy Harrell, he was banned off everything.
And he really does let us say whatever you want.
I mean, one of the other hosts literally said the N-word hard R, and he was like, Great show.
So he it's like full free speech.
Okay.
She was saying it in the context of free speech.
She wasn't just like saying you and where, you know.
Um, but that's really important to me as someone that's you know blacklisted from the blaze, and like a lot of conservatives can't.
Well, you got blacklisted from the blaze, you can't just say that and let that slide.
What happened?
Um, well, it's an alleged blacklisting.
Um, you know, things like I'm not supposed to know, but I know.
Um, just I guess one of my comments about suicide, it's actually my least controversial things I've ever said, and it's not even like a trolling thing.
Like, I was just saying, if you commit suicide, it's selfish and it's natural selection because we don't there's someone doing stuff outside my apartment.
I apologize if you can hear that.
Oh, that's okay.
Um, but yeah, so apparently one of their the ad agencies, they lost a lot of money with ads across the shows.
So, yeah, and there's some people inside Blaze that don't really like me, but there's a lot of you know, gay gatekeepers, literally gay in Blaze.
So being able to say whatever I want is very important important to me.
I'm not one to censor myself.
You know, when I first started doing politics, my dad, knowing my personality, because we're like the same person, he's like, you have to decide if you want to be someone that you know wants to go on Fox News or someone that is gonna say whatever you want, and you'll probably make less money.
And I would much rather the latter because any girl, any person can read a teleprompter.
Well, women can't read, but they can try to read a teleprompter on Fox News, and that's just not what I'm interested in doing.
I like to piss people off and I like to confuse them.
I like being a troll, so that's very important to me.
So yeah, having the free speech is important to me.
That's why I have show Moody with Isabella, which is my husband's last name that I took, which is so perfect for me.
And yeah, it's daily Monday through Friday, four to five PM Eastern, and yeah, we F stuff up on there, yeah.
So, how do you feel about women who don't take their husband's last name?
I mean, they do it for the dumbest reasons.
Like every argument against men that feminists have, they still have to go to a man, like they still are taking their father's last name, so it's still a man's last name.
It's the same thing with um with OnlyFans, is women will be like, I don't want a man, I want to be independent, but they still have to get money from a man.
Like the end of the day, women still need men.
I just tweeted out women need men, and that's a fact.
And every single aspect, whether you're working a job and your boss is a man who's writing your checks, all men.
Yeah, that's very that's very interesting.
That's one of my favorite things about you is is your style, right?
I like you for the same reason that I like Jim Morrison.
You're just cool, but you don't do you don't do provocation for the sake of it.
You use provocation as a tool to like really get at the bottom of the problem with some of these arguments.
Uh, you tweeted a couple of things yesterday.
Like, uh, what was the tweet?
Uh, If if if he's not man's, if if your boyfriend's not mansplaining to you, don't have a boyfriend, you have a girlfriend.
I just think that's absolutely hysterical.
It's it's true though, because like, do you want some beta male that's gonna listen to you woman splain to him?
No, like my husband, you know, I used to tweet all about being a trad wife and women just need to submit and serve their husbands.
Well, I got married since then, and now I've learned what it's actually like.
I've honestly never been happier before, but sometimes he has to tell me I'm in control here.
Shut up.
Yeah.
So because I can definitely talk back.
So I mean, it's really true, and I respect him for that.
You know, like I respect him as being the leader of the household.
Good luck, wives who don't have a leader of the household.
They're never gonna respect their husbands and they're probably gonna cheat on them, honestly.
Well, and I think one of the one of the bet the benefits of traditional marriages, which is something I obviously have advocate for as a member of the patriarchy.
But it's amazing.
It it forces more careful selection, right?
So if you plan to, as a woman, if you plan to have a traditional marriage where when push comes to shove, you're gonna follow the lead of your husband or whatever, then you're gonna be much more selective about who you marry because you don't want to marry somebody that's gonna make dumb, irresponsible decisions or make your life miserable.
And I think it just forces the cream of the crop to rise to the top.
You actually have to be a better man, otherwise you're never gonna find anybody that wants to live with you the rest of your life.
Am I right?
Right.
No, absolutely.
You need to find someone that you can trust to make decisions.
And my husband, if I ever am disagreeing with him on something, he's like, okay, do you trust me?
Okay, then stop.
Like I have our best interests at heart, and then I'm just put like it's just I'm put at rest.
And also, as a woman, I'm so indecisive about every single thing I do.
I can't help it.
It's I hate it.
But having a husband to make all the decisions gets rid of that indecisiveness.
And it you right, you are weeding out the beta males because, like I said, like I always say, you should not be reproducing with beta males, you should not be reproducing with feminists.
We don't need more of them in this world.
So if we were to, if you were to look at trying to find a male partner, or that's kind of sounds kind of gay.
If you were to try to find a husband based on him being a leader of the household, someone that you can trust, it will weed out the beta males and less beta males would be reproduced with, which is a c for the common good of society.
Yeah, absolutely.
I I think we have a a beta pandemic going on.
And it's so funny because yeah, you can have it.
But we have this we have this situation in which these beta, do you think do you think there's any males that are just feigning beta, feigning feminism to sort of get in and try to get laid?
Do you think that's what's going on for a lot of these these guys?
Oh, for sure.
When they're like, I'm a feminist ally, like these are the biggest male creeps ever.
And it's really just it's cringe.
It's such like a stupid and pathetic way to try to get in the pants of a female.
And honestly, even the left-wing girls, the feminists, they don't even want them.
They do like I always see on TikTok the feminists being like, when you're liberal but have a conservative boyfriend, like they all want the conservative men because they're the strong men that by nature they are driven to and wanting to reproduce with because having a weak male is not someone you want as the leader of the household.
And even if you think because of the feminist brainwashing that's been going down in our society for the last century, just even if you think that you don't want the man to be a leader of the household, you are biologically driven to seek that out, whether you want to or not.
Yeah.
Well, and and let me put it to you this way in in speaking with your friends or just just in in an abstract context, if if you don't have any personal examples, have you ever been in a conversation with a woman and you're like, why did you sleep with that guy?
And she was like, Oh, he's a feminist.
Never.
I've never.
And I went to college and my friends were whores, and they've never slept with a feminist man.
Really?
And would they identify as feminist?
No, I mean, I really was never friends with the feminists, honestly.
They I've always been outspoken.
Yeah, I've always been annoyingly outspoken about everything.
So I pretty much repelled all the bad people, which I love alienating bad people.
That's why I'm myself obnoxiously 24-7.
Because A, I'm an introvert.
I like being by myself.
So less people I'm friends with, less people have to deal with.
And if I'm gonna deal with anyone, they better love me for me.
And I don't want to have to, I'm not someone that changes depending on who I'm around.
Yeah.
Now we've just got about a minute left before we have to go to break, but I want to ask you really quick on that note.
Have you a lot of people are afraid to speak their mind on social media because they're afraid they're gonna lose their job or not be able to get another job if they ever reply somewhere else.
Have you ever, other than the blaze, had your freedom of speech and expression get in the way of you getting a job that you actually wanted?
So ever since I was outspoken online, I've only wanted to do politics, and I've kind of understood that I put myself in a box, but it's really led me to making the connections that I wanted to.
Like I also have a weekly show on censored.tv with Gavin McGuinness.
No, he's not in my show, but it's on his platform.
And these are just the type of people I want to do business with.
And it's honestly it never affected me at all.
Yeah, that's great.
Well, say hi to Gavin for me.
He was uh a guest on this segment with me when I subbed uh uh once a few months ago, and uh it's always good to watch his content.
Uh we're gonna go to break here in about 10 seconds.
After that, we'll continue the conversation.
Everybody make sure you stay on, and we're gonna try to do some calls during the last half of this hour as well.
So make sure you call in after the break.
Welcome back to the American Journal, folks.
We are live with Isabella Riley Moody, having a great conversation.
Make sure you call in 877-789-2539, because next segment we are going to be taking some calls with our special guest.
This segment, I want to talk a little bit about the Nashville shooting.
So I'm going to place the broad question, Isabella, what are your thoughts?
Well, clearly this was, you know, the a transvestite.
She was 28 years old, a biological female.
So that's interesting.
That's kind of different.
What makes her different, makes her quirky, so different from the other girls.
She's not like the other girls because she's being pumped with hormones and testosterone, which probably doesn't do that.
Great wonders on someone that's already severely mentally ill, with which all transvestites are in fact severely mentally ill.
And she shot up her old school that she went to.
It seemed like her old Christian school that she went to.
It seemed like she had some sort of vengeance.
And I don't know, it's just it's really sad.
There's clearly a this is a hate crime.
You know, the left loves to use the term hate crimes, but the left will be like hate crimes for me, but not for thee.
Um, so they're allowed to be committing murder against Christians and white people and whatever, but you know, the times whenever there's a white male school shooter or mass shooter, you know, like that's the thing with this entire situation, too, is whenever there's a mass shooting, you pretty much know exactly how the left and the right are going to respond.
It's pretty much, you know, the left's gonna be pushing for more gun safety laws, gun safety laws, so you know, unconstitutional um restrictions on our second amendment, and then the right will be pushing for the second amendment.
So it's just crazy.
I also want to ask you, did you see that thing where it's like two different shoes?
No, oh yeah, I saw the conspiracy, but I don't buy it.
I just think that it was a low res shot of the shoe, so it didn't show the color.
Okay, okay.
I only saw like one quick tweet on it, and I think I was like half asleep, but I was like, that's a little weird, but who knows?
I think it really happened.
I think it was one person, I think it happened exactly as it's being portrayed.
Uh and part of the reason I do is because I lived in Nashville for seven years and I have personal friends on the police force and I talked to them about it.
And they're like, Yeah, it happened.
I know the guy that went in, it's all the dead kids and all the stuff.
So I I do believe in this case, I believe the narrative.
Uh also the Nashville Police Department's actually pretty cool.
They had a rule when I lived there that if you got pulled over for speeding, they could they would not write you a ticket as long as you weren't like a jerk.
Um, because they didn't want the community to hate them.
So they pull you over and tell you to slow down, but they almost like 90%.
I think they had a 90% no-ticket rate.
90% of the time you didn't get a ticket if you got pulled over in uh in Nashville.
And everybody loved the cops because they were cool.
And you then you slow down.
Yeah.
Yeah, I'm like usually a cop hater because again, I think a really hip hypocritical thing of conservatives are like, we hate the government, the government can't handle USPS and the government can't handle the DMB, but suddenly they think the government can handle important things like the military and the police.
So I I don't think that's really consistent.
Sure.
But that is a little, that's a little pro, I guess, with the Nashville police.
And obviously the Nashville police that took down this transvestite freak.
It they're heroes, but I still am a cop hater.
I'm I can't if I'm a government hater, I have to hate the cops.
I understand consistent.
And I think every cop shop is different.
Like I grew up in Illinois and the cops were absolutely terrible.
I hated the police, and then I went to Nashville thinking police were the same everywhere.
And turns out they were awesome.
Like I got pulled over, they're going 70 and a 55, and they'd say, Hey man, slow down, I'm gonna let you go.
And I was like, this is a completely different experience than than Illinois.
So it depends on the department.
I think a lot of people who are pro-police are rural people that live in small towns where the cops aren't a problem.
But then if you go to like New York or a major city, like obviously cops do heroic things everywhere.
So I don't want to make a blanket statement about them, but there are certainly more corrupt precincts than others, right?
Uh uh in police were, you know, notorious in some of the major cities during the drug war for you know, sort of taking payments or whatever.
It just depends on where the cop shop is.
But I generally do uh agree with your sentiment.
I do think the Nashville shooting though happened as it's bringing being portrayed.
Uh, what do you think about the fact that they've uh failed to release the manifesto so far?
Yeah, that's the one thing I've been waiting for to cover on my show is I just want to see this manifesto.
So I don't I I think I saw a tweet earlier of someone saying they were planning on releasing it soon.
I don't know why they wouldn't release it immediately.
I did see that the cops were saying that this transvestite was clearly even extra stupid because she was talking about other places that she was planning on shooting up, like a mall.
And typically these mass shooters died.
So that just indicated to me how stupid she was, thinking that she would survive this and like go to another, like go to a mall or something.
But yeah, I want to see the manifesto.
I don't know what's taking them so long.
Have you heard anything inside the department with your connections?
Well, that yeah, that was why I actually called my friends yesterday, because I tried to get them to leak it to me and they just wouldn't do it.
Oh, that would be so cool to be.
We can't, I'll we'll lose our job.
Uh, but I I am told that when something like this happens, uh the ATF and the TBI, which stands for the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation, comes in and actually takes the case.
So I don't even think it's in the hands of Metro Police anymore.
I think it's in the hands of those those entities.
And I reached out to my connections there as well.
And they were too close to retirement to take the risk of leaking the information to me.
So I I understand.
Uh, but I tried to get it for the show because I thought it would be awesome if we broke the manifesto here on InfoWars, but it was just something I wasn't able to pull off.
Um, so hopefully next time.
So, what do you think is gonna happen?
What do you what do you think about the fact that like from the from the transsexual community, we have this constant claim that they're advocating for children's rights by advocating for the right for children to have this gender reassignment surgery and actually go through a physical biological transition.
But then on the same token, they are defending the acts of a member of their community who actually kills children.
So do they do they believe in a child a child's right to life less than they believe in a child's right to transition?
Well, of course, these are the same people that, if I had to guess, are probably very pro-abortion.
They don't care about a children's right to life, they care about pushing their trans or retarded hard R agenda, which is what we're seeing.
They don't care if kids are dying.
They just want more trans kids.
And I actually went to a there was like a really viral drag queen event here in Dallas last summer.
It was a drag your kids to pride.
And Aldo Budazzani, who's now with Prager You, who interviewed one of the transvest or the drag queens, he was saying that his goal is to create more drag queen kids.
So they literally are recruiting, it's like a religion.
They're recruiting more children, and they're preying upon children because they know that children's brains are more malleable, they can actually influence them way more.
And these people are predators.
Oh, yes, that is the video.
I was there.
Um, yeah, children handing these grown men dollar bills or their parents pushing them to do it.
It was really really freaky to see.
It was at a gay bar too.
I didn't know children were allowed at gay bars, but I guess if there's grown men dressing as female strippers doing shaking their ass in front of these children's faces, then it's okay all of a sudden.
There was literally toddlers at the bar.
That is so bizarre to me.
That is just so bizarre to me.
I do want to remind everybody to call in because we are going to be taking calls in uh the next segment.
Make sure you call 877-789-2539.
Got a couple of great callers lined up here.
I'm not gonna take any calls this segment because we've just got two minutes left, and I want to give everybody a time to express themselves.
But after the next break, we will be taking more calls.
Isabel, I want to ask you, what do you think is next after all of this?
Is then is this Nashville shooting gonna actually impact anything one way or the other?
What do you foresee happening as a result?
Uh it's so hard to predict these things because like the left will always out crazy themselves and I'll think it's shocking, but then I'm also not surprised based off everything they're doing.
I don't know.
I don't know.
Obviously, they're making excuses because we saw that trans page basically say like that the tranny was forced, like pushed into doing this because of all the trans hate.
So I don't know, we might see more violence.
And isn't that trans vengeance day this Saturday where they're doing some big I don't know, like in major cities, like it's not safe to go out in major cities.
Like you're in Austin, you should be careful.
Keep your wife and kids at home because you know, you don't want anything bad to happen.
But we might be seeing more violence because these people are very violent.
And you have all these biological men who are just dressing up as women and getting so mad with their testosterone about everything going on and all this, you know.
I wish there was more trans hate, but they're perceived trans hate.
And then you have women being pumped with all these hormones and testosterone who are all angry too, and they don't care.
They don't hold their their own community accountable.
Like this person, this transgender that actually killed all these kids, made them look worse, made their community look worse, but they were still pushing and advocating for this person and defending them.
So why would anyone else be just swayed away from actually committing more crimes?
I don't know.
What do you think?
Because it's kind of hard to predict.
Well, I think that someone in the audience needs to take that clip from a few good men with Jack Nicholson saying, You can't handle the truth and change it into a meme that says you can't handle the testosterone, because obviously it's causing all sorts of problems.
Stay tuned, folks.
We're gonna go to break here in about five seconds.
Make sure you call in 877-789-2539 because we are gonna be taking calls in the next segment after this break.
Welcome back to the American Journal.
It's a nice day for a white wedding.
Isabella, it's an honor and a pleasure to have you.
You've got to go after this segment, but I do want to take some calls first.
Andrew, how are you, sir?
Okay, guys, thanks.
Great great guest that you have today.
Thank you.
What are your thoughts on TikTok?
Just want to say nitro boost, it helps in the bedroom and it also it lives the bedroom, but it also keeps you alive because the clot shot, which I avoided taking for such a long time, that I broke down and took it because I it was required for this local news job, which I was trying to get and wound up not getting it, but which is embarrassing.
But then I it more embarrassing, I'm working for a C span, which is boring, so I needed the shot.
But the nitro boost helps with circulation and which avoid, you know, helps you avoid clotting.
And it was funny trying to phrase it to my doctor said, Oh, that doesn't work.
And I was thinking, I know it works because you can feel it, you know, in the down nether regions, but I was like, how could I phrase this you know, without being uh like sounding like Alex doing the promo?
Like uh so I have to say it like scientifically, but I want nether regions to use the anatomical name.
So I was like, how do I phrase this to the doctor without sounding weird?
But um the uh thing with um TikTok, and I'm mostly a camera guy because I'm and I'm a little dyslexic, so I'm not real big into the social media because it's harder for me to type, especially when the windows are small.
But I think people that have followers like you guys may be biased because you have followers, but I think we're at a cold war with with uh China, and I would like it as to the cold war with the Soviet Union with if they controlled our breast, which kind of our press was biased in favor of them, so that's a bad example.
But if the former Soviet Union was able to control or the uh you know the Nazi regime was able to control our media during World War II.
So the Chinese communists are fanatical, they would kill babies, female babies, they have the Muslim Uyghurs in concentration camps.
So they're influenced it's not just about taking information, they want to have military buying farms around our military base.
So they're conquerors, and they're using it to like corrupt our youth, which they're already corrupted with or without that.
But I just think because it's the communists that are trying to not just get information but to corrupt us, and they show the difference in China with their TikTok is educational and wholesome.
So that's why like I support Banning it, but you know, just want to hear your thoughts and do you think because you have followers and it's part of your you know business and your life that you don't want to and lastly, it was funny hearing the yes say girls with their guy.
So I'll have to check it out.
But now I don't want to look I don't want to especially some of them probably lie about their age.
You'll be really feeling the nether regions.
Andrew, thank you so much for your call.
I really appreciate it.
Isabella, before before we cut you loose, I want to hear what your thoughts are on some of Andrew's comments about the CCP using TikTok to uh manipulate our our youth.
I mean that that may be happening, but again, I think it's on the parents to restrict their kids from seeing this stuff.
And I remember I was listening to Michael Knowles yesterday.
I can't exactly remember the name of the person, but the bill doesn't actually ban TikTok.
It gives this woman in the government the authority to ban TikTok, and she's even said that she's not pro banning TikTok.
So there's a bunch of other stuff in this bill, so we'll actually see if it passes, and if TikTok's actually banned, or if this is just another Trojan horse to push whatever they're trying to push, you know how they always push bills where there's a bunch of other stuff that's actually being being done versus like what's the name of the bill is actually supposed to be doing.
So we'll see.
I don't I don't know.
I'm not pro the government having more power in banning stuff.
I'm very pro-free speech, and that comes with its consequences because that can come with infiltration from outside sources, but I will I'm always against the government having more power in restricting us.
So where can people find you and follow you after this show?
Okay, so I am on Twitter at Isabella O'Reilly US, Instagram at Isabella Riley at Moody 2.0, and you can find me on Rumble on LFA TV.
It's Moody with Isabella, Monday through Friday from four to five PM Eastern.
Join me today, guys.
Well, thank you so much for coming on the American Journal here on InfoWars at Band.video.
It's been an honor and a pleasure to have you on, and I hope you'll come back and join us again sometime in the future.
Of course, I'd love to come on any time.
Thanks for having me, and it was a lot of fun.
Thank you.
Absolutely.
Next, I want to take some calls to close out the show today.
We've just got a few minutes left in this last segment.
I'd like to hear from Jordan.
Jordan, how are you today, sir?
How are you this morning, sir?
I'm doing well.
Thank you for calling in.
Thank you for having me.
Two questions.
I'll be quick.
I know we're sure on time.
One, Donald Trump's previous administration.
Secretary of Defense James Mattis.
How come he resigned?
I never heard the actual reason he resigned.
And two, um, I run my business almost strictly online.
How can I spread the word about all the bull crap that's going on in the world without getting um banned off of um whatever social media I'm using, which by the way, in this case is Facebook.
How do you recommend that, boss?
Yeah, that's a really really great question.
So my business is a social media advertising business.
So I run my business on Facebook and Instagram.
I that's how I actually make money.
This the stuff that I do is on the side for my country because I love it and it's fun.
And I'm I'm an upset American.
And so what I decided to do as someone who manages over 250 ads accounts for clients is not post anything on Facebook that could get my account restricted.
So I use every platform except for Facebook.
If you were to go to my personal Facebook page, you would not see a post or a link to a podcast that I've done or an interview that I've done, whether it's Bannon or Roger Stone or Gavin McKinnis or anyone.
You wouldn't see any of those conversations.
So my advice to people who actually run their business online, it just don't use the platform that you're dependent on for money for politics, because it will present problems uh for you down the road.
And I know that that's ugly, but uh ultimately these these platforms are gonna suffer uh because guys like us who could easily gain a following on these platforms and actually engage with an audience just won't use them.
Gotcha.
Yeah, thank you so much for your call.
I appreciate it.
Uh we've got about three minutes left in this segment.
I want to do one more call with Swimmer in Wisconsin before we go to break.
Swimmer, how are you?
Pretty good.
How are you doing?
I'm doing well, thank you.
Uh in light of this um uh shooting that happened with uh tranny person.
I think a lot of people aren't discussing um the uh testosterone absorption.
Yeah.
Uh from women, uh, where women have like one-tenth or one twentieth of the absorption of uh mean of testosterone in their body.
And I think these women who are getting too much testosterone are like flipping out.
That's why I think we need to like ban these type of uh assault trainings.
And like um, you know, you've seen how like with regular guys, even with like in history of Helen of Troy, uh, how guys will go through great length with the testosterone they have naturally in our body.
There's laws already on the books with barbiturate and steroids about uh people taking those.
So I think it's something that needs to be addressed because it also messes with the natural absorption of testosterone from women uh from men.
And it's been scientifically recently proved that it um the proteins and chemicals go all the way to the brain of women uh through normal inner course, and it messes with that system.
You know, and then guys naturally absorb this.
A lot of people don't know this.
After about 74 days, um the sperm inside the body, a male body will live, and then it will disintegrate in the body, will reabsorb the testosterone.
Where Joe Rogan talks about like the Ioto tribe and tribes in Zambia, where men give uh kids uh testosterone by having them uh drink uh their semino fluid, and they actually have testosterone absorption that way.
So it's kind of like a weird topic and kind of icky to talk about.
But you can tell how this shooting occurs, and no one can tell me that having 200 milligrams of testosterone a day compared to having uh 10 nanograms won't have an effect on someone's mind.
Absolutely.
And frankly, I don't know how many studies there have been conducted on the psychological effects of testosterone if given in these high doses to women in transition.
Uh, I'm sure that the studies exist, but should they exist, they certainly aren't really being talked about because there's there's there's just no way that this is physically healthy.
I mean, it's it's not only in our DNA, but in our very chromosomes, our gender.
And when you start messing with that root code of of who we are and just doing everything you can to counteract it, your body's trying to reject it naturally.
So I just can't imagine this being a healthy outcome for for anyone.
And I feel bad for especially our children who are put through this because they're they're misguided and manipulated.
Uh, but thank you so much for having me on the show today here on the American Journal.
We're gonna go to break.
I'm gonna be back tomorrow, hosting as well on the last day of this week.
And Harrison should be back with you next week after he kicks the last bit of this pink eye that he's fighting.
Uh, but make sure you check out InfoWars Store.com during the break and stick with us for the Alex Jones show coming up at gentlemen, we have a new toothpaste that my dad, a retired dentist and oral surgeon developed.
Dr. Joe's natural tumor toothpaste that just came into stock.
And I gotta tell you, I got samples of this months ago, and it is amazing.
The way it makes your gums feel, what it does to your mouth is insane.
We know turmeric is an antioxidant and anti-inflammatory.
It does such great things for the body.
Then you add that with tea tree oil and a bunch of other essential oils.
It is just dynamo.
It is so good to detox and attack inflammation in your mouth.
I'm gonna challenge everybody to try the new toothpaste at Infowarstor.com.
Dr. Jones Naturals turmeric toothpaste.
And while you're at it, check out the new Oshwagon lineup products.
We have Oshwagonda with black pepper extract, your libido, your testosterone in pill form, and we have the pure Oshwaganda root gummies as well.
Now available at Infowarstore.com.
They're amazing products, and they fund the InfoWar.
