Commission Impossible: Senator Ron Johnson on DarkHorse
Bret Weinstein speaks with Senator Ron Johnson on the subject of 9/11. Find Senator Ron Johnson on X: http://x.com/SenRonJohnson ***** This episode is sponsored by: Fresh Pressed Olive Oil Club: Scrumptious & freshly harvested. Go to http://www.GetFreshDarkHorse.com to get a bottle of the best olive oil you’ve ever had for $1 shipping. ARMRA: Colostrum is our first food, and can help restore your health and resilience as an adult. Go to http://www.tryarmra.com/DARKHORSE to get 15% of...
Hey folks, welcome to the Dark Horse podcast Inside Rail.
I have the distinct honor of sitting this morning with Senator Ron Johnson here in studio, which is the result of a strange and serendipitous meeting.
We were literally hiking down the trail, Heather, Toby, and myself, and who should come the other direction but Ron Johnson and his wife.
And I recognize you.
You recognize me and probably with you out of uniform, even though I know you pretty well, I don't think I would have spotted you.
I would have said hello and kept going.
I'm really glad that you did recognize us and stop us.
And I will also just say that while you and I probably disagree on whether or not there is a creator, I think we would reach consensus on the fact that he works in some very mysterious ways.
We'll agree on that, sure.
Yeah.
All right, so somehow We're not gonna have a Tucker Brett discussion here, No need for it.
In fact, in general, my sense is, you know, I tend to think that those sorts of claims are metaphorical, but very important and that they stand in for things that we can't quite describe.
And lots of folks, probably you, feel that they're more literal, but I don't see a huge difference between those things.
So anyway, there's nothing to disagree with.
It's a big mystery to me.
That's all I can say.
Well, I think it is to all of us.
Our first sponsor for this episode of The Inside Rail is Fresh Pressed Olive Oil Club.
We love these guys and their olive oils so much.
Extra virgin olive oil is delicious and nutritious.
It's healthy for your heart, helps prevent Alzheimer's, and is high in antioxidants.
The list of health benefits from olive oil goes on and on.
And it's a cornerstone of Mediterranean diets.
But if you've never had excellent fresh olive oil, you may wonder what all the fuss is about.
Fresh Pressed Olive Oil Club is the brainchild of TJ Robinson, also known as the Olive Oil Hunter.
He brings the freshest, most flavorful, nutrient-rich olive oils from harvest to your door.
TJ's farm fresh oils are incredible.
We've received six different varietals, all with noticeably different flavors, and we've used them in all the usual ways.
A light dressing on a capressé salad, marinade for grilled chicken, tossed with carrots and coarse sea salt before roasting.
We've made olive oil cake with these fantastic oils.
We've drizzled steaks with TJ's fresh olive oil before adding a nice dose of salt and letting them sit for several hours before grilling.
You will not believe how good this olive oil is and how many uses there are for it.
Olive oil is a succulent, delicious food that, like pretty much all fats, is best when it's fresh.
But most supermarket olive oils sit on the shelf for months or even years growing stale, dull, and flavorless, even rancid.
The solution is to have fresh-pressed artisanal olive oils shipped directly to you after each new harvest when the oil's flavor and nutrients are at their peak.
And they've now got amazing vinegars too.
These are just as surprising, fresh, and vibrant as their olive oils with a wide range of flavors and histories.
We add a splash of fresh vinegar to bone broth and to roasted vegetables and so much more.
As an introduction to TJ Robinson's Fresh Pressed Olive Oil Club, he is willing to send you a full-size $39 bottle of one of the world's finest artisanal olive oils, fresh from the new harvest, for just $1 to help him cover shipping.
And there's no commitment to buy anything now or ever.
You get a free $39 bottle for just $1 shipping and taste the difference freshness makes.
Go to getfreshedhorse.com.
That's getfreshedhorse.com for a free bottle and pay just $1 shipping.
It is the 24th anniversary this year of the attacks that occurred on September 11th, 2001.
You and I are both patriotic Americans.
And, well, let me just describe for a second what my experience of my own history with understanding those events has been and see how it dovetails with yours.
I initially believed the official narrative enough that I've tried to reconstruct exactly where I became skeptical of what and when, and I can't do it.
It's too long ago.
But I know that I was sufficiently credulous that I supported the war in Afghanistan.
I did not support the war in Iraq.
Going back, I wouldn't support either one of them, given what I think I now know.
But over the 24 years that have passed, I have become alarmed about obvious anomalies in this story.
They have caused me to dig more deeply.
I have spoken about my doubts, and frankly, I see I think we are obligated to have doubts when there is reason to, to express them, to discuss them.
I would like nothing more than to have my doubts put to rest.
I would love to discover that all of my concerns turn out to be wrong.
The official narrative has, you know, bumps and scratches because reconstructing an event is difficult, but it all pretty much matches.
I would love to discover that.
But the more I know about it, the less that seems likely.
And what I've come to understand in the last few years is that actually the doubts I harbor are incredibly common amongst rigorously thinking people.
But most of the people who harbor these doubts do not talk about them because the cost when you do talk about them is so spectacular that we've been trained out of it.
So my sense is what I have to say about what doesn't make sense about this story isn't really that controversial.
It might even be that a majority of people have spotted some fraction of these anomalies and privately harbor their own doubts.
But that it is significant to discover that Americans who one would think were as free as anyone on earth to discuss whatever it is they should choose to discuss feel that they do not have that freedom because of the consequences in their own lives when they do so.
Well, I would start on the day of 9-11.
And those of us who are alive, who are alive back then, will never forget it.
I think there's an almost universal thought at that point in time.
And it was, this changes the world.
This changes everything.
Yep.
And no matter what the exact cause of 9-11 was, whoever initiated it knew this would change the world.
And I would argue, not for the better.
You mentioned Afghanistan.
I think the best book I ever read in Afghanistan was written by special ops soldiers who basically made the point, we accomplished what we need to accomplish in Afghanistan before Tommy Frank ever put a boot on the ground.
And, you know, 20-some years later, thousands of American lives, you know, Iraq, I mean, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, I mean, more thousands of Americans.
I mean, it's just, it's been a disaster, no doubt about it.
But like you, I pretty well accepted the narrative.
I'm not a structural engineer.
You know, you take a look at that and come, you know, massive damage, planes running into a building.
I mean, I suppose I could bring it down.
What my eyes began opening during COVID had nothing to do with 9-11.
It just when you started seeing what was happening, how none of it made sense, the sabotage of early treatment, you know, the maniacal desire to force a vaccine or an injection on everybody.
One that, you know, I was trying to medical experts.
They were highly, not as skeptical, but I mean, they were beside themselves in terms of what their colleagues were doing, you know, literally turning the body into its own manufacturing site for something that's toxic to it.
They would be attacked by it.
Okay.
I mean, it did make sense to me very early on.
So we started questioning that.
Then as my role as former chairman of Homeland Security, now then ranking member of the permanent subcommittee investigations, the chairman then, Richard Blumenthal, wanted to do an investigation into the PGA deal with Saudi Arabia, the live.
I didn't think it was really the kind of investigation government ought to be doing.
It's a problem between private parties.
Let them deal with it.
We shouldn't have our nose under that tent.
But the result of that, high-profile hearing, I had families, the families of 9-11, come up to me then in the hallway, in the heart building, with the stack of papers.
This is what the FBI had released in terms of what we knew about Saudi involvement.
It was heavily redacted.
You couldn't make head or tails of it.
And they were literally begging me, can you use your position here to get the government to release this FBI report unredacted?
That's where I started going down that rabbit hole.
And the result of that, and you probably have the same reaction, is when you start asking a few questions, those who The firefighters, I mean, the families in LM, people who lost their loved ones, the people who really paid attention that know that the narrative doesn't make sense at all.
You know, just with a little bit of scrutiny, they start sending you information.
You get, for example, links to, what is it, Calling Out Bravo 7, Building 7.
I had never heard of World Trade Center Building 7.
Never heard of it.
But, I mean, this is 20 years later.
You know, I, like you, I'm reasonably well informed.
Okay, I read a lot.
I'd never heard of it.
And then you thought, like, why?
And then you see the thing come down.
And I've seen enough.
Because it's cool to look at.
I mean, when you see a controlled demolition, that's a, I mean, I'd love to see one of those things in person, you know?
Sure.
And here it sure looks like we experienced that on September 11th and nobody talked about it.
Instead, you had NIST do a investigation, examined no physical evidence.
Doesn't make sense at all.
It's been that their investigation has been reviewed by a structural engineering professor up in University of Alaska for your project.
Pretty well debunks everything that NIST said.
NIST will not release the data it used in its analysis.
I mean, so again, you just start going down that rabbit hole.
You start seeing very legitimate questions that are not even allowed to be asked.
And that just raises my own suspicions.
So no, my eyes are wide open at this point in time.
And again, you talk to more and more people and I just have more and more legitimate questions.
Our second sponsor is ancient.
It's Armra.
Armra is colostrum.
Colostrum is the first food that every mammal eats.
It is produced in the first two or three days of an infant's life and is nutritionally different from the milk that comes in afterward.
Colostrum serves many vital functions, including that of protecting and strengthening the mucosal barriers for infants before their own barriers mature.
Modern living breaks down your mucosal and immune barriers, and ARMRA is the superfood that builds them back.
Armra colostrum protects and strengthens your body's barriers, creating a seal that guards against inflammation and everyday toxins, pollutants, and threats.
Armra uses their cold chain biopotent technology to concentrate colostrum's 400 plus living nutrients into their most pure and bioavailable form.
According to a review published in the journal Clinical Nutrition Open Science in 2022, bovine colostrum has been used to treat cancer, AIDS, polio, heart disease, and rheumatoid arthritis.
It is a general anti-inflammatory, and its use in adults is known to increase lean muscle mass, improve athletic performance and recovery time, support healthy digestion, and reduce allergy symptoms.
Armra starts with sustainably sourced colostrum from grass-fed cows on their co-op of dairy farms in the U.S. And they source only the surplus colostrum after calves are fully fed.
Unlike most colostrums, which use heat pasteurization that depletes nutrient potency, Armra uses their cold chain biopotent technology, an innovative process that purifies and preserves the integrity of hundreds of bioactive nutrients while removing casein and fat to guarantee the highest potency and bioavailability of any colostrum on the market.
The quality control is far above industry standards, including being certified to be glyphosate-free.
Benefits of Armora's colostrum also include clearing of blemishes, shinier, thicker hair, stabilization of blood sugar levels, and acceleration of fat burning.
And colostrum has been shown to significantly improve fitness endurance and significantly decrease recovery time after intense exercise.
Armra has a special offer for the Dark Horse audience.
Receive 15% off your first order.
Go to tryarmora.com slash darkhorse or enter dark horse to get 15% off your first order.
That's T-R-Y-A-R-M-R-A dot com slash dark horse.
Our final sponsor today is Masa.
Masa makes delicious, healthy chips that aren't going to make you sick because they're made with real whole ingredients the way that all food used to be made.
These chips are fried in 100% beef tallow.
No seed oils ever.
You can taste the difference and your body can feel the difference.
America's health is declining fast.
Chronic illnesses, obesity, and autoimmune diseases have exploded.
Why?
In large part, because we've swapped real food for cheap industrial substitutes.
All chips and fries used to be cooked in tallow, but in the 1990s, corporations switched to cheaper seed oils, which include soybean, canola, sunflower, safflower, and corn.
Seed oils are linked to metabolic health issues and inflammation.
And today, seed oils make up 20% of the average American's daily calories.
Think about that.
20% of our total calories come from seed oils.
Big food companies also use artificial dyes, stabilizers, and other toxins.
In contrast, Masa chips have just three simple ingredients.
organic nixtamalized corn, sea salt, and 100% grass-fed beef tallow.
Absolutely no seed oils, artificial dyes, or additives ever.
Beef tallow is nutrient-rich, nourishing, and makes food taste incredible.
Masa chips are crunchy and delicious, and after you eat them, you'll feel satisfied, satiated, and energetic.
Masa also supports American farms and regenerative agriculture.
Choosing real food heals us and our environment, which in turn makes us even more healthy.
Try masa chips with salsa or goat cheese or a spicy pepper jam, smother them in beans and cheese or just eat them straight out of the bag.
They're delicious.
My favorites are their original blue and lime flavors.
Zach surprised himself when he realized that he really loved their churro flavor.
They've also got white corn and cabanero.
Ready to give masa a try?
Go to masachips.com slash dark horse and use the code dark horse for 25% off your first order.
That's masachips.com slash dark horse and use the code dark horse for 25% off your first order.
And if you don't feel like ordering online, starting in October, masa chips will be available nationwide at Sprout supermarkets.
So stop in today and pick up a bag before they're gone.
So I was thinking about the experience and I agree with you.
I was awake about 9-11 before COVID.
But the experience is virtually identical, where you are given a story.
It superficially is self-consistent.
There are elements of it that don't quite satisfy.
And if you start to dig there, you discover that the whole thing comes apart.
And it's like I was thinking about what the analogy is.
Imagine that aliens got a hold of the movie Mission Impossible.
And they had thought that it was a memoir of the life of Tom Cruise, right?
And some annoying alien is saying, wait a second, it doesn't really add up as a memoir of some set of events because the scenes weren't filmed in the order that they're clipped together.
We can tell that because of the shadows or something like that.
Well, once you start looking at it as possibly not a literal description of events, well, then you see a whole different something.
You understand that its purpose is to entertain, it's not to inform, that the physics of many of the things that happen can't be reconciled with known physics.
So it's that experience where I understand that there is a story that superficially explains 9-11.
And I understand that every challenge that you and I would find worthy of a deeper dive has a superficial answer that will be delivered, you know, usually, you know, down somebody's nose at you.
But all you have to do is be curious and attempt to exert some sort of rational discipline.
And it is clear that the story is not the right story.
That does not make it clear what the right story is, but it should be a national priority because, as you point out, the war in Iraq, for example, cost something like half a million to a million Iraqis their lives and many thousands of Americans their lives.
Many more thousands than were killed on 9-11 itself.
So from the point of view of a war triggered by an event, whatever the damage of the event, which was substantial, but not really a threat to the nation, we compounded that damage with the lives and treasure that we spent in the deserts of Iraq.
Which we never talk about.
Which we never talk about.
I mean, I think most people watching this podcast would not realize hundreds of thousands of Iraqis lost their life.
Oh, yeah.
That wasn't covered in the mainstream media.
Nope.
It wasn't.
And, you know, there's debate about how many, but it was a huge number of people who had nothing to do with Iraq.
Yeah.
I think a big part of the problem is any alternate scenario, any alternative explanation you wouldn't want to even contemplate.
I mean, that's part of the problem.
It's like, okay, if that's not what happened, if it weren't these crazy Islamic terrorists that had this plot that brought down, you know, then what did happen?
Again, we started going into the, you know, talking to the structural engineers and the architects and the firefighters.
You know, people that know what they're talking about, unlike me.
Okay.
Right.
They do not believe the narrative at all.
And they've got, and they lay out very convincing evidence of why you shouldn't believe that narrative.
Then, I mean, their explanation is explosions, thermite, military-grade, nanoparticle thermite.
And they have all kinds of evidence that would point to it, including unexploded fragments of it through all the ash.
Unexploded thermite and iron globules.
So then the next question is, well, who would have placed explosives in those buildings?
And nobody, literally, virtually no one wants to go down that path.
It's unthinkable.
But of course, its unthinkability is the defense that prevents us from asking the questions that obviously are so pressing.
So two things.
One, I don't feel like a 9-11 truther.
I feel like we're damned if we do and damned if we don't.
The truth is clearly, maybe I've got it wrong.
I'll be tremendously relieved if that's true.
If I'm not wrong, if the anomalies really are the anomalies that I think they are, then as you point out, any answer is unthinkable.
But not discovering the answer to that question is equally unthinkable.
It is terrifying, in fact.
And I recently spent some time with a very old friend of mine who happens, he's not an architect, but he has spent his professional life in architecture.
And he happened to be living in Manhattan on September 11th, 2001.
And he happened to be living in an apartment where when he stepped out the front door of the building, he looked down the street at the Twin Towers.
He saw them fall himself.
And he told me that his immediate reaction was, that can't happen.
He knew right away.
It took you and me quite some time to figure out that what we had seen couldn't be reconciled with the structural engineering.
But then, you know, it's another one of these things.
You scratch the surface and you discover the Twin Towers were actually built to withstand impact by jetliners.
707, and yes, these were large.
And steel doesn't melt the temperature that jet fuel burns at or ordinary office fires burn at.
It doesn't happen.
It just doesn't happen.
Right.
And there have been lots of fires and the buildings are charred, but they remain standing.
And even if something anomalous existed in this context that would explain the difference between what you would expect to happen to such a building and what did happen, it doesn't fall.
None of them fall like that.
And if they did, you wouldn't have firefighters, no matter how brave they are, walking up into danger trying, because again, the firefighters went up there because they did not feel like this thing was going to collapse on them.
No, they're walking into danger.
They've got fires put out.
One of the more famous firefighters lost their life, Ariel Palmer, went up the elevator to the 40th floor, then walked up to, I think it's the 74th floor.
And he's reporting a minute before the towers fell.
Okay, we've got a couple fires here.
We'll be able to handle them pretty easily.
I'll be able to put these things out.
Again, they were trying to get up to the upper floors to evacuate people.
I mean, that's what's on their, in their mind is not, oh, these things could come down.
Because no building built like that to a stand with all the fire retardants and had ever come down.
Not before, not since.
Right.
Okay.
So that's why the people really pushing for the answer to this are the 9-11 families, but particularly the firefighters who lost their brethren, who realized that this just doesn't add up.
And again, if you watch Building 7, if you watch Calling Out Bravo 7, you look at those documentaries, I mean, they do a far better job and they're far more expert, people like Richard Gage, the former head of the, you know, I guess architects and engineers for 9-11.
I mean, these are people who devoted their lives since 9-11 to just try and get the truth out.
They're not crazy people.
They are dedicated.
They know what the vast majority of the rest of us don't know.
And again, why is there such resistance?
Why is there such resistance?
And it occurs to me, I was rethinking in preparation for our discussion.
I was rethinking the things that caused me to begin to wonder and to look into the matter.
And I remembered Max Cleland.
Max Cleland was a Democratic senator from Georgia.
He was a veteran.
He had lost three limbs in the Vietnam War.
And he was on the 9-11 commission.
And he resigned saying, I have the quote here.
He said, I cannot look any American in the eye, especially family members of the victims, and say that the commission had full access.
This investigation is now compromised.
He called it a national scandal.
And so my feeling is this is an obvious patriot who had privileged access and quit in disgust because he took it to be raped.
And he's not the only one.
I mean, other 9-11 commissioners said this thing was set up to fail.
Set up to fail.
And I remember actually being quite angry myself at the revelation that George Bush and Dick Cheney were going to testify to the commission behind closed doors.
It would not be recorded and they would not be under oath.
It's like, tell me you have something to hide without telling me you have something to hide.
Now, why should they have anything to hide?
This is the most significant failure of American intelligence, arguably, in history.
We have a national interest in figuring out exactly how it happened so that we can protect ourselves from it happening again.
And you don't want to do it under oath.
It's mind-boggling.
And so all I would say to those who would challenge you and me for speaking about this is look at those two facts, the resignation of members of the 9-11 Commission and the insistence of the president and vice president that they not be put under oath for their testimony, which we cannot now scrutinize.
That is reason in and of itself that Americans should go down this road and pursue every loose end that exists in this story, just so that we can assure ourselves that the official story is right if that's what's true, or discover what terrifying thing explains it that isn't the official narrative, if that's the case.
So we started talking about, you know, how do we get into this?
It really was COVID, but then COVID introduced me to Bobby Kennedy.
And I remember did a podcast with him.
I think it was in Nashville, Tennessee.
And first time, I think, I met him actually in person.
And when I walk in the green room, he's talking about the assassination of his father and Sir Han Sirhan.
And again, I won't get into that, but that's where he turned me on to books like JFK and the Unspeakables and The Devil's Chessboard.
And you start reading that.
And, okay, so he can't believe anything the government told us about the JFK assassination or the RFK assassination, probably the Martin Luther King assassination.
So again, you see the government is lying to you, people like Fauci, okay, during COVID.
You start, again, I kind of accepted the whole Lee Harvey Oswald thing too.
I never was a big JFK assassination buff.
But when you start reading the evidence that's been accumulated, when you start reading about all the witnesses that disappear.
When we met on the trail, I asked you, so what are you working on?
And that's how the 9-11 thing came up.
But I said, this is a book I just got, Blowback, on Oklahoma City bombing.
And you start reading the stories of all these potential witnesses that had some kind of connection to Oklahoma City bombing and commit suicide in their cells and after beating themselves.
Someone had to just develop a list of all the people who could provide key testimony to all kinds of conspiracy theories that happened to commit suicide in their cell.
I did not realize it was so easy to commit suicide in your cell.
That's why they take your shoelaces away, right?
Right.
So, yeah, I don't have the answers.
And I think, Brett, I think one of the things that, you know, being involved in these investigations, understanding how very limited, for example, congressional investigations are, we just don't have the manpower.
We don't have the, you know, we don't have the tools.
When President Trump vowed to release all the JFK files, well, the Epstein files.
I mean, the first thing I'm thinking is, are they all there?
Right.
I mean, do you think we're really going to get the full story here now?
I mean, these things have been hanging around in the CIA headquarters for decades.
You think they haven't kind of combed through those things and pulled out all the, you know, incriminating information or maybe inserted other stuff.
So I think what's very unsatisfying about any of these, what, you know, the legacy media would call conspiracies, I'm not sure we'll ever get the answers to it.
And in particular with 9-11, I think it's a legitimate point to be made.
We maybe don't want to know the answers.
Well, I mean, I don't, do we, do we, can we really afford to know the truth?
I have joked that I'm not part of the 9-11 truth movement.
I'm the founder of the 9-11 fiction movement because I don't think we can handle the truth.
So, I mean, that is.
I mean, it's a legitimate concern.
Well, I would just say this.
Where I really come out is whatever happened here, damn them for putting us in this position because I don't know that we can withstand the discovery of what happened, but I know we can't withstand allowing such things to pass and continue.
And COVID effectively demonstrates that whatever happened to JFK and kept the actual narrative hidden, whatever happened with COVID, all of these stories that aren't what they appear to be on the surface suggest that there is a force or some forces that are capable of creating historical events on which our national fate pivots.
And that can't be allowed.
They have the story that minute.
Right.
I mean, that's what's, you know, they knew immediately as Hussain bin Laden.
Well, how do they know that?
I mean, that's, wow, that's great detective work, isn't it?
Man, our government's really competent.
And as good as the American press is, the British press is even better.
They had the news of World Trade Center 7 20 minutes before it did.
It's insane.
And it drives me.
And it's in the picture behind the reporter reporting on it.
She's reporting on it.
It's still standing in the background.
But check this out.
I wanted to make sure that I had the facts straight and that if anything had emerged since I last looked at it, that I would have knowledge of it.
So I queried Grok about whether or not the BBC had indeed reported the collapse of World Trade Center 7 before it had actually taken place, which I knew full well they had.
But anyway, listen to what Grok had to say on the matter.
Grock said, no evidence supports claims that the BBC reported the collapse of World Trade Center 7 before it occurred on September 11th, 2001.
A widely discussed BBC broadcast aired around 4.54 p.m. Eastern mentioned World Trade Center 7's collapse, but it was after the actual collapse at approximately 5.20 p.m.
Eastern.
The confusion stems from a BBC reporter stating the building had collapsed while it was still visible, likely due to erroneous information from emergency services or wire reports amid the day's chaos.
Investigations included by the 9-11 Commission and NIST found no credible evidence of foreknowledge.
Claims of a premature report often rely on misrepresentations or edited footage.
That doesn't happen.
I mean, NIST has debunked that.
That is the dumbest paragraph I have ever encountered.
It literally says it didn't happen and then gives the two timestamps that show that it did.
So I have learned, because I've started using Grok for looking at the budget and getting stats, that type of thing.
My chief staff warned me, be careful, because AI is often confidently wrong.
Oh.
And I have determined that.
We do not want AI running the world.
There's a difference between confidently wrong, though, and saying something that can't possibly be right because the sentence is contradicted by the one immediately after.
So the question I always have is, who are they?
Who are they?
Well, I have no idea.
I don't know either.
I will say this.
We are often, people like you and me are often challenged.
Who are they?
Because we know, let's take the topic that brought you and me together, COVID.
We can see the hand of they all over the place, multiple different topics, whether it's the slandering of repurposed drugs that had utility against COVID, whether it's the pretending that the shots were safe and effective when they were the opposite on both counts, whether it was pretending this was a wild zoonotic spillover rather than an engineered virus.
We can see the hand of they.
We don't know who they are.
But that's not, I'd love to know who they are.
I think we can name a few names that are likely on the list.
But as for who decided to do this and why, that is an open question.
But if we were on a battlefield and the mortars started landing and I said, they're shooting at us.
And somebody says, well, who's they?
It's like, I don't know.
And at this moment, that is irrelevant.
The point is the mortars are landing.
They're coming this way.
I don't know if that's friendly fire.
I don't know if that's hostile fire.
But what I do know is that there is a they implied by the rounds that are landing here, right?
So we're in that situation.
Yes, we would love to know who did what and why.
That is an important question, even if we can't punish them.
Knowing that at least allows us to recover our own history so that we can act rationally going forward.
But pretending that the fact that we can't answer every question is somehow an indictment of the recognition that the story we've been given is obvious garbage, that doesn't make sense either.
I think what the firefighters, and I think it's a very legitimate request on their part, they're asking for a new 9-11 commission.
The President Trump appoint one.
No political figures on it whatsoever.
A guy like me, as open-minded and skeptical as I am, you don't want it tainted by politics.
And I support this.
They ought to have firefighters.
They ought to have structural engineers.
They ought to have architects.
They ought to have people that actually know the stuff at least go through and ask the questions in an official forum that where they can't be called whack jobs, where nobody can attack them.
So no, this is a rigorous review.
Don't know that we have the answers of who they were in the case of 9-11.
But can we at least get these legitimate questions on the table and start asking them?
I think that's the least we ought to be able to do.
I hope President Trump takes them up on their offer.
He's the only one that can really do this.
Yeah, and, you know, it is what we voted for.
We voted for a renegade who wasn't part of the structure in order to do the things that somebody who was part of the structure couldn't do.
I hope that he's in a position to do it.
I don't know.
And in part, you know, this is where the question of who they are.
It depends on who they are.
It depends on who they are.
And how powerful they are and what kind of influence they can exert.
Yeah, which, you know, and I mean.
So again, there's nothing wrong.
I mean, there's nothing wrong with asking legitimate questions.
No, it's our obligation.
Leaping to conclusions.
I don't do that.
Got to show me the proof.
It just sure seems like the story that we've been given doesn't add up on, you know, multiple fronts.
So let's talk about, you know, again, this is this podcast is not.
Well, a it spontaneously happened based on a chance meeting on a trail.
But let's instead of trying to do an exhaustive discussion of all.
We're really not qualified.
We're not qualified to do that.
But we are patriots, people who think carefully and critically about difficult topics.
So what I thought would be useful is to discuss the things that after all these years bug you.
The things about the story that cause you to feel that it's not just a matter of, you know, the fog of war and the fact that eyewitnesses don't always agree that the anomalies are significant enough to actually falsify the official story and leave us with a question as to what replaces the official story.
What are those things?
Well, first of all, I think the way to analyze the problem is you have to break it down into its components.
Prior to 9-11, the actual event of 9-11, and then after 9-11.
So, you know, prior to 9-11, I think there's an awful lot of evidence that the U.S. government knew a whole lot more about al-Qaeda, the cells, some of the terrorists that were supposedly on the plane.
There are a lot of questions that need to be answered about what the government knew and when they knew it prior to 9-11, which would obviously help inform you about what might have caused 9-11.
Then just the actual event.
And this is like, you know, really what got me curious is when you see things like, you know, why didn't I know about Building 7?
Sure looks like controlled demolition to me.
I mean, how could NIST ever come up with their theory, which seems to be pretty well debunked?
Then you start, again, you start going down and you have, you know, I do Zooms with Richard Gage and he takes me point by point.
Okay.
And if you do that, and again, there's some great documentaries that do that.
I think Graham McQueen is the guy who just painstakingly assembled and found about 156 different witnesses pretty much that day on camera, news reporters, firefighters, survivors saying they heard explosions, evidence of explosions.
And that's always been completely debunked, right?
There were no explosions.
So again, there's so much just basic science.
I mean, I'd love to get physics PhDs together.
Go through it.
Tell us how this works.
Tell us how you have these multi-ton fragments, not fragments, massive pieces of steel hurled away from the Twin Towers as they're falling, 60, 70, 80 miles an hour, trailing white smoke.
Again, explain that to me.
It doesn't fit into the narrative.
There's an alternate explanation.
So that's 9-11.
Then afterwards, you talked about Afghanistan.
You talk about Iraq.
I mean, if there was a rationale for some other actor other than Al-Qaeda, let's face it, if Al-Qaeda wanted to keep the U.S. on the Middle East, that was the wrong way to do it.
Blowing up, bringing down the Twin Towers was probably the most likely way of getting us into the Middle East.
And proof is it did.
And we still haven't extracted ourselves.
And again, are things better off having to, listen, Saddam Hussein, evil human being, okay?
But in real politics, Iraq was a counterbalance to Iran.
Right now, Iran's the big threat, okay?
Is the world better off by not having some counterbalance in the Middle East other than just Israel against Iran?
Again, unanswerable questions, but that's how I'd analyze the problem.
Prior to 9-11, the actual event, and then post-9-11, take a look at it.
Prior to 9-11, which includes the day before, when Donald Rumsfeld announced a $2 plus trillion dollars.
It's just a couple trillion.
It's just a couple trillion dollars that the Pentagon could not account for, which was big news until the morning of September 11th, at which point everybody forgot about it because, well, for multiple reasons.
They forgot about it because the entire news cycle was taken over for weeks and months with these sensational events that had just taken place.
But also because, strangely, the accounting section of the Pentagon, which was at least partially the locale where this accounting failure was to be analyzed and understood, was the exact section of the Pentagon that was hit by the flight that crashed there.
So if that were the only anomaly here, I would say, wow, odd coincidences happened.
That's really strange.
But it's so far from the only coincidence that it does raise the question of whether or not, you know, in the same way that news, bad news is often announced on a Friday because people don't tend to notice it.
If you knew that a major historical event was going to happen, that's also a great time to announce embarrassing things so that they get swept away.
I'm not saying that happened, but I am saying in light of the other anomalies, including the very strange flight path of that flight that is understood by pilots to be well beyond the capacity of somebody who could barely fly a Cessna, raises questions.
I don't like those questions.
So again, from my standpoint, that's the way to approach this is the people who are invested so much time and effort in here, and that's what I've asked them to do, is just give me the questions.
Give me a list of questions.
They've done that.
I mean, I've gotten dozens and dozens of questions here.
And they're all legitimate.
None of them are crazy or wacky, and there's probably a lot more.
And so that's, to me, that's what a 9-11 commission would do is assemble those lists of questions, get experts that can speak to those questions.
Here's how the narrative answers that question, but here's how science, here's how physics, here's how structural engineering would answer that question and prove the official narrative wrong.
At least give the families and the firefighters the satisfaction that they've been right all along.
This doesn't make sense.
Now, do we actually have the final answer?
Do we know who really prompted who's responsible for 9-11?
Again, it's also a legitimate concern.
Can we handle the truth?
Do we really want to know that answer?
Well, again, I mean, you and I do, but I mean, I would say I don't know whether we can handle the truth, but I think it's a question of relative hazards.
The truth, I think, is a hazard.
And I'm not going to pretend it's a small one.
Not having it is clearly to me a much worse hazard.
The ability to create an event like this is, I mean, let's put it this way.
The official narrative described a group that had the ability to create an event like this.
And we went to war twice because it was that important to address it.
And hundreds of thousands of people lost their lives.
Right.
So that's in the rearview mirror now, okay?
So if those people weren't responsible or they were responsible with some larger they participating, then the importance is as big as the one that got us into Afghanistan and Iraq.
The question I have is if we honestly knew the truth, what would be the result of that?
Would it even be more horrific?
I don't know.
I just don't know.
I mean, what they depend on is a good enough story, a good enough narrative to get us downstream where, listen, if you're 25 years old or 24 years old, you weren't alive.
So it all becomes in the rearview mirror.
It just all gets forgotten and you move on.
You forget the hundreds of thousands of people who lost their lives in Iraq and Afghanistan.
And the people who really want to get the answers, I mean, the firefighters, the families of 9-11, they also pass.
And it's their kids and grandkids who kind of lose touch with who their firefighter father or grandfather was.
So that's the game they play.
It's just wait them out.
Stave it off long enough.
And, you know, history is written by the victors.
And in that case, they will be the victors.
Okay, but let me ask you this question.
Obviously, neither of us can know the answer.
But let's say that we had gotten to the bottom of 9-11 within a few years.
Does COVID happen?
Yeah, it's an unanswerable question.
What's your instinct?
Listen, I'm for the truth.
I'm for transparency.
So again, I'm not arguing against it, okay?
But I think you have to contemplate, you know, part of, as we talked about this, is we want to discuss why are they so effective at preventing people from asking legitimate questions?
I mean, what is the downside?
Let's face it.
It's in the back of both of our minds.
Witnesses die.
I mean, you go through, like I say, JFK and the Unspeakables, and you listen to all these key witnesses to Leah Harvey v.
Oswald and what happened.
They'll say, they're dead.
Yep.
You know, you read this book now that I'm starting to, you know, I've got the free download sample on Kindle on Blowback.
And it's just individual after individual after individual that's dead.
So again, when you're in public life, I mean, you get death threats.
I mean, you kind of live with it.
You kind of, you know.
But that's not an unreasonable or irrational fear if you really've got important information.
So again, that's certainly one of the deterrents from getting to the truth, from digging deeper.
But again, you know, they can't really do much more damage to me publicly.
I mean, I'm viewed and widely discussed as a conspiracy theorist and whack job, all that type of thing.
You've got a career.
And others do as well.
Okay.
And you don't necessarily want to be on the conspiracy side of these issues.
It's a lot easier to go, well, we're never going to get the answer on that.
So why delve into it?
Why risk my career?
And again, that's a legitimate concern on the part of people.
So again, that's why we're 25 years down the path here from 9-11.
And all these very legitimate questions are still buried.
You've got Grok.
You've got Grok.
These large language models that should have access to all this information obviously are tuned by algorithms to embrace the narrative.
Well, actually, that's not what I take from this.
What I take from this is that the story of World Trade Center 7 is so crazy that nobody has even put together.
Grock cannot make heads of tails of what's going on because the claims are just from two different universes.
So I think Grok is legitimately confused here because, you know, like it really is, I think the dumbest.
So 9-11's stumping Grok.
It's stumping Grok because of what the LLMs are.
LLMs are a high-compute rendering of the public mind.
And the point is the public mind is high on drugs when it comes to World Trade Center 7.
There's no coherent rendering of this.
But the majority of the information out there would tend to call that a conspiracy theory, that that wouldn't be true.
And so I would think a large language model would come down on the side of most of the things it's reading and has access to going, well, that's fringe.
Ignore that and go along with the main narrative that there's no, because it says there's no evidence.
There's no evidence.
But of course, the evidence is two sentences up where it gives you the two timestamps.
And of course, it does suggest, I wouldn't call it foreknowledge.
We don't know.
It could be the weirdest coincidence in history.
But it pulls out the truth, but then it goes in the narrative.
The narrative is there's no evidence.
Right.
So I think, look, there's a reason that all of those of us who have paid the price of questioning the 9-11 story and immediately found out that, you know, it's worse than we feared.
You question one thing and you hope to satisfy yourself and you just, it leads you to a string of others.
The reason that World Trade Center 7 plays the role that it does is that it really is a smoking gun.
There's no explaining World Trade Center 7 in a satisfactory way.
Which is why we never heard about it.
Why we didn't hear about it right.
That's the first evidence right there.
They so effectively suppressed that story.
Which is the explanation for it.
It's the exact opposite of what you would expect.
The news tends to err in the direction of the sensational.
The idea that three buildings fell, not two, is more sensational.
You would expect that to have been a focus, right?
It would have been minor compared to the towers, but it would have nonetheless been an important, well-known footnote of history, and yet it remained invisible to most people for a long time.
Which in fact brings me back to your point about murder and witnesses and fears you and I might, I think, legitimately have about having our lives ended.
By the way, I'm not suicidal.
I love life.
Yes, I can't imagine ever contemplating suicide.
Well, you know, short of some terrifying, debilitating illness from which there's no way back, I am exactly in agreement with you.
Life is absolutely precious.
And not only will I not kill myself, but I drive carefully.
I, you know, treat firearms with respect.
So two points, though, with respect to the tendency of witnesses to live shorter lives.
One, if there's something weird about the 9-11 narrative, then whoever the they is that engaged in this was obviously willing to kill thousands of people.
Is it surprising that they would kill dozens to keep it secret?
I mean, in fact, I think it's an automatic presumption that we should have, that if you're willing to kill thousands, you're probably willing to kill dozens.
But the other thing is the most, there are several strange things about the World Trade Center 7 story.
One, that we didn't know about it.
Two, that if the BBC didn't have foreknowledge, it managed to predict one of the most unpredictable events in history in the most absurd form possible, like literally reporting on the collapse of a building that had not yet collapsed and happened to be in the shot, right?
If it wasn't foreknowledge, it was an amazing coincidence.
Yeah, but there were other people that walked away from there.
They were being told, no, that building's coming down.
Right.
Again, there's just, again, you have to watch the documentaries, Building 7 or Calling Out Bravo 7.
It just lays out all this evidence.
But what I wanted to get to, though, is something that I think, I don't know if you have seen it or not, but there is a story that stops me in my tracks.
A guy who I'd never heard of named Danny Juenko.
Danny Juenko was, if what I've read is correct, a demolition expert from the Netherlands.
I did a little checking this morning to make sure he didn't show up suddenly in the aftermath of 9-11.
No.
In fact, his demolition company, there's evidence of it going back into the 90s.
So he was apparently, the company that bears his name, was apparently a demolition expert from the Netherlands, was caught off guard by a documentary film crew that showed him, without explaining what it was, the video of World Trade Center 7 collapsing and asked for his opinion.
And he says, well, it's obviously controlled demolition.
And they reveal to him that this building fell on the same day as the Twin Towers, and he is disbelieving because how could that possibly be the case?
He'd never heard of World Trade Center.
He'd never heard of it.
Imagine that, a demolition expert.
One of three.
By the way, I think Donald Trump was quoted right after 9-11 as thinking that was a controlled demolition.
Really?
I'm quite sure, yeah.
Oh, yeah, there's a phone call, I think, in some program.
But anyway, Danny Juenko says it's controlled demolition.
The crew asks him, you know, well, what would it have taken?
You know, how long would it take to rig a building like that?
You know, he runs through it, and it becomes just clear that it's implausible to him that it was rigged on the day of 9-11.
It's utterly clear to him that it fell because of controlled demolition, which means it must have been rigged in advance of 9-11.
And he never recanted his claim.
It was just utterly obvious to him what he was seeing on this video.
And some years later, he died in a one-car car crash.
I think he was driving a Volvo, a safe car, crashed it into a tree, I believe, on the way home from church on a Saturday with his dog in the car.
The dog survived.
Now, obviously, people wrap their cars around a tree.
People travel with their dog.
People drive Volvos.
People go to church.
Sometimes it even happens on Saturday.
But the whole story has kind of a Michael Hastings vibe to it.
Michael Hastings being a journalist who, if the story is accurate as I understand it, was investigating some story that he thought put his life in danger.
In a panic, asked his neighbor if he could borrow his neighbor's car because he thought his own car had been tampered with.
The neighbor did not loan his car.
He got into his own car and hurtling down Highland Avenue in Los Angeles, crashed into a palm tree so hard the engine was ejected from the vehicle and he was incinerated.
So, oh, and I, well, in any case, the point is, Danny Juenko was a fly in the ointment.
He was a demolition expert who looked at this and didn't understand how any demolition expert could disagree that that's what had happened to World Trade Center 7, and he's no longer with us.
And the story of why he's no longer with us raises questions of its own.
So that's why I'd like to see a complete list covering all these instances of conspiracy of all the witnesses.
Rather than do it kind of one-off with this particular, I mean, just start listing them all.
Yeah.
I need to be a really long list.
Well, it'd be a good idea for some journalist or for some book.
Many years ago, I think it would have been when I was in college, I started to wonder if you could use the tools of science to demonstrate that something anomalous had happened with the two Kennedy assassinations and the Martin Luther King assassination by studying the longevity of witnesses compared to a control group in similar health, basically.
Could you just say, hey, here's one of the things that shortens your life, witnessing something.
Conspiracy.
Yeah, something like that.
Anyway, it was an idle thought.
So there's a good query for Grok or Perplexity or something like that.
Just give me a list of all the witnesses and all these different cases that died mysteriously.
Exactly.
It's a long list.
Well, then what are the chances that if you did ask Krok that Kroc would end up dying in a one-car accident, wrapping his Volvo around a tree?
You know, could happen.
Yeah.
All right.
So are there particular, we've talked a little bit about World Trade Center 7 and the anomalies surrounding it, the BBC reporting its collapse before it happened.
maybe before we complete that thread, we should talk about the fact that there were two men trapped in World Trade Center 7 trying to escape, trapped by explosions that they, well, I believe both of them spoke immediately about what they had experienced.
There's an on-the-street interview, I think it's Barry Jennings.
Barry Jennings.
Yeah, so they went up there and because that was going to be a emergency response location, but nobody was there.
There were like hot cups of coffee then.
So they had evacuated.
The building had been evacuated.
So they were basically told to get out, but as they tried to get out, they were stopped, I think, in the sixth to eighth floor landing because it had been blown out.
Yep.
And I think I'm pretty sure this before the towers come down.
That's correct.
So again, there are multiple reports of explosions in buildings, seismic events prior to the towers coming down.
Again, the 156 witnesses that day, news reports testifying that they heard explosions.
And again, these are credible witnesses.
These are firefighters.
These are first responders.
I mean, these are also reporters.
And then NIST doesn't even mention, I think they actually probably say the contrary.
There was no reports of explosions.
So there's all kinds of reports of explosions.
What are you talking about?
So again, it's just not credible.
It's literally, NIST to me in this sense is like a two-year-old just stole a cookie from the cookie jar.
He's holding his hands.
I didn't take a cookie.
Right.
There are clearly reports of explosions.
In this case, you have two witnesses in the building, Michael Hess and Barry Jennifer.
Barry Jennings, who reported initially explosions.
Barry Jennings continued to speak about the fact that what he had felt were explosions.
He said that he had had experience with exploding boilers.
He did not believe that this was a boiler in the building exploding.
And he, of course, is sadly no longer with us.
He, another fly in the ointment, who just so happens to have died early.
So World Trade Center 7 does seem to be whoever they might be, something did not go right at World Trade Center 7.
There's a part of me that wonders if the plane that crashed in Shanksville was supposed to hit Building 7, which would then explain its collapse much as the other two World Trade Center towers collapse was explained by the airliners that hit them.
Which then, of course, brings us to the question of Shanksville.
Does Shanksville bother you?
So it's all part of the story.
I mean, it's been turned into, and here's a story of heroism.
Todd Beamer, let's roll.
Let's roll.
Preventing whatever death was prevented by crashing into field.
By the way, that's a if you ever go to that memorial, they've got a row, a couple rows of telephone handsets.
You can listen to the voicemail messages left by the people on the plane for their loved ones.
And what's extraordinary about it, it's just, again, you'd like to think just quintessential American.
People weren't concerned about themselves.
They're concerned about the loved ones.
It chokes me up even talking about it.
It is the one thing about all these tragedies.
It is amazing how the real character, the true character of the American people get revealed.
I mean, as much tragedy, as much death as there was, these things are inspiring.
I mean, what the pastors on that Flight 93, 399, okay, what they did, their heroism.
But the firefighters did.
I mean, the iconic pictures of firefighters walking up into danger.
But again, they knew they were walking into danger, but they had no, I'm sure, no concern that these buildings are going to come down and collapse because that just doesn't happen.
They've got fire to contend with, but they've got people to rescue.
So they walk up there.
So that's the other flip part of this, the whole 9-11 story.
It's just the level of heroism and really the inspiring stories of Americans doing what Americans do.
Well, look, I agree about Americans.
And my concern is that they were used as pawns in this case.
And I will tell you, you know, I would love to discover that the crash in Shanksville is what it appeared to be because it is a story of American heroism.
And, you know, it's one of the few bright spots from that morning is that, you know, passengers on this flight struck the first blow against whoever did this.
But I will tell you, that story doesn't stand up to scrutiny either.
The crash site does not, it's not like any crash site from any jetliner previously in history in terms of, I mean, maybe I've got the story.
You're taking me down a whole new rabbit hole.
Holy rabbit hole.
Well, unfortunately.
Again, I've been there.
I went through it with Secretary Jay Johnson.
We toured that.
I was, again, I was inspired by what I saw there.
I'm inspired by it too, but I have the sense that whatever.
Look, as you say, can we handle the truth?
The goodness within us was weaponized by whoever they were.
Well, that's, again, that's what they, that's a huge advantage they have, that they have.
None of us wants to contemplate that level of evil.
Just don't.
Right.
Me, Americans.
By the way, I'm not a fan of government, okay?
I think it causes or exacerbates more problems than ever solved.
But most Americans don't want to contemplate that the trillions of dollars we spend every year is wasted or goes to exacerbating problems.
They don't want to believe it.
They certainly don't want to believe that the U.S. government might have taken some participating role in the assassination of JFK or RFK or Martin Luther King Jr.
They don't want to contemplate it.
So it's a huge advantage for who they are in terms of developing a narrative very quickly.
And okay, good.
It's been explained.
It's been explained.
Let's move on until COVID hits.
Well, but that's just what I wanted to raise with you is I have a principle that I detest, but I find it useful, which is no matter how cynical you become, you're still being naive.
And you and I got a graduate-level education in reality from COVID.
The inability to swallow the official narrative on COVID results in the terrifying recognition that something deployed very dangerous shots to billions of people, at best, not knowing what would happen, but more likely understanding.
They knew exactly what would happen.
There you go.
I mean, that's why a guy like Michael Yeaten was beside himself when I was talking to him.
He said, Brian, I was educated with these people.
I know what they know.
I know they're lying to us.
I know they know they're lying to us.
Right.
So my only point is this.
It's very hard.
Empathy is a key tool in the human toolkit, but it depends on the fact that somebody else is structured sufficiently similarly to you that you can figure out what they're thinking and they're feeling by just sort of putting yourself in their place.
Very hard for somebody like you or me to imagine saying yes to a plan in which you knew that billions of people would be exposed to a lethal shot, right?
You couldn't do it.
I couldn't do it.
But obviously there are enough people who could do it that it happened.
So if you take that discovery, that there are people who, you know, presumably with files and communications and discussions could actually get to the point of saying yes to a plan that dangerous, then coming to understand how the rest of this stuff happens is much simpler.
It's the one thing you really need is a willingness, a broadening of the imagination to allow you to imagine monstrousness this powerful and apparently this common.
So this gets us into a discussion like you and Tucker had.
You know, what was striking is I started holding my hearings on early treatment, that type of thing, and contacting doctors, medical researchers.
Most of them were not Republicans.
I mean, most of them were Democrats.
Most of them voted for Obama.
But there's a very common theme of these interviews.
Most of them were people of faith, and they would often express, I mean, what we're seeing here is we're seeing evil on a biblical scale.
They viewed what was happening as evil on a biblical scale.
And I think that's probably what's open.
My eyes have been open to the fact that, no, there is evil.
And in this world, there is a struggle between good and evil.
There always has been, probably always will be.
But we are witnessing evil just on a, again, biblical scale, massive scale.
And again, the good news is most people are good.
And they're so good that they don't want to contemplate evil at that level.
They don't want to accept that it exists.
And I think that's maybe the difference between a lot of people and you and I is, no, we're owning up to the fact, no, it does exist.
It's wish it didn't, but it does.
Yeah, I don't disagree with that at all.
And, you know, the only hint of a disagreement is I think this is evil on a biblical scale.
I don't think that necessarily requires anything supernatural.
No, I get you.
But is it evil on a biblical scale?
Absolutely.
So I did want to point out, though, there are a number of things in the story of 9-11.
As much as I have sadly reached the conclusion that there's a they and there's a story we don't know that accounts for most or all of the major anomalies, which we could go on for hours recounting, there's also a set of things that I don't understand if there is a they, why they didn't do it better, right?
Like, okay, if this was a setup to get us into Iraq, why not include some Iraqi paperwork just to make that connection?
Because there wasn't any.
There was plenty of Saudi paperwork, but there was no Iraqi paperwork to justify that.
They had to phony that up.
Likewise, you know, they burned Colin Powell on the phony claim that there was evidence of weapons of mass destruction.
Well, whatever got us into a war in Iraq couldn't come up with a measly little something on the ground that would amount to, you know, a validation of that claim.
Like, why would anything capable of an elaborate hoax not, you know, tie up some loose ends that are galling to many of us?
I mean, I don't know the answer, but my point is that those things exist there too.
And I think one of the things that I'm learning about this, and it fits very well with your point about most people are good.
I hate it when people say that everybody thinks they're the hero, because I think it's true for most people, but I think there is a small number of people who are comfortable with their own evil and we just don't intuit it because it works differently in the mind.
But even if elements of our government participated here somehow, most of our government didn't know anything about it.
And in fact, you see agents of government.
There's no, obviously, if you're going to create some sort of a phony event, you can't have entire agencies be aware of it.
That wouldn't work.
So what you have is agencies that don't understand that they're not supposed to be investigating something.
And then other, you know, I don't know how that plays out internal to these things.
But anyway, you see, for example, in the Oklahoma city bombing case, you see the FBI continuing to discover evidence that then later gets dropped.
You know, the John Doe number two stuff.
Like the FBI is initially pursuing this and then somehow it evaporates.
What happened behind the scenes?
Maybe you know.
I sure don't.
So you have to imagine that there's, you know, there's the earnest FBI and there's the corrupt FBI and they live in the same building and maybe if you're inside the thing, you don't even know who's who.
But I mean, you know, there's interesting Bobby Kennedy reports that he had a dinner with Mike Pompeo, you know, person he does not like at all.
And apparently Pompeo made a couple points or confessions to RFKs.
First of all, he fell guilty about not doing more reform CIA while he was there.
But then there was a group, not an insignificant group, didn't sound like, but a group inside the CAA that simply don't believe in democracy.
And then you go back down to the devil's chessboard and Alan Dulles.
And I mean, these are people that are powerful.
They've got their black ledgers.
They've got their amounts appropriated to them that never get audited.
They're covert operations, that type of thing.
So, you know, whoever they are, they are immensely powerful and they are there in positions that span administrations.
Not necessarily the top job, but and then they're just so many people that are connected, you know, at the top.
Right.
You know, you get, I guess, you get led in the club.
I don't know how it works.
I haven't, by the way, I have no inside information on this.
I mean, we secure briefings in Congress are a joke.
I mean, they're mainly designed to make sure that you don't talk about something because you just had a secure briefing on this issue.
And then what you're told, it's already out in the news media.
So, again, maybe if you're on the Intel committee, which I'm not, maybe you get some more information.
But in general, don't think your member of Congress has a clue in terms of what's happening here.
Again, our founders are geniuses.
They realize that we're not angels.
If you don't want to live in chaos and anarchy, you need some form of government.
But government is something by and large to fear.
I agree.
And it took me a died in the wall liberal a long time to understand.
I sort of thought that the founders had PTSD because of what they had experienced.
But I now have exactly the same PTSD, having watched malignant governance, you know, engage in tyranny effectively out in the open.
That's what we saw during COVID.
Good news, you know, Kings had no restraint.
Eventually they did with Magna Carta, but at least there's some constraint on our government.
But as it spends $7 trillion and mortgages our kids' future, sets up these agencies that are, you know, again, those bureaucrats look at a president.
Well, this too shall pass.
They are the ongoing government.
They do as they please.
Well, that is, I think, exactly the reason that we have to overcome our fears, fears that I share with you about what happens if we do pursue this threat.
We don't know how much of what we face is the result of forces that are steering us in the same way that firefighters went up into these buildings, not understanding which hazard it was that they were being exposed to.
It's just, it's extremely, extremely dangerous.
Let me tell you the decision I have to make.
Yep.
Okay.
Again, I'm chairman of the permanent subcommittee investigations.
I have a very limited budget.
I got like $1.4 million.
Sounds like a lot, but D.C. wages.
You only have so many investigators.
We just don't have the tools.
Yeah, I can issue subpoenas.
I have very little ability to enforce those subpoenas and administrations know that.
So again, I'm kind of doing this.
I'm talking about the commission that the firefighters are asking President Trump to appoint.
I think it's a good idea.
Don't have people like me or any elected official on this thing.
Keep it strictly to subject experts on that.
If President Trump doesn't do that, I'll have to make a decision.
Do I want to use my committee to hold a hearing to voice these questions?
I mean, I think I wouldn't necessarily shy from that.
It's just not the best venue.
And one of the reasons I say that is, you know, I came out on some podcasts and I was talking a little bit about this and get immediately attacked by a Republican member of Congress, you know, chiding me for criticizing me for pushing conspiracy theories and being really harmful to the 9-11 families.
And are you not telling the 9-11 families?
The 9-11 families, the firefighters, they're the ones that I'd be doing this for.
I'm from Oshkosh, Wisconsin.
9-11, other than it changed the world, didn't impact me like it did impact people who lost loved ones.
I'm advocating for them.
They've got legitimate questions that want to be answered.
So again, I've got a, I mean, I hope President Trump, again, I ran with him in the same tick in 2016.
I always talked about him as the political equivalent of a disruptive technology.
He is.
He's a disruptor, and we need disruption in Washington, D.C. This would certainly be disruptive.
So again, Mr. President, if you're watching this, appoint that commission.
If not, I've got to make the decision, would it be beneficial?
Would it be do more good than harm me holding a hearing on this and letting these questions be aired publicly?
Yeah.
Well, that's a great idea.
Let me ask you this question.
I really, it's beyond my expertise.
I don't know.
What did you say the budget was?
$1.4 million.
$1.4 million.
I think the January 6th committee and the Democrats, I think, devote a whole lot more time and effort to that.
Yeah.
No, $1.4 million is not a lot in Washington dollars.
Is there any mechanism by which the public could crowdsource funds and you could exist?
We couldn't use it.
I mean, there's ethic reality.
That's what I figured.
I mean, I can't even get people to volunteer.
Legal time, that kind of stuff.
And we have all these ethics rules to keep us pure.
To keep you chasing your own time.
To make sure there's no corruption.
Yeah.
All right.
So let's see.
We mentioned the FBI.
There was one thing I definitely wanted to mention.
Actually, maybe this is something that your committee could do very inexpensively.
One of the things about the 9-11 story that has never stopped bothering me is there's obviously a lot of debate about what hit the Pentagon.
Doesn't look like a plane to me.
And it's amazing how very few videos there are.
I wasn't going to go, as you were talking about the Pentagon, that was going through, again.
Well, that's what I wanted to get to, though.
Doesn't look like a plane to me, but I am willing to accept that, you know, first of all, a plane is an elegant structure with less material to it than you would think.
You know, the tube is what gives it structure.
And so who knows?
Maybe something happened that I don't quite anticipate where a lot of material went through the hole in the side of the building and we can't see it.
But here's the problem with that story for me.
There were a lot of videos.
They were all collected by the FBI.
And we've only been allowed to see one of them, which does not resolve the question.
Yeah.
So here's the question.
24 years after this event.
Get those videos.
What possible purpose does it serve to not let us see the other ones unless they reflect something that is inconsistent with the narrative?
So my feeling is the FBI should shut us up.
Just release the damn videos.
Let us see them.
Let us go through them frame by frame.
And then, you know, I wasn't aware that the FBI had collected all those things.
So there are more videos that exist, and the FBI has them.
That's interesting.
I mean, anybody watching this, if you have information, I'm open for business.
I'm collecting information.
I told you about a gentleman I saw outside the heart building.
He claimed it had been to my office and left them the information because I asked him if he had a business card, so I left with your office.
Nobody, my staff has that, but basically he told me the story.
He is a government employee.
He volunteered to help out in the aftermath of 9-11, so they assigned him to the debris pile.
And they had debris going by a conveyor, and his job was to just pull out anything that looked like an electronic component.
Again, that's just a little tidbit of information.
I thought that was quite interesting when they just couldn't get rid of that crap soon enough, put it on a barge to be recycled over in China within two weeks.
But they're having volunteers, government employee volunteers go through and extracting any electronic component.
Why would they do that?
Well, so let's fill this in for the moment.
So if that guy's listening, I want to know your name.
I want to ask us more questions.
So let's fill in some things that you said for people who are new to questioning this story.
One, the structural steel from the Twin Towers, at least, was immediately recycled.
Gone.
Which is probably criminal because it was evidence of a crime and it was disposed of.
You can understand why they removed from the site.
Sure.
Okay, but then they have to hold it.
Right.
Because you have to do forensic testing.
You have to test it for explosive chemicals, that type of thing.
That's, you know, the firefighters, they'll go through their investigation manuals and just the basic laws that were broken in terms of doing that.
And of course, it's all justified by, well, this national emergency.
And it's like, well, you can haul it out to a dump site and leave it available for further investigation.
Absolutely.
And it would solve the question.
So what I'd like to know who ordered that.
Right.
Who ordered that and why?
I mean, that ought to be something we ought to get to the bottom of.
I mean, somebody with the true investigatory manpower and ability to do it.
Who ordered the disposal of all this equipment and all this material, all the wreckage?
Who ordered it?
And I would also just point out, if you and I are wrong, If the official narrative is basically correct, it is not our fault that we are left with questions that could easily have been solved by looking at the over 25 years.
Right.
That's not our fault.
That somebody destroyed the evidence that could have put this to rest.
And a totally foreseeable consequence is that we would be left with questions that we should be able to answer but can't.
The obvious implication is that those structural beams would have answered the question in a direction that would actually have validated our concerns rather than the other way around.
With respect to the pulling of electronic components from the WTC 7 site, I did look into it after you mentioned I had never heard of it before.
And here's the upshot.
The Grok explanation?
I can't remember where I found a description of it, but I did find a description that this, in fact, had happened.
So here's the issue.
World Trade Center 7 contained some really interesting stuff.
Really interesting stuff, including much of the evidence surrounding the Enron scandal.
And by the way, we're just scratching the surface of all the interesting questions surrounding it.
I mean, we're just scratching the surface.
You can go for many, many hours just basically with the bullet points.
But World Trade Center 7 contained really interesting stuff.
The Enron files being part of it, or some of the Enron files.
The Enron scandal was a major problem for the Bush administration because the Bush administration was closely tied with Enron.
Henley was a good friend of the president.
And the Enron scandal, I did not remember this, effectively spanned 9-11.
Enron began to come apart with the resignation of its CEO, I believe, in August.
And the collapse of the stock happens in October, right?
The flanking months of 9-11.
And lo and behold, it was much harder to figure out what had happened because of all of the loss of documentation.
So one could imagine a legitimate search for whatever remained.
And it wasn't the only, you know, the CIA also had an office in World Trade Center 7.
There were many interesting things.
Just the ownership of it, the insurance policies taken out.
Right.
You know, no, there's just, again, we're only scratching the surface.
Only scratching the surface.
But you could imagine a legitimate search to recover.
I would have certainly imagined that the stuff would have been backed up and be in multiple sites because of exactly the hazard of one site being lost.
But somehow lots of stuff was lost.
The destruction at the Pentagon and World Trade Center 7 seems to have compromised our ability to investigate financial crimes or anomalies.
That's interesting.
But one could imagine an honorable search for hard drives to recover some of that information.
And one could also imagine that the idea was they didn't want that information to survive.
So looking for it made sense.
So I don't know what of these things explains that, but it's certainly interesting that somebody came to you, suggested that this had happened and then vanished.
Yeah.
And you can't find them.
All right.
Well, what else is on your list of anomalies or things worth discussing in this context?
I don't know.
Honestly, I think we've covered it there.
Again, there's so many things that I'm just not expert in as you read about it.
All I can say is if you're interested in this topic, start looking at these documentaries, start reading up about it.
Richard Gage is a wealth of information.
The firefighters for 9-11 Truth, the architectural structural engineers, I mean, there's a growing list of questions that they're legitimate.
They need to be answered.
So there's, again, just all what was housed in World Trade Center 7.
Yeah.
I mean, I've, again, I'm not expert in it.
I don't understand all the, that was supposed to be the emergency site.
But they had something set up that they use immediately.
It's like, well, you know, again, there are just so many things.
And it's not like as you go down these rabbit holes that you go, well, this is a rabbit hole.
These are legitimate issues.
So again, I think the question that we were kind of discussing is why is there such reluctance for anybody to get into this?
It's because people get destroyed.
Yeah, you get punished.
whether it's your career or your reputation, people lose their lives.
I'm assuming that we don't know anywhere near enough to be in danger from that standpoint.
I hope not.
But we're certainly in danger of, again, just what I did in COVID is marginalized me enough in the eyes of the public.
I mean, my wife was reading your Wikipedia pages.
So I don't even bother reading mine.
I mean, it's like, you know, why subject yourself to that kind of torture, you know?
So again, it's, it's, we're human beings.
You know, we, we, we, I think, enjoy or value our integrity, our reputation stuff.
So you don't do this lightly, but you do it pursuing the truth.
Well, I don't frankly feel, I mean, I don't feel like I have a choice.
And I also would point out the toolkit that is necessary to do this work is the scientific toolkit.
And most, even most scientists don't really know how to use it.
They don't understand the philosophical requirements for a valid hypothesis and how you figure out whether or not it's been refuted.
But when you apply those tools to something like this, you don't end up discovering that it all makes sense.
Right.
You sure don't.
And you do discover, you know, if you were studying a forest, you would know what to do because the questions lead to each other and you pursue them.
In this case, what happens is the discovery of what is true leads to a social penalty, right?
It's a kind of don't go there, girlfriend response, which has nothing to do with the analytics of the matter, right?
It's not like you've got it wrong.
That's what they say.
And again, the alternate theories of what may be true, you just don't want to contemplate.
Can't afford to contemplate it, but I think can't afford not to is the problem.
And, you know, I do think that there's a danger, hopefully not to us.
I think in my case, I think probably what protects me is that as annoying as I am to power sometimes, doing something about it would make the problem worse, not better, from their perspective.
And we both declared we're not suicidal.
We love life.
I've clinged to it to the last.
Until there's something really horrific death in sight.
Exactly.
And again, I think, yeah, I've mentioned this to you.
I mean, all the things that have happened to me that are serendipitous.
I mean, in fact, I gave President Trump the chart that end up, you know, a lot of serendipities.
The chart that saved his life because he turned his head.
I mean, walking down a trail, not expecting to see Brett Weinstein and your family.
It's like, that's Brett Weinstein.
And it was funny your reaction.
It's like, oh, God, somebody recognized.
And you obviously didn't recognize me because I wasn't in my Senate costume.
But again, just the serendipity of that, you go with it.
Doors are open.
I walk in.
And again, I think you are like Bobby Kennedy was with the vaccine injured, right?
He knew the problem with that.
That's why I kept him at arm's length for such a long period of time until one of those moms came up to him at his house, stacked science.
I'm not leaving until you read it.
He read it into his credit.
Probably to his, you know, because you're compelled.
You see the truth.
Your eyes are open.
You can't close them.
And that's, I think, both, we both are.
It's like, well, again, I've seen truth after truth after truth that's been covered up and hidden in the lies our government tells us routinely.
At some point, I'm going to pursue the truth.
I will try and uncover it.
I'll try and expose it, try and publicize.
And that's kind of the position we're in.
We're compelled to do it.
Compelled to do it.
And I would say for those who have completely understandable fears about going down these rabbit holes, you will discover a much larger percentage of the thinking population has already gone down these rabbit holes than you're aware of.
People have been trained not to talk about this because of the social consequences, but you are not, you know, you are led to imagine that you are, by questioning this, a fringe human.
And this is just not the case.
And a huge problem now with the internet, there are a lot of rabbit holes that are rabbit holes.
Okay.
And people, you know, prey and feed off of that.
And so there's monetary benefit for doing that type of thing.
So again, it's what's getting very difficult is what is the truth?
How do you discern it?
It's a real challenge.
I mean, because first of all, we're biased.
We all have our biases.
You hear something, you go, I remember, you know, The Onion.
Yeah, of course.
First time I ever read The Onion, my daughter gave it, she was going to UW-Madison, and there was a story about, and just left it on the counter, there's a story about Bill Clinton.
And I was obviously biased to believe anything about Clinton.
I'm just reading the story.
Why isn't this in the mainstream?
I didn't realize this is a parody, but I immediately believed it because I could believe that about Bill Clinton.
So again, I think we all have to understand our own biases, how we can ease, and the people who purvey us of these things, they understand that as well.
So we're in a tough situation with AI, deep fakes, all the type of thing.
It's getting more and more difficult to discern the truth.
Yes.
And in fact, there's a clock ticking because at the point that AI becomes capable of making video that we can't detect, a lot of stuff that constitutes evidence, like, you know, the video that was taken of the crash at the Pentagon becomes meaningless because you don't know what was generated.
I mean, same thing with the Epstein video.
So we've got to get some of this stuff done quickly.
I will also just say, though, on your point about there being lots of rabbit holes that really aren't legitimate, I completely agree with this.
Not only are there lots of people who have engaged in low-quality thinking, but I also think that one of the tools that those who conspire use is they set traps.
Oh, they're false flags, sure.
Yeah.
So they give you something that's, you know, 70% true, but contains 30% garbage.
And if you're uncritical because you're like, yeah, it was that, then you fall into these traps.
So what that means is that the whole thing is a puzzle.
Can you sort the wheat from the chaff?
What is a real signal?
Well, as chairman of the European Subcommittee on Foreign Relations, I held a hearing on Russian disinformation.
And this is 2014, 2015 timeframe.
And what I got out of that was Russia is not trying to convince you of their point of view.
They're just trying to make sure that nobody believes anything.
Yep.
And that's kind of, again, that's the weapon they can use is throw a bunch of other stuff out there that's plausible, you know, that feeds into the bias people have.
And then when you find out that you got burned on that one, it's just going to be that much easier for you to just dismiss a truth that you don't want to face up to.
Totally.
And the overarching lesson for whoever they is, and I assume it's not the Russians in this case, but who knows, is to train you out of the instinct to question, which is the last thing that you should allow them to do because your ability to question it's your primary weapon with which to protect yourself and your family from all sorts of things,
whether it's a dangerous shot or being sent to war on a foreign battlefield where we have no business.
So you're scared.
My daughter always used to accuse me of being too judgmental.
That's what life is.
Right.
It's a series of judgment calls.
Right.
In fact, judgmental makes it sound negative, but it's really a question of discernment.
You've got signal and you've got noise.
Distinguishing the two is the difference between a life wasted and a quality life.
And in that light, I think we have to figure out how to figure out which of these things are illusions and which of them are sad truths that we have to confront.
Good luck.
Glad I met you on that trail.
Yeah, I'm really glad that we met on that trail.
And I want to thank you for doing this.
It obviously takes a lot of courage to say these things.
The cost is not small in terms of reputation.
But I think most Americans have realized by now that you are a true patriot and that you do what you do because you believe it's the right thing.
