New DOJ Indictments Criminalize Dissent—Weaponizing the Very Censorship Tactics They Condemned in Russia | SYSTEM UPDATE #74
Escalating the War Against Dissidents.
Watch full episodes on Rumble, streamed LIVE 7pm ET: https://rumble.com/c/GGreenwald
Become part of our Locals community: https://greenwald.locals.com/
- - -
Follow Glenn:
Twitter: https://twitter.com/ggreenwald
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/glenn.11.greenwald/
Follow System Update:
Twitter: https://twitter.com/SystemUpdate_
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/systemupdate__/
TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@systemupdate__
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/systemupdate.tv/
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/systemupdate/
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Welcome to a new episode of System Update, our live nightly show that airs every Monday to Friday at 7 p.m.
Eastern, exclusively here on Rumble, the free speech alternative to YouTube.
Tonight, a new indictment from the Biden Justice Department is one of the most disturbing and extremist yet, and the ongoing attempt by the U.S.
government, under the guise of a domestic war on terror, to criminalize any real dissidents and any real dissent.
In one sense, these charges are just yet another manifestation of the dreariest and most cliched Russiagate paranoia, seeing Russians under every bed.
But if you look under the hood of these charges just a bit, as we'll do along with you tonight, you'll see that the framework being constructed is dangerous in the extreme.
Nothing less than a tactic for empowering the federal government to transform its harshest critics, At its core, the indictment targets numerous American citizens, five of them, who are part of radical black leftist groups.
As such, they have very harsh words for Joe Biden and his administration, harbor contempt for U.S.
foreign policy and the U.S.
security state, including the FBI, and are very vocal opponents of U.S.
proxy war in Ukraine, even going so far as to argue that the provocations of the U.S.
and NATO in Ukraine render the Russian invasion justifiable as a legal and ethical means for combating Western control over their border and violent anti-Russian extremism in the provinces in eastern Ukraine.
Now, you may not agree with those views, but it's certainly not a crime in any way to express them.
Yet those charged today, in addition to those views, often denounce many of the same police brutality cases on which more mainstream liberal and Black Lives Matter activists focus, such as Michael Brown and George Floyd, but from a radical black lens.
So how does an American citizen, or five of them, end up criminally charged by the Justice Department for expressing these views?
Because prosecutors in this case claim that they were acting on behalf of the Russian government by disseminating messaging designed to, quote, sow discord among Americans, all because they received trivial amounts of funding that the GOJ claims emanated from the Russian government.
None of that is a crime either.
You're actually allowed to receive funding from other governments.
The white dissidents in those countries often receive funding from the United States government.
So the indictment really amounts to a claim that these Americans failed to file the proper paperwork notifying the government that they were agents of a foreign power, which means they now face 10 years in prison for that offense and another five years in prison for allegedly inducing others to do the same without their knowledge.
So, why is this indictment so threatening?
Because, as we will show you, the charges are so plainly motivated by the political dissent of these American citizens, and not by concern that they failed to file the right forms, and much less so by the belief that these are somehow real Kremlin agents who are doing anything other than expressing the views they have long held.
Quite tellingly, the U.S.
government and the media and think tank elite who serve it have frequently denounced every enemy state, starting with Russia and China and Iran, for doing exactly that with the Biden-administered Justice Department is doing in this case, namely using the laws that require, quote, foreign agents to register To turn dissidents into criminals.
We'll go through the indictments and the implications of this case and then speak with Nick Cruz of the Black Revolutionary Network who has been a frequent guest on System Update about these groups that have been indicted or the individuals who have been indicted and why this indictment is so menacing to the right to dissent.
As a reminder, System Update is available in podcast version.
We post the shows 12 hours after they first appear live here on Rumble.
They are on Spotify, Apple, and every other major podcasting platform.
To follow us, simply follow us, rank and review us, and it helps spread the visibility of the show.
For now, welcome to a new episode of System Update, starting right now.
One of the issues on which I focused journalistically most in the first year of the Biden administration is the fact that a top priority for Joe Biden and his leading foreign policy and domestic advisers was to create a new war on terror in the United States.
Only this one, unlike the first one, would have as its primary focus not foreign enemies in Al Qaeda or ISIS, but instead domestic enemies right here at home.
And in fact, this priority of the Biden administration was announced well before January 6th.
He emphasized it during the campaign and then when he was declared the winner of the election in the transition before January 6th ever happened.
The riot on January 6th obviously gave the Biden administration the pretext it needed to implement what has been a real new war on terror, only this time the enemies being American citizens.
And they've done that in multiple ways, and I spent the first year of my reporting in the Biden administration probably focused on that issue more than any other.
The official position of the U.S.
security state and of the Biden administration is that the greatest threat to American national security comes not from foreign terrorist groups like Al Qaeda or ISIS, or from foreign adversaries like China or Iran or Russia, but from violent extremists, domestic extremists here at home.
And the definition of what an extremist is is incredibly broad and it basically includes anybody who in any way is a real critic of establishment pieties.
If you're somebody who supports the establishment wings of the Republican Party or the Democratic Party, if you're somebody who stays within what President Obama once called playing within the 40-yard lines, meaning the establishment wings of both parties, who President Obama rightly observed, have far more in common with one another than differences with one another, then you have nothing to worry about.
You're not considered a dissident.
If you want to support Jeb Bush or Mitt Romney or Nikki Haley or Joe Biden or Hillary Clinton or people of that nature, you're well within the guidelines set by the government and by their supporters of where people can safely reside without being regarded as an enemy.
They don't mind at all if power switches back and forth between those two wings because they know that the fundamental precepts will remain the same.
What they really fear, especially now, is actual dissidents.
And as I said, this idea was in place long before January 6.
January 6 became the pretext, just like neocons used the attack on September 11th to justify a war in Iraq, a regime change war in Iraq, that if you go back and look from before 9-11, They were long advocating and long craving.
They used the 9-11 attacks as a tool for ushering in what they long had planned.
That is the same with this new domestic war on terror that the Biden administration has been craving for a long time, has successfully implemented, and this indictment today is an extension of it.
It cannot be understood simply looking at it in isolation.
The context is critical.
Now, just to take a look at that history, we have an article from the Wall Street Journal, if we can pull that up.
There you see it on the screen.
I need this here on the table as well, if we can put that on the table.
But there the headline is, the Biden administration urged to take a fresh look at domestic terrorism.
And this is an article from the Wall Street Journal on November 13, 2020.
So just a few days after the 2020 election, obviously two months or so before the riot on January 6.
And here's what the Wall Street Journal reported about the Biden administration and what they were thinking two months before January 6.
Quote, the first ever White House post and more funding to combat violent extremists floated by working group that advised President-elect's team.
Quote, President-elect Joe Biden, who has said he plans to make a priority of passing a law against domestic terrorism has also been urged to create a White House post overseeing the fight against ideologically inspired violent extremists, meaning those at home, and increasing funding to combat them, according to people who have advised his team.
A proposal for the Biden presidency's first 100 days, now with Mr. Biden's transition team for consideration, also calls for passing more, quote, red flag laws, which allow authorities to temporarily take guns from people deemed dangerous, just deemed dangerous, some of the people said.
While domestic terrorism spans extremist ideologies across the spectrum, And I think that's an important point.
When they talk about domestic terrorism or domestic extremism, it usually ends up targeting the right under the Biden administration.
But it also sometimes, as this indictment today, targets the left.
The idea is to create a precedent or a framework to criminalize either upon any whim.
The Wall Street Journal says it has been predominantly a far-right phenomenon in recent decades, according to researchers, who also say attacks by anti-fascist and other leftist groups rose this year.
Mr. Biden has said he decided to run for president after the 2017 Charlottesville-Virginia rally, during which an avowed neo-Nazi killed a woman and injured scores of other people.
According to a campaign website, Mr. Biden intends to work, quote, for a domestic terrorism law.
That respect free speech and civil liberties, of course, while making the same commitment to root out domestic terrorism as we have to stopping international terrorism.
That is the key part.
What they explicitly wanted to do, as they said right here, is take exactly the same tactics that were used against Al Qaeda and ISIS and other international foreign terrorist groups.
Not just mass spying, but theories of detention and punishment without due process.
And invoke them, weaponize them, when aimed at American citizens they, quote, deem dangerous.
That is the official posture of the United States government.
In fact, the proposed legal change they were talking about here, a domestic law against terrorism, was a proposal by California Democrat Adam Schiff,
It was a very short bill that essentially would do nothing other than take the legal authorities that were enacted in the wake of 9-11, including the Patriot Act and others, that talked about powers the government would have to combat international terrorism, and simply amend it by inserting the phrase, and domestic.
So it would say, against international and domestic terrorism, or against foreign and domestic terrorists.
That was the legal framework.
to implement this war on terror against people they perceived as being quote radicals and extremists.
Now, as it turned out, they never implemented that law because January 6th made it so that they didn't actually have to.
January 6th gave them the political capital and the support in Washington to do all the things that they wanted to do with this new law, but then ended up not meeting this new law in order to do.
There has been a domestic war on terrorism almost since the start of the Biden administration, again, justified by the riot on January 6th, but then extending, as it always does, Far beyond that and far more, more places.
So here is an article I wrote specifically about this concern on March 24th, 2021.
So just two and a half months after the Biden, after Joe Biden was inaugurated as president, the headline was the U.S.
intelligence community flouting laws is increasingly involving itself in domestic politics.
And it was about how the CIA, Homeland Security, the FBI are now targeting domestic dissidents, what they consider domestic extremists, and doing so in order to affect our domestic politics and criminalize dissent.
The article read as follows.
A letter from House Intelligence Committee members demands answers from the DNI about illegal breaches of the wall guarding CIA and NSA domestic activity.
In other words, it was a letter that had alleged that the CIA and the NSA were using their powers of spying against foreign actors, but instead handing it to the FBI about American citizens.
Involvement of the intelligence community in the U.S. domestic activities of U.S. citizens is one of the most dangerous breaches of civil liberties and democratic order of U.S. government can perpetrate.
It was after World War II when the CIA, the NSA, and other security state agencies that wield immense and unlimited power in the dark were created in the name of fighting the Cold Legal and institutional prohibitions on wielding that massive machinery against the American public were central to the always dubious claim that the security behemoth that operates completely in the dark was somehow compatible with democracy.
As the ACLU noted, that was the good old school ACLU, quote, In its 1947 charter, the CIA was prohibited from spying against Americans.
In part because President Truman was afraid that the agency would engage in political abuse.
Since then, Truman's fears have been realized over and over.
Some of the worst post-World War II civil liberties abuses have been the result of breaches by the CIA and other agencies of this prohibition.
As the ACLU documents, the CIA in the 1960s was caught infiltrating and manipulating numerous domestic political activist groups.
Under the auspices of the war on terror, entire new bureaucracy, such as the Department of Homeland Security, and new legal regimes, such as the Patriot Act and the FISA Amendments Act, were designed to erode these longstanding limitations by dramatically increasing surveillance powers aimed at U.S. citizens.
And by design, the infiltration of these security state agencies in U.S. domestic politics has dramatically escalated.
As the first war on terror was escalating, the Washington Post, under its headline, CIA is expanding domestic operations, reported in October 2002.
That's how the 9-11 was weaponized and exploited.
Quote, the CIA is expanding its domestic presence, placing agents with nearly all of the FBI's 56 terrorism task forces in the United States and U.S.
cities.
The Post added that in the name of the war on terror, FBI Director Robert Mueller, remember him, recently described the new arrangement as his answer to MI5, Britain's internal security service.
Unlike the CIA, MI5 is empowered to collect intelligence within Britain and to act to disrupt domestic threats to British national security.
Quote, it goes some distance to accomplishing what the MI5 does.
Mueller told a House Senate Intelligence Panel last week in describing the new CIA role in the FBI task forces.
They were creating MI5 explicitly right in front of you, which is a security state agency in Britain designed to do domestically what the CIA or MI6 does internationally.
In the years following, two whistleblowers, NSA whistleblowers, William Biddy and Edward Snowden, both cited their horror over the turning of the surveillance machinery against American citizens as the reason for the decision to denounce their agency.
One of the aspects that most disturbed me about the Russiagate conspiracy theory from the start was that it was created and disseminated by the CIA and related agencies with the intent first to alter the outcome of the 2016 election and then to undermine the elected president with whom they were at war.
That's what Russiagate was.
It emanated from the bowels of the US intelligence agency and it was designed to manipulate the 2016 election.
Just like the new lie for 2020 election emanated from the CIA and the intelligence community, namely that the Hunter Biden laptop, filled with information incriminating about Joe Biden, was something that should be ignored and even censored because it was Russian disinformation.
An absolute lie that did the trick, but it shows how the intelligence community is increasingly interfering in our politics, specifically in order to Manipulate our politics.
Now, as part of that article I wrote in March of 2021, I found and then showed the Department of Homeland Security, from a Department of Homeland Security report, their definition of what they mean by dangerous extremists or violent extremists.
And essentially, it's every group that, in reality, genuinely dissents from establishment orthodoxies.
Again, it doesn't mean Mitt Romney or Jeb Bush or Lindsey Graham-style Republicans.
Everyone is fine with that.
Those people are not a threat.
They endorse the core values and core policies of the bipartisan class in Washington.
They really are only worried about people who question or challenge Those core establishment precepts.
If you go back and look in 2016 at when neocons really started turning against Donald Trump, and when the security agencies decided he was a genuine threat, it was when he began questioning the viability of NATO, saying, why is it that this alliance that was created to protect Western Europe from a country that no longer exists, an empire that no longer exists, the Soviet Union, why do we still need it?
What is its purpose?
It was designed to protect everyone from the Soviet Union.
The Soviet Union collapsed.
It fell.
It exists no more.
Why are we spending hundreds of billions of dollars to protect all these countries that in many ways have higher standards of living than we do, at least millions of Americans do?
Nobody questions NATO.
It's central to US hegemony.
And when he did that, that's when he became a threat.
He stepped outside of the 40-yard lines that President Obama talked about.
That's the definition of a real dissident.
It doesn't matter to them if it's on the right or the left.
It just so happens that the American left, in general, The bulk of it has been led into subservience and captivity by the Democratic Party.
So the left in the United States, that kind of radical anti-establishment left, really exists only in very small numbers.
The people who are really threatening to them, the anti-establishment voices, are generally on the right.
That's what January 6 illustrated.
But here you see the chart.
And here, for example, they have animal rights and environmental violent extremists.
DVEs, which are, I'm gonna get that acronym, I believe it's, oh, it's Domestic Violent Extremists.
So animal rights and environmental extremists, they count that.
DVEs seeking to and or mitigate perceived cruelty, harm, or exploitation of animals, or perceived, I'm gonna get my glasses for this, perceived exploitation or destruction of natural resources and the environment.
And then as well, abortion-related violent extremists, people in support of pro-life or pro-choice beliefs.
Anybody who's anti-government or anti-authority is on their list.
These are people with ideological agendas derived from anti-government or anti-authority sentiment, including opposition to perceived economic, social, or racial hierarchies, or perceived government overreach, negligence, or illegitimacy.
And then anarchists, violent extremists, DVEs who oppose all forms of capitalism, corporate globalization, and governing institutions which are perceived as harmful to society.
They have the sovereign rights movement on there.
And then, just to kind of catch all, for anybody else who has grievances against the establishment.
So, you see, they don't really care if the people are labeled right-wing or left-wing.
Everyone who's in this category of dissent is considered somebody that Homeland Security is supposed to keep their eye on and use these tools to combat.
You're allowed to be an extremist or hold views that the United States government regards as radical or dangerous.
That's supposed to be a constitutional guarantee protected by the Bill of Rights, especially the First Amendment.
So why is the government maintaining these lists And adopting an official position that their role and the tools that they've been given, the trillions of dollars in weapons that Homeland Security has, CIA, DHS, FBI are used for this purpose.
But this is absolutely what this new domestic war on terror is.
One of the tools that they use is a law called Foreign Agent Registration, which basically says that if in some way you are acting on behalf of a foreign government in your advocacy or in your activism, then you are required to register as such with the U.S.
government, and if you fail to do so, you are committing felonies.
Now all over Washington, people constantly are acting on behalf of foreign governments and getting paid millions of dollars to do so.
As we'll show you, that was what Tony Podesta was supposed to be arrested for, but never was.
The fact that he was with Paul Manafort acting on behalf of foreign governments, getting enormous amounts of millions of dollars and not filing these forms, that's what a real foreign agent is.
Somebody who's actually working for a foreign government and advocating things they otherwise wouldn't advocate, and absent they're getting paid by these foreign governments, that the law is that you have a right to know about that.
But one of the things the United States and the UK have been insisting for many years is that enemies of the United States, Russia and China and Iran, have similar laws and they abuse them, say the United States, because they go and find people who have say the United States, because they go and find people who have gotten a tiny amount from the United States or from Western European countries and advocate views they otherwise would advocate.
And then Russia sleeps in and says, we discovered that part of the money you got for this expense on this event you did has origins with the United States government and now we deem you a foreign agent and we're going to put you in prison for it.
So let's look at what the United States says as well as human rights agencies say about when countries like Russia do that.
Here from December 2022 is a Human Rights Watch report titled Russia new restrictions for quote foreign agents foreign influence would now suffice for toxic designation.
Here's Human Rights Watch denouncing Russia, quote, a new law enacted entered into force in Russia that drastically expands the country's oppressive and vast foreign agents legislation.
Human Rights Watch said today, said today the law is yet another attack on free expression, legitimate civic activism in Russia and should be repealed.
Adopted in July 2022.
The law's entry into force was delayed until December 1st.
The law expands the definition of foreign agent to a point at which almost any person or entity, regardless of nationality or location, who engages in civic activism, or even expresses opinions about Russian policies or official conduct, could be designated a foreign agent, so long as the authorities claim they are, quote, under foreign influence.
It also excludes, quote, foreign agents from key aspects of civic life.
For more than a decade, Russian authorities have used foreign agents laws to smear and punish independent voices, says Rachel Denbar, Deputy Europe and Central Asia Director at Human Rights Watch.
Quote, the new tool in the government's already crowded toolbox makes it even easier to threaten critics, impose harsh restrictions on their legitimate activities, and even ban them.
It makes thoughtful public discussion about Russia's past, present, and future simply impossible.
You wouldn't want to live in a country like that, where the government can easily take a foreign citizen who's expressing radical dissent to government policy and turn them into a criminal by claiming that they're a foreign agent based on the tiniest sliver of evidence.
That would be incredibly despotic.
No, it's not just Human Rights Watch, but it's also the U.S.
Embassy and consulates that have been criticizing Russia.
And I should note that Russia's foreign agents law was actually A response to a similar past in the United States and then by the EU that required media outlets like RT and Sputnik and then all sorts of activist Russian nationals to register as foreign agents.
They basically copied the US law and then implemented it in Russia.
So it's very similar in fact to the controversy that Elon Musk recently provoked by putting labels on media outlets like NPR and this Canadian broadcasting channel and BBC pointing out that they are funded by their governments and the reaction was so enraged
NPR said we're not using Twitter anymore, so did the CBC, I believe the BBC is, but they're very angry about it, because the idea that there's any equivalency is something that American elites can't accept.
We're not tyrannical, say Canadian and British and American elites, even when we do the same thing they do.
Tyranny and despotism and authoritarianism is not something that only happens in the bad countries.
So even though it's undeniably true that NPR and the BBC, the CBC, get funding from the US government, and at least in the case of NPR and BBC, I won't comment on the Canadian Broadcasting Network as much because I've been on there many times before but I don't know them as well as I know NPR and BBC, it is definitely the case that their messaging is almost entirely
In fact, when I was doing the Snowden reporting, by far the most aggressive and angry and pro-state reporting on the Snowden journalism we were doing came from the BBC.
That's where the most hostile interviews were, where they basically just voiced the government's view 24 hours a day.
And the same with NPR.
When has the last time NPR did anything critical of the FBI or the CIA or the US security state?
They don't.
But this equivalence is one that people can't stand in the West.
And yet, it's still here.
Here's the US Embassy and Consulate in the United Kingdom, quote, how Russia's, quote, foreign agent law silences dissent.
And this is also important to understand what this criticism is.
So when we look at the indictment, which we're about to do, You already understand why it's so repressive and so dangerous and tyrannical because the U.S.
government And the UK government, when talking about how Russia does this, has already made it very clear.
Quote, harassment and censorship of independent media and government critics is common in the Russia Federation.
A so-called foreign agents law, passed in 2012 and repeatedly expanded, allows the Justice Ministry to label groups or individuals, quote, foreign agents, exposing them to fines and harassments that stymie their work.
In July, Russian authorities prosecuted human rights advocate Semen Semenov, who exposed the mistreatment of construction workers on criminal charges filed in connection with the foreign agents laws, Human Rights Watch reported, calling the case a, quote, sham.
The same month, the Russian authorities effectively shut down the investigative news outlet, The Project, deeming it an undesirable organization and designating its editors and four journalists as, quote, foreign agents.
The Project's reporting have raised questions about how a top Russian official obtained his wealth.
In March, longtime human rights defender Lev Ponomarev closed his group for human rights after Russia increased fines for violating its foreign agents law.
While Russian authorities draw false parallels between the foreign agents law they use to suppress dissent and a similar sounding US law, the two are very different.
Of course, imagine the US government taking that position.
The U.S.
Foreign Agents Registration Act says the U.S.
government simply requires individuals and organizations to disclose their work on behalf of a foreign entity.
In Russia, the quote, foreign agents law is one of the government's major tools to suppress and punish dissent.
Under Russia's law, anyone receiving funds from abroad can be designated a foreign agent even if they are not acting in the direction of a foreign entity.
Let's stop that right there.
This is the key point.
This is why the US government claims that Russia is tyrannical when they do this.
Prosecute dissidents of the government as foreign agents while the American law and the American actions are not.
This is their distinction.
Under Russia's law, anyone receiving funds from abroad can be designated a foreign agent even if they are not acting in the direction of a foreign entity.
So they're saying what's tyrannical is to call someone a foreign agent simply because they get some funds that can be traced to a foreign government.
And they're saying what should be required is for people to actually be doing and saying things because Russia is or because the foreign agent is ordering them to do so.
But in this case, they're saying these people, these critics of the Russian government, get funds from the United States because the State Department funds all kinds of anti-government groups in Russia.
So they are actually getting funds from the United States, these people that Russia is prosecuting.
But the U.S.
government argument is they shouldn't be prosecuted because they're not taking orders from the U.S.
government.
They're just getting funded by the U.S.
government.
Which is exactly what happened today with the five people who were charged with acting on behalf of Russia.
If you look at them, and we're going to show you them, you will immediately recognize what they are.
They are radical black socialists, radical black communists of the kind very common in the 1960s.
They come from the tradition of Marcus Garvey and Fred Hampton.
That was a faction that used to be pretty vibrant in the 60s.
It is much less so these days, where, as I said, most of the left is in lockdown by the Democratic Party, led there by Bernie Sanders and AOC and all kinds of media figures who have branded and become rich based on their branding.
So this left that once was found menacing the United States doesn't exist anymore.
But these people indicted today are that.
And it's designed to take what the US government says Russia does, Which is call anybody a criminal merely because they get funding from a foreign government, even if they're not acting at the behest of that government and what they're saying.
And this is the framework the United States government is now trying to set in order to criminalize dissidents.
Quote, nearly every reputable human rights organization in Russia, says the US government, and many independent media outlets have been forced to register under Russia's, quote, "foreign agent law." Quote, "The American people have a right to know if a foreign flag wavers behind speech broadcast in the United States," Justice Department officials said after this case.
Our concern is not the content of the speech, but providing transparencies about the true identity of the speaker." So that is the -- let me just go back to those paragraphs.
That is the claim of the United States government and why Russia is despotic and how it uses foreign agent law.
Now let's look at the case today.
The Justice Department trumpeted this new indictment in a press release from April 18th, so that was yesterday.
They sent out a press release boasting of what it is they did.
There you see the headlines.
U.S.
citizens and Russian intelligence officers charged with conspiring to use U.S.
citizens as illegal agents of the Russian government.
And what did these Americans do?
They sought to sow discord, spread pro-Russia propaganda, and interfere in elections within the United States.
So, if you're somebody who the US government believes is spreading pro-Russia propaganda, which as we know, for liberals, is essentially everybody who's critical of the Democratic Party, And they can prove that somewhere along the way a group to which you belong or an activity or an event that you organized got Russian funding or funding from any foreign government, you immediately become a felon.
Even if you're not taking orders from the Russian government, even if you're doing nothing more than expressing the ideology that you've always held, exactly what they're saying the Russians do that make them so despotic.
Here is the press release, quote, a federal grand jury in Tampa, Florida returned a superseding indictment charging four US citizens and three Russian nationals with working on behalf of the Russian government and in conjunction with the Russian Federal Security Service, FSB.
To conduct a multi-year forward malign influence campaign in the United States.
Among other conduct, the superseding indictment alleges that the Russian defendants recruited, funded, and directed U.S.
political groups to act as unregistered illegal agents of the Russian government and sow discord and spread pro-Russian propaganda.
The indicted intelligence official officers, in particular, participated in covertly funding and directing candidates for local office in the United States.
Additionally, in a separate case out of the District of Columbia, a criminal complaint was unsealed charging Russian national Natalia Berlinova with conspiring with an FSB officer to act as an illegal agent of Russia and the United States.
Quote, Russia's foreign intelligence services allegedly weaponized our First Amendment rights, freedoms Russia denies to its own citizens.
To divide Americans and interfere in elections in the United States, Assistant Attorney General Matthew G. Olson of the Justice Department's National Security Division, quote, the department will not hesitate to expose and prosecute those who sow discord, no-sowing discord, and corrupting U.S.
elections in service of hostile foreign interests regardless of whether the culprits are U.S.
citizens or foreign individuals abroad.
Efforts by the Russian government to secretly influence U.S.
elections will not be tolerated, said Assistant Attorney General Kenneth Polite of the Justice Department's Criminal Division.
As today's announcement demonstrates, the Criminal Division is committed to eradicating foreign malign influence on the U.S.
political system and helping ensure the integrity of our elections.
Now, before I show you a couple key paragraphs in the indictment itself, from the charges, The four citizens who were charged today are very easily recognizable.
They may have some views that you disagree with, especially if you're a conservative.
These are genuine black leftists, so they have real left-wing ideology.
They're not the nice leftists like AOC or Hassan Piker or those kind of people that we talked about last night, who end up just always supporting the Democratic Party.
These are real radicals.
These are real dissidents.
And the idea that any of these people are saying anything that they haven't been saying for years because the Russian government is telling them to is preposterous.
Yes, sometimes people so discord in the United States when you stand up and complain about the acts of other people.
I might criticize the CIA or the FBI.
Or Joe Biden, or establishment liberals, or think tanks, or corporate media outlets.
That sows discord.
That creates conflict.
You're allowed to sow discord in the United States, or in any free country.
That is not a crime.
You're also allowed to get funding in your activities from foreign governments.
That is not a crime either.
And the only thing the indictment alleges, even if you believe everything that it says, what?
Even if you believe everything that it says in the indictment, all it actually alleges is that these individuals, over the course of five years, starting in the 2016 election, again, this is a Russiagate residue case, received a trivial sum of money.
I'm talking about $500 here, $3,000 there to do speaking tours or organize events.
And they're very clearly advocating the views that every black leftist for decades has advocated.
So let me just show you a couple of clips from the people who were Indicted today is a Russian agent.
So here is Amali Yeshidulata, who is with, I believe, he's the chairman of the Africa's People Socialist Party.
So let's just take a little listen to him, and you tell me if this sounds like a black radical leftist that we've been hearing from for many decades in the United States, or whether this sounds like somebody who's saying things the Kremlin told him to say.
engage in this fight back and we engage in this counter-offensive that we recognize that part of what's happening in 2024 is the presidential election and that i think is really important for us to not let the so-called white liberal biden and the liberal democratic party get away with what they're doing
i think we're going to have to characterize biden and the white liberal biden who himself has an extraordinary record not just dealing with the uh the omnibus crime bill that's responsible for the the murders of george floyd and so many other people but and the the massive imprisonment of african people in this country but But his participation in passing legislation as a senator, So he dislikes establishment liberals.
He's a very harsh critic of the Biden administration.
say they believe in the liberal Democratic Party and the liberal Biden say they believe in that they sucker African people into voting for them and others as well who are sympathetic to these liberal issues.
So he dislikes establishment liberals.
He's a very harsh critic of the Biden administration.
He hates militarism on the part of the United States government in places like Russia, thinks it's a aggressive proxy war.
All things that all kinds of people think.
I had Norman Ficklestein on my show last week.
Actually, we interviewed him.
We're going to show you his interview soon.
We taped it.
And one of the arguments he made was he actually criticized me and Matt Taibbi and a few others, Aaron Maté, who are opposed to the US proxy war in Ukraine.
I think I mentioned this once before.
Because, he says, we don't have the intellectual courage to come out and say what we should really say, which is not just that.
The US and the West have been provoking Russia in Ukraine, but that as a result of those provocations, the Russian invasion was justified.
That's what I think all four of the people indicted today believe.
That's something that, again, you can hear from all kinds of American citizens on both the right and the left.
Who may have more extremist views than you have, but this person is not saying any of these things because he got orders to say them from the Russian government.
We're going to have in just a few minutes someone I regard as one of the smartest black actual leftists in the United States.
Not someone who ends up in captivity to the Democratic Party, but who comes from that tradition of Fred Hampton and the radical black movement in the 60s.
And this is very much within the expectations of what you would hear from American citizens who ascribe to this ideology.
You can hear this on the right as well.
So here is Yashlita talking just recently, last month.
He already found out that he was raided by the FBI.
I don't think he has seen the indictment yet.
And here's him at a rally of ANSWER, which is a far-left group.
They've been organizing peace in Ukraine, protests and the like.
And here is him addressing Here's him addressing the rally.
Despite the fact that I have opposed every predatory war that the United States, which by the way is the strategic enemy of all of humanity, despite the fact that I have always done that, That they have declared that black people are so stupid that it takes Russians to tell us that we are oppressed.
I have never known a moment of black freedom for my entire life.
I have never read of a moment since the beginning of a colonial mode of production where black people have been free.
And yet they're saying that we are agents of some foreign power because we say black people must be free, because we say Africa must be free, because we say African people everywhere must be free.
And we are here today to tell them that they don't have enough flashbang grenades in their arsenals.
You actually think that he's saying any of that because he got orders from the Kremlin to say it?
Or...
Or, as he said, do you think that's something he's been saying every single time there's a US military conflict or a war, and he stood up and denounced it?
It's so visible, it's so inherently blatant, the idiocy of this indictment, but the fact that it's idiotic doesn't make it less dangerous.
Because it is designed, and I think they purposely did it in this case against left-wing radicals rather than right-wing ones, to try and ensure that there's very little objection.
If they do this on the right, there's a very significant contingent on the right that will stand up and understands the DOJ and the FBI and the US security state and harbors a lot of skepticism for them.
And they get a lot of pushback now.
But when it's on the left, they count on the fact that people on the right won't care.
Although I think a lot of people on the right will understand the actual precedent being set here and will be disturbed by it and will object this is an attack, an attempt to criminalize his free speech rights in a way that even if you have a different ideology can be used to criminalize yours as well.
But they also know that people like this, far leftists, are very unpopular among the vast mainstream liberal left, precisely because he despises the Democratic Party.
He's not someone who thinks, oh, I have some disagreements with the Democratic Party, but at the end of the day, they're nice people.
I wish they were a little different, but they're closer to me, and I'm going to support them, and the Republicans are the really bad ones way over there.
That's not, he's not a YouTube host who brands himself on burning AOC.
He's a true radical.
And so people like this aren't widely supported, and I think that's part of what the government is counting on.
Now let's look at just a couple of the, before I bring Nick on, the indictment.
There you see it here.
It was unsealed today and you see several of the Russian citizens who are accused to be agents of the Russian government, along with the four American citizens, including Amali Yashlida, whose real name is, I think, Joseph Walker, or Joseph Waller, along with three others who belong to similar groups.
And the allegations are essentially-- let's look at the first two paragraphs, and you'll get a good taste of what this does.
Quote, from at least as early as October of 2013, Aleksandr Viktorovich Onubov worked with officers of the FSB, the Russian Federation, as described in more detail below, to use members Specifically, he provided financial support to these groups on behalf of the FSB, directed these groups to publish pro-Russian propaganda, as well as other information designed to cause dissension in the United States and to promote secessionist ideologies.
Coordinated and funded action by these groups within the United States that was designed to further Russian interests, and coordinated coverage of the group's activities in Russian media outlets.
Yanubov relayed detailed information about his activities and the activities of these separate groups to his FSB handlers.
And if you go through the indictment, as we of course did today, and I'm gonna leave those sections out, a lot of them, so I can get Nick on and we can talk to him.
What it essentially says is that, at most, over the course of five or six years, these two groups got something like a total of, at most, $15,000.
It was really, can you send us $500?
We want to have this event.
The greatest amount was $3,000 for a multi-state tour.
And there's not even an allegation, not even an allegation, that any of them ever said anything that they did not believe because the Russian government directed them to say it.
Not a single allegation.
In other words, exactly what the U.S.
government says Russia does, China does, Iran does that makes them so repressive, namely consider people foreign agents simply because they receive funding from a foreign government, Just because of that alone, they are claiming that these people are agents of the Kremlin and therefore had to file these forms and for failure to file these forms, they are now guilty of major felonies.
Now let me just show you this last document before we get to Nick, just so we can get a sense for the repulsive hypocrisy of the party of the United States government.
As I said, it is not even contestable that the US government funds large numbers of anti-government dissidents and groups in Russia.
In fact, the reason Vladimir Putin hated Hillary Clinton is because Hillary Clinton, when she was Secretary of State in Obama's first term, funded through things like the National Endowment of Democracy, which funds Bellingcat, and all kinds of groups around around the world that destabilize countries we want to destabilize. and all kinds of groups around around the world that She was funding, Hillary Clinton was, protests against Vladimir Putin.
So there was disruption and instability on the streets of Moscow funded by Hillary Clinton and the United States government.
And according to the US government, none of these people should be considered foreign agents unless they're taking direction from the United States government.
So here is an article from Business Insider in December 2011 when Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State.
And it says, yes, the United States State Department is probably supporting Russian protest groups.
Quote, we're sure a lot of people scoffed at Vladimir Putin's accusations against the US State Department and Hillary Clinton earlier today.
But the article says, quote, however, this evening, a Russian news source, Life News, has announced it is in possession of more than 60 MBs of emails between US agencies and opposition groups in Russia.
Specifically talking in terms that indicate the U.S.
was paying opposition groups, groups that Life News projected themselves as independent.
In fact, these are non-revelations.
Mark Toner of the U.S.
State Department said earlier this week that the U.S.
had spent $9 million on financial support and technical training for civil society groups in Russia.
And it's certainly arguable that, quote, goalless comes under that category.
And USAID is clear that it is acting in U.S.
interests.
The USAID website openly states that, quote, U.S.
foreign assistance has always had the twofold purpose of furthering America's interests while improving life in the developing world.
So what the United States is saying is we fund all kinds of Russian citizens.
And Russian groups, and we don't think they should be deemed foreign agents.
If you deem the people we're funding in Russia as foreign agents, you're being tyrannical unless you can prove that they're saying what we tell them to say.
And then the US government turns around today and indicts four American citizens who have been black, radical, leftist forever without even a hint That they're saying things the Kremlin told them to say, doing exactly that which we say Russia makes Russia despotic.
The US, and that was $9 million, not $500 and $2,000, as the indictment suggests these American citizens receive.
Remember, the US has gone so far, as the Guardian article in 2014 here says, to create an entire fake Twitter, a Cuban Twitter, to stir unrest and undermine the government there.
The U.S.
government actually created an entire social network to make it look like it was real Twitter to get Cubans on there and then disseminate messaging designed to destabilize the Cuban government.
Part of the Twitter files, which remember, at first you were supposed to ignore because the U.S.
media said it was a nothing burger, and now you're supposed to believe it was debunked because a hack at MSNBC who serves the U.S.
security state, Manny Hassan, claimed to have found two Tiny errors in Matt Taibbi's reporting that weren't even errors at all, and now we're supposed to believe the whole thing is debunked.
Part of what that showed, the part that was done by my former Intercept colleague, Lee Fong, who I then had on the show to talk about, was this.
This was on December 2022, how Twitter quietly aided the Pentagon's covert online psyop campaign.
Despite promises to shut down covert state-run propaganda networks, Twitter docs show that the social media giant directly assisted the U.S.
military's influence operations.
So, what the U.S.
government does is far beyond anything that these American citizens are alleged to have done.
The amounts of money in this case are minute, and what this clearly is about Is creating more legal precedent to further the Biden administration's domestic war on terror whereby they can criminalize dissent on both the left and the right.
Essentially anybody who is anti-establishment, who criticizes U.S.
foreign policy, who is skeptical and suspicious of the U.S.
security state, all the things that these defendants do and that many people on the right Also do as well.
So to talk more about this case, I am delighted now to welcome Nick Cruz of the Revolutionary Blackout Network, who has been following this case, who has been talking about it, who has knowledge of some of the groups involved.
Nick, it is great to see you.
Thank you so much for coming back on our show.
We're always happy to have you.
Yeah, absolutely.
It's always great to be on your show, Glenn.
And I'm glad that you are covering this because this issue is going to expose the people who actually really believe in free speech or not.
Because despite what a lot of right-wingers believe, free speech is more than just the ability to say slurs on social media.
And this is not a new story.
This story started in August of last month when the FBI raided the Uhuru Black Socialist Movement.
And I noticed at the time no one covered it except other black radicals like myself and our allies.
So it's easy to pay attention to the red-blue distraction when it comes to free speech.
Are you actually speaking up against the government's enemies?
Because these are the people the government considered to be a real threat.
Not the Nina Turner's, not the Jamal Bowman's, not the Cory Butch's.
If you're black in this country, you can sound as radical as you want, Glenn.
You can say, you can advocate for reparations, you can call for the end of war, you can call for defunding the police.
As long as your core message at the end of the day is support the Democratic Party, they're 100% okay with you.
As long as you are supporting the talking points of the empire and militarism, they will be okay with you.
Now, Glenn, what does this remind you of?
They are painting Omali and these black socialists who are speaking out against empire as agents of enemies of the state.
That's no different than what they did to MLK when they say MLK was part of communist training school.
Do you remember that, Glenn?
Let me just interject because we covered this the other day actually when we went over at Lane.
Martin Luther King's speech in 1967 in the Riverside Church, and exactly a year to the day before he was assassinated, where basically it was the speech where he had stood up and said, I had been silent for too long about the Vietnam War.
I now realize there's no way to pursue improvement in the lives of people here at home without Critiquing the imperialism and the militarism of our government because they're inextricably linked.
And that was when the New York Times, the Washington Post, everyone, all these good liberals who had pretended to support him all along, stood up and said, you've gone too far.
Stick to your nice talk about racism.
Criticizing the war is something that's going to lose you a lot of support.
You also don't know what you're talking about, and you're being reckless and treasonous and irresponsible in your language because he went too far.
He stepped over that line.
Yeah, and do not get twisted, guys.
Nothing has changed since the 1960s, especially in terms of racial income inequality, but also in terms of how liberals view black radicals, how they treat black radicals.
We see how they handle MLK despite the people trying to change history.
MLK was a deeply despised figure because of his willingness to speak out against capitalism and his willingness to speak out against imperialism.
You also had Malcolm X, who was smeared as a communist enemy of the state because he had nothing but great things to say about Fidel Castro and Stalin.
And these are the kind of things that is completely out of line if you're part of the Democratic Party, if you're a liberal.
And this is why Malcolm X described them as foxes.
And foxes are more dangerous than the wolf because what liberals do, they actually cause more damage to the black community.
When you look at Jim Crow Joe and his crime bill and when you look at what they do politically, because, Glenn, what did they actually accomplish?
What they do, they gain political capital by claiming they are going to go after white supremacy, domestic terrorism and crime.
And then after getting that political capital, they then turn the state against black people, indigenous people and workers.
This is a longstanding tradition of the liberal establishment that actually hurts our communities.
They passed and they expanded the Capitol Police under the guise of fighting white supremacy, Glenn.
They said they saw January 6th, they said we're going to get the Trumpers.
We did get the Donald Trump supporters who are domestic terrorists.
You guys want to know what the Capitol Police are spending their time doing?
Right after they passed that bill, they was cracking their heads and committing violent acts, tear gassing indigenous people who were protesting pipelines on their lands.
So they use the battle against white supremacy to expand the state.
Then once the state is expanded, who do they go after?
They go after the dissidents.
Well, let me just say, one of the points I make most often is that if you're on the left It is important that you step up and object when these precedents are set when aimed at the right, because if you don't, it's going to be too late.
That's, of course, true with censorship.
It's, of course, true, especially with these kind of domestic powers.
But I also think it's important that, you know, if you're on the right, you stand up and object on the left.
And I do think once the indictment is out, that gives people more information than, say, like an FBI raid where you're not really sure what's going on.
We have a lot more clarity now about what this case actually alleges.
But I do want to just say that I think if you look at how people who participated in January 6 at that riot have been treated, not just the people who engaged in violence, but the people who didn't engage in violence, who the state doesn't even claim have engaged in violence, and yet have been given sometimes years long who the state doesn't even claim have engaged in violence, and yet
I mean, the Q shaman, Jacob Chesley, who didn't touch a single person who is not accused of assault, had got a four-year prison sentence after serving nine months in solitary confinement in pretrial detention, like hundreds and hundreds of them are.
I think it's 950 now, and only 150 of them are accused of actually using violence.
So that's 750 people charged with felonies for nonviolent political protest.
And I think we shouldn't dismiss the fact that the US government does actually consider people who are real dissidents on the right.
I don't just mean violent white supremacists, I mean anti-government radicals to be just as threatening and they want to use these powers against anybody who is challenging their basic precepts.
A lot of conservatives will listen to that video I showed with him talking about the Biden administration or militarism or NATO or Russia and agree with a lot of what he's saying.
Yeah, and that's why I've been essentially excommunicated from the progressive left because I was one of the people that said January 6th is a joke very early on.
I was cut off from a lot of left groups because I thought it was a joke that people were trying to expand the power of the state because of January 6th.
I spoke out against Uh, Trump being censored from social media, and many other right-wing figures, including Alex Jones, for being censored from social media.
Glenn, these things got me completely excommunicated from the Bernie Sanders wing of the party I used to be a part of when I used to work on the campaign.
So there was a standard that we held when we stood up to anyone who was a victim of government overreach.
What I want to see, I want to see these quote-unquote right-wingers, because I have paid attention, they have not been there.
Now, if they were there for this story, that's great, Glenn.
That's a great sign for things to come.
But this is nothing new.
And right-wingers pretend they are for free speech, but they are for cracking down on protests.
They're cheering Ron DeSantis crackdown on dissonance in Florida and cheering crackdown on Palestinian rights.
They, in Florida, Ron DeSantis, I mean Republicans, crackdown on BDS laws.
So Republicans are front and center on crackdown on free speech because protest is a part of free speech.
And you telling protesters where they can and cannot protest is a crackdown on free speech.
I need them to talk about that more as well instead of just social media nonsense.
But if they do speak on this issue, that's a great sign to things to come because I have called out the insane authoritarian.
Because this is what you mentioned in your stories you were doing earlier.
I think this is a point to hit on the hypocrisy of Western chauvinists and the liberal establishment and even the conservative establishment that believe in the American dream.
So they accuse China, they accuse Russia of being authoritarian.
And I am asking you guys, this is what we talk about on Revolutionary Blackout all the time, no other media has this kind of conversation, what does that mean?
I'm legitimately asking people, what does authoritarian mean?
Because the United States used the term authoritarian to smear any enemy of the state.
I will make the argument that we are the most authoritarian country in the world, way more so than Russia or China.
China has 1.4 billion people, but they imprison less people than we do, Glenn.
We have a billion more people, but they imprison less people.
In fact, they imprison billionaires for corruption and mishandling of funds and white-collar crime, and then the American media writes stories like, oh my god, where did these billionaires disappear?
They was abducted.
No, they was arrested for corruption, because that's a priority of the Chinese government.
So I'm going to throw some terms out to you guys.
I want you guys to decolonize your mind.
Whenever they say authoritarian, that's law and order.
You got people in our country that run on law and order.
That's what they call authoritarianism, a country that's upholding their law.
They will say there's Russian oligarchs, there's Chinese oligarchs.
That's an entrepreneur.
There's no Russian oligarch that is more powerful than George Soros, who donated $128 million, way more than anyone else.
No one's more powerful than George Soros.
They say China and Russia, they have secret police in the streets that people don't know about, and that's authoritarian.
Meanwhile, we have undercover cops.
You guys see how that's the same thing?
They said Russia and China, they crush dissent.
Meanwhile, in the United States, they call riot control, where they use tear gas as a war crime on their own people.
And they also say, oh, Russia and China, they have gulags where they put people in prison labor.
That's the United States prison industrial complex.
There was a black guy who was just eaten alive by bedbugs.
You had Kamala Harris, our vice president, that literally implemented prison slave labor.
And the Democratic Party still support prison slave labor.
But you guys are talking about gulags?
I know there's a long point, Glenn, but overall, once you guys are decalling out of your mind, everything the United States accused their enemies of, we are doing, but we call it nicer language.
It's not secret police undercover cop.
Nick, I mean, yeah, I'm glad.
I mean, it is a long point, but it's a very good point.
And that's why I wanted you to elaborate on it.
I will say that.
Just like there is this distinction you're drawing on the left between kind of the left that ultimately ends up in servitude to the Democratic Party and therefore aren't real threats like Nina Turner and Jamal Bowman, those kind of people, this kind of distinction, and then there's the kind of the radical black left that these defendants are part of, that you are part of, these distinctions also exist on the right where there are a lot of people on the right who do not see the Republican Party as their allies or their friends in large part because of some of these establishment and authoritarian doctrines including
Support for the US security state.
I think oftentimes the difference becomes between local police and federal police, and that is definitely something to examine.
But let me just ask you, because a lot of what you're saying, I'm sorry to say, sows dissent or discord in the United States.
You're criticizing all kinds of people.
And the thing that is so amazing is you really, I mean this kind of ideology that these defendants defend is very familiar.
I mean this is not something new that the Kremlin needs to invent.
You can, they're so easily recognizable in this tradition that I'm not saying You are completely a part of because perhaps you have differences with these groups, but certainly you come out of that same tradition of Fred Hampton and Marcus Garvey and people like that, Malcolm X. So what can you tell us about these specific individuals and about these two groups that are at the heart of this indictment and the idea that these are people who are Russian agents acting at the behest of the Kremlin?
Yeah, so we had Amali on Revolutionary Black Guy, I believe that's how we interviewed the guy, and we have a lot of similar beliefs.
These are the beliefs that you find in the Black Panthers among Black Marxist radical thought that have been completely absent in Black mainstream politics.
If you are someone on the right, Or even Independent Right, Central Right, and even paying attention to the Left.
And Glenn, you hinted at this a few times.
You may think of the Black Left as Nina Turner.
You may think of the Black Left as Ilhan Omar.
R.B.N., Revolutionary Blackout, and the Uhuru Black Socialist Movement, we consider Nina Turner, Cori Bush, Jamal Bowman, these people, to be a joke.
They are a fraud of the highest order, and we have called these people out multiple times.
They are significantly to our right, and they do not share the same politics.
They all voted yes, just as one example, to send $40 billion to the proxy war in Ukraine.
Yes.
Meanwhile, our black radical leaders before spoke about militarism.
Meanwhile, they're all for funding military budgets and supporting Jim Crow Joe, who any black radical will call out.
And this is what liberals do, which is extremely upsetting.
They shut out true black radical thought.
But if you are a standard liberal establishment military bootlicking black liberal, they will elevate you.
You will become a Jean Pierre.
You will be a Lloyd Austin.
You will be one of these people that's elevated.
They completely erase black radical thought.
And then they create psyops like Russiagate.
I was, it was driving me crazy Glenn, during the 2016 election.
And then you got 2020 election where they said, well, Hillary Clinton lost this election because of Russian propaganda.
There are a lot of black people that didn't vote for Hillary Clinton because they fell for Russian propaganda.
I was called a Russian propagandist multiple times, even though I use my real picture on Twitter, even though I have a podcast, they still call me some sort of Russian propagandist who would try to get people to vote against Joe Biden, as if black people do not have enough reasons to be upset with Jim Crow Joe, to be upset with Hillary Clinton, who destroyed Libya and manufactured consent for the crime bill.
So what they say is any dissent towards the Democratic Party, any dissent towards liberalism must be influenced by Russian propaganda instead of the lived experience that we have where we are suffering under Democratic Party politics.
When you look at the four black mayors in charge of the biggest cities, when you look at the people who are in charge of the black communities, these are black politicians.
My Congressman is Emmanuel Cleaver, a member of the black congressional caucus, who support the Ukraine war against Medicare for all, against any progressive policies.
Our mayor in Kansas City is a black man, Quentin Lucas, who sold us out to real estate developing companies and landlords, which increased the quality of life for black Americans in this So you have black liberals that side with the Democratic Party that destroy our lives while black radicals and Marxists and socialists are not only marginalized, but we are attacked by the government.
And are you hearing any statements from Cori Bush, Jamal Bowman?
Oh, Nina Turner?
Nobody's going to get near.
That's what I was saying earlier.
No one in the Democratic Party is going to get near this case because you know they find people who are like these defendants to be utterly distasteful and detestable and they want nothing to do with them precisely because they know the Democratic Party can see it for what it is and do not snap into line at the end the way you need to in order to remain within good establishment standing.
And this is what I think is so important about this case is if you just look at the four corners of the indictment maybe you would say oh well they caught them getting money from the Russian government under the law you're supposed to register with the Justice Department.
But in the full context of everything that's going on, starting with the fact that usually foreign agents are people who get millions of dollars to advocate for foreign governments like Tony Podesta and K Street and all those scumbag lobbyists.
That's what this law is really for.
But moving on to the more important fact that this is all just a residue from Russiakate, which was about nothing other than criminalizing all dissents of the establishment by accusing everybody right and left who is a dissident to establishment orthodoxies of being a Kremlin agent.
And it's gone now from rhetorically assaulting people and slandering them in that way to censoring them from social media on this grounds to now trying to turn them into felons.
And this is why I wanted to have you on, because I wanted people to hear you speak in your organic ideological framework, which could so easily, if you're found to have 10 or $100 in your bank account for an event that you organized that came from the Russian government, which is not a crime and you didn't file a FAR form, you would be facing 10 years in prison, And being turned into a felon when it's so obvious the motive here is to create a standard to allow them to criminalize dissent exactly like they're saying that Russia did.
Exactly what they're saying Russia does, which is turn people into foreign agents simply based on evidence that they got money from a foreign power without proving they changed their views at the behest of that foreign government.
And that makes them despotic.
This is exactly what the Just Us Department is doing in this case.
Yeah, and as I explained to people, we only have temporary rights in this country.
How is this an example of us having First Amendment rights?
We do not.
We have First Amendment rights until the government decides we do not.
We have a Second Amendment right until the government decides we do not.
This is why it's extremely important that we need members of the right, and I think you're optimistic that there's going to be right-wing media figures covering this, but there's also this trend of police officers... Just to be clear, I'm going to be on Tucker Carlson's show tomorrow talking about this case.
Now, maybe that's because... I'll be watching, I'll be watching.
I was pushing it, but he did ask me to come on and talk about it.
Yeah, and I'll be watching.
I really hope that Tucker leads the way on this, because I have noticed right-wing populists getting issues regarding civil liberties correct, and this is what I am doing at RBN.
We are trying to expand their mind, expand So, I support the Second Amendment.
I know this may surprise right-wingers, because they see liberals and left-wingers as nothing but gang-hating, gun-hating people, but Marxists, we are pro-gun.
And one of the biggest problems I have with this country, Glenn, how many videos have you seen where cops in this country just unload bullets on someone because they have a gun?
And they say, well, we shot him because he has a gun.
He was dangerous.
But I thought we have a right to have a gun.
So if someone, if the cops' reason for shooting someone is not because they committed crimes, Glenn, it's because they were scared and they have a gun, my question is, do we really have Second Amendment rights?
Now, this is a problem that the white community haven't faced for a long time, but black people are overly policed, and we've been raided by the administration, something that liberals won't talk about as well.
They tried to steal the Fourth Amendment rights of many workers, including black people, because they lost in the Supreme Court.
I don't know if you follow this, Glenn.
They were trying to make it so the police have the power to take the guns of anyone who is charged with a crime, whether they're guilty or not.
It was a massive violation of the Second and the Fourth Amendment.
Luckily, they lost in the Supreme Court.
But this is a problem that our community is playing with, where the police kills us and they disarm us.
This is a Second Amendment violation.
I know we're talking about the First Amendment with the Uhuru Black Socialist Movement, but there's many, many examples of this that we need a united coalition on, because we are very weak politically, Glenn, and I think you will know this as well, in terms of Black radical Marxists in this country.
We don't have a loud voice.
So we've been speaking about this for years, the attack on the First Amendment, the Second Amendment, and the Fourth Amendment.
But obviously the liberal establishment is not going to have our back, right, because they support these things.
The Black liberals and the Democrats, they're not going to speak out for this because they support these things.
We need a coalition of good faith people on the right that is willing to swallow their disagreements with us on economics And stand up for people who are having their rights taken.
I stand for the Second Amendment, and our Second Amendment has been trampled by not only Democrats, but Republicans in Missouri that support police disarming people, even though they didn't break the law.
So I think it's very important for us to be principled and for us to look past the red-blue game and speak up against this, because whether you guys believe it, if you're on the right, there are people like us.
There are revolutionary blackouts.
There is Omali with the Black Socialist Movement that's calling out the war, that's calling out the Democratic Party's unhinged shift towards the CIA and FBI.
I know the Republicans have been running on a boss FBI, but there is a left constituency here.
But we are not the majority, but we do believe most people will like our ideas once they hear it.
Exactly.
I mean, that's why I love having you on the show, because I want people to see that.
And, you know, you came very revved up today.
I knew you would.
You answered my first question before I even asked it.
You were all ready to go as soon as I introduced you.
But, you know, I always encourage people who are on the left to seek out the smartest right-wing voices, right-wing populist voices, because I do think there's a lot more in common than people typically realize.
And so I really hope people on the right as well will seek out the most Independent-minded and most informed voices.
That is why I love the Revolutionary Black Guy Network.
I really do.
I've had Savvy on the show before and Nick.
There's more people I intend to have, but I really encourage you to watch.
This is the kind of content you hear.
You will not agree with everything, but there's a huge amount of opportunity for common ground on some of these most important matters.
In this case, although it's aimed at Left-wing radicals could just as easily be weaponized against people on the right who are dissidents as well and I'm thrilled that you're somebody who's willing to kind of stand up and say we need to denounce this regardless of who it's aimed at because that is the only way to stop this kind of stuff is by embracing the principle involved and then demanding it be enforced regardless of who Who's name it's being violated in order to criminalize.
So I'm thrilled you came on, Nick.
I really appreciate it always.
You're definitely gonna be back on, I hope.
And I hope people continue to watch your program on YouTube and your podcast as well.
Yeah, Glenn, this show is always extremely fun to do.
I'll be live on Revolutionary Blackout with Midwestern Marks, and we're going to be talking about the government crackdown on free speech and the black socialism.
We're going to do some debunking of the Ukraine war like we always do on our channel, so make sure you check us out on Revolutionary Blackout.
Thank you for having me on, Glenn.
It's always a pleasure, Nick.
Thanks.
Keep up the great work.
Good night.
Thank you.
So that concludes our show for this evening.
As always, we will be back tomorrow night at 7 o'clock p.m.
exclusively here on Rumble.
For those of you who want to listen to podcasts, we post each system update on podcast roughly 12 hours or so after we first air live here on Rumble.
So you can follow us on Spotify, on Apple.
Following us and rating us actually helps the show in terms of visibility.
As a reminder as well, every Tuesday and Thursday night we have our After Show on Locals in order to hear your feedback, to respond to your critiques, and take your suggestions for topics and guests and the like.
If you want to have access to that After Show, all you have to do is join our Locals community by clicking the Join button, the red button right underneath the video on the Rumble page.
For those who have been watching, we're super appreciative.
We hope to see you back at our regular time tomorrow night and every night at 7 p.m.
