Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Nov. 22, 2021 - Dinesh D'Souza

56:15

PROSECUTE THE PROSECUTION Dinesh D’Souza Podcast Ep223

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	I'm going to give you my full reaction to the Rittenhouse verdict.
	Yay! And also make the case for why we should now prosecute the prosecution.
	Danielle D'Souza-Gill joins me.
	We're going to talk about the latest incident in Waukesha and how it relates to the aftermath of Rittenhouse.
	And I'm going to look at the 1980s movie, The Star Chamber, to examine the conundrum of vigilante justice.
	This is the Dinesh D'Souza podcast.
	The times are crazy, and a time of confusion, division, and lies.
	We need a brave voice of reason, understanding, and truth.
	This is the Dinesh D'Souza Podcast.
	I'm here with Daniel D'Souza Gill, host of Counter Culture with Daniel D'Souza Gill on Epic TV. Daniel, lots going on here.
	On the one hand, we have this spectacular Rittenhouse verdict, which I want to react to and get your reaction to.
	But let's start with this amazing Waukesha tragedy.
	A guy named Daryl Edward Brooks, 39 years old, plows into a Christmas parade, killing five people, more than 40 people injured.
	And this is a guy with a major rap sheet.
	By the way, black.
	And I only mention this because we're in an era of intense race consciousness.
	Had the guy been white, it would be all over CNN. White supremacy.
	Hey, look what happens.
	Rittenhouse gets off and now this.
	But interestingly, the narrative switches when you're dealing with a black perpetrator.
	What do you make of this Waukesha tragedy?
	Well, it's horrific.
	It's a horrible tragedy.
	But this man, he has a rap sheet of supporting BLN. He supports Black nationalism.
	He supported the George Floyd riots.
	And has even posted on his Twitter about how to get away with running a car through a crowd.
	So, of course, we see that the people who support the things he's supporting, I mean, he's being defended even by the media right now.
	I mean, CNN put out the narrative basically saying that, and I don't think they know, that maybe he was fleeing from some other incident and just happened to sort of careen into the crowd.
	But given who he is, given his background, given his ideology, it seems to me at least plausible that this was a payback for Rittenhouse, don't you think?
	Exactly. And I think the point is that we always try to look at the facts, at least the right does.
	We want to see, you know, is this person trying to harm these people and so on.
	And for the left, it's really only about race.
	the left, it's only about the fact that Kyle Rittenhouse was white, this guy is black, therefore it's fine for him to just go run his car through and kill these people, you know, allegedly, he's the suspect. But when it comes to those white people who were the, you know, the pedophile and the other violent people that were shot by Rittenhouse, of course the left still defends them. So it's not just about race, but also about the fact that if you're a leftist, you know, white person, then that's a
	pass. But if you're a white person who's not a leftist, then of course you're basically the angry white man who's You're like a killer. It's almost as if you get to be an honorary Black person by being a leftist white person, right?
	I mean, that's the... That's why...
	And there were actually people who believed that Rittenhouse's victims were Black, even though all three of them were white.
	Right. And a lot of people didn't even know the details of the case, but were just listening to, you know...
	The left-wing media and hearing that, oh, it was something like a white man just killing a bunch of black people, when, of course, that wasn't the case at all.
	Here's an article in CNN, which I think is particularly telling coming out now when you have the Waukesha incident, and I'm going to read the title.
	There's nothing more frightening today than an angry white man.
	I mean, first of all, there's nothing more frightening, right?
	So... Nuclear Holocaust is not more frightening.
	The climate change end of the world is not more frightening.
	Apparently, an angry white man is more frightening than anything that they can think of.
	Talk a little bit about how these narratives become completely unhooked from reality.
	They're completely unhooked because we see that when we actually look into it, what the left really believes and what they actually push is At least the far leftists, they believe that there should be some form of Black power.
	There should be kind of a role reversal where for many years they think, you know, because whites were the ones in charge, now Blacks have to be the ones in charge.
	And not just that, but since there was violence from white people, now Black people need to be able to, you know, kill someone if that's what they need to do.
	Basically act as though they will get a pass because they believe in this kind of Black supremacy idea.
	To counter past white supremacy.
	You were saying that this is actually kind of the plot of Black Panther.
	The movie. The Black Panther movie inverts the old hierarchy and puts it in the opposite direction.
	So you're saying actually that from the progressive leftist point of view, it's not a matter of moving from race consciousness to race neutrality, but rather we have a new model now where by and large, if you're a white guy, even if you didn't do it, your ancestors did it, you're to blame. But if you're a black guy and you did it, you're not to blame.
	Why? Because you're a mere victim of white supremacy and you're merely responding to this racist system.
	So, in a sense, the ideology has nothing to do with reality.
	It could be that you have an epidemic, let's just say, of black and white violence, and it would either not be covered, they try to essentially pretend like it's not happening, or they would say, well, yeah, but those people are merely responding to the Yeah, well, this is what happened with the Black-on-Asian violence.
	When we saw a lot of Asian crimes, they were actually a lot of them being perpetrated by Blacks.
	But of course, the left, they don't care, even though the Asian person isn't a white person, so to speak.
	So even though they only want to demonize white people, they don't really actually care about any of the other groups either.
	They don't care about Asians. They don't care about Hispanics.
	And I would say They don't even actually care about Black people because acting this way isn't even good for them.
	It's not good for anyone. It's not good for the people that are being harmed and it's not good for the perpetrator.
	Let's talk about Rittenhouse. Rittenhouse apparently is in Florida.
	I saw a picture of him just kind of beaming.
	And think about how his life has changed so dramatically.
	I mean, one moment he's facing life in prison.
	And now he's exonerated.
	I mean, there he is kind of sitting in a restaurant, you know.
	And there was a sort of attractive female next to him.
	And Debbie was joking. She's like, is that his girlfriend?
	I don't think it was his girlfriend.
	But nevertheless, it's funny how your life can take and turn on a dime.
	And in a sense, the system has now acquitted him.
	I mean, justice was served in that case.
	Exactly. But I think the left, you know, they don't want to see it as a victory.
	They don't want to see it as, well, you know, we're so glad that someone wasn't wrongfully convicted, that we didn't have someone who was innocent, who should be found innocent.
	No, they see it as we need to make sure that everybody pays the price.
	And so... I think that they're gonna see a lot of other people as sort of like, oh, we didn't get Rittenhouse, maybe we can get this other guy in another situation similar.
	I mean, the sad thing is that I don't think they would have minded that Rittenhouse be convicted even if he was innocent.
	Why? Because, see, that would then serve the ideology.
	If the ideology basically goes white boy evil, then Rittenhouse has to play—he's playing a part in a fictional drama.
	It's not about Rittenhouse.
	It's not about the circumstances on the street.
	It's ultimately about he needs to play his role, and they're angry with him because he didn't play his role and because the jury didn't play their role and the judge didn't play his role.
	So nobody played according to the leftist script.
	And it was not just that Rittenhouse is free, the leftist script took a beating.
	In a sense, the jury called BS on the whole leftist narrative, didn't they?
	Exactly. And for the left, I mean, they basically wanted him to be an example.
	They wanted him to be used as someone to show other white males, you don't really have any power, you can't defend yourself or You know, regardless.
	But I think that, you know, obviously they saw that, oh, our narrative was improved in this case.
	And so they're now trying to save the narrative by saying, oh, now it's going to be that it's open season for white males to go out there.
	And that's the point of this.
	There's nothing more frightening today than an angry white man.
	You want further proof that Mike Lindell is one of the great guys of America?
	Well, he's the guy who put up a whole bunch of the bail money that had Kyle Rittenhouse out even prior to his trial.
	That was Mike Lindell. That's the kind of guy this is.
	And the left has been striking out at him, canceling his stores, canceling his shopping channels.
	So this guy has been victimized for being a great guy.
	Well, the good news is that he's going to take the savings that he would otherwise have been giving to these stores and to these channels, and he's going to pass it directly on to you.
	You can get the lowest price in the history of MyPillow for the classic standard MyPillow.
	It's regularly $69.98, but now $19.98 with promo code Dinesh.
	Now, these wonderful pillows, they won't go flat.
	You can wash and dry them as often as you want.
	They maintain their shape. They're made in the USA. By the way, Lindell has got Queen size MyPillows, normally $79.98, now $24.98.
	King size pillows, regularly $89.98, now $29.98.
	So MyPillow, by the way, not just pillows.
	They have over 150 products, discounts of up to 66%, everything from sleepwear to my new beds.
	Go to MyPillow.com or call 800-876-0227.
	Use promo code Dinesh to take advantage of Mike's special offer, not just under the pillows, but on all the other products.
	That number again, 800-876-0227 or go to mypillow.com.
	Make sure to use promo code D-I-N-E-S-H, Dinesh.
	I mean, what an incredible vindication, a vindication not just for Kyle Rittenhouse, and I just feel so great for that kid, 18 years old, and suddenly his whole life opens up in front of him.
	This is a guy, by the way, who did nothing wrong.
	Kyle H. Rittenhouse, not guilty.
	Members of the jury, are these your unanimous verdicts?
	Is there anyone who does not agree with the verdicts as read?
	Would you wish the jury pulled?
	He was attacked in all three cases by these vicious Antifa assailants.
	And he defended himself.
	And now he's free.
	The jury agreed. And I think this is crushing for the left because it's not just about Rittenhouse.
	It's about the whole left-wing narrative.
	And the jury essentially went thumbs down on the narrative.
	Let's think about this for a minute. You have a jury of 12 people.
	And it's a multiracial jury, predominantly female, and all of them voted to acquit Rittenhouse on all charges.
	So this is very hard for the left to process, and you can just see from their reactions that they're just palpitating with rage.
	Here is Nicole Hannah-Jones, the author of the 1619th.
	In this country, you can even kill white people and get away with it.
	If those white people are fighting for black lives, this is the legacy of 1619.
	So this is basically Nicole Hannah-Jones.
	It's always 1619th.
	What year is it, Nicole? 1619th.
	1619. We've never basically gone beyond 1619.
	Yes, Colin Kaepernick.
	We just witnessed a system built on white supremacy validate the terroristic acts of a white supremacist.
	Wait. Is there a shred of evidence that...
	Kyle Rittenhouse was a white supremacist?
	No. In fact, it was Joseph Rosenbaum regularly using the N-word.
	If anything, there is smoking gun proof he's the white supremacist.
	Kyle Rittenhouse is the kid that stopped the white supremacist.
	Now, I was laughing because there's a guy, this is a fellow from, he's a legislator in West Virginia, Richard Ojeda, Democrat.
	And he goes, Kyle Rittenhouse is the equivalent of someone jumping in the lion's den at the zoo and then shooting the animals in self-defense.
	I'm thinking to myself, wait a minute.
	I'd love to have Ojeda kind of spell out this analogy a little bit more because in his analogy, I'm just using his framework, not mine.
	The Antifa guys are the animals.
	Yes. And Kenosha is their zoo.
	It's their den. Evidently, they are allowed to maraud and pray in Kenosha, just like animals do.
	And interestingly, they have no agency.
	In other words, they can't be held responsible any more than you can hold a lion responsible for jumping on a deer.
	So the lion is just being a lion.
	That's the idea here.
	And Rittenhouse is apparently the only human who has moral agency and moral choice.
	And so... I don't really know if this guy thought it through, but look at the dehumanization that is involved here, and the dehumanization, weirdly, of his own side.
	Now, here is Andrew Cuomo, and this is kind of very typical of the political type of response.
	Today's verdict is a stain on the soul of America, blah, blah, blah.
	We must stand unified in rejecting supremacist vigilantism and with one voice say, this is not who we are.
	My favorite word here is we.
	And I'm thinking, who's we?
	Who are you speaking for?
	We just had 12 jurors speak with a single voice.
	So it's a little hard to know what you mean by we.
	The only we that matters here is the jury.
	Now, I'm just hoping for the best for Rittenhouse.
	I'm kind of laying out his career path.
	Starts out Rittenhouse's intern for Matt Getz.
	Matt Gaetz. And he proves himself.
	Then he runs for state rep in Wisconsin.
	Eventually, he runs for Congress when he turns 25.
	He becomes the youngest U.S. congressman at the age of 25.
	I mean, what a way that would be to take his notoriety created by the left and turn it into a nightmare for the left.
	For Kyle Rittenhouse, as for us generally, success is the best revenge.
	Want to do something really smart this month?
	I'm going to give you a deal to cut your cell phone bill in half.
	It's called PureTalk. PureTalk gives you killer 5G coverage on one of the largest 5G networks in the country and still saves the average family over $800 a year.
	I made the switch. The coverage is great.
	The U.S.-based customer service actually cares about you, and PureTalk's prices are pretty much wholesale.
	Unlimited talk, text, and 6GB of data for just $30 a month.
	Keep your number, keep your phone, or this month get Black Friday prices on new phones like the iPhone 12 that I got for just $479.
	They have a 30-day risk-free guarantee, so you literally have nothing to lose.
	Go to puretalk.com, shop for the plan and phone that's right for you, then enter promo code SAVEHALF and you'll save 50% off your first month and you'll also save on a new phone.
	That's puretalk.com, promo code SAVEHALF. PureTalk is simply smarter wireless.
	Some restrictions apply. See site for details.
	You know, now that the Rittenhouse case is decided, now that the facts are known, it's time to revisit the fake fact-checking process employed by fact-checking instruments like PolitiFact or even Facebook.
	I posted to Facebook my clip on the Ingram Angle on Fox News, and Facebook flagged it.
	And they flagged it not for inaccuracy, but for, quote, encouraging or supporting dangerous individuals.
	And who's the dangerous individual in this case?
	Kyle Rittenhouse, even though the jury has now completely vindicated him.
	So I'll keep you updated about whether Facebook now fact-checks itself.
	And recognizes that Rittenhouse is not a dangerous individual.
	In fact, he stopped some dangerous individuals.
	Now, right after the Rittenhouse case emerged, Donald Trump tweeted, and he said that the video shows that Rittenhouse was trying to get away from these two assailants.
	He, quote, fell, and then they violently attacked him.
	PolitiFact rates that false.
	Think about it. We've now all seen the video, and it's not false.
	It's true. But here you see how they use the fact-checking process not to promulgate truth, not to correct misinformation, but to promote misinformation.
	Now, most egregiously, there was a guy who put out on Facebook that Rittenhouse at 17 was, quote, perfectly legal to be able to possess that rifle.
	And again, PolitiFact rules that false.
	Now, of course, now PolitiFact has to go back and explain why they did that, because the judge ruled that the gun was legal, dismissed the gun charge against Rittenhouse, but PolitiFact is now backing off a little bit, and they say this, Our reporting found that it was far from perfectly legal and that it was, in fact, legally murky.
	That's why we rated the claim false.
	So now they're saying, no, we're not saying that Rittenhouse had an illegal gun.
	We're just saying it's a disputable matter.
	And since the guy used the phrase perfectly legal, it is the perfectly legal claim that is false.
	So they're still sticking by the fact that it's false.
	And then to justify themselves, they go on to show why this case is supposedly murky.
	They go through the Wisconsin law, and they talk about the fact that the gun could not have been legal, except that That they misread the law itself.
	Defendants are only guilty of the provision of the law they quoted, quote, if they possess a short-barreled rifle.
	This is under section 941.28.
	Well, it turns out that Rittenhouse did not do that.
	He didn't fit the definition of illegal.
	The judge very clearly said to the prosecution, let's measure the gun.
	The gun, it turns out, is within the requirements.
	It's a legal gun.
	So again, the claim of perfectly legal turns out to be true.
	Facebook rated a perfectly true claim as false.
	And in that sense, PolitiFact is putting out false information under the guise of fact-checking.
	Essentially, what this comes down to is hiring bogus experts who know what they want you to say and who play along and provide a kind of facade or patina of expertise, legitimizing false statements.
	So we can now look at digital platforms as themselves in the business of purveying systematic falsehoods.
	Taking murky things and making them false or taking murky things and essentially massaging the facts to try to conform to a pre-existing ideology.
	The whole fact-checking enterprise itself needs some fact-checkers.
	Using the internet without ExpressVPN?
	Well, that's like taking a call on a train or a bus on speakerphone for everyone to hear.
	Do you want the whole train to know about how much you weigh, your ailments, your finances, or how much you hate Brian Stelter?
	Internet service providers know every single website you visit.
	Internet service providers can sell this information to ad companies and tech giants who then use your data to target you.
	That's why I use ExpressVPN.
	It's so secure. No one can get past ExpressVPN's encryption.
	You just fire up the app, click one button, and boom, you're protected.
	It works on all smart devices.
	So go ahead, protect your online privacy by visiting expressvpn.com slash Dinesh today.
	That's E-X-P-R-E-S-S, vpn.com slash Dinesh.
	You'll get three extra months free, expressvpn.com slash Dinesh.
	Update on the border.
	The Western States Sheriff's Association, this is an association that represents sheriffs from 17 states.
	Has apparently declared a no-confidence resolution in Secretary Mayorkas.
	This is Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, the head of the Department of Homeland Security.
	And they've written a letter to Biden.
	And the letter is illuminating because it sums up the border crisis beautifully.
	They say that...
	Reaching the United States for some of these illegals represents the beginning of years of drug distribution, slavery, and prostitution to pay back the drug cartels.
	So this is what the Biden administration is not just permitting, but encouraging.
	They point out that this illegal coming across the border has been going on for decades.
	But they say, quote, today we are witnessing a complete and total breakdown of efforts of the past several years.
	Over a million illegal crossings already this year.
	Hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants have entered the country illegally and were never intercepted by law enforcement.
	And these aren't just Mexicans.
	Quote, these are individuals from 160 different countries.
	Many of them with ties to terrorism.
	It goes on to point out that border agents have tried to do something about this.
	Quote, border patrol agents have been relegated to daycare supervisors at housing units.
	And when they do attempt to act, they are scrutinized, placed on administrative leave, investigated for political gain.
	Drugs. They talk about drugs.
	They talk about violent crime.
	They talk about fentanyl.
	And then they say, we call on President Biden to take the appropriate steps to remove Secretary Mayorkas.
	And here, I think, we see the problem.
	The problem is not with Mayorkas.
	True, Mayorkas is a kind of a henchman, but whose policies is he enforcing?
	He's enforcing Biden's policies.
	It's Biden who has signed off on this.
	I'm not saying Biden was the initiator.
	It's probably radical left-wing immigration attorneys who are pushing the process, but they are politically influential in the Biden administration.
	Biden has given them a free hand.
	And Mayorkas is merely the man deputized by Biden to carry out these radical policies.
	Kind of like if you were in early Nazi Germany and you were to say, you know, this is a sternly worded letter to Chancellor Adolf Hitler to get rid of Himmler because Himmler is doing all these outrageous things.
	No, Himmler is basically a functionary.
	Himmler is Hitler's man.
	The two are operating.
	They're singing out of the same sheet music.
	Himmler has merely been put into place to carry out what Hitler has endorsed at the outset.
	So, of course, am I saying that Mayorkas is Himmler?
	No, it's not exactly the same thing.
	But what I am saying is that it is, I think, a tactical mistake to think that Mayorkas here is the problem.
	He is a problem, but he's a problem because he is part of a dysfunctional and corrupt system that has, for political reasons of its own, decided, we don't care about the country.
	We don't care about the border.
	We don't care about the stress to communities that are forced to digest these immigrants.
	We don't care about any of that.
	As long as we stand to gain by this happening, we're going to let it happen as long as we have the power to make it happen.
	And ultimately, if we lose the House, we lose the Senate, we're forced to stop it.
	We'll stop it then.
	But until now, come on over.
	The water is just fine.
	Guys, we're kind of in a new environment.
	Inflation is out of control.
	We're facing the same danger of stagflation, stagnant growth and inflation that we endured in the Jimmy Carter era.
	So the old investment strategies don't really work, or at least they need to be modified.
	For a long time, I invested mostly, well, almost solely in the stock market, all my eggs in one basket, and it was a good basket.
	But now I realize I need to hedge my bets.
	We have a ridiculous regime in Washington.
	We see the value of money being eroded through wasteful spending and runaway inflation.
	So this is not the time to be reckless.
	I'm not saying get out of the market, but I am saying protect your savings and investments by putting a portion of them in gold and other precious metals.
	Birch Gold is the place to do it.
	They will help you to convert an eligible IRA or 401k into an IRA backed by precious metals.
	And here's an added incentive to do that this month.
	When you text Dinesh to 484848 and purchase precious metals with Birch Gold by December 23rd, you'll get free silver for every $5,000 you invest.
	Birch Gold has an A-plus rating with a Better Business Bureau, thousands of happy customers.
	So go ahead, text Dinesh to 484848 and get free silver for every $5,000 you invest.
	Offer ends December 23rd.
	Once again, text Dinesh to 484848 and protect your savings today.
	Guys, I want to introduce you to J.D. Rivera, who is a January 6th defendant, but he is also a Christian, a husband, and a father.
	He's a 10-year veteran of the Marine Corps.
	He is a citizen journalist, videographer, and also a documentary filmmaker.
	And I think it's very interesting to hear directly from the January 6th defendants their stories.
	JD, welcome to the podcast.
	Thanks for joining me.
	I really appreciate it.
	Why did you go to Washington, D.C.? Why did you go to the Capitol on January 6th?
	What was your motive? My motive wasn't to go to the Capitol.
	It was actually just to go watch everything that was happening with President Trump.
	As a conservative, influencer, video maker, the whole works, I wanted to see for the last time everybody together enjoying themselves because we all knew that was President Trump's last time speaking.
	So me and my wife went there January 5th and January 6th to document all the events that transpired both of those days.
	So you saw yourself in a journalistic capacity as somebody who was going to sort of make a record, not to mention just be part of that experience yourself.
	Then what happened? What did you see there?
	What did you do? What is it that got you, in a sense, in trouble with the law?
	Yeah, so everything was great.
	Most of the stuff they're not showing you is what happened the day of and the day prior, which was amazing.
	The camaraderie, the morale, the amount of just happiness and joy we were having, the Christians uniting, the whole works, worship, you name it.
	But on January 6th, when everybody went to the Capitol, we ended up going to lunch and found out that there was something more happening at the Capitol.
	We were getting a bunch of people texting us, messaging us, saying, hey, they're going into the Capitol.
	You guys got to come check this out.
	And at that moment, that's when I looked at my wife and I said, hey, look, this is why we came.
	We came to make sure we documented anything and everything that was going to happen.
	If I don't go, I'm going to kick myself in the butt later on for not documenting these events.
	So we ended up going to the Capitol.
	And as we all know, what happened on January 6th, there was the...
	Quote-unquote insurrection, correct?
	What everybody's trying to call it.
	And we were there documenting that footage.
	I was there on the Capitol steps.
	I went up to the Capitol.
	I was documenting all the footage of all the riot police, the Capitol police, going back and forth, throwing grenades, you name it.
	And I did go inside the Capitol as well.
	I went inside the Capitol to show what was going on inside the Capitol, because as a journalist, I felt that it was my obligation to let everybody know what was actually going on everywhere I could potentially find a way to record stuff.
	Now pause for a second, because you are a Trump supporter, and there were sort of Trump supporters who went in the Capitol because they wanted to, you know, let's just say, make their voices heard, make sure that the lawmakers heard them.
	It sounds like your motive, however, was a little bit different.
	You felt that there was kind of action going on and that you wanted to put it on film so that it would be available later for people to look at.
	Mike, so then what happened?
	How did you suddenly become a target of the authorities and of the FBI? Did they arrest you on the spot or was it later?
	No. Actually, I was arrested January 20th.
	7.30 o'clock in the morning, the FBI came to my house.
	Mind you, and this is probably every story that I've heard, no arrest warrant at the time.
	I've never been in trouble with the law, so I didn't know how this goes.
	I've seen the movies and all that stuff, but the first thing I wasn't thinking was, hey, where's the arrest warrant?
	I was stressing the fact that I had multiple FBI agents at my house, inside my home.
	They came in, rifles at the ready, and I'm just like, what is going on?
	Mind you, this whole situation happened because I am a Trump supporter, because I'm conservative and I'm outspoken.
	I've been purged, obviously, from all social media formats.
	I'm regaining that, you know, the amount of people that I had before.
	But I was following Trump all last year and I was going to all the rallies and we were documenting those things.
	So, yes, I thought it was important going inside the Capitol and document everything there.
	It was important for my viewers and everybody to see what was going on, because a lot of them came to me for that information to find out what was going on.
	So we found out that there was individuals, well-known individuals that we knew, unfortunately, that we thought were friends, who actually reported myself and my wife to the FBI here in my local town of Pensacola, Florida.
	They called us domestic terrorists and used my veteran status against me, pretty much saying that I was off my hinges because I'm a vet and he's probably going to shoot stuff up.
	All that craziness.
	So, of course, we had the FBI come to our house and do what they did.
	Now... You want to.
	You're facing these charges and you're fighting them.
	And I should ask you, though, did you get into any fights with the cops?
	Did you take anything from the Capitol?
	Are there any charges of violence against you?
	Or are the charges against you that you are, quote, parading in a Capitol building and you're essentially trespassing and, quote, obstructing an official proceeding is the standard charge they've basically hit everybody with?
	Is that pretty much your charge sheet?
	Yeah, absolutely. I'm dealing with the standard four misdemeanor charges that everybody's getting.
	The funny thing, though, is on Twitter, the FBI put out on the day I was arrested, they were going to hold me accountable for my violent actions at the Capitol.
	But then they turn around and give me four criminal nonviolent charges.
	So they're saying one thing on Twitter.
	They're doing another thing in person.
	It's all crazy how they're picking and choosing what's going on.
	But I didn't go there to harm anybody.
	I didn't harm anybody.
	I didn't touch anybody.
	I pushed my way through with the crowd just as everybody else did.
	I was doing it specifically to capture footage of the events that were happening that day.
	No more, no less. I mean, are you laughing your head off when you hear all these narratives about white supremacy?
	I mean, here you have, you know, you're a Hispanic guy, you're basically out there, you're trying to document what's going on, and you've been lumped together with, I mean, does it outrage you when you hear the left keep talking about this as if this was some kind of a KKK rally?
	Absolutely. I try to tell people I guess I'm the new face of white nationalism.
	I don't understand how that works.
	It's ridiculous. It's ridiculous.
	I've been called a white supremacist.
	I've been called a white nationalist. My wife, she is white, so they're saying that she's the reason why I'm doing this stuff.
	Mind you, I'm the one that deals with the politics, not my wife.
	It's been crazy being lumped into this specific category of individuals knowing that's not what it was.
	The MAGA movement, the conservatives that were part of their And I'm not saying that everybody there is, it was great people, right?
	In every movement, in every political party, there's some off-the-wall individuals.
	I'm not a part of that.
	The people that I know, my friends are not a part of that.
	We are their supporters, and that's all we were.
	We want our voices heard. I wanted to show people's voices being heard.
	But, you know, it's crazy that not only am I being called a white nationalist or a white supremacist, I'm also being called a coconut, you know, an Uncle Tom, sometimes myself, because I don't I go with the same grain when it comes to being a Hispanic American.
	People think that I should bow down to being Mexican.
	That's not who I am.
	I was born and raised in the United States of America.
	I fought for my country.
	I did 10 years in the Marine Corps.
	I'm 100% pure-blood American, and that's how I consider myself every day, all the time.
	J.D., you're making a documentary film in which you're going on the inside.
	In fact, I think you're taking some risk by doing this because you have a pending case, and yet you're interviewing other people who were involved in January 6th.
	You want to sort of get the truth out there to combat this rival narrative.
	Say a word about what you hope to achieve with this documentary film, and then also let's close by you telling people how they can support your case and also how they can support your film project.
	Thank you. Absolutely, yeah.
	So I decided to go on this journey to document all this stuff because I saw how much support I wasn't actually getting.
	Individuals like yourself, sir, one of the only major people that I know that's actually helping out anything to do with January 6th, and I thank you for that.
	So when I noticed that there were so many people just didn't want to be a part of this, they considered us a threat, they considered us some type of liability, I realized that it can't be about me anymore.
	I am a filmmaker. Even though the FBI took all of my gear, I was able to round up some more stuff to do what I got to do just for basic filmmaking.
	And I decided to go from Sanford, Florida, all the way to Beverly Hills, California, to talk to different individuals who have been arrested, charged, have a family member that's in prison right now, to talk about their specific, what's going on with them specifically, with and after January 6th, more or less after January 6th, what's happened to them, how they've been denounced, how they've been treated, just like everybody else, like myself, being our crowdfunding gets automatically removed from any social media platform.
	So I wanted to make it a point that, you know, yes, we have January 6th individuals in the Gulag in Washington right now, but we also have individuals like myself who are still potentially at risk of going to prison for something as ridiculous as what they claim parading and demonstrating around the Capitol.
	And we face, you know, anywhere from six months to 25 years in prison for these misdemeanor charges, and they don't have the proper...
	Legal help that they have.
	I do. I was blessed with an amazing attorney.
	And because of that, that's why I'm using my platform or whatever I can get to help out other individuals to get their stories told, to make sure they're being helped.
	Because it's not just one person.
	It's families. It's husbands, wives, children's kids, you name it.
	Veterans specifically. I'm a veteran, so that really holds near and dear to my heart.
	We got to get everybody help as much as we can.
	Tell JD, there are a couple of websites we want to direct people to.
	One is to do some crowdfunding for you and your work, but another for people who want to support this documentary.
	Where can people go to find out more about you and about your work?
	Absolutely. Yeah. So I'm partnering up with my buddy David Summerall from StopHate.com.
	StopHate.com. If you go to StopHate.com, there's an area where you actually gave me a good idea.
	They call it an insurrection.
	It's the site that you go to on the StopHate.com website.
	And you can go there to help us fund the rest of our documentary.
	because the purpose of the funding is I did everything on my dime and now I have multiple people reaching out saying please come talk to me we want to get our stories out I'm not afraid to talk to them they're not afraid to talk to me so we need as much help so we can travel to the different places within the U.S. because we have well over 500 people I'm not saying that's everybody we're going to get to but there's a there's a lot of people that we need to get to so we need the funds and support to get out there to to be able to tell their stories as well so So stophate.com.
	You can go to anything January 6th.
	They call it an insurrection.
	That's going to be where you can go for our crowdfunding specifically for the documentary.
	For me specifically, I have a link, give, set, and go forward slash Jesus Rivera.
	It's my crowdfunding link to help out with my legal case, everything else.
	I've been through a portion of it.
	I have a little bit more to go.
	My next court date out of all days, January 6th, that's going to be my next court date, and I believe we're going to be talking about me going to trial.
	I'm going to say this right now. I'm not pleading guilty to anything because I'm not guilty of any of the charges that are going with me, so I'm going to take this on full force, and I need as much support and help as I can get, and there's going to be other individuals that are going to need The same help and support that we can get to rally against this and prove that they're just treating us as political prisoners and it's something that needs to be taken care of.
	Well, I want to commend you for your courage.
	And I also want to say how important it is to fight these things out because we need to put the system on trial.
	Notice that's what happened in the Rittenhouse case.
	And I'm glad there have been a number of January 6th defendants who I think out of necessity have pleaded out.
	You're not pleading out. You say you're going to fight.
	I encourage you to do it, to put the system on trial so that Americans can see what has been going on in a sense right in front of their eyes.
	Thank you, J.D. Rivera, for joining me.
	I really appreciate it. Yeah, Dinesh, thank you so much for having me on.
	I appreciate you. Fruits and vegetables are integral to any healthy diet, but why do so few Americans actually eat the recommended servings of produce every day?
	Well, because it can be difficult to prepare that much produce daily.
	But by taking balance of nature, you're giving your body all the nutrients it needs to increase your cells' vitality.
	Get the nutrition that can only be found in whole natural fruits and vegetables.
	Debbie and I take 10 daily servings of fruits and veggies.
	All in six small capsules.
	They're absolutely no trouble swallowing.
	Always fresh. Nothing artificial.
	They smell great. Debbie swears by the fiber and spice.
	And I was finally convinced to take it.
	We are really liking it.
	Invest in your health. Invest in your life.
	Join me and experience the balance of nature difference for yourself.
	For years to come, for a limited time, all new preferred customers get an additional 35% discount and free shipping on your first Balance of Nature order.
	Use discount code AMERICA. Call 800-246-8751.
	That's 800-246-8751.
	Or go to balanceofnature.com and use discount code AMERICA. By a thoroughly partisan vote in the House, the Democrats have voted to censure Paul Gozar, Republican congressman, and to strip him from his committees.
	And this is a very serious matter because it is very unusual for one party...
	Even if it's the ruling party, or even especially if it's the ruling party, to be knocking the other party, a member of the opposite party, off his committees.
	So let's consider Gozar's offense that led to this admittedly extreme action.
	This has happened only, what, three times in the last several decades?
	So it's not a normal thing for...
	A group to do. So Gozar must have done, you say, something really bad.
	What did he do? Well, it turns out he posted an anime, a cartoon, a kind of meme.
	And the meme apparently has Gozar and Lauren Boebert apparently delivering a kind of coup de gras, delivering a kind of death blow to AOC in the cartoon.
	Now, a word about these cartoons, this is apparently from a show called Attack on Titan.
	I can't say I'm an avid follower of the show, but apparently it's a hugely popular and successful Japanese kind of anime.
	You can think of it as kind of a Game of Thrones.
	What you have is you have this fictional city.
	It's surrounded by these great Big walls.
	And apparently there are evil giants on the other side.
	So you kind of get the metaphor here that appeals to Gozar, right?
	You've got a wall that's keeping, if you will, the giants away.
	And then inside the city, you've got these heroes or soldiers who wear this special gear to fight these giants.
	And so it's a good and evil struggle by the evil bad guys trying to storm the walls.
	And you can see, I thought to myself, why would a Japanese cartoon be popular in the United States?
	I think the answer is that American popular culture is essentially in free fall.
	I mean, first of all, everything is either black or Latino or gay.
	I mean, you have this kind of Superman is bisexual, Captain America is black and gay.
	So I think people are turning off from all this.
	It's part of the, I think, a healthy reaction against wokeism.
	And then you turn to Japan and And what you see in this anime is kind of the good old, kind of old-style Western, except now it's not the cowboys and the Indians, or it's not the American soldiers against the fascists, but rather it's the soldiers inside the wall fighting against the giants outside the wall.
	And apparently there's kind of appealing, contagious musical accompaniments.
	And so people follow this kind of stuff.
	And apparently Gozar, who apparently is more plugged in to popular culture than I am, jumps on this meme, adapts it.
	Big deal. This is a nothing at all.
	And yet, all these solemn statements by AOC, you know, we have to agree that this is just wrong.
	And think of all the stuff that they get away with.
	So here's my remedy.
	And this is an important point because this will continue to happen to Republicans unless Republicans not just return the favor, but return the favor, you may say, in spades.
	So the House Democrats have now stripped two Republicans, remember the other one, Marjorie Taylor Greene, from their committees.
	And when Republicans take the House, as I think they will next year, here's what they should do.
	Strip a minimum of 10 Democrats from their committees.
	It's not going to be hard to find.
	If you want to know who they are, ask me.
	I'll be happy to provide the list.
	I'll be happy to provide the full bill of indictment.
	And in fact, I'm not saying to stop at 10.
	I'm saying to start at 10.
	10 might just have to be the starting point.
	It's the way you tame a bully.
	What happens with a bully is you have to stamp on his feet, and then when he looks down and sees that he's missing three toes, he immediately realizes that it doesn't really pay to be a bully.
	Aches and pains come to us all eventually.
	Well, whether from the normal wear and tear of time or from injury.
	But now, there's a 100% drug-free solution tried.
	It's called Relief Factor.
	Relief Factor supports your body's fight against inflammation.
	That's the source of aches and pains.
	Now, the vast majority of people who try Relief Factor Order more.
	Why? Because it works for them.
	Debbie's been suffering from frozen shoulder for a couple of years now.
	She decided, let me try Relief Factor.
	She found it works amazingly well.
	The pain just disappeared.
	And Debbie knows if she doesn't take it regularly, the pain is going to come right back.
	So she's made a vow never to be without it again.
	Well, being able to lift her arm and exercise is kind of super important to her.
	Relief Factor is a tool she needs and she's glad she's got it.
	You too can benefit.
	Just try it. You'll see.
	Order the three-week quick start for the discounted price of just $19.95.
	Go to relieffactor.com or call 833-690-7246 to find out more about this offer.
	That number again, 833-690-7246 or go to relieffactor.com.
	Feel the difference. The term vigilantism is now all over the place in leftist commentary, and it's because that's the only way they can claim a kind of refuge after this Rittenhouse repudiation by the jury, by, as I said, a multiracial jury.
	And so they are drawing a kind of genre.
	We can't have vigilantes walking around shooting people for no reason.
	Now, Kyle Rittenhouse was not a vigilante.
	He's not somebody who went there shooting people for no reason.
	In fact, the only people he shot were people who attacked him, and he shot them at the moment that they were attacking him when he had reasonable fear.
	But it's got me thinking about the larger issue of vigilantism, and my mind flashed back to a movie I saw in the 1980s.
	I think I've seen it once subsequently.
	It's a very interesting movie.
	It's called The Star Chamber, starring Michael Douglas and Hal Holbrook, directed by Peter Hyams.
	And I'll lay out the plot of the movie because this is what makes the movie interesting.
	It's not the greatest movie.
	I'd rate it kind of a 7 out of 10.
	But it raises a very provocative issue.
	Michael Douglas is a young superior court judge.
	And because of leftist laws that allow you to...
	That force you, as a judge, to release people on technicalities, one after another, burglar and violent attacker and rapist and murderer, is set free.
	And this guy, just ultimately, his conscience gets to him.
	He's like, I can't stand it.
	I am the instrument of their exoneration.
	And sure enough, they go out and do it again.
	They go out and do it again. And so, once this guy reaches his limit, he goes to a professor of his.
	This is Hal Holbrook.
	And Hal Holbrook tells him that we've got a solution, but we can't tell you about it now.
	This guy's like, tell me, tell me.
	And then he releases another guy.
	In fact, he releases two vicious thugs named Monk and Coombs.
	And these are guys who are suspected of killing a little child.
	And the evidence appears pretty incriminating.
	In fact, their possessions are found in the truck that was used as the getaway truck in this gruesome murder.
	So it seems pretty clear that they did it.
	And so Michael Douglas goes to his professor and goes, you've got to tell me, what is the solution?
	And then, of course, the movie takes off, the professor reveals, he goes, well, we have a special court.
	In other words, we, a bunch of retired judges who themselves became sick of the system, sick of the fact that they were releasing bad guy after bad guy, have created a star chamber, which is to say they've created a private court in which they meet, they only consider kind of clear-cut cases, They look at the evidence, they vote, and if they vote to convict, they hire a private executioner, a hitman, to go out and take the guy out.
	So this is kind of, you may say, a very primitive form of justice.
	But of course, the question raised by the movie is, is it justice at all?
	Now, kind of the genius of the movie is that it begins by stoking one's support for vigilantism.
	And you begin to support this vigilante court, because it is.
	It's a vigilante court in the sense that it is a lawless court operating outside the bounds of the normal court system.
	These judges do not have the authority to do this, but they do it anyway.
	But they do it because they genuinely believe that they are doing justice.
	And the movie asks the question, are they?
	Are they? And it appears that even though their procedures may be, quote, illegal, so they're, in other words, falling outside, you may say, the positive law, They are within the natural law.
	They're within the natural law because they are, in fact, giving bad guys what they deserve, which is an eye for an eye.
	That's the model of justice here.
	But the point of the movie is, while stoking the sentiment for vigilante justice to ultimately come out against it.
	Now, what interests me is the way in which they come out against it.
	They come out against it because it turns out that Monk and Coombs didn't do it.
	They didn't do it because the car was stolen.
	The real guys who did it, it's their vehicle.
	It's not Monk and Coombs' vehicle.
	So Michael Douglas basically realizes that a mistake has occurred and the executioner has already been dispatched.
	And so he goes rushing to his professor, Hal Holbrook, and he says, listen, I found out that these guys are innocent.
	You got to recall the hitman.
	And this is when the movie takes a strange turn because Hal Holbrook goes, well, can't do it.
	He goes, listen, we're taking a lot of risk by having this private court.
	We have a process in which we unleash the executioner.
	We don't even know who he is.
	We don't directly deal with him.
	Moreover, he says, these are bad guys.
	Think of all the crimes they've committed.
	They've got long rap sheets.
	So if they didn't do this, okay, they probably did something else.
	And this is where Michael Douglas sort of gets off The bandwagon, by which I mean he's willing to go along with the idea of a vigilante court for the bad guys, for the people who did it, but he's really not willing to go along with a vigilante court for someone who is being erroneously...
	But I think when you look at the movie more closely, you realize that although the judges are supposed to be scrupulous, look at the facts of the case, you notice in this case they are a little sloppy.
	You notice that in this case they don't have any more evidence than one piece of evidence which, of course, could be disputed and turns out to be wrong.
	So, in this case, I think the judges did not find Monk and Coombs guilty, quote, beyond a reasonable doubt.
	They jumped to a conclusion.
	And second of all, why couldn't they call off the hitman?
	Why couldn't you have a vigilante court where you say, in effect, listen, we're going to make provision for the fact that if we subsequently discover that we made a mistake, we're going to have these three ways in which it could be corrected.
	So, although the movie...
	Turns on vigilante justice and makes an argument against it.
	The argument itself is flawed because the movie doesn't consider ways in which the flaws of the vigilante court could have been corrected.
	In any case, this is my take on a very provocative film, kind of an interesting film to go back and see now against the landscape of Rittenhouse, because it shows you that there's a moral ambiguity Surrounding this issue of vigilantism, and while vigilante justice is crude, it's imperfect, I mean, it has to be compared to what justice is going on in the first place.
	I mean, let's remember that the reason that these guys went to vigilante justice is the normal system had completely broken down.
	Just like the reason that Kyle Rittenhouse said to be on that street at all with his AR-15 is that the cops were nowhere to be seen.
	The marauders and looters were just going about it.
	Even the adult males of Kenosha were apparently hiding in their homes, deciding, I better not go out there.
	It's too dangerous for me.
	We can't protect our own town.
	And therefore, it was up to essentially a teenager, an 17-year-old kid, to go out there and say, well, listen, if the cops won't do it and the adult males in Kenosha will do it, who's left to do it but me?
	Guys, we're going to do an audio question today, but I just want to say I hope you're enjoying the podcast, and you should subscribe if you're listening to it on Apple.
	And if you're watching it on YouTube, also make sure you hit the notifications.
	Now, by the way, they don't always notify you, but they sometimes do.
	At least this is Debbie's experience, but it's good to subscribe and hit notifications.
	Also, I should announce I'm going to be doing a locals podcast.
	Live Q&A. We'll be talking Rittenhouse, things to be thankful for, how to harpoon a liberal, all the topics in the news.
	And this is tomorrow, Tuesday, 7.30 p.m.
	Eastern. And go to dinesh.locals.com.
	dinesh.locals.com.
	You can listen for free and you can check out the local site.
	Let's go to today's question.
	Listen. Hi, Dinesh.
	It's Josh. Hey, love all your work.
	Hey, I had a question for you.
	If you've ever kind of pondered on the idea, what could our founders have done differently With the Constitution that would have protected us nowadays.
	And when I think about that, I come up with that they had it right with the senators being elected by the state legislatures and we messed it all up by the 17th Amendment.
	And I'm just curious what you if you have your own idea what they could have done differently or what your thought is about the 17th Amendment, because I think we'd be in so much better shape if you had all these conservative legislatures around the country like Arizona and Pennsylvania and Michigan and places putting in conservative senators.
	Imagine the government appointees being better, the judges being better, the slowing down the government spending being better.
	It's incredible what a mess making the senators directly elected has created.
	Curious what you think. This question has to do with the fact that we have changed over time the way in which senators are Chosen.
	Moving from the senators being chosen by state legislatures to the direct election of senators.
	Now, I do think that certainly at this moment, given the political configuration now, that if we had the old system, we would have more senators disposed our way.
	But I don't think that that is the heart of the problem.
	So let me say what I think it is.
	It's this. The founders are creating an architecture that is supposed to outlast them, and outlast them not by 10 or 20 or 30 years, but outlast them, you may say, in perpetuity.
	Outlast them for now, we're 200 years and more from the founding.
	So how do you do that? How do you create a blueprint that cannot be damaged or tampered with in a fundamental sense?
	Well, you have to say that any constitutional architecture depends ultimately on the people conserving that architecture.
	Because if an architect does the most masterful blueprint for, let's say, the St.
	Peter's Basilica and the Sistine Chapel, the truth of it is that people later decide, well, I'm not going to look at the blueprint.
	I'm going to use this other blueprint, or I'm going to pretend like the blueprint doesn't really count.
	Now, the founders also, and I noticed this fact when I was doing research for my PragerU videos on the founders, the leading founders, that there is a hidden assumption in the architecture of the founding.
	And it's hidden in the sense that it peeks its head out a little bit in the Federalist Papers on more than one occasion.
	The basic idea here is that when you have a majority and when you have a minority in a country, Both sides need to have a certain rational or prudent fear of the other.
	Both sides have to worry that if I go too far, the majority says, listen, if we use our 51% to start confiscating the property and suppressing the rights of the other 49%, they can rebel.
	And we might have the numerical numbers, but it's not obvious that if they rebel, we're going to win.
	So there is a reciprocal respect of the two sides, and I think that's really what's broken down.
	The left doesn't fear our side.
	The Democrats don't fear the Republicans because—and I developed this theme last Friday in my special issue on the Republican Party—the Democrats don't think that we will retaliate against them in the way that they treat us.
	I think if we can address this problem and generate, if you will, a more—a tougher— More no-nonsense Republican Party, one that recognizes the crisis of the situation and responds to the Democrats in kind, a lot of their nonsense would at least be arrested if it didn't stop altogether.

▲