All Episodes
Previous Next
May 1, 2023 - Dinesh D'Souza
48:30
SECRET KNOWLEDGE Dinesh D’Souza Podcast Ep569
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
This episode is brought to you by my friend Rebecca Walser, a financial expert who can help you protect your wealth.
Book your free call with her team by going to friendofdinesh.com.
That's friendofdinesh.com.
Coming up, I'm going to talk about the identity of the Dobbs leaker, but I'm going to argue that the real question is not who did it, but why.
What's the motive? A gruesome incident provokes the question, why does the media conceal the truth whenever it involves illegal immigrants?
January 6th, defendant Jenny Cutt joins me.
We're going to talk about why the GOP is so silent about this issue.
And I'll explore the worrisome cultural implications of the Jerry Springer Show.
Hey, if you're watching on Rumble or listening on Apple, Google, or Spotify, do hit the subscribe button.
I'd appreciate it. This is the Dinesh D'Souza Show.
America needs this voice.
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.
The identity of the Dobbs decision leaker, the person who leaked the Supreme Court's Dobbs decision, and in a sense, the full opinion, the leading opinion written by Justice Alito, was out before it was out.
But that person's identity is to this date unknown.
It seems very odd, not just to me, but to many other people, because it's a small circle of people who would have not only known the outcome, but had actual access to the decision.
We're talking about the Supreme Court, nine people.
We're talking about their clerks.
That's probably, what, five or six per justice.
So 45 people.
Maybe there were some other administrative staff, but maybe 75, 80, I don't know, 100 people.
How hard can it be?
To figure out who the leaker was.
It can't be that hard.
And yet, there's been this supposed investigation, now conducted not by the FBI, conducted by the marshal of the court.
It's done really by doing interviews with people.
I'm not even sure if these people have the competence to be able to do this kind of detective work.
But they evidently interviewed a bunch of people.
They did a bunch of affidavits.
They put people under oath.
They warned them that if they lie, they can be subjected to prosecution for making false statements.
But supposedly, they came up with nothing.
In fact, they said that...
That the marshal, her name is Gail Curley, quote, has to date been unable to identify a person responsible by a preponderance of the evidence.
So, you don't need beyond a reasonable doubt, but you need more evidence pointing to it than pointing to someone else or away from it.
And yet, Supreme Court Justice Alito recently said in an interview, he goes, basically...
I have a pretty good idea.
Quote, So Alito is basically saying, I know who it was.
Now, I can't prove it definitively, so I'm not going to say the name.
But he does say this.
He says that the person who did it, quote, it was part of an effort to prevent the Dobbs draft from becoming the decision of the court, and that's how it was used for those six weeks by people on the outside as part of the campaign to try to intimidate the court.
So this is the key point here.
I mean, obviously, we'd like to know the identity of the person.
We'd like to have that person be held responsible.
Just think about it. You've got somebody, most likely a Supreme Court clerk.
Now, there were some early reports that it might have been departing Justice Breyer's clerk.
And I've even seen pictures of the supposed perpetrator.
But whether it was that guy or some other guy, this is a guy who's got a very important Supreme Court imprimatur.
I clerked for a Supreme Court justice who generally goes into a high position I mean, here's someone who, if lawyers should be trusted to do anything, it is to respect the procedures of the law, respect the Supreme Court as the highest institution charged with carrying out and interpreting the law.
and maintain confidentiality, which is a part of the routine business of law.
This is under wraps, this is under seal, you can't talk about this, don't divulge that, patient, I'm sorry, attorney-client privilege, and so on and so on.
So this alone, the idea that we're putting someone out there who is not only not being held accountable, but guess what?
I wouldn't be surprised if after the statute of limitations is over, this person comes out and goes, it was me!
This is fantastic!
And the person is then praised by the left for being heroic and for taking all the risk and for basically putting themselves on the line.
So this is a transformation in which you take something that you did that is administratively bad, that is ethically horrible, and And then you claim that it's some sort of a credential or a kind of insignia of virtue.
As I said, it's interesting to know who it was and important to find out who it is.
But it is just as important to know what the motive was.
And this, I think, is the significance of what Alito is saying.
What he's saying is, listen, there were people who implied that this leak was coming from the right.
Nina Totenberg, the legal propagandist, I think I would have to say, for NPR, she wrote an article basically saying, quote, the only theory that makes sense Is that a conservative leaked the opinion?
Think about how, first of all, Nina Totenberg may not be the brightest bulb in the legal field, but how can that be the only theory that makes sense?
Who is more likely to leak an opinion?
The people who affirm the opinion and want Roe to be overturned?
Why would they want that to be leaked?
To maybe have some early outrage about it that is then what?
So it's not quite as much of a shock when the decision itself comes out.
No, it makes far more sense to say that somebody on the other side, on the left, leaked it because what they wanted to do is create a sort of...
A cascade or an escalating wave of indignation and outrage that would then scare the justices into, oh my gosh, there's going to be social upheaval if this decision is released, and so we better at the very least tone it down or maybe even rethink if we want to go this far and really overturn Roe v.
Wade. So this appears to have been the motive, and And here's Alito saying, based on what I know, let's think about it.
Alito is being briefed, obviously, about the status of the investigation.
He is actually the justice most directly involved because it was his opinion that was leaked.
And what he's saying is, no, the leak did not come from the conservative side.
The suspected leaker, or maybe leakers, were on the left.
And that in itself is, I think, information that confirms What so many of us had already suspected.
Debbie and I started eating better this year.
We've lost weight. But the foods we can't seem to eat enough of, and it's a requirement, are veggies and fiber.
Now, what better way to get all your fruits and veggies plus fiber than with Balance of Nature?
Balance of Nature, fiber, and spice right here.
It's a proprietary blend of 12 spices for digestive health.
The intense flavors and deep colors of the spices are the most condensed whole food source of phytonutrition available.
It's recommended to be paired with their star product here.
Fruits and veggies in a capsule.
So easy. Select the whole health system for the best price.
Now right now, start your journey to better health.
Take advantage of Balance of Nature's Great Offer.
$25 off plus free fiber and spice with your first preferred order of fruits and veggies.
But you got to use discount code AMERICA. The offer can end at any time.
So act now. Call 800-246-8751.
That's 800-246-8751.
Or go to balanceofnature.com.
Use discount code AMERICA. I want to contrast two headlines, one in the New York Post and one in the Washington Post, because they tell us a lot about the state of journalism today.
Here's the New York Post. Migrant on Migrant Massacre.
Five dead after confronting still-at-large Texas gunmen firing AR-15 as baby slept.
What we learned from this headline is a reference to the shooting that left five people, including an eight-year-old boy dead in San Jacinto County, Texas.
And the headline, migrant on migrant, is key because the guy who did it is an illegal who has been repeatedly deported to Mexico, but five times he has been able to cross back over.
So this is really a reflection right there of the Biden administration's border policy.
They deport you, you come right back.
Even if you get deported, you come right back.
And so this incident would not have happened if we had a secure border.
To that degree, it's safe to say that the Biden administration, through its border policies, bears some responsibility.
They're obviously not the perpetrators, but they enabled this to happen by enabling this guy to be in the United States.
But now let's turn to the headline in the Washington Post.
Gunmen killed neighbors.
Gunmen killed neighbors.
Child with, neighbor's child with AR-15 style rifle, Sheriff says.
Notice in this headline there's no reference to the identity of the shooter.
There's no reference really to the status of those who were shot.
Now, those who were shot, turns out that they were all illegal too.
In other words, they were what?
Hondurans, honey, I think?
A group of Hondurans, apparently 10 people living in a small home right next to the perpetrator.
And the perpetrator was a Mexican illegal.
And what he was doing evidently was, I don't know if he was high or if he was drunk, but he was firing his rifle in his own backyard.
And so since the Honduran illegals next door had a baby, they decided to basically send somebody over to tell this guy, hey, listen, please don't do that because we have a baby that can't sleep.
So the simplest of kind of neighborly situations that ordinarily would happen Lead a normal person to say, of course I will.
I'm really sorry. I shouldn't do that.
Instead, this guy goes marching over, guns blazing, and causes this massacre to happen.
Now, even though the Washington Post is highlighting, notice that they have a child with AR-15 style rifle, implying that the rifle is the problem here.
The rifle is not the problem here.
In fact, the rifle could also have been the remedy here.
Think of the Hondurans.
I mean, I had...
A couple of AR-15s in their house, and this guy comes over with an AR-15, and there are 10 of them and one of him, they would at least have been able to return fire.
They might have been able to get him and prevent him from taking all the lives that he did.
But the media today is such that they deliberately withhold this kind of information.
You just cannot trust the headline because you know it's not even just that what they say is false.
That's often true.
But even more chilling is what they withhold.
Because since you don't know the truth, you don't know that it is false and that they're withholding it from you.
So no mention. And I told Debbie, take a look at the article.
Let's see if it...
Maybe they missed it in the headline.
That's the headline writer. But there it is in the first paragraph or the second or the third.
And Debbie's reading down and she keeps saying, no, no, no.
There's really no reference at all, even as you start scrolling down, scrolling down the article.
Now, this guy has evidently vanished.
There is a manhunt for him.
And his name is Francesco Oropesa.
And I'm guessing that he went back across the border and sort of dissolved Among the Mexicans and so it's not going to be all that easy Although it shouldn't be impossible to be able to to find him He's obviously an extremely crazed and dangerous individual and and that's really the problem Let me think about it. If you had gun control laws would Francisco Francisco or a Pesa have not been able to obtain a gun
These kinds of bad guys know how to get guns.
They're probably part of criminal circuits or enterprises.
This is a guy who would have no trouble getting a gun.
And so taking guns away from the law-abiding citizens doesn't do a whole lot to prevent this kind of thing from happening.
Texas, I'm happy to say, is one of the states that still has the death penalty.
And in this sort of situation, we'll most certainly administer it.
So I'm hopeful Governor Abbott, I saw, has put out a $50,000 reward.
I hope that the money is some sort of incentive and that they're able to nab this guy, try him, and if, of course, he is the perpetrator, as it seems obvious that he is, that he will be given his deserved and just, and let's also hope, swift punishment.
Debbie and I started taking Relief Factor a couple of years ago.
The difference we've seen in our joints, nothing short of amazing.
Our aches and pains have essentially disappeared thanks to this 100% drug-free solution called Relief Factor.
Now, how does it work? Relief Factor supports your body's fight against inflammation.
That's the source of aches and pains.
The vast majority of people who try Relief Factor become regular customers.
They order more because it works for them.
Debbie's a true believer she can now do exercises that for a long time she wasn't able to do.
So Relief Factor has been a real game changer for her, her aunt, other members of our family, Mike here in the studio, and for many other people.
You too can benefit. Try it for yourself.
Order the three-week quick start for the discounted price of just $19.95.
Go to relieffactor.com or call 800-4-RELIEF to find out more about this offer.
The number again, 800-4-RELIEF or go to relieffactor.com.
Feel the difference. Just as America had January 6th, Brazil had January 8th.
What happened on January 8th?
Well, supposedly in Brazil there was an insurrection.
There were a bunch of supporters of Jair Bolsonaro who stormed the Brazilian capital and other prominent buildings.
And the reaction in the aftermath, very similar to January 6th, there's a crackdown by the newly installed Lula da Silva, a number of arrests, people being charged with various offenses, sedition and trespassing and taking over public buildings and so on.
Well, Now, it's recently emerged from media footage inside Brazil, including, by the way, CNN Brazil.
And what does the footage show?
Just as with January 6th, you begin to see that not everything is the way it seems.
It seemed, again, from the beginning that these were all Bolsonaro supporters.
They stormed the Capitol.
But now it turns out that the minister of President Lula's institutional security office, his name is Gonsalves Dias, or Dias, He is inside the presidential palace on video interacting with the rioters.
So think about it.
This would be like Chuck Schumer or somebody of that caliber being inside the Capitol talking to the rioters, the so-called rioters.
And not only that, but the captain of the military police is also inside, not only walking and talking to rioters, but serving them water.
So you see a video of the military captain doing this, as if to say, this is fine.
Here, have water.
No attempt to ask people to leave.
No attempt to arrest them.
And then you begin to see, again on video, the flags of the landless workers movement.
So there were far-left activists.
Also, who are connected, by the way, closely with the current President, Lula.
This would be like Antifa types.
And what are they doing? They're inside the occupied buildings.
And all of this, of course, is, as I say, chillingly, as chilling parallels to January 6th.
And in both cases, there seems to be an element of orchestration.
Or if not outright orchestration, hey, this is a politically beneficial event for us.
We can use it now not only to shut down any debate over the election, but we can also use it to go after the activists on the other side.
After political opponents, we now have something to charge them with.
Now, the difference between Brazil and America is that although Bolsonaro lost that election and Lula is the current president, the parliament, the both houses of Congress, if you will, are conservative.
So it's almost, it would be the equivalent of Republicans having a strong control over both the House and the Senate.
We're talking, of course, about Brazil.
And so what's going on right now is there are deafening demands on the part of Congress For an investigation of these January 6th events, and if the investigation warrants the impeachment of President Lula because of the complicity and involvement of the Lula people in what happened.
In other words, if it was an insurrection, guess what?
That makes all the Lula people who are part of it insurrectionists, doesn't it?
And so... What's happened is that the acting minister of Brazil's Institutional Security Cabinet, this guy Ricardo Capelli, he has dismissed a whole bunch of people already for their role in the January 6th events.
Once again, a parallel to January 6th, Lula has been saying, it's Bolsonaro who caused this to happen.
Now again, as with Trump, there's simply no evidence that Bolsonaro did anything.
Bolsonaro, as far as I know, made no appeal for people to do this.
He did suspect that the election was stolen.
But even then, he maintained largely a silence after the election had occurred.
And so...
The situation as we're seeing it is that there are, just as there are in other ways parallels between say Venezuela and the United States in terms of the actions of the left, we see here that in terms of elections we have a similar pattern.
A kind of right of center leader in the Brazilian case Bolsonaro is ousted in a very close election that seems to could have gone either way.
It was followed by this so-called insurrection that turns out maybe not to have been entirely an insurrection with all these suspicious characters involved.
It sounds disturbingly familiar and we'll watch with interest to see what happens.
Debbie and I made a New Year's resolution.
Let's lose some weight.
And thankfully, PhD weight loss came to the rescue.
We both started the PhD weight loss and nutrition program almost 13 weeks ago.
Debbie has already lost 17 pounds.
I'm down 24 pounds.
Wow, we are delighted.
The program is based on science and nutrition.
No injections, no pills, no long hours in the gym, no severe calorie restriction, just good, sound, scientifically proven nutrition.
It's so simple, they make it easy by providing 80% of your food at no additional cost.
they tell you when and what to eat. And guess what? You can do the whole program without ever being hungry. The founder, Dr. Ashley Lucas, has her PhD in chronic disease and sports nutrition.
She's a registered dietitian. She helps people lose weight and most important, maintain that weight loss for life. So are you ready? If you're ready to take the step of losing weight like Debbie and I have, call PhD Weight Loss and Nutrition. Here's the number 864-644-1900 or find them online at myphdweightloss.com. The number again to call 864-644-1900.
Not sure if you heard, but Jerry Springer, the talk show host Jerry Springer, died toward the end of last week.
I was going to sort of let it pass, but then as I thought about it, it occurred to me that there's a There's a very lasting kind of cultural significance to what Jerry Springer did over many, many years, the impact of his show.
So I thought I'd like to say a few things about that.
So this is not so much a reflection on Jerry Springer, the man.
I'm going to say a couple things about the man, but I'm going to focus a little bit more about the show.
Now... First of all, many people don't know that Jerry Springer was, even while the same guy who's hosting this outrageous show with people being administered paternity tests and people coming to blows and Jerry Springer's guys running in to pry people apart, this same guy was also the mayor of Cincinnati.
Now, when I noted this on social media, someone goes, well, yeah, Dinesh, but you know that he was forced to resign because he got caught paying a prostitute with a check.
I'm not sure if this was when he was on city council or when he was mayor, but I mean, I have to agree that, well, first of all, don't go to prostitutes if you don't want that to be exposed.
But the other thing is, if you do, Don't pay with the check.
I mean, I don't think you need a political consultant to figure that out.
On a somewhat more noble note, when Springer was the mayor, apparently there were a group of Nazis who demanded to march in Cincinnati.
Springer, who is of Jewish origins, said, he goes, wow, my parents are Holocaust survivors.
I don't know what I'm going to say to them.
I can't really stop this march.
And so he talked to his parents and his parents said, Jerry, this is America.
Let them march. I mean, a remarkable affirmation of free speech, not just on the part of Springer, but also on the part of his parents.
Now, with regard to the Springer show, I remember when I would go back to India, there would be my relatives and my cousins who had seen the show, but I found what's interesting is they didn't take it as a show.
They took it as kind of a window into American life.
And their conclusion was Americans are nuts.
First of all, look at the situations they get themselves into and those are bad enough.
But then look at the way that they then go and parade their embarrassing secrets on TV and they get shamed and humiliated and they behave in this sort of horrific manner.
And so... Interestingly, we've got to remember this about American culture.
It is taken by other people around the world as this is who Americans are.
This is how Americans behave.
Now, inside of America, I was always intrigued by why people not only watched the show, but sort of became addicted to it.
And let's remember that Jerry Springer's show was kind of one of many shows of the same genre.
There was Montel Williams, who were some of the other guys.
Wow. Geraldo, of course.
Sally, Jesse, Oprah.
But I think Jerry Springer took it the furthest.
He was the reductio ad absurdum of the genre.
It's like, you can do it? All right.
What if we push the limit?
And so I would say the typical show, at least the typical show that I watch, involve people coming to blows, wrestling each other down onto the ground.
And of course... In one case, they broke around those notes.
Tabby reminds me.
But look, I mean, I guess there's a certain amount of entertainment value in all that.
But I think at a deeper psychological level, it was also a sort of, it's almost as if people whose lives were not all that great, they were a little humdrum, maybe even you have problems, but then you turn on Jerry Spring and go...
I thought I had problems.
Look at these guys!
So it gives you a certain...
You compare them to yourself and you discover that your problems are in effect not so bad.
Now, I think the bad news on Jerry Springer is just this.
He started a freak show and the freak show, alas, has now become mainstream culture.
In other words, we see the same freakishness.
Think about... Let's take a typical...
I think I once saw a Jerry Springer show, and this was intended to be almost on the face of it humorous.
You had a married couple, and the man had had a sex change operation to become a woman, and the woman had had a sex change operation to become a man, and the point was that their marital life was better than ever.
So this is like, I remember like chuckling at this and shaking my head and being like, this is nuts.
But now I say to myself, this idea of transitioning from one gender to the other, this idea that it sort of is a way of affirming your true identity, this is now happening all over the place.
I saw something this morning.
These were posts from various hospitals in North Carolina.
They do these gender transitions at the age of two.
And three years old.
So obviously, without the consent of the person involved, this is something evidently that the parents are pushing or being pushed into by therapists.
I'm not exactly sure.
But how can you possibly make an informed decision at that age?
Moreover, how do you sort of know that my child is born with male anatomy, but really this is a little girl?
I mean, it's very scary, the stuff that's going on.
And so I don't think that Jerry Springer endorsed it.
I mean, he realized, of course, that his show was highly successful.
In that sense, he enabled it.
But you always got the sense that he himself was not part of it.
In other words, he would step back and had this wry look on his face as if to say, I realize that these people are total freaks.
But that distancing ultimately didn't change the fact that Jerry Springer and the show in its own way helped foster our current climate in which the kind of shameless freakishness that we saw so often on his show is now virtually a cultural norm.
And I don't see how history can record that as a positive legacy.
Hey, have you heard? Mike Lindell and MyPillow have launched My Mattress Topper 2.0.
The new three-inch MyPillow mattress topper is made up of three unique layers.
Layer one, MyPillow patented foam, which provides superior support and durability.
Layer two, transitional foam, which provides optimal comfort, evenly distributes body weight, and helps relieve pressure points.
And layer three, the cover, made from a special material to keep your body temperature regulated through the night.
This MyPillow mattress stopper is washable and dryable.
It's made in the USA. Comes with a 10-year warranty and a 60-year money-back guarantee.
This incredible 3-inch mattress stopper is as low as $219.59 with promo code Dinesh.
So go ahead and call 800-876-0227.
Again, the number 800-876-0227 or go to MyPillow.com.
Make sure to use the promo code D-I-N-E-S-H Dinesh.
Guys, I'd like to welcome to the podcast a new guest.
Her name is Jenny Cudd, C-U-D-D, and in fact her website, JennyCudd, J-E-N-N-Y-C-U-D-D dot com.
She's actually a former January 6th defendant and now works as a criminal justice advocate for January 6th defendants.
She's a West Texas native and she's also the owner of Becky's Flowers.
Jenny, welcome to the podcast.
Thanks for joining me.
You know, just kind of looking over your bio, I was chuckling because it sounds like you are someone who has been involved in political activism almost from an absurdly young age, and you've been involved in so many different things.
You've run for office, you've been involved in local politics, and And so, since we like to encourage people to get more involved, I want to talk to you a little bit about your motivation.
How did you catch the political bug and jump into the political fray?
How did that happen? Absolutely.
Thank you for having me on, Dinesh.
I've been involved in politics at least since I was five years old.
That's when I went to my first protest, which was against the Planned Parenthood in Lubbock, Texas.
And that Planned Parenthood is no longer there.
Now, I don't think that's because as a five-year-old, I ran them out of town, but I'm very grateful that both of my parents were very tuned in politically and always encouraged me to get involved because it takes all of us in order to save our country.
And so I've been involved from protesting, running for office, Usually just fighting the government when it comes down to it, especially in the last few years.
I mean, you've organized rallies and fundraisers for Pastor Bob Fu of China, a guy who has been persecuted by the Chinese government.
You've taken on the Midland City Council on the mask mandates.
I mean, there's almost no issue that doesn't have some footprint here.
Now, you did go to the Capitol on January 6th.
Talk a little bit about your case and your involvement in January 6th.
Yes, sir. So I went to Washington, D.C. on January 6th to support President Trump and to fight for free and fair elections.
And I wound up going inside the Capitol through the West Terrace door, which was opened by police officers and they were gesturing people inside.
And that door leads up to the Capitol Rotunda.
And I can tell you, everybody had a different experience on January 6th.
But I can tell you what I experienced.
We're families with small children inside the Capitol Rotunda and Statuary Hall pointing at the paintings and the statues and explaining the history of our country to their children.
You know, I saw several Vietnam veterans who are very near and dear to my heart because both my dad and my uncle served in Vietnam.
And I never saw any violence that day except from the police officers towards the protesters.
And we know now that there have been four different Americans that were killed on January 6th by police officers.
And just to mention their names, that was Ashley Babbitt, who was murdered by Capitol Police Officer Lieutenant Michael Byrd.
Roseanne Boyland, who was beaten to death in the tunnel entrance by D.C. Metro Police Officer Lila Morris.
And then there were two gentlemen outside, Kevin Greeson and Benjamin Phillips, who both died from heart attacks as a result of being hit by concussion grenades that were thrown from the police just out into the crowd.
Jenny, you're making an important point, which is that a lot of times the medical examiner rules, oh, this guy died of heart failure, and the implication is that he was not brutalized in any way, but you're saying, what brought about the heart failure?
What caused it to happen right then and right there?
And so this is something that has been, I mean, we can safely say it's something that January 6th committee has worked really hard to suppress.
What were you charged with and what was the outcome?
Yes, sir. I was inside for 19 minutes and I was ultimately charged with four misdemeanors and the 15-12 obstruction felony.
And by God's grace, I was able to hire Marina Medvin, who is a phenomenal lawyer out of Alexandria, Virginia.
And I wound up taking a plea deal 10 months later for the Class A misdemeanor for trespassing.
Now, when I took that plea deal, I made a deal with God that if I took this plea deal and got my consequences from January 6th over sooner, then I would use my voice to educate people about the other January 6th defendants, the political prisoners, and the people that cannot speak for themselves.
And so that's what I've done ever since then.
For the last year and a half, I've been traveling around talking to people, pretty much anybody who will listen, and giving them detailed information about different court cases, about the people that passed away on January 6th, and then also about the political prisoners that are still incarcerated.
And what has been in general, just very briefly, because we'll then pick it up in the second segment, the reaction when you speak to me.
Let's take a pause. Let's do it this way, Jenny.
We'll take a pause right now.
We'll come right back and pick up the reaction to your presentations.
We are in the most vulnerable times in U.S. history with our markets and economy and now this calls for an expert financial advisor for your investments.
Don't go it alone. Yet many Americans are with the conventional kind of right out the dips in the market advisors that have kept recycling the same advice We're good to go.
Go to friendofdinesh.com to book a call with Rebecca's team today.
That's friendofdinesh.com to secure your investments and your future.
I'm back with activist Jenny Kudd.
Jenny, C-U-D-D.com is the website.
You can also follow her at Twitter, at JennyTexas1, the number one.
Jenny, we're talking about January 6th.
You say you're out there busy doing presentations about January 6th.
What has been the reaction among people?
Have you gotten some pushback from people who go, no, Johnny, this was an insurrection.
They're trying to overthrow the government.
What has been the mood and the reception?
Well, usually the groups of people that I get to speak to are either Republican groups or conservative groups of some type.
And every time they are absolutely shocked to learn that there are still over 150 people that are incarcerated, 80 of those are pretrial.
So some of these men, including veterans, have been incarcerated pretrial for over 800 days.
They have not had their day in court.
They have not been convicted of anything, but especially the veterans are being denied bond repeatedly by these judges because their military training makes them a threat to society.
It's absolutely a grave miscarriage of justice and, in my opinion, the gravest human rights violation that we have seen in our country so far as far as how these political prisoners have been treated.
So people are always shocked to learn that even people that are pretty involved with either the Republican Party or election integrity, you know, different aspects of the things that we fight for as conservatives.
I mean, what you're saying is very disturbing because if you think about it, these are guys who got their training to defend the country and now their very training is being used against them as if to say, I can't let this guy go even if he's not even charged with a violent crime because, gee, he knows how to use a gun and he might go into sort of insurgent mode again.
And these are judges now...
Oddly enough, there are some Republican appointee judges who are also making the same types of decisions.
How do you explain that?
Is it just that they've been in D.C. too long?
They've basically joined the alligators in the swamp?
What's your theory about why would Republicans who would normally be expected to have some respect for someone who's a veteran do that?
Well, I think a lot of it has to do with these activist judges that are tuned into mainstream media.
And the narrative for the last two and a half years is that January 6th is the worst thing to happen to our country since 9-11 or Pearl Harbor, which is very disrespectful to the men and women that died in 9-11 and Pearl Harbor.
And of course, as conservatives, we know that that's not true.
But it's very difficult to get a conservative judge as a January 6th defendant because they will not move any of the cases outside of the District of Columbia.
I was very fortunate that I had the most conservative judge, Judge Trevor McFadden, who wound up sentencing me to two months probation, federal probation, and a $5,000 fine.
And the fine was because my words hurt people.
And what were your words that hurt people?
What did you say? Well, my words from doing interviews, different things like that, immediately following January 6th, which was certainly before the entire scope of January 6th had come out and what I was aware of and what I learned during that process.
So I think it's very important that people get involved in standing up and helping these January 6th defendants and political prisoners and not just them, but also their wives, their children, all the other people that are affected by this.
Because in most cases, the man is the breadwinner.
And so we have hundreds of men that are incarcerated right now, many of them pretrial, like I said.
And the wives have been, not only have they lost their businesses if they were small business owners, but the wives have been forced in many cases to sell their homes in hopes of hiring a decent attorney in order to fight these charges.
And now they are at home left with raising the children, maintaining a household, all of those different things.
And so I certainly hope that your viewership will get involved in writing letters to the January 6th political prisoners.
Supporting the family members.
If you want to learn about some specific stories about the different veterans and defendants, you can go to my website.
Or also, I would like to say that there's a wonderful nonprofit organization called AmericanPatriotRelief.org that was started by January 6 defendants that specifically helps the families with 100% of the money that is donated to that organization.
And I'm very grateful that I get to be a part of one of the things that organization does, which is they started a January 6th hotline that runs 24 hours a day because so far we have lost eight January 6th defendants to suicide pre-trial.
I did not know that.
I mean, I'm aware of the Matthew Perna case.
Yes, sir. But I was not aware that there were other January 6th defendants who have taken their lives.
Are you saying that that number is up to eight?
Yes, sir. I believe Matthew Perna was the first one, and there have been seven others.
And so because of that, the American Patriot Relief Organization started this 24-hour hotline.
In hopes that people will call in to get support, to feel like they're not alone, to get different resources, things like that.
And I'm grateful that I get to be one of the people that answers that phone call.
Wow, this is remarkable.
Janika, thank you very much for joining me.
I really appreciate it.
This is information that people need to know.
Yes, sir. Thank you, Dinesh.
I'm comparing the crimes of religion or crimes in the name of religion with the crimes of atheism.
And I mentioned last week that if you just take Stalin, Hitler, and Mao, just those three guys, and add up the body count of people killed, You would find that it exceeds 100 million people.
And then there's a bunch of others that I mentioned but didn't sort of add up.
So we're talking about a giant body count.
And religion and religious inspired killings can't even compete.
No Islamic fundamentalist can even dream, except maybe by detonating some nuclear bombs, of having that kind of destructive impact.
Now, I recognize that in previous times, when the Crusades occurred, the Inquisition, Population levels were a lot lower, and of course it's easier to kill people today because you've got more sophisticated weapons.
But even taking higher population levels into account, atheist violence surpasses religious violence by staggering proportions.
Here's my rough calculation.
The world's population arose from around 500 million in about 1500 AD to about 2.5 billion in 1950.
So that's a five-fold increase.
Taken together, the Crusades, the Inquisition, the witch burnings killed approximately 200,000 people.
Adjusting for the increase in population, that's the equivalent of 1 million deaths today.
That's a big number. But even so, these deaths caused by Christian rulers over a 500-year period amount to only 1%, 1% of the deaths caused by Stalin, Hitler, and Mao.
Now, I realize this is a Kind of a macabre and gruesome calculation, but we need to do it to get an objective picture of the death count, the death toll of religion versus the death toll of atheism.
And now we turn to Richard Dawkins' point, which he makes very strenuously, although I think very enigmatically, that atheists killed a lot of people, but not in the name of atheism.
You can't blame atheism just because it so happened that the killers were atheists.
But is this really true?
Can anyone seriously deny that communism was and is an atheist ideology?
Communism calls for the elimination of the exploiting class.
It extols violence as a way to social progress.
And it calls for using any means necessary to achieve the atheist utopia.
Not only was Marx himself an atheist, but atheism was a central part of the Marxist doctrine.
In fact, atheism became a central component of the Soviet Union's official ideology.
It is still the official ideology of China.
Stalin, Mao, and many others enforced atheist policies by systematically closing churches, murdering priests, and religious believers.
All communist regimes have been strongly anti-religious, suggesting that their atheism is intrinsic rather than incidental to their ideology.
Now, what about Hitler?
What about fascism?
Nazism, as it turns out, was a secular, anti-religious philosophy.
And strangely enough, and I've written, well, a whole book and made a whole film about this, Death of a Nation, Nazism had a lot in common with communism.
These were ideologies of the left.
They differed in some important ways.
While the communists wanted to empower the proletariat, the Nazis wanted to empower a master race.
So there was a explicit racial component to Nazism.
For the communists, the enemy was the capitalist class.
For the Nazis, the enemy was the Jews and other races deemed inferior.
But both the communists and the Nazis treated the Christian churches as obstacles and as enemies.
Both said that they were engaging in a revolutionary action to create a new type of human being, and this human being would be part of a new social order freed from the shackles of traditional religion and traditional morality.
This is something that Nazism and Communism had very much in common.
Now, one of the skeptic or atheist writers, this is the philosopher Daniel Dennett, in his book Breaking the Spell, he makes a point that I want to support.
I want to endorse. I don't endorse the book, but I endorse this point.
He says, look, we've got to judge religion by its consequences.
And he says it doesn't matter if some of these Christian killers were themselves not following the actual teachings of Jesus.
He goes, well, they did what they did in Jesus' name.
They thought they were following the actions of Jesus.
And so therefore, if we're going to count the crimes of religion, you got to look at what these people did, regardless of whether or not they were, quote, true Christians.
Now, I accept this standard, but I demand that it be applied equitably across the board.
And what I mean is, if it is the case that you blame religion for its effects, kind of by their fruits ye shall know them...
We should also apply the same test and the same criterion to communism and to atheist regimes.
By their fruits, ye shall know them.
We're not gonna ask whether or not they were sort of, whether Marx was a true atheist and whether or not there's an actual conformity between what Hitler did and the atheist ideology.
We're simply going to say, was Hitler an atheist?
Were the Nazis acting in the name of a kind of radical, secular utopia?
Well, then you have to look at their actions and blame them on atheism.
So by the same criterion that Dennett is using, we have to say that the millions of murders committed by Stalin, Hitler, and Mao, not to mention those of lesser tyrants, are atheism's responsibility.
And again, if you're going to blame the Crusades on the Christians, if you're going to blame 9-11 on Islamic radicals, as we do, and rightly so, so too we should blame the crimes of atheism on atheist regimes.
And we should blame the crimes of atheist regimes, I mean to say, on atheism itself.
Subscribe to the Dinesh D'Souza Podcast on Apple, Google, and Spotify.
▲
Export Selection