All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 17, 2024 - System Update - Glenn Greenwald
01:22:41
Another Trump Assassination Attempt: What Caused It, and Who Is To Blame?

TIMESTAMPS:  Intro (0:00)  Another Assassination Attempt (4:41)  Outro (1:21:12) - - - Watch full episodes on Rumble, streamed LIVE 7pm ET. Become part of our Locals community - - -  Follow Glenn: Twitter Instagram Follow System Update:  Twitter Instagram TikTok Facebook LinkedIn Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
.
It's Monday, September 16th.
Welcome to a new episode of System Update, our live nightly show that airs every Monday through Friday at 7 p.m.
Eastern, exclusively here on Rumble, the free speech alternative to YouTube.
Tonight, For the second time in the last two months, Donald Trump was the target of an evidently serious attempted assassination.
Unlike last time, the attempted assassin was not able to shoot Trump, but he came within a few hundred yards of him on the former president's golf course, packed with an AK-15 and other armaments.
Unlike the first shooter in Pennsylvania, who was strangely depicted as an utterly apolitical loner with no internet footprint who simply acted out of mental illness, This shooter, identified as 58-year-old Ryan Wesley Ruth, has expressed all sorts of clear political statements over the year, including increasing levels of animosity toward Donald Trump.
His principal political project over the last two years has been a fanatical devotion to supporting Ukraine.
To the point that he went to Ukraine and tried to position himself as some sort of leading American coordinator of foreign volunteer troops, and repeatedly pledged that he would die for Ukraine against Russia if necessary.
Just five months ago, in April, he begged Joe Biden on Twitter to please win the 2024 election, since, echoing the standard liberal pundit view that, quote, democracy is on the ballot, and Trump is a grave threat to it.
He sounded like anyone in MSNBC does.
We'll examine what we know about this attempted assassin of Trump, the reality, versus widespread media claims about him.
And then beyond that, it is very common for Trump supporters to be accused of having incited violence through their political rhetoric.
I still remember when Tucker Carlson was widely blamed, by consensus, for the white nationalist shooter in Buffalo who killed 10 African Americans despite literally no evidence that the shooter even knew who Tucker Carlson was.
Let alone that he was inspired by anything he said.
And even if he had listened to Tucker Carlson, this theory that that would make somebody expressing political views responsible for the violent acts of those who hear them is extremely dubious, I'd argue even dangerous.
And yet, every time someone acts in the name of a common, identifiable, liberal ideology with the goal of attempting violence against someone on the right, the whole dynamic reverses.
Not only can liberals never stand accused of so-called stochastic terrorism, this theory that protected political speech can incite violence and that renders the speaker responsible for the acts of others even if they use violence, but somehow, at least in this case, there is a widespread media narrative that Trump and his rhetoric are to blame for having incited two murder attempts against himself in the last two months and that the only way to solve it is for Trump To lower the temperature and change his rhetoric.
We'll examine all of this, obviously, when there are two political attempted assassinations of a leading political candidate, a former president, within a scope of two months.
There's a lot of important things to analyze.
Before we get to all that, we are, first of all, encouraging our viewers to download the Rumble app.
If you do so, it works both on your smart TV and telephone.
And then if you do that, you can activate notifications, which we hope you will, which means the minute any of those shows that you follow on the platform begin broadcasting live on it, you will be immediately notified by email or text, however you want, and you can click on the link and begin watching immediately.
It really helps the live viewing numbers of every program and therefore the free speech cause of Rumble itself.
As another reminder, System Update is also available in podcast form.
You can listen to every episode 12 hours after the first broadcast live here on Rumble on Spotify, Apple, and all the major podcasting platforms.
If you rate, review, and follow our show there, it really does help spread the visibility of the program.
Finally, every Tuesday and Thursday night, once we're done with our live show here on Rumble, we move to Locals, which is part of the Rumble platform, where we have our live interactive after show, We take your questions, respond to your feedback and critiques, hear your suggestions for future guests and shows.
That aftershow is available solely for members of our Locals community, so if you want to join, which gives you access not only to those twice-a-week aftershows, but to many interactive features we have on the platform.
It's the place we publish a lot of original written and video content that is available only on that platform.
It is where we publish written, professionalized transcripts of every program we broadcast here.
We published that there the following day.
And most of all, it is the community on which we really do rely to support the independent journalism that we're doing here every night.
Simply click the Join button right below the video player on the Rumble page, and it will take you directly to that community.
For now, welcome to a new episode of System Update, starting right now.
There are so many things that are historically unique about the 2024 presidential election, beginning with the fact that the person who is representing one of the major two, part two major parties as its nominee, did not campaign for that office, did not participate in any debates to express her did not participate in any debates to express her views, did not sit for any interviews, did not receive even a single vote for the president.
from her party, nor try to get any vote for it, and yet was just imposed on the party and then the country three months before the election.
But another obviously historical fact that people are going to remember for a long time, that historians will study, is that the other presidential candidate, a former president of the United States, Donald Trump, has been targeted with two quite serious assassination attempts within a period of just two months.
Now, the only comparable historical example to that is when the President Gerald Ford, who became president when Richard Nixon resigned, and Gerald Ford, based on an agreement, became president in exchange for pardoning Nixon.
He had two assassination attempts within a 17-day period, one from a woman who was a part of the Charles Manson cult, and the other, a woman who was mentally ill.
But in those cases, there was no real proximity to Ford.
The first Charles Manson follower did get kind of closed to him, but as soon as she pulled out her gun, which didn't work, the Secret Service was able to apprehend her.
But in none of those cases, neither was there any political motivation at all.
One was a Charles Manson follower and the other was simply mentally unstable and there was no political component to it, not even arguably.
In Trump's case, certainly this last shooter had a very clear and strong political ideology and worldview that generated immense animus toward Donald Trump, particularly when it came to Ukraine.
But not only, he also had been convinced by pretty much everyone in the Democratic Party and in the liberal media has been attempting to persuade people to believe for the last eight years that Donald Trump poses an existential threat to democracy.
That's something he repeatedly said.
And then a week after the presidential debate where there was a strong suggestion from ABC's David Moore that Donald Trump actually didn't even want Ukraine to win, couldn't even say that he wanted Ukraine to win the primary political priority of the shooter.
He goes to a golf course of Donald Trump's and tries to murder him and came pretty close.
He was just a few hundred yards away.
Had Trump been able to advance on the golf course just a little bit, he would have had a clean shot at him with an AK-15.
And it was really by luck that the Secret Service saw this little part of the weapon sticking out from a bush and then shot at the shooter.
He then ran away, picked up his car, got on the highway, and then the police apprehended him.
Here from the New York Times in their report this morning, just compiling what was known this morning, Trump safe after what FBI describes as an assassination attempt.
Quote, the Federal Bureau of Investigation said it was investigating what appeared to be a second assassination attempt on former President Donald J. Trump.
Former President Trump was playing golf on Sunday afternoon in Florida when a secret service agent spotted a man with a rifle standing by a chain-link fence on the perimeter of the course, law enforcement officials said.
The suspected gunman was identified as Ryan Wesley Ralph, 58, of Hawaii, according to a law enforcement official.
Mr. Ralph was interviewed by the New York Times in 2023, last year.
For an article about Americans volunteering to aid the war effort in Ukraine, Mr. Ralph, who had no military experience, said he had traveled to the country after Russia's invasion in 2022 to recruit Afghan soldiers to fight there.
He told the Times he once visited Washington to meet with politicians to strengthen support for Ukraine.
Quote, I'm just a U.S.
citizen that's helping out, he told the Times.
There's all kinds of evidence that he was, in fact, in Ukraine, including all sorts of photographs that he posted to social media, all kinds of people in Ukraine who knew him.
And there's no doubt he went to Ukraine with the explicit attempt of doing everything possible to aid the Ukrainian cause, and he made very clear that his goal was the destruction of all of Russia, the murder of Vladimir Putin, regime change, and basically blowing Russia to little bits and pieces, something he was insisting was our moral obligation to do.
Again, aligning himself very closely with not only the Democratic Party, you remember every single member of the Democratic Party has that same view of Ukraine, Every single one of them voted to fuel and fund the war with tens of billions of dollars, in fact hundreds of billions, who believe it's our moral obligation to do everything possible to fight that war, help Ukraine fight that war and win, no matter what risks we incur.
But he also, as I said, went beyond that and began having serious anti-Trump animus, despite having said he voted for Trump in 2016, something he claimed he came to regret very deeply.
And by 2022 or 23, he viewed Trump as the gravest threat, which was very clearly at least a factor, a major factor, in why he tried to kill him.
Now, the first shooter is something we still know very little about.
Despite being 20 years old, he had almost no online presence.
And yet he got very close to Trump, had Trump in his sights, actually hit Trump with one of his bullets, killed one of the persons attending Trump's rally in Pennsylvania, severely wounded another.
And we were told, oh, look, there's no political motive to it.
This is just an apolitical owner.
And now two months later, someone with a clear political agenda tried to murder Donald Trump.
Despite how clear this is, the corporate wing of the media, the part that is devoted to the Democratic Party, is trying to run interference to say, oh, it's impossible to decipher this person's political views despite everything I just got done saying.
He's just kind of a freak, some kind of crazy person who seems to have been all over the map, just another second mentally ill person bereft of any real politics.
Hear from Time Magazine.
Also today, quote, the suspect arrested in relation to the shooting at Trump's golf course in Ford on Sunday has been identified as Ryan Ruth, a 58 year old with unclear political ideology.
I just want to let's highlight this part here because I think I've already expressed enough facts that make that remarkably deceitful to say that he has an unclear political ideology.
I think they're saying that because he voted for Donald Trump in 2016, but then immediately or shortly thereafter said how much he was disappointed in Trump and regrets having done that.
He then at some point supported Tulsi Gabbard, saying she should run on a ticket with Vivek Ramaswamy to defeat Trump.
Remember, Tulsi Gabbard was at the time, very recently, a member of the Democratic Party.
She endorsed Bernie Sanders in 2016.
She ran for president as a Democrat in 2020.
And then when she pulled out of the race, she endorsed Joe Biden over Donald Trump.
But if you look at his tweets and everything else he said, including a video he recorded while in Ukraine, It's beyond clear.
There's nothing unclear about his political ideology.
He's basically a never-Trump neocon.
He wants to have the U.S.
go to war to protect Taiwan against China.
He's fanatically supportive of the Democratic policy, the Biden-Harris policy of fueling the war in Ukraine, which a lot of Republicans, almost in the higher establishment wing of the Republican Party also supports.
And it says here he has a history of praising Iran and supporting Ukraine.
Iran has been supplying weapons to Russia.
He wasn't praising Iran, he was asking Iran to help kill Vladimir Putin.
That's what he was urging Iran to do.
Here is a video that was first published in Newsweek Romania in June of 2022, so just three or four months after Russia massively invaded Ukraine, where he is in Ukraine being interviewed by a Ukrainian who speaks English with a clear Ukrainian accent about why he's in Ukraine and what he's hoping to accomplish.
So you are working with an international legend?
Yes.
And you are trying to convince people to help, to donate and to join?
My final question is what would you say to the people in order to convince them to join the International Legion or to donate for it or to be involved in the humanitarian aid to Ukraine?
It's just extremely important, the whole thing, as far as joining the military.
You know, yes, if you have some military experience or know people with military experience.
Encouraging them to come and fight.
We have units all over the place.
So, you know, there were some leadership issues initially, but we've got so many units available to us.
Georgian, Crimean, Ukrainian, Territorial Defense, Foreign Legion.
We have, you know, so many paramilitary groups.
I can put, I put a 74-year-old Japanese guy in a unit.
So, you know, we have girls in units.
So we have two girls that are in the unit up the street.
So any gender, any age, any skill level to no skill level.
But yeah, if you want to fight, come here and see me.
And I'll put you in a unit so you can go fight.
Regardless of that, we should have thousands upon thousands of people standing here with the Ukrainians.
This made the square an independent square.
We should have millions of people in this square, filling this square from every country around the world.
And while we don't, I don't understand.
I'm here every day with all the flags from all the supporting countries, with the memorials for the people that have died.
And, you know, I've had several people come.
But just a handful, you know?
So it blows my mind that I'm standing here alone without thousands of people from every country, from Asia, from Africa, from Australia, from Canada, from everywhere in South America, every place.
Europe.
Yeah, Europe, everywhere.
We need everybody here.
You know, if you have no skills, just come.
We need to be cheerleaders.
Just being here and saying, hey, I support They're Ukrainians and I support human rights and I support good and generosity and caring and kindness and altruism.
We need to show the world that we care.
It's essential.
If you don't do any work at all, just being here and supporting and showing them that we care, we care for our fellow human beings, is the most important thing we can do.
Now just to be clear, that video was 10 minutes long.
It was very, it went very much in that vein.
And I personally look at that and I don't see an insane person.
I see somebody who's very genuine, who's very clear-headed about how he sees the war in Ukraine and how he sees Russia.
He repeatedly says he sees it as good versus evil.
He has been convinced by the prevailing Western media narrative, convinced by the American media narrative that this is a fight of good versus evil, that there's no worse monster maybe in history, but certainly now, than Vladimir Putin.
And that people all over the West should be going there and risking their lives and fighting and willing to die as he said he was for Ukraine.
This is not somebody who's babbling incoherently, who has some kind of set of all sorts of conflicting views out of mental illness.
I could show you all 10 minutes and it was just like that.
Very coherent, very clear about what he thinks.
It fits right in.
He could go on any MSNBC show.
Or write for any Never Trump neocon site like the Bulwark founded by Bill Kristol or the Dispatch founded by Jonah Goldberg.
Any of those sites, he would fit right in.
There's apparently one tweet that wasn't completely pro-Israel.
He showed a map and he said, I don't understand the historical basis for Israel's claim to this land.
It was like a very earnest question.
And he even said, maybe they have a historical claim to Judea, which is the term that, uh, Israeli militarists used for the West Bank, and he said, I think Israel has a potentially historic claim.
So a lot of people are trying to say, oh, he's anti-Israel.
That means that he's some leftist.
He wasn't anti-Israel.
He just asked that one question that was, I believe, the only tweet he ever had or any mention he had of that topic.
But what clearly is the topic that animates him the most is the war in Ukraine, and then eventually became Trump's threat to democracy.
Here, I think, is one of the most interesting things is, Last year, the New York Times considered him sufficiently important in the attempt to create an international volunteer force led by Americans to try and gather people from around the world, encourage them as Vladimir Zelensky urged people to do at the start of the war, Westerners who support the Ukrainian cause to come to Ukraine and fight.
He took that call very seriously.
He himself went.
And here's the New York Times yesterday recounting their experience with the A suspected shooter.
The title is, Suspected gunman said he was willing to fight and die in Ukraine.
Text, In a telephone interview with the New York Times in 2023, Mr. Ralph was in Washington.
He spoke with the self-assuredness of a seasoned diplomat who thought his plans to support Ukraine's war effort were sure to succeed.
He appeared to have little patience for anyone who got in his way when American foreign fighters seemed to talk down to him in a Facebook message he shared with the New York Times.
Mr. Ralph said, quote, he needs to be shot.
In the interview, Mr. Ralph said he was in Washington to meet with the U.S.
Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe, known as the Helsinki Commission, quote, for two hours to help push for more support for Ukraine.
That commission is led by members of Congress and staffed by Congressional Age and it is influential on matters of democracy and security and has been very vocal in supporting Ukraine.
And here is this committee of bipartisan members of the House, almost all of whom are fanatical supporters of the war in Ukraine, which apparently he met with when he went to Washington about these efforts to encourage troops to go to Ukraine.
And here you see the chairman of the committee is Joe Wilson of South Carolina.
It has Steve Cohen of Tennessee, who's the ranking member.
And then people like Ruben Gallego, who's now running for the Senate in Arizona, all of Mike Waller of New York, all these people who are joined, united, vehement supporters of this bipartisan foreign policy that includes supporting Ukraine, but so much else.
And then in the Senate, You see the co-chair are Ben Cardin of Maryland, and ranking member Roger F. Wicker of Mississippi, Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, Tim Scott of South Carolina, Gene Shaheen of New Hampshire.
All these people who are just Mr. Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, these are all fanatical supporters of the war in Ukraine, and also fanatical supporters of having Americans pay for and fuel and fund Israel's military and all of its wars.
They have the same ideology, even though they're technically nominally two different parties.
And that's the commission with whom he met.
Now, I think that this has always been one of the understated reasons to be so concerned about the war in Ukraine.
Historically, when the United States or any Western country floods some war zone with highly sophisticated weaponry, and now we're talking about tanks and fighter jets and long range ballistic missiles.
Those always end up somewhere that we then have to go and fight.
And beyond where those weapons go, and you're talking about pouring immense amounts of weaponry into the most corrupt country in Europe by far, in the middle of a war zone where nothing is being tracked, where there's hundreds of billions of dollars flowing of American and European money.
And beyond the question of where these weapons are going to go, it's attracting a lot of fanatics.
A lot of highly violent people.
Who else would go to Ukraine from the West in order to volunteer to fight on the front lines with Ukraine against the Russian army?
Just people who are looking for violence, who are looking for some kind of escape from their lives.
Maybe people who get convinced that that's the moral thing to do, but clearly this person is one of them.
And it's completely unsurprising if you've participated at all in the Ukraine-Russia debate or the debate over U.S.
policy toward Ukraine.
These fanatical supporters of the Ukraine war are among the most extremist people you will ever meet.
They're unstable, they're violent, they're just connected into the crudest, most vulgar discourse of war.
And when you spend years, and this is also an understated impact of a country going to war, I used to talk about this a lot during the War on Terror, when you just spend years demonizing an enemy as Hitler, the Nazis, the pure embodiment of evil, you talk about the need to destroy them and blow them up and bomb them to smithereens and kill that country and destroy their country and the glories of war, and you just keep connecting to that mentality,
You're going to come back from a war zone oriented toward violence and extremism.
Not everyone, of course.
I mean, members of the US military are professionally trained not to be that way, and yet a lot of them come back with all kinds of problems with their mental health as well.
It's one of the tragedies of sending people to unnecessary wars, not just that they're killed or physically wounded, but their mental health is affected as well.
And I would expect a lot more people than just this one.
Who have been so radicalized about the war in Ukraine and talking about weapons and destruction and violence and killing and just watching that every day, let alone ones who go there, who are so committed to this ideology that they actually go there.
He has nothing to offer.
He's a 58 year old with no military training, but he went and claimed at least that he was a key part of the international volunteer force that was coordinating foreign fighters coming from places like Afghanistan or even the West to help the Ukrainians fight the Americans.
There's some indication he may have exaggerated his role, but he was clearly there enough for the New York Times and other media outlets to have interviewed him about what he was doing in Ukraine and what he was doing back in Washington.
Now,
The other, I think, darkly hilarious aspect of this attempt to say, oh, we just have no idea what his ideology is, so confusing, just indiscernible, he's just crazy, is this tweet from April 2022 of this year, where he tweeted directly at POTUS, the President of the United States, who at the time was Joe Biden, and this is what he wrote to Joe Biden, quote, your campaign should be called something like K-A-D-A-F, keep America democratic and free.
It's an acronym that rolls off the tongue.
We are the cutoff movement.
Keep America democratic and free.
Trump's slogan, however, should be MASA, M-A-S-A, make Americans slave again, master.
And then he said this, which every single liberal, every single Democrat on television with a column that I know has said or written this at some point in the last eight years, quote, democracy, all caps, Is on the ballot and we cannot lose.
We cannot afford to fail.
The world is counting on us to show the way.
So what is unclear about this?
You tell me.
He's begging Joe Biden to win the 2024 election on the ground that Trump wants to make American slaves, whereas Joe Biden, the Democrats want to keep America democratic and free.
And he's saying democracy is on the ballot, meaning the only way we can save American democracy is if we vote for Joe Biden or the Democrats and against Donald Trump.
The whole world, he said, is counting on us to show the way.
Does that sound like an unclear or difficult to decipher political perspective?
He wrote a, I guess you could call it a, well, here's another tweet, actually, that he wrote, just to give you a sense of the kind of things he was thinking.
Right around the same time, April 21st, 2024, just four months ago, And he tweeted this to Elon Musk, where he wrote, quote, I would like to buy a rocket from you.
I wish to load it with a warhead for Putin's Black Sea mansion bunker to send him.
Can you give me a price, please?
It can be old and used as not returning.
So this is the kind of thing that, I mean, there's a little dark humor in that, a little black humor in that, that I can recognize.
But when you're, this is what you're thinking about and what you're connecting to, this kind of destructive war-oriented mentality every single day.
To the point where you get so carried away that you actually volunteer to go to a war zone.
It's highly unlikely that you're going to come back at some point violent and unstable.
And obviously, that's exactly what we got.
It's very unlikely that he's going to be the only person like this spreading out to who knows where with who knows what weapons once this conflict is concluded.
In 2023, he wrote a manifesto of sorts that he entitled Unwinnable War by Ryan Ralph.
And the sub headline was the fatal flaw of democracy, world abandonment and the global citizen.
Taiwan, Afghanistan, North Korea, World War Three and the end of humanity is only four months ago.
Quote, why is Putin not been assassinated?
The swirling question in every chat around the world as to why Putin has not yet been killed.
I have asked many occasions of countless people in Ukraine to cross over into Russia and smuggle ourselves to Moscow to handle the job, but all hell loses its courage and will to make something happen.
The entire world runs in height in fear of Putin.
Just because he has nuclear weapons.
Why has the world been afraid of Russia for the last 100 years or 300 or 1,000 years when we have the power to end it?
We must strike first.
We must give Ukraine back all of their nuclear warheads that we took away with the only stipulation that they all be used.
So not only are we supposed to give Ukraine a whole pile of nuclear weapons, the condition for giving them to that is they must use them all against Russia.
Quote, we must instigate this war and push the issue to the end.
Sadly, the U.S.
and the world has likewise failed Venezuela and won Guaido.
Yet another neocon view that we should be toppling the government of Venezuela, that Juan Guaido, that person we said, was the legitimate president of Venezuela.
I remember when Nancy Pelosi led the joint session of Congress, and she introduced him as the rightful president of Venezuela, and both parties stood up and applauded for them, even though Juan Guaido has never received a single vote for a president in his life, let alone won an election to become president.
We just decreed that the rightful president of Venezuela was Juan Guaido, and this is what he's echoing as well, but he's saying, quote, sadly, the U.S.
and the world has likewise failed Venezuela and Juan Guaido, and democracy has dissolved quickly under our watchful eye.
We have failed yet again.
Furthermore, we have mirrored their devastating events with their own catastrophe on January 6th, perpetrated by Donald Trump and his undemocratic posse.
Look at how confused and impossible to decipher His political views are, we have, he says, he writes, we have mirrored their devastating events, Venezuelans, with our own catastrophe on January 6th, perpetrated by Donald Trump and his undemocratic posse.
Posse.
Everything that he writes, pretty much, would fit very well on the New York Times op-ed page, even more so on MSNBC, more still on one of those new neocon Never Trump sites.
I mean, this is pure neocon ideology.
We have to go around the world importing democracy, overthrowing governments that we think are undemocratic.
And obviously this turned into, as it usually does, a fanatical anti-Trump position since Trump has essentially been saying that this is exactly what we shouldn't be doing.
We shouldn't be going around the world trying to overthrow governments, install better governments or new governments.
We should only fight wars when our national security is at stake.
And so if you believe in this neocon worldview, It is going to manifest at some point as fanatical anti-Trumpism, which is why Dick Cheney and Bill Kristol and that whole gang are supporting Kamala Harris.
He went on, quote, it seems that the Putin mindset is winning across the globe, as even the supporters of Bolsonaro in Brazil behaved like uncivilized brats as well.
As the International Legion struggles for the simplest of vehicles to get soldiers at the front line, And Malcolm, meaning Malcolm Nance, the MSNBC analyst or commentator who also made a big showing of himself going to Ukraine.
As Malcolm is forced to buy his own computers for HQ and Stu to buy lights and cars and the basic necessities, it makes one wonder where all the U.S.
funding is going.
I mean, again, you can say whatever you want about him.
But the idea that, oh, he has this very confused mental illness that makes it impossible to understand what he's saying, he's very coherent.
It's so easily recognizable in that worldview.
It's so easy to identify exactly what it is.
He's writing it in very clear terms.
Now this idea of foreign fighters going to Ukraine was first raised by President Zelensky in the early part of the war back in February of 2022.
There you see it.
Ukraine appeals for foreign volunteers to join fight against Russia.
President Zelensky issued calls to arms to foreign nationals in the battle against quote Russian war criminals.
Now, on some level, I have to say that the people who insisted that this war was some sort of existential threat to the United States, that it was the great cause of our lifetime, I almost respect the people more who actually answered President Zelensky's calls, where he was saying, like, if you're, like, a fighting capability, if you're a fighting age, and you're saying you support the Ukrainian cause, putting our flags nearby, or whatever, get offline!
Come and help us fight!
The Russian army knew that this massive size difference between the two countries by itself would ensure that eventually Ukraine would lose.
And so few people answered that call, preferring instead to make themselves so strong and tough and powerful, writing more and more columns about how we have to send more and more Ukrainians, including ones increasingly unwilling to fight, to go die in that war.
But at least This assassin or would-be assassin, along with people like Malcolm Nance, actually followed that insanity to its logical conclusion by actually going to Ukraine and doing what Zelensky said, but very few did.
Here is the original article that focused on people like Ryan Routh and Malcolm Nance and some of these Utterly crazy people who went to Ukraine, started wildly exaggerating their credentials and what they were doing there.
This is from March of 2023, quote, stolen valor, the US volunteers in Ukraine who lie, waste and bicker.
Quote, people who would not be allowed anywhere near the battlefield in the U.S.-led war are active on the Ukrainian front with ready access to American weapons.
Quote, they rushed to Ukraine by the thousands, many of them Americans, who promised to bring military experience, money, or supplies to the battleground of a righteous war.
Hometown newspapers hailed their commitment, and donors backed them with millions of dollars.
Now, after a year of combat, many of these homespun groups of volunteers are fighting with themselves and undermining the war effort.
Some have wasted money or stolen valor.
Others have cloaked themselves in charity while also trying to profit off the war record show.
One retired Marine Lieutenant Colonel from Virginia is the focus of a U.S.
federal investigation into the potentially illegal export of military technology.
A former army soldier arrived in Ukraine only to turn traitor and defect to Russia.
A Connecticut man who lied about his military service has posted live updates from the battlefield including his exact location and boasted about his easy access to I swear I don't sneeze ever except during the show.
About his easy access to American weapons.
A former construction worker is hatching a plan to use fake passports to smuggle in fighters from Pakistan and Iran.
And then here's where this article from 2023 talks about this suspected assassin.
Quote, Ryan Ralph, a former construction worker from Greensboro, North Carolina, is seeking recruits from among Afghan soldiers who fled the Taliban.
Mr. Routh, who spent several months in Ukraine last year, said he planned to move them, in some cases illegally, from Pakistan and Iran to Ukraine.
He said dozens of these trained Afghan fighters, trained by the U.S., had expressed interest.
Quote, we could probably purchase some passports through Pakistan, since it's such a corrupt country, he said in an interview from Washington.
It is not clear whether he has succeeded, but one former Afghan soldier said he had been contacted and was interested in fighting if it meant leaving Iran, where he was living illegally.
Malcolm Nance, a former Navy cryptologist and MSNBC commentator, arrived in Ukraine last year and made a plan to bring order and discipline to the Legion.
Instead, he became enmeshed in the chaos.
Today, Mr. Nance is involved in a messy, distracting power struggle.
He accused a pro-Ukraine fundraising group of fraud, providing no evidence.
After arguing with two Legion administrators, Mr. Nance wrote a, quote, counterintelligence report trying to get them fired.
Central to that report is an accusation that one Legion official, Amice Abigail Fyke, fraudulently tried to buy a house on an Australian reality TV show with money she said she didn't have.
He labeled her, quote, a potential Russian spy, offering no evidence.
Mr. Fake denied the, Ms.
Fake denied the accusations and remains with the Legion.
Mr. Nance has left Ukraine but continues fundraising with a new group of allies.
Malcolm Nance is an insane person.
I think he basically got excluded from every MSNBC show except Joy Reads.
I can't tell you how many times I've been called a Russian agent by Malcolm Nance.
He just states explicitly, oh, he's a paid agent of the Kremlin.
He says that pretty much about everybody.
But this is the circle that attracted people to...
The war in Ukraine, they created so much melodrama.
In fact, we've had in our possession for several months a lot of these documents about Malcolm Nance, by Malcolm Nance, revealing just some of the insanity around these American would-be fighters who went there claiming they were going to organize an international legion of fighters.
And we just basically haven't reported on it because he's not significant enough.
But in light of his connection to this Trump assassin, would-be Trump assassin, in light of the kind of importance of understanding what this war is producing, And what impact it will have once the conflict ends for wherever they go, as we've just seen.
I think it's worth doing that reporting, so now we're going to hear from a video about the Azov Battalion, which you probably remember was formally classified as a neo-Nazi hate group until history needed to be revised and rewritten in order to support the Azov Battalion.
I mean, they were, for example, banned from, you could not praise the Azov Battalion on Facebook prior to February 2022 or you would be banned.
There were U.S.
laws in place prohibiting any American weapons from reaching the Azov Battalion because the Western consensus was that they were an actual Nazi group, that their allegiance was to various SS leaders and Ukrainian neo-Nazis who collaborated with Hitler during World War II.
They used Nazi insignia and they were the most prominent battalion in Ukraine.
And because Putin said one of the purposes of the war was to denazify Ukraine.
Remember, Russian history is steeped in the evils of Nazism.
They lost tens of millions of people in order to defeat Nazi Germany during World War II.
The Germans invaded Russia through Ukraine, which is why that part of the border is so sensitive.
Overnight, this history got rewritten.
You no longer were calling the Azov Battalion neo-Nazi.
In fact, they started just to be called nationalist, and then eventually there were many media articles just depicting them as heroic.
These heroic defenders of Ukrainian sovereignty from the Azov Battalion.
Just look at the power of propaganda.
They can take a group for 10 years and formally classify them as a neo-Nazi hate group, and then overnight, When they want to arm that group and rely on them to fight for the United States, the entire narrative reverses instantly, overnight, to the point where we now venerate the fighters, the heroic, courageous fighters of the Azov Battalion.
Anyway, here is a video from May of 2022, just three months after the war began.
So I don't think the Azov Battalion had time to do any of its reforms.
Even if they had done them, certainly not by May of 2022.
Remember, four months earlier, in January of 2022, the entire consensus of the West was that this was a neo-Nazi group.
And here's a video about the Azov battalion in which, you'll never guess who appears, Ryan Roof, the alleged attempted assassin of Donald Trump.
We are military men who are now in the city of Maripol.
We appealed to our president.
Please, Vladimir Zelensky, officially address the U.S.
representatives and put our wounded, the military garrison, on the lists and take away the bodies of the dead soldiers.
All the families and all of Ukraine are asking you to do this.
I am Azov, I am Mariupol, I am Ukraine.
Sorry, it's really hard, but the purpose of the action Now there you see, at the rally, pretty small rally, Ryan Ruth, who went to an Azov rally.
Wearing his American uniform.
And there's some conflict that this was presented as and appeared to be a video produced by the Azov Italian.
Some Ukraine supporters online are claiming that Azov didn't produce this.
It was just about Azov.
It was open to anybody.
But nonetheless, you can just see the extremism from the start of aligning with the most extremist groups in Ukraine, which are pretty much the only real fighters at this point.
We have interviewed many times the American-Ukrainian journalist Lev Golonkin, and back in June of 2023, writing in The Nation, he documented, quote, the Western media is whitewashing the Azov battalion.
Before Russia invaded Ukraine, these fighters were neo-Nazis.
They still are.
And he's a Ukrainian Jewish writer, so he's particularly sensitive to the presence of Nazi battalions inside Ukraine for obvious reasons.
And he wrote, quote, In November of 2014, Kiev sought to gain control of the Azov battalion by absorbing it into the government.
Azov became a regiment in Ukraine's National Guard, which made it a potential direct recipient of American aid.
The prospect of organized white fanatics being aided by the U.S.
quickly came to the attention of Congress.
Where lawmakers attempted to ban the Pentagon from working with Azov, though they were ultimately unsuccessful.
Later in 2018, a ban on US military aid to the Azov regiment did pass.
The media also ramped up scrutiny.
Quote, volunteer Ukrainian unit includes Nazis, U.S.
Today reported in March 2015.
The Daily Beast followed with a piece titled, quote, how many neo-Nazis is the U.S.
backing in Ukraine?
By 2021, the Azov movement's position as a premier hub of transnational white supremacy was firmly established.
It was tracked by researchers as fighters were banned from receiving military aid by Congress and it was kicked off Facebook.
The State Department declared its political wing a, quote, nationalistic hate group.
But by 2023, February 2023, right when the war began, The Guardian was assuring its readers that, quote, Azov's fighters are now leading the defense of Maripol, insisting they have shed their previous dubious politics, dubious politics, and are rapidly becoming Ukrainian heroes.
The campaign believed to have recruited British far-right activists was now a thing of the past.
The BBC began to assert that although, quote, to Russia, they are neo-Nazis and their origins lie in a neo-Nazi group, the Azov regiment was being, quote, falsely portrayed as Nazi by Moscow.
Again, these were the same newspapers that for a decade, from a liberal perspective, were warning about the neo-Nazi Azov battalion and then overnight they just rewrote history and said, no, no, this group Even though in every one of those videos, including the one I showed you, you can see Neo-Nazi insignia decorating the uniforms and the flags and banners of the Azov group.
That really shocked me, how easily and blatantly they can just rewrite history on a dime.
When their support for a war requires them to do so.
Sometimes, no matter how much you think about propaganda and how intense it is in corporate media in the United States and in the West more broadly, when you see those kind of things it still remains stunning.
Early in the war, Facebook actually lifted its formal ban on the Azov group, said it's no longer a hate group, and then the United States government followed suit from the Washington Post in June of 2024.
Quote, the U.S.
lifts weapons ban on Ukrainian military unit.
Quote, the decision was made following a State Department review of the Azov Brigade, a one-time militia, now part of Ukraine's National Guard.
So I want to talk in a little bit about How this attempted assassination and this person's politics who tried to murder Trump are being depicted and discussed by the parts of the media that are primarily devoted to sabotaging Donald Trump, his campaign in 2016, his presidency from 2017 to 2021, and now his second, his third campaign for president.
But I just want to emphasize that This country that we're involved in, this war that we are heavily intricately connected to, going on its fourth full year, is one that is corrupting and radicalizing so many people, not just in Ukraine, but throughout the West.
And that's the reason why people are willing to do something almost as insane as trying to murder Trump on his golf course, which is provide long-range missiles to Ukraine, encourage them to use them to strike deep inside Russia, even though, as the Russian government has pointed out, NATO involvement is required for those attacks and will make the West a direct belligerent in a conflict with Russia, something that during the Cold War we were obsessed with avoiding and were able to do.
And then you add to that all the things that are put into our discourse constantly about how anyone questions the war in Ukraine is a Russian agent.
That was the main theme of the debate when David Murrah repeatedly harassed Trump to say, I'm cheering for Ukraine to win and implied strongly as did Kamala Harris that he's a Russian agent.
And this kind of thing put into the atmosphere, along with things like Donald Trump and his movement, are not just an ideological adversary, but instead are some kind of existential threat.
They're going to impose a dictatorship, a white nationalist dictatorship.
They're going to end American democracy, of course.
When you link that to, especially the cause of Ukraine, which has been the number one political priority of Washington for the last three years, is going to produce all sorts of violence and all sorts of instability.
So if you're somebody who in the past has argued that people who espouse extremist rhetoric are responsible for those who hear it and then commit violence in the name, a theory that I've often rejected and still do, but if you're somebody who has insisted upon this,
There's absolutely no question that all that Democratic Party and liberal rhetoric, repeated and echoed perfectly by this attempted assassin of Donald Trump, clearly was a major part of what formed his thinking and his worldview and his political motives.
Enough to first get him to go to Ukraine and then wait on a golf course where Donald Trump was playing with an AK-15 in the attempt to murder the former president.
Have you ever sat down in the morning and drank your coffee and then wondered like, hey, what's really in this cup of coffee that I'm consuming?
Because studies have shown that 45% of commercially available coffee beans contain mold toxins, and nearly a third of that survives the roasting process.
That's what you're consuming into your body, mold toxins.
7075 Coffee is a product that Rumble has produced itself as a model for insulating itself from pressures on its advertisers that come from media virtually every week.
And they believe in doing better.
Rubble does.
Their beans are grown high in the Bolivian mountains where the cool climate slows growth.
It results in denser beans with bold concentrated flavors.
Only about 30% of the world's coffee is single-origin like 70-75 coffee.
So when you choose it, you're not just getting coffee, you're getting a rare top-shelf experience without the risk of ingesting toxic mold.
Rumble, and it's the reason why we're here, stands for quality, freedom, and pushing back against the big corporate suppression and coercion that's taken up so much over the coffee industry, as well as the internet.
And at least being open to and sampling and trying Rumble's products is a real way that you can further the cause of preserving free speech on the internet.
You can do that by going to 1775coffee.com slash glen.
And if you use the code Glenn, you will have 10% off of your first order.
So we just laid out all the facts of who this assassin is, what his clear political ideology is, what the implications are of what he's been doing and what his brain has been drowned with for a long time.
So I want to just assess what the media reaction has been because obviously the shooter's ideology is their ideology.
There's almost nobody in the media who opposes the war in Ukraine, the corporate media.
And if you do, you're pretty much formally denounced as a useful idiot of Russia or Kremlin asset, whatever.
And obviously, they can't go on air and say, oh, he was driven by our ideology, pro-war, bipartisan, foreign policy, anti-Trump fanaticism.
Obviously, I'm not going to do that or say that.
So the question is, how are they going to Obscure this.
I showed you a little bit before where they're trying to pretend.
Oh, we read through all his tweets.
It's so impossible to know what his politics are.
It's like really weird.
He's just a weirdo.
He has no politics.
No coherent politics.
In a Hartford affiliate yesterday, they called on a professor who's at something called the University of New Haven.
They claimed he was one of the premier experts and scholars in national security and counterterrorism.
And they asked him about what he thinks drove the attempted assassin of Donald Trump.
AND HERE'S WHAT HE HAD TO SAY.
He started by saying, look, we don't want our presidential candidates to be assassinated.
According to Rob Sanders, the distinguished- That is an incredibly sophisticated, profound, and remarkable admission.
He started by saying, look, we don't want our presidential candidates to be assassinated.
And then he went on to say, but- Sanders, the distinguished lecturer of national security at the University of New Haven.
The two assassination attempts on presidential candidate Donald Trump are a reflection of the actions of political leaders and the overall political climate in our country.
Violence has increased in part due to Donald Trump's own actions.
Okay, let's think of any other, literally any other situation.
Where somebody is targeted with unjust violence, where they're an attempted victim of an assassination or murder.
Is there any other instance in which we're permissible to go on air and say, oh, he bears a lot of blame for his own victimhood.
There has been instances where people have said this before.
about in cases that produced a lot of controversy where a police officer murdered black people.
I remember in the case of Michael Brown, the New York Times, on the day that he died or the day after went and said, he's no angel.
He smoked pot and had been at parties before and people were infuriated.
That they would attempt to point out or suggest that he was somehow to blame for his own murder.
And of course, with Palestinians, that's done all the time.
Oh, yeah, well, they're up in Gaza.
They probably support Hamas.
But in general, imagine if somebody were to try and assassinate Kamala Harris or Joe Biden or Nancy Pelosi.
Do you think anywhere, anyone in the media would say, well, look, they're to blame in large part because of their rhetoric.
Their rhetoric is just so toxic, constantly demonizing other people who don't agree with them, calling them fascist and threats to all things decent, that when you do that and you inject that kind of violent rhetoric into the political sphere, you're going to produce violence that that when you do that and you inject that kind of violent rhetoric No one would—you say that, you'll get fired instantly.
You say that about Kamala Harris, so she's to blame.
Someone tries to kill her, gets close to doing so.
Oh, well, she bears a lot of the blame for it because of the way she speaks.
It's remarkable.
Here's the rest of what he said.
Due to Donald Trump's own actions, But it's also increased due to the divisiveness of the nation right now in this political environment.
After today's incident in the July 13th assassination attempt, when Trump was grazed in the ear by a bullet, Sanders says Republican lawmakers are now asking that his Secret Service detail would have the same coverage of a sitting president rather than a candidate.
The perimeter surrounding the individual is larger.
There's a helicopter immediately in vicinity.
I don't know if they're going to do that, but there's at least an argument now for which to do so based on his second attempt.
All right, so obviously you need to be a very studied and learned high-level national security expert to be able to provide people with that wisdom that maybe a bigger perimeter of secret service agents might help in the future.
Who knows?
And also that it's the fault of this vague animosity in the air in our political discourse, but particularly Trump's fault.
No suggestion at all that it's the fault of anyone who spent eight years accusing Trump of being a traitor and a Russian agent, which, by the way, it's not the first time that this exact discourse calls people to engage in violence.
You probably recall the 2018 incident where a fanatical fan of Bernie Sanders and Rachel Maddow, who posted every day on his Facebook page what he was hearing from both of them, that Republicans in general are selling the country out to Russia.
This was behind a Russiagate.
That Trump was a fascist and a traitor?
He went to a softball field where he knew that Republican members of Congress, House members, gathered each weekend to play and he tried to murder as many as he could.
He shot one of the senior members of the House Republican caucus, Steve Scalise, and nearly killed him.
It blew apart his pelvis, several vital organs.
Scalise nearly died just from bleeding to death and then was interned in the hospital for weeks.
And of course, nobody said, oh, well, this is the sort of thing that's going to happen if you're Rachel Maddow and Bernie Sanders constantly accusing Trump of being a traitor and a threat to all things decent and a Russian agent, even though, of course, it is.
That's very likely to happen.
All political rhetoric might inspire people.
To go and engage in violence on behalf of that ideology, which is why I think we have to be extremely careful about the theory that if you express a political view which someone hears and then they go and get violent in the name of that ideology that somehow you're to blame.
And yet this is commonly asserted whenever the ideology that they are using violence in the name of is Trump.
The Trump movement, or MAGA, or right-wing populism, but it's never done, as in this case we just saw today, or yesterday, or in the case of that 2018 show.
No one blamed Bernie Sanders and Rachel Maddow, even though they obviously played a big role in radicalizing him to go act at the political motives that he had.
Here is Rachel Vindman.
She is the wife of our great national hero, that courageous whistleblower, Alexander Vindman, who generated the first Trump impeachment.
He's such a courageous Whistleblower has put himself in such danger that he turned into a major celebrity, wrote best-selling books, had an appearance on Curb Your Enthusiasm.
That's how you know that he really confronted power centers.
And he has since become, I believe, his background is Ukrainian, as is his wife's.
And these two are among the most fanatical supporters of the war in Ukraine and opponents of both Russia and Donald Trump.
And she went on to Twitter the day These are the people who constantly claim that they are worried about Donald Trump's incitement of violence through his treatment of toxic rhetoric or his indifference to violence, his attempt to incite violence.
No ears were harmed.
Carry on with your Sunday afternoon.
These are the people who constantly claim that they are worried about Donald Trump's incitement of violence through his treatment of toxic rhetoric or his indifference to violence, his attempt to incite violence.
Look at this.
Joy Reid spent weeks doubting that the first assassination even happened.
She's like, I have questions.
Here was Lester Holt, the anchor of NBC News, and here's how they reported this assassination attempt yesterday.
Today's apparent assassination attempt comes amid increasingly fierce rhetoric on the campaign trail itself.
Mr. Trump has running mate J.D.
Vance continue to make baseless claims about Haitian immigrants in Ohio.
I'm not a fan at all of what's being said about Haitian immigrants in Ohio.
I think it's often fabricated.
It's so over the top and it's a broad brush.
I think it is reasonable to say that some of that rhetoric can put people in serious danger.
I grew up in South Florida.
There's a big Haitian population there.
They're almost all hardworking people, members of the community, whatever.
These are all Haitian immigrants.
I grew up around a lot of them.
So I'm not on board with or cheering for what's being done, saying they're eating dogs and cats and some large number.
Of course, you're going to generate a lot of hatred if you do that.
I think some of the claims appear with no evidence.
It's perfectly fine to raise the issue of immigration generally at the point of particular towns where you can argue they're overburdened economically or culturally by the influx of massive numbers of new immigrants, illegal immigrants or legal immigrants.
That's completely legitimate within the grounds of basic discourse, of legitimate discourse.
But look at what Lester Holt did here.
He linked What the media had been claiming for days was the violent political rhetoric of Donald Trump and JD Vance to Donald Trump's assassination.
Again, basically saying like, hey, why is Donald Trump continuously doing things to incite people to go and murder him?
It's exactly the same as if you Report on a case of a victim of rape or attempted rape and then you say, look at the, you know, this rape comes as she's been fighting with her parents over the shortness of her skirts.
It's exactly the same.
It's pure victim blame.
Listen to this, how this was framed.
Today's apparent assassination attempt comes amid increasingly fierce rhetoric on the campaign trail itself.
Mr. Trump is running mate.
J.D.
Vance continued to make baseless claims about Haitian immigrants in Ohio.
This weekend, there were new bomb threats in that town.
Our Maggie Vespa is in Columbus, Ohio with more.
Lester, simply put, Springfield, Ohio has been inundated by threats over the last several days.
Why would you link those things?
You can argue on the one hand, as I just did, that some of the rhetoric about Haitian immigrants is excessive or baseless, without any evidentiary foundation, dangerous even.
What did it have to do with the rhetoric that caused someone to try and kill Donald Trump for the second time in 60 days?
You see what they're doing?
They're basically saying exactly that, that Donald Trump is responsible for his own attempted assassinations because he's the one who's somehow driving people who hate him to want to murder him.
And there's no attempt to wonder or even ask or interrogate whether a lot of the rhetoric about Donald Trump from Democrats, from liberals, from Never Trump fanatics over the last eight years, over the last four years, might be responsible in the same way that they're trying to link the rhetoric, the anti-immigrant rhetoric of Donald Trump and J.D.
Vance to Haitian populations in Ohio.
There's no counterattempt, even though I believe the ground is much, much stronger.
To suggest that all of this excessive maximalist rhetoric and demonization of Donald Trump and his movement, not as just another ideologically misguided force, but as some, as I said, Russian agent, traitor, dictator, Hitler-like figure.
If you spend years accusing somebody of being a Hitler-like figure, a dictator who wants to end American democracy, of course there's a strong likelihood that you're going to incentivize people to use violence to stop them.
It's almost rational.
If you really believe what you're saying, that he's like a Nazi-like figure, of course you're going to encourage and give people the rational justification to try and go do that, but there's no attempt made to interrogate how that rhetoric goes in both ways.
They're basically blaming Trump for inciting his own assassination.
Here is a reaction from the aforementioned Malcolm Nance, who knows the shooter, certainly knows of him.
Apparently he knows him.
The shooter spoke of him.
He spoke of the shooter.
And he went onto Twitter on September 16th, this morning, and he wrote the following quote.
Actually, he retweeted somebody else's tweet that said the following quote, MAGA Republicans have nobody to blame but themselves.
for the second assassination on Donald Trump.
And this actually became a pretty common theme.
Now, let me just make clear my view so that there's no confusion about it.
I have always been, both as a First Amendment lawyer and as a journalist, opposed to and concerned about this attempt to link people to the violent acts of others by saying that their political rhetoric, the expression of their protected political views, is what the expression of their protected political views, is what not only motivated the person to go and engage violence, which is fine, but that they are morally and even legally responsible.
And what prompted me to write about this in May of 2022, there you see the headline on the screen when I was at Substack, quote, The Demented and Selective Game of Instantly Blaming Political Opponents for Mass Shootings.
And the sub-headline, which is what I believe, is, quote, All Ideologies Spawn Psychopaths Who Kill Innocents in Its Name, Yet Only Some Are Blamed for Their Violent Adherence by Opportunists Cravenly Exploiting Corpses While They Still Lie on the Ground.
And this was from That grew out of the widespread assertion that Tucker Carlson had blood on his hands as a result of this white nationalist, this overt white supremacist who deliberately went to a predominantly black part of Buffalo into a supermarket where mostly black people were shopping and killed ten black people on purpose.
And then somehow they said Tucker Carlson was to blame, even though this person left a very long manifesto.
Citing his influences, none of which were Fox News or Tuck Carlson.
Tuck Carlson's name wasn't mentioned in this long manifesto.
There was no indication that this person even knew of Tuck Carlson and watched it, but instantly it was the attempt to say, this is how we're going to get Tuck Carlson off the air.
And that's what I really believe was that Tuck Carlson was going to be removed from the air as a result of this attempt to say he's too dangerous to go out in the air because he's inspiring violence in the name of people who hear him and agree with his ideology.
Now, set aside the utter fraudulent premise there that he agrees with the shooter's ideology.
In the case of the shooter, as we demonstrated, the ideology is so clear, he has been absorbing and ingesting for years the establishment rhetoric, the anti-Trump rhetoric about Ukraine, about Russia, about Trump's allegiance to Russia, about Trump's threat to democracy, and he clearly acted in the name of doing that.
He kept feeding on this liberal discourse, on this corporate media narrative.
And then went and acted based on that ideology.
So how is it that Tucker Carlson is to blame for the shooter who goes to Buffalo, even though there's no evidence at all that that shooter ever heard of Tucker Carlson, let alone was inspired by him or even had a similar worldview.
And yet St.
Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden and Kamala Harris and Rachel Maddow aren't responsible, aren't with blood on their hands from either the first Trump assassination or the second one.
That's how it's exploited and weaponized.
Now, Tucker Carlson went to Australia to speak at the Australian Freedom Conference in June of this year, just a couple months ago, and there was a reporter who tried to confront him to essentially blame him for inspiring violence in the name of the Great Replacement Theory, the Great White Replacement Theory, and violence, and this is what happened.
I must say, one of the reasons people don't like people like you, in the media, is that you never say exactly what you mean.
Your slurs are all by implication, and you're about to tell me the great replacement theory, or as you say, idea, that has inspired the New York Buffalo shooting where 11 white Americans were killed.
Oh God, come on!
You know what I mean?
It's also inspired... It's not, first of all... It's inspired one of the worst Australian guns of all time.
How do they get people this stupid in the media?
I guess it doesn't pay well.
Look, I'm sorry, I've lived among people like you for too long, and I don't mean to call you stupid, maybe you're just pretending to be, but I've never... I'm totally against violence.
I'm totally against the war in Ukraine, for example, which doubtless you support, and like all dutiful liberals, support more carnage.
I don't.
I hate mass shootings, actually.
Nothing I said... What does it mean to inspire something?
My views Are not bigoted against any group.
They're honest.
They're factual.
That's not hate.
That's reality.
And my views derive from my deep concern for Americans, actually.
Americans aren't having kids because they can't afford to.
And nobody in charge cares.
And so that's my position.
That doesn't inspire mass shootings.
How dare you try to tie me to some lunatic who murdered people?
How dare you, actually?
And in fact, I mean, do you know what I mean?
I mean, like, you know, Hitler wore those shoes.
A lot of people are saying that you're like Hitler.
Can you explain those shoes?
Hitler wore exactly the same shoes.
Now, I mean, I think it's pretty reasonable if you're accused of having blood on your hands for a racist shooting that you obviously disapprove of, let alone had no role in inspiring, to be personally offended and to be pretty aggressive.
But the premise there is, again, this idea that when people like Tucker Carlson say something and they can try and link it to the ideology of a shooter, he's instantly responsible for it.
And yet it never goes the other way.
Here, just to remind you about what happened in 2017.
I think I said 2018 earlier.
It was 2017 at the shooting of the softball field.
Quote, suspect in a congressional shooting was Bernie Sanders supporter, strongly anti-Trump.
Quote, James T. Hodgkinson, the man identified as shooting a Republican member of Congress and four others on Wednesday morning with a small business owner in Illinois who defined himself publicly by his firm support of Bernie Sanders' progressive politics and his hatred of conservatives and President Donald Trump.
Quote, Trump is a traitor.
Trump has destroyed our democracy.
It's time to destroy Trump and company.
He posted on his personal Facebook page on March 22nd, just a month or so before he went and tried to murder Republican members of House.
That's right from Rachel Maddow's daily show or Nancy Pelosi's every interview she gives.
It's verbatim.
And yet no one suggested that Nancy Pelosi or Joe Biden Or Rachel Maddow or Lawrence O'Donnell or Joe Scarborough are to blame for having inspired this shooting, even though we know that this shooter was a fanatical fan of Rachel Maddow and Bernie Sanders and was mouthing everything they said every day on his Facebook until he finally took action and went and tried to murder Republicans in the name of this ideology he was feeding on. even though we know that this shooter was a fanatical
Quote, in the past year, most of his Facebook posts consist of signed petitions on change.org with titles such as, quote, Bernie, please run no matter what.
Quote, Hillary Clinton should concede the nomination to Bernie Sanders and, quote, health care for all Americans.
Hodgkinson's own description on social media portray him as an avid consumer of political shows.
His favorite television shows were listed as Real Time with Bill Maher, The Rachel Maddow Show, Democracy Now!, and other left-leaning programs.
So do Bill Maher and Amy Goodman have the blood on their hands of Steve Scalise for having radicalized this person with their endless daily Hate-driven rhetoric about Donald Trump being a traitor and a Russian agent and a threat to American democracy?
If you believe that Tucker Carlson is to blame for the Buffalo shooting, or you believe that Donald Trump is to blame for any violence that takes place in Ohio, or you believe that Donald Trump was responsible for that shooting in El Paso, Texas, where that shooter went in and killed a bunch of Latinos on purpose out of racism, and they blame Trump for it, then how can you not?
Apply that standard to say, oh yeah, the fault is actually people like Kamala Harris.
This is what Kamala Harris in September of 2019 had to say during the debate before she finally dropped out before a single vote was cast.
You know, people asked me in El Paso, they said, you know, because I have a longstanding record on this issue.
They said, well, do you think Trump is responsible for what happened?
During the same period when he was running for president on August of 2019, speaking on CNN to Jake Tapper.
Well, a mass murderer who's trafficking in hatred and bigotry, literally trying to give some kind of exculpatory reaction to the president.
I mean, come on.
Our president right now is using the same language of racism, of bigotry and white supremacy.
The way this president is talking about immigrants, the way he's talking about minorities in this country, these are the words that are used by The kind of folks that are in the darkest corners of the internet, and as we see in this terrorist attack, the kind of people that ultimately manifest that hatred and violence.
And for him not to take responsibility for that is a moral failing.
It's a moral failing, said Cory Booker, for Donald Trump not to take responsibility for the mass shooter in El Paso, Texas who killed Latinos because Trump's rhetoric It's so closely related to the driving ideology.
This is what they all were saying.
Kamala Harris said the same thing.
Congressman Dan Goldman, the heir of the Levi Strauss billionaire fortune, who basically got elected to that seat in Manhattan, in part because he was on the Mueller team, but also because his parents were, are very good friends with the Sulzberger family, the owners of the New York Times.
And so the New York Times endorsed Dan Goldman because they're a billionaire family, a nepotistic billionaire family, the Goldmans are as well.
So the two got together and agreed to help elect The father of Dan Goldman's boy, Dan Goldman.
And now he's a member of Congress, and he was on MSNBC just a few months ago, and here's what he had to say about Donald Trump.
It's just unquestionable at this point that that man cannot see public office again.
He is not only unfit, he is destructive to our democracy, and he has to be eliminated.
He has to be what?
What did he have to be?
I didn't think you heard that right.
Let me hear that again.
And he has to be eliminated.
Oh, eliminated.
He has to be eliminated.
He was talking on the MSNBC program of Jen Psaki.
She didn't object and say, wait a minute, doesn't that seem kind of violent to suggest that we should eliminate our political opponents?
Isn't that the language of assassination and violence?
When you say, oh, I'm going to eliminate him, generally means you're going to kill him.
So does Dan Goldman bear moral responsibility for accepting that he was a cause of the two assassination attempts on Donald Trump, especially this last one, which has a clear political motive?
Here is Kamala Harris on The Ellen DeGeneres Show in 2018, where If you had to be stuck in an elevator with either President Trump, Mike Pence, or Jeff Sessions, who would it be?
puts this sort of sentiment in the air all the time. - If you had to be stuck in an elevator with either President Trump, Mike Pence, or Jeff Sessions, who would it be?
Does one of us have to come out alive? - Now, aside from the joke about how she would have to kill one of them if she were in an elevator with them, just as a reminder, watch Kamala Harris, how she constantly cackles at her own jokes.
I mean, the part of where she's talking is only about 10 seconds, but the entire clip is about 23 seconds, because she just spends so much time, as always, cackling at her own joke.
- Let's have to come out alive. - She really loves her sense of humor I mean, I've never seen anybody laugh as heartily at their own jokes.
I've never seen her laugh at anyone else's jokes, but she laughs very heartily at her own joke.
This one was about murdering Donald Trump in an elevator, or Mike Pence.
Here is a tweet from Joe Biden, and I could literally show you dozens of these, exactly the same kind.
This was the theme of the Democratic Party for the last eight years.
This is the theme on which Joe Biden ran in 2020.
And the thing he's been saying as president, including that time when he gave a speech in front of this very militaristic imagery.
Donald Trump is a genuine threat to this nation.
He's a threat to our freedoms.
He's a threat to our democracy.
speech that was about Donald Trump.
And this is afterward when he tweeted out, this is just actually in June of this year, he was planning on running on the same sentiment this time, quote, Donald Trump is a genuine threat to this nation.
He's a threat to our freedoms.
He's a threat to our democracy.
He's literally a threat to everything America stands for.
So if you have been saying that for eight years, that Donald Trump is a threat to our freedom, he's a threat to our democracy, he's literally a threat to everything America stands for, I find it strange and bizarre that both times when Donald Trump was almost killed, two people tried to kill him, both Joe Biden and Kamala Harris came out and said, oh, we're so relieved to hear that the former president is safe.
Our prayers are with him.
Why?
Why would your prayers be with him?
It's like saying, oh, I recently learned that someone tried to murder Adolf Hitler and I'm so sad to learn that they came close to succeeding and my prayers are with Adolf Hitler and his family.
This is the kind of thing that you're putting out there.
Obviously, there's a good chance that somebody's going to take this seriously, is going to feed on it.
This is the message of the media, pretty much the entire establishment.
And if you're going to hold people to this standard, that Trump has a moral obligation to accept responsibility for the mass shooting in El Paso because it was language about Latino immigrants, then you have to take this rhetoric exactly the same way.
Now, I just want to show you one more example.
I think we have it.
Okay, so this is also on Jen Psaki's show.
Her show and Joy Reid's show is kind of ground zero for the most violent extremist rhetoric.
And over the weekend, By Jasmine Crockett, who is a, I think in her second term now, might be her first term, a Democrat from Texas.
She's a newly elected member of Congress who uses anti-Trump rhetoric in the most unhinged and extremist ways possible.
And this was over the weekend.
So she went on to Jen Psaki's show and she basically said that when you take an oath of office, and pledged to enforce the Constitution.
One of the things you're promising to do, one of the things you're duty-bound to do, is to fight against all enemies, both foreign and domestic, which is the language of the Constitution.
And she said that one of America's enemies, in fact one of America's primary enemies, domestic enemies, is Donald Trump and his political movement.
And that not only is someone justified, in doing everything to stop it, they're obligated to.
I mean, this is the language of violence.
This is when you say, I pledge to protect America from all enemies, both domestic and foreign.
This is the kind of framework that justifies wars You wage wars against foreign enemies that threaten the United States.
You wage wars against domestic enemies that threaten the United States.
Here was the rhetoric that she used, also on Jen Psaki's show.
And needless to say, at no point did Jen Psaki say, hey, wait a minute, doesn't this violence rhetoric kind of risk the possibility of violence against the president?
He was just almost assassinated two months ago.
Shouldn't we turn down the temperature so that we don't incite people to go kill former President Trump?
No, of course she didn't say that.
Here's what was said on that show.
I talk about the fact that when we swore in, finally, in January, that we swore to defend against those that are coming against us, whether they are domestic or international.
And right now, I feel like MAGA in general, they are threats to us domestically.
And we see it time and time again.
And I think that's why you see so many national leaders, whether they're Republicans or Democrats, coming together to say there is only one person qualified to be the commander in chief, and that is Kamala Okay, I mean, that is, you can't use language more extremist than that.
And she didn't actually just say that Donald Trump is a leading threat to our country.
She said the entire MAGA movement is, meaning Donald Trump and his supporters and his followers and his voters.
And this is the kind of rhetoric, I'm sure you recognize it, is the rhetoric that has been in the air pretty much every day for the last eight years since Trump posed a serious threat to become the president, especially once he became the president.
And so the only thing that's surprising about it is that it hasn't led to more people trying to kill Donald Trump.
And here we have a perfect example of someone feeding on this existential good versus evil framework about the Ukraine war, about the overarching necessity to try and kill Vladimir Putin and destroy Russia.
Which, independent of Trump, is an extremely dangerous sort of vision to feed people for eight years.
All that began as a way of, first, justifying Hillary Clinton's defeat, and then trying to demonize Trump.
Just constant anti-Russia fanaticism.
Violent anti-Russia fanaticism.
Telling people, ignore the fact that they have nuclear weapons.
Those threats don't matter.
We have to stop Russia no matter what.
Combined with Linking Donald Trump to Vladimir Putin, who we're being told is an Adolf Hitler figure as well, so sort of two Hitler figures, both of whom are devoted to the ending of American democracy.
What Joe Biden said is the enemy, literally, of all things decent, the American soul.
And so you have a shooter now who came close to killing Donald Trump, who sounds like an MSNBC pundit.
Democracy House on the ballot.
It's urgent that Joe Biden win.
Nothing is more important than defeating Ukraine and I do think that this fact that this came quite soon after that presidential debate where the ABC moderator David Moore tried very hard to strongly imply that Trump was so controlled by Vladimir Putin that he couldn't even say that he wanted Ukraine to win very well may have been a contributing factor but clearly all of this rhetoric the whole mountain of it is something that is.
And so for people to stand up, as these liberals and Democrats have been doing, and people in the media have been doing, and demanding that Donald Trump be responsible for his rhetoric, and then not only not take responsibility for their rhetoric, but actually blame Trump's own attempted murders on Trump and take no responsibility, and even try and imply that the two people who killed Trump are Trump supporters?
Like, why does Donald Trump's most fanatical MAGA adherents keep trying to kill him?
It, again, is the kind of propaganda that when you watch it, it just sort of stuns you.
And if the rule is that people who use extremist rhetoric become responsible for those who use violence in the name of it, then clearly the entire Democratic Party, American liberalism, members of Congress, pretty much on the whole, and the American media is responsible for at least this one assassination attempt, if not both.
Because that has been the overarching rhetoric for eight years.
Not that Donald Trump has the wrong ideology, but that he is an existentially evil, incomparably evil, Hitler-like threat to all things decent, and that he and the other Hitler, the one in Moscow, are united and joined to end American democracy.
All right, so that concludes our show for this evening.
As a reminder, a system update is also available in podcast form.
You can listen to every episode 12 hours after they first broadcast live here on Rumble on Spotify, Apple, and all the major podcasting platforms.
If you rate, review, and follow our show on those platforms, it really helps spread the visibility of our show.
As a final reminder, every Tuesday and Thursday night, once we're done with our live show here on Rumble, we move to Locals, where we have our live interactive aftershow, where we take your questions and hear your critiques, we respond to them, we hear your suggestions for future shows and guests.
Those aftershows are available only for members of our Locals community, so if you want to join, which gives you access not only to the twice-a-week aftershows, but to multiple interactive features that we have there, it's the place we publish original written Transcripts, professionalized transcripts of every show that we publish here.
We publish those the day after.
It's where we publish a lot of original written content and video content, such as our coverage of both conventions and then the spin room after the presidential debate.
And most of all, it's the community on which we rely to support the independent journalism that we do here every night.
Simply click the join button right below the video player on the Rumble page and it will take you directly to that community.
For those who've been watching, This show we are, of course, very appreciative and we hope to see you back tomorrow night and every night at 7 p.m.
Eastern Live exclusively here on Rumble.
▲
Export Selection