All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 9, 2018 - Get Off My Lawn - Gavin McInnes
41:48
Ep 195 | Spygate | Get Off My Lawn
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Live from New York, it's Get Off My Lawn with Gavin McInnes.
Hello, folks.
I have some very exciting news here.
We have the author of a book that just came out today, Spygate.
We have Matt Palombo in the studio.
Ladies and gentlemen, Matt Palumbo!
All right, good to be here again, Gavin.
How are you?
Very good.
Very good.
You're a very tall, gentleman, aren't you?
I think you tell me that every time I'm on.
I guess you forget between a That's why you shrink every time I see you.
I'm sure.
And then you reinstate your height.
I've shrunk to 6'4, and now I'm.
Before we talk about the book, I really want to push this idea that you do a show called Palumbo, where you wear a trench coat with a tie, and maybe you screw up one eye, like Peter Fock.
Are you familiar with Columbo?
Just, I mean, the concept of the show, but I obviously just are watching it for this future role.
I think I'm going to have to go on the show.
I don't like the way you dress.
I don't like the way you're going to dress, though.
Yeah.
That's sleepovers.
There's always something wrong with me, isn't there?
Yes.
You know what that kind of is?
That's kind of a sexy girl's shirt.
Like if she's sleeping over at your house.
The thing is, three years ago, you said we'd go shopping together, and that date has not happened.
Well, you know what's weird about that?
After I chastised you the first time.
I did get new shoes.
You had like J. Crew with shoots on, and then I think you got laid and you got lazy.
Yeah, you haven't bullied me long enough for me to get my look together.
Yeah, there's more to life than just getting laid.
You don't just sort of peace out as soon as you get one girlfriend.
You've got to keep trying.
I'm 48.
Well, have sort of working out.
That's one thing.
I'm counteracting the lack of fashion sounds with that.
Well, you can do both.
And just do nothing.
Like, if you're not into it, then just have a white t-shirt on.
Okay.
Like, you don't have to.
So don't try if I'm going to leave it.
Yeah, just go to basics.
Just have Converse or Vans and Levi's and white t-shirts.
You know, brown cord Levi's jacket that just popped into my head.
That would be a cute look.
So here's the plan.
It's called Palumbo.
Now, Peter Falk was a guy.
He was a successful actor.
There he is.
And he had a good career.
And then he goes, I'm going to do this character that's like a blue-collar detective with kind of a New York accent who's dumb.
And I don't know what's going on.
And so I investigate all these hoity-toity rich people.
And it's kind of a parody of classism in a way.
Because they poo-poo him and they go, this crap old New York detective, he can't figure anything out.
And then he'll just, he'll say, do the questions, and he'll lay it all out, and then he'll entrap the murderer by going, all right, well, my wife's a huge fan.
She's read all your books, and she won't shut up about you.
And she's going to be so excited that we met.
But thank you very much for your time.
Thank you.
And then he'll go, there's one thing that's bothering me.
You said that, and then they'll go, oh, and then they'll entrap themselves.
Every episode.
Nice formula, like an ACDC song.
So I'm going to be doing this with politics, though.
So you do this with politics and economics.
Oh, because I can talk to like myself and then play a clip of someone saying something and then.
Well, you'd have someone on your show and they'd say, Trayvon Martin was being hunted by George Zimmerman.
And he just shot him.
And you'd go, oh, that's terrible.
That's horrible.
And then you'll go, all right, well, thank you.
There's one thing that's bothering me.
Didn't he assault the guy?
Was he not smashing George Zimmerman's head on the pavement?
It's going to be hard, though, to get guests to come on your show.
You're going to have to coach my acting, I think.
I don't want to say that.
Well, that's that.
You've got to master the impression.
You've got to get the outfit.
That's the easiest part.
But it's going to be hard to entrap every single person that's going to be a lot of fun.
They're going to know me.
They're going to be a shtick by the time.
Yeah, yeah, they're going to go, I'm not going on that show, Palumba.
Well, let's just watch some of the people talking about it.
Oh, listen, there's one other thing I wanted to ask you about.
There's one other thing.
One thing is possible that Leslie worked.
Dr. Murchison.
I can't find him, and I was wondering whether you can help me.
Apparently he goofed up on some expensive project that he was working on.
Gee, I've seen this picture every day for 12 years.
You're a beautiful woman.
At any rate, the...
I've got Dr. Murchison's telephone number, and I've called him.
But I haven't had any luck.
Can you help me?
Well, just try the nearest saloon.
I'm sure that's the only place he's welcome anymore.
Oh, murderer.
Spoken like a true murderer.
Well, look at this one.
Oh, my audio's cut out.
I can yell overlay.
For a while.
Trench coat?
Yeah.
No one wears a trench coat anymore.
Well, I think Colin Blane kind of ruined that look.
It's a black one.
Yeah, you need a suit underneath.
Look at this.
Can the stylist do something about this, please?
Cut.
Oh, hit up, Nico.
Cut, his collars are weird.
Oh, one other thing.
In regard to your practice of recording people's comments every day.
What is that?
Like a question?
This is bothering me.
The people in the audience, they recognize that.
At the very least, we should script a commercial.
I'm down.
No, usually we meet in the first place.
It's the first one of which cover you like, too, which is a very good film there.
It is a really good cover.
Let's advertise it.
All right, that's enough.
Oh, you're doing the live.
Enough of my stupid Colombo tangent, which, by the way, would totally ostracize young people.
It's true.
It would be funny to no one under 50.
But most of my demographic and the people who follow me from Fox News are 60.
Great.
Well, then.
The idea is back.
Hey, technicians, I don't like that my head is touching on this camera.
Can you give me a little more room up here?
All right.
So this is the book, Spygate, and I love guests like you.
Thank you.
Because you have so much to say about this.
And I can just, we've been drinking beer ever since yesterday with Kavanaugh.
It's Kavanaugh beer.
He brought beer back.
I did.
And why don't you tell me what this is about?
The attempted sabotage of Donald J. Trump, and is written by CRTV's own Dan Bongino, and also you and DC McAllister.
Yeah, she's a writer for like the Federalist and PJ Media, so that's mainly where she's known from.
Oh, cool.
Yeah, so I mean, Dan called me up out of the blue in January with the idea of doing something on the Russia investigation.
He started podcasting about it, and those ended up being his most popular podcasts.
The story really started blowing up among his audience.
So we thought, you know, why not put all that information into a book?
So we set out with the goal of doing a 30,000-word book that we'd finish in about a month or so.
Yeah, as you can tell, this is much longer.
I think this is around 75,000 to 80,000.
Yeah, that's just a small book size.
Yeah, it almost felt like every week we were saying, all right, another week or two, this thing's all going to be done.
And then more and more just kept coming out.
So we ended up not really finishing it until around May or June.
But we got so much more information than we ever hoped.
You know, there's a heap, we were talking to Michael Malice yesterday about how this chain of journalists, journal list that Ezra Klein put together.
And they would say, it's these talking points.
We're going to go.
And they say Russia collusion.
And I was saying to Michael yesterday that collusion is a weird word.
Yeah.
You don't use it that much.
And they are giving themselves away by using it all the time because it shows that they are all repeating the same talking points.
You see this, well, I guess not with you on Twitter anymore, but anytime someone with a blue check mark talks about the Kavanaugh accusations is always credibly accused, no matter what, with no exception.
And I wonder, there must be some list of talking points they're all getting to coordinate this.
Yeah, credibly, because that's another strange phrase.
Way to put it.
I've never said credibly accused in my life.
The majority are certainly not credible either.
Yeah.
In fact, what would be the normal verbiage for that kind of thing?
I don't know.
Like repeatedly accused with evidence.
Yeah.
You would just say accused.
And then it would be up to the other person.
Yeah.
So let's pull back a second.
What is the left saying?
Are they saying that Putin wanted Trump to win, which is already kind of a strange situation, and then he somehow got into our internet election machine and changed actual votes?
So there are different levels of hysteria.
That would certainly be the craziest that they were actually literally hacking the election, which I don't, to my knowledge, is not actually possible.
I don't think most of these booths are connected to the internet.
I mean, don't quote me on that, but it would be extra.
If they did, we would have known by now.
So, I mean, the more general theory is just Russian actors, with the knowledge of the Russian government, tried to subsert themselves in the Trump campaign.
There is, however, I mean, there is evidence of Russian influence, certainly trying to influence and help Trump.
All I've heard evidence of is like $1,500 or Facebook ads.
And that also went both ways.
But of, let's say, Russians who actually interacted with Trump campaign members, the Trump campaign members had no idea who they were talking to.
So there was Russian attempted interference, but not collusion.
It wasn't both ways.
But isn't also another allegation that Russia hacked into Hillary's emails and had them released, which made Hillary look bad.
So that's very interesting.
And I'll talk about that and the DNC hack, which actually might have either never happened or have been an inside leak.
Because if you remember, they immediately used the DNC hack to say it was Russians and they gave those emails to WikiLeaks.
The FBI offered to look at their servers and examine for them, and they refused.
Which you'd think, well, I mean, we know with the Kavanaugh things, they seem to think very highly of FBI investigations, but they did not want one for whatever reason.
And obviously the reason is the Russians didn't actually hack them.
Right.
They brought in a firm.
And also, there could be all kinds of other things.
That you don't want to cover.
So they brought in a firm called CrowdStrike.
CrowdStrike, a number of their senior officers and stuff had worked for the Obama administration.
They were the firm that claimed those Planned Parenthood videos were deceptively edited.
And then all these other independent firms found they actually were not at all.
So they hired CrowdStrike, which generally speaking has a left-wing bias.
And within one day, they concluded the Russians were behind the hack.
So I'm just going to, I mean, I'm not a cybersecurity expert.
I'm just going to assume it takes longer than a day to come to that kind of conclusion.
Yeah.
They would have said immediately, but just wait 24 hours, do it tomorrow.
Yeah, exactly.
You know, it's funny, that's such a smoking gun.
Yeah.
The day it, just that one piece of information was a day.
And I've never heard that before.
And now the DNC is claiming they weren't hacked at all, which, so I don't know how that, why they're now saying that, because what are we supposed to believe crowd strike down then?
This is what I keep coming back to on this show.
What do you want?
Yeah, I don't know.
Like, say there's their couple in a bar and it's a girl and a guy's hitting on her.
If she were to say, what do you want?
You would say, I want to have sex with you.
Correct.
Maybe a relationship.
I don't know, but I definitely want to have sex with you tonight.
Got it.
That's clear.
But like with the Kavanaugh thing, I don't understand.
I know they don't want to be on the Supreme Court, but as far as the system goes, do you want a system where an allegation with no evidence means someone can't get a job?
Well, don't you see now that people would weaponize that?
And by the way, if you notice on Twitter, whenever someone calls Kavanaugh credibly accused, there's always one right-wing troll saying, so-and-so raped me, like the person who posted the accusation against Kavanaugh.
And then they always respond with a screw you, or there's no evidence, or something along those lines.
And it's like, well, obviously you see how fallacious it is when applied to you, so why not anyone else?
Yeah, yeah.
You clearly don't want a society where you can just go, that guy raped me, and then that guy's life blows up.
Yeah.
Because you just gave someone a ray gun and they're just going to go, psh, p, p, p, p, p, p, I remember.
Believe women.
I remember when I read the Salem Witch Trials, or The Crucible in eighth grade, and when I got to the end, my first thought was, thank God this could never happen today.
Yeah, and I love that analogy, too.
Yeah.
Because I don't like when people say McCarthyism.
Yeah.
Because with McCarthyism.
There actually were communist influences.
There were communists infiltrating, but there's no such thing as witches.
No.
And this Nazi hunt, which wasn't really Kabul, although they do make it a Black Lives Matter thing and all that.
But this Nazi hunt is like, there's no Nazis.
And to change the subject back to the book, with the special counsel, it has all like everything you'd expect of a witch hunt where there are witches being found, but they're not being charged with witchcraft, which would be Russian collusion.
It's tax evasion, tax fraud.
Most of the Russians that were charged were charged with creating fake identities and not registering as foreign agents.
There's not a single, so far, not a single conviction in the mill their special counsel that mentions collusion at all.
All right, so let's sift through the weeds here before we get started and try to zero in on what the allegations are from at least the moderately sane left.
And their allegation is that Russians hacked Hillary's email and seeing anyone's emails can make them look bad.
If we saw Trump's emails, that would hurt Trump's campaign.
So that's what they mean when they say the Russians hacked the electorate.
But there's been no evidence of that whatsoever, besides a privately funded leftist group that determined it in 24 hours.
Correct.
I see.
Yeah.
That was for the DNC emails.
Hillary, I think, was a hacker named Gussifer 2.0.
I believe he was Russian, but not connected to the, not the Russian government.
Yeah, that's another thing they keep doing.
They say Russia.
Do you mean a Russian?
People say Russian hacker and don't realize that's like saying if you get into meet his nail salon.
It's just kind of the way, like that's the.
They're either from China or Russia.
Yeah, exactly.
That's what they do.
What else are they going to do?
Their countries suck.
Exactly.
All countries.
Just to be clear, folks at home, when Trump calls other countries sh ⁇ holes, that includes Russia and China.
Russia and China blow.
No one wants to live there.
No one.
All right.
Yes.
So we have the left's allegation, but you've got a whole book here, so you clearly went past that.
Let's try to go through some of these attempted sabotages.
The P-tapes.
Yes.
Now, Tom Arnold has a show on Vice, my old alma mater, called Show Me the Tapes.
I believe he's expanded the definition of tapes so I can just be like, Trump's sellotape.
But the original plan was, there are tapes of Donald Trump getting prostitutes to urinate on a bed.
Something like, yeah.
So the story originates.
It was, Trump was in Russia in 2013 for the Miss Universe pageant.
He was meeting with these two guys, one of his names Amin Aguaralarov, who's like a pop singer over there in Europe, and his father, Aros Aguilarov.
So the story allegedly takes place.
They're all staying in a Russ-Carlton together.
Some of them, I think it was one of the Agalarovs, offered to send up prostitutes to Trump's room.
Which, by the way, in Russia, is like offering to send a host.
But by all the counts, Trump denied that, laughed it off.
The Agalarovs haven't confirmed it.
So the story, it's very possible it did.
Some sort of story about that started with them and then kind of got corrupted through a game of telephone.
Because if you look through Christopher Seale's dossier, the source is this guy named Sergei Millian, which is interesting because he's one of the people who randomly approaches George Papadopoulos, who was, do you remember when it was uncovered there actually were spies in the Trump campaign?
It was a guy named Stephan Halper?
No.
No?
Okay, well.
Spies for the left.
Yes, it was.
Not Russia.
No, an FBI informant.
Oh, yeah, yeah, no, I know that.
And Obama did it.
Obama was surveying Trump.
Yeah, so Halper was one of the people who met with Papadopoulos.
Basically, Papadopoulos, if you listen to Papadopoulos, it sounds like Halper was trying to pry information out of him to get him to incriminate himself.
But Millian was also a man who approaches Papadopoulos out of the blue.
He's cited as a source for the Golden Showers incident.
So there's somehow some sort of transmission of information from the Aguilaros to him where we got this weird story, and we don't know how.
So a spy who is working for Obama and also met with George Papadopoulos is also the guy who said that Trump has P-tapes.
But can I just add something?
I don't care.
Like, say that was true and he has a weird sexual fetish.
I could not care less about people's sex lives.
Well, Halper was a guy who met Trump, I think, a few months before the election.
Milliam's a different guy, I mean, potential spy as well, but he's one who met Papadopoulos kind of out of the blue, weird circumstances, and also is credited as the source for the peace story.
So it's very likely he was trying to maybe fish information or something of that nature out of him.
For instance, when Halperman Yeah, because I was about to ask.
There's actually a lot of background information.
Yeah, so he was brought on as Trump's foreign policy advisor.
But he's a Clinton guy.
Was he?
Yeah, I thought he was friends with the Clintons, although they had a falling out with him, I believe.
His background was very pro-Clinton.
Okay, you actually didn't know that backstory.
So he met with a guy named Joseph Mifsud in Europe.
This is the TV guy.
See the TV guy?
Avanopoulos?
Am I thinking of another George Stampanopoulos?
You're the ABC guy?
Staphanopoulos?
There was an interview, though.
George Papadopoulos interviewed by George Staphanopoulos.
Hey, Greece, can you do some normal last names?
With Milo Ianopoulos.
Milo Iiannopoulos, tacky Theodora Cropoulos?
It sounds like someone is playing basketball in your mouth.
So in early 2016, Papadopoulos got a All right, we'll go ahead and he met with this guy named Joseph Mifsud in, I think it was Rome.
Somewhere in Europe is the point.
Mifsud didn't really appear interested in Papadopoulos until he started mentioning he had connections to Trump.
And then Mifsud started talking about how, oh, actually, I have all of Hillary's hacked emails and all this dirt on her.
Which is interesting because those records of him donating to the Clinton Foundation.
So the theory is he wanted Papadopoulos to somehow claim he himself had access to those emails and incriminate himself even though he didn't.
Which was interesting because a few months later an Australian ambassador named I just lose it.
There's no point.
Yeah, dude, it sucks.
I'll be the one that's told how long we're going.
So he meets with this guy named Alexander Downer in a bar in London a few months later.
Papadopoulos reportedly drunkenly starts talking about how he possesses Hillary's hacked emails, which he doesn't at all.
Downer then takes that information and goes to the FBI, which the FBI claims is why they opened a counterintelligence investigation into the Trump campaign.
However, that's what they claim happened.
Devin Nunes started looking to the documents of why the FBI started the investigation.
There's no mention of that.
So I think it's just their official quote-unquote cover of an investigation that was already either going on unofficially or then started.
That makes a lot more sense.
And also, in addition to that, John Brennan testified that it was actually British intelligence sending him intel about members of the Trump campaign that he relayed to the FBI that started the investigation.
So we have two different competing explanations for why the investigation started.
And you might remember, before those two explanations, it was thought that dossier was the reason.
So we really have three.
So we have no idea.
And I think they just went, okay, it was a dossier.
Oh, no, it was Papadopoulos.
All right, actually, it was this third reason.
And I think they're just kind of trying to come up with something that's believable.
Well, we're dealing with an incurious populace and a lot of women who are emotional.
So all you need to do if you do something immoral like spy on Trump is just throw in some obfuscation.
It's sort of like those things that confuse heat-seeking missiles.
You throw out those bits of tinfoil out the back and then the heat-seekers just get bounced off and it gets forgotten.
It's worked.
America has pretty much ignored the fact that we had people spying on Trump throughout his campaign.
And people don't seem to realize, like, liberals will admit that Manafort and Page were surveilled on, but they don't realize literally every call they make is surveilled.
And when they work for Trump, who do you think they're going to be talking to?
I would assume Donald Trump.
So we would argue it's almost like, especially with Carter Page, it's almost a backdoor way to spy on Trump because there's no record of a warrant.
Oh, I see what you're saying.
Yeah, that would confuse you.
But he's going to be talking to Trump, so you're going to get that.
You're going to get Trump information.
Right, I understand.
And this is kind of going off topic.
Spying on the people he talks to is the same spying on him.
And this is interesting, too.
Remember the tweet of his about Trump Tower being surveilled?
We think we know why he tweeted that.
And it would be an example of Trump's, quote-unquote, truthful hyperbole, as he calls it.
But you might remember, right after he won the election, he was having meetings in Trump Tower where he was interviewing people for certain jobs.
And then he immediately one day, I think it was Thursday or Friday, said, no more meetings here.
We're going to Bedminster, New Jersey.
And there was no pre-announcement for that at all.
The day that was announced, the last interview was with Mike Rogers, who was the NSA head.
I think it's very likely he said something to Trump that spooked him and made him want to do interviews somewhere else who wouldn't be surveilled.
Wow.
It's something we can't prove, but it seems very likely.
And I would argue, too, Obama was really pissed off after that, too, and threatened to fire Mike Rogers because he allegedly didn't tell Obama beforehand he was meeting with Trump.
And then he claimed his official reason for wanting to fire Rogers later was that he didn't do enough to fight ISIS or some nonsense, which just seems like a stupid excuse.
So I think Obama, he probably told Trump something, like, you're being surveilled in this manner, like, not literally Trump Tower being wiretapped, but you're being surveilled in X, Y, and Z, and you should probably be cautioned about that.
And that's why he moved.
That's our theory of why.
It would make sense.
Unbelievable.
You know, this keeps coming up with the left, where they accuse you of doing what they're guilty of.
Yeah, they always project.
They always project.
When they talk about genocide, that's because if they get into power, these socialists will end up committing genocide.
There are no right-wing celebrities saying, confront your left-wing senators and all that.
So, yeah.
Yeah.
That's true.
So we've got the pee tapes covered, right?
Yes.
I think we may have an unturned stone with that, though.
What is the exact allegation?
I think it's just like...
I thought he had prostitutes piss.
on a bed well it's like and then say it was obama okay so the it's basically like a liberal fantasy of the story which is kind of how you know it's not true right i think this their narrative is he rented a hotel room that Obama once stayed in so then he could defile it or something.
It's really stupid.
Oh I see.
So Obama slept on that bed.
Hey, prostitute.
Pee on me.
Pee on that bed.
And on me.
And on me.
There's a germaphobe.
Yes.
Who might be autistic a little bit.
You think so?
Yeah, he's very regimented with his, and the way he eats, too.
In a good way.
I mean, the spectrum's wide.
I want him autist up there.
You've got to be autistic to take on the entire world.
All right, let's go through some more, Miss.
What about the Trump Tower meeting?
So that one's very interesting.
It was organized by the Aguilarovs, who I mentioned were the ones who were in the hotel with Trump.
Pop star in the state?
Pop star, who were in the same hotel where the P incident allegedly happened.
So it actually started with them.
They emailed Donald Trump Jr., or sorry, their publicist emailed Donald Trump Jr. and said, I had this friend, Natalia Veselnitskaya.
She works with the Crown Prosecutor of Russia.
There's no such title as a Crown Prosecutor of Russia.
So I think he probably injected that to be like, she's connected to the Russian government and wanted him to entrap himself.
Oh, okay.
But, I mean, he denies that, of course.
Anyway, he claimed they had dirt and Hillary.
They were open to hearing about it.
So they set up this meeting in Trump Tower.
A lot of people don't know this, but Vessel Moskaya at this time was working with Fusion GPS on a case to defend the Russian government.
At the same time, Fusion's funding steele's dossier to prove collusion between Trump and the Russian government.
The morning of the Trump Tower meeting, Glenn Simpson, the co-founder, and Velsa Moskaya meet.
I'm going to go ahead and assume they talked about the Trump Tower meeting that was going to occur, because they met after that and the next day.
And they deny that this ever came.
Right, I'm confused here.
So Fusion GPS is an American company.
Yes.
And they were responsible for the Russian dossier.
Yes.
Wasn't the Russian dossier just the P thing?
There was all this other stuff in there, too.
That was part of it.
That's why the most sensational.
And that's the one Daily Beast leaked?
Was it that?
BuzzFeed.
BuzzFeed.
Yeah, yeah.
BuzzFeed leaked that.
And at the same time, they were working with the Russian lawyer who went to Trump Tower.
I understand.
And there is overlap between the cases, and there are people who worked on both cases, so there is a direct analytic.
It sounds like we have raging incompetence because it's not.
Correct.
No one knows this.
There's all this conflict of interest.
It sounds like terrible scam after terrible scam.
And when I find out, I boil it down to what exactly the allegation is, I go, I don't care if Donald Trump's son met with someone who said they had dirt on Hillary.
You should meet with someone who says they have dirt on Hillary.
And I don't care if you pay prostitutes to pee on a bed.
I couldn't care less.
Unfortunately, I think other people do.
Why is that affecting foreign policy or anything?
Technically, it's not, I guess.
I mean, I guess the thing would be that they blackmail on Trump, but I don't know.
I mean, you'd think they would have released it by now because the thing is, Trump has objectively been harder on Russia than Obama, just not in his rhetoric.
Like, the amount of sanctions he's put on Russia is way out of proportion to what Obama did.
Oh, really?
Yeah.
And Putin, I don't understand why it's just a given that Putin wants Trump in.
For what?
I mean, he did.
Okay, so he admitted in that Holinsky summit he preferred Trump to Hillary, but he also said in 2012 he preferred Obama to Romney.
But what's it going to lead to?
I mean, it proves trade with the American.
And it doesn't prove collusion.
Like, so what?
He supported them.
The Brits supported Hillary.
so what?
You know, they always lie about what they care about, too.
I remember when they thought Hillary was going to win, they were all pro-Electoral College.
And now they hate the Electoral College.
Yeah, the theory was Trump might win the Electoral College, but not the popular.
And I also remember this.
It was John Oliver had a show.
He has a show.
But he had read that it's illegal for another country to influence elections.
And he wanted Canada to get involved in sabotaging the election.
And he heard it's a $5,000 fine.
So he said, let's do it.
I'll do the $5,000.
He had Mike Myers come on the show just as an RCMP on a horse.
And he had hosers with snowblowers and hockey guys.
And they all did a song about how you shouldn't vote for Trump.
And so they were really into foreign collusion.
Then it was the cool thing to do.
And we have in the book, too, a lot of, and I mentioned this with the John Brennan thing, in Britain, their version of the NSA is called the GCHQ.
It's a government-something headquarters.
But anyway, it's like their NSA.
In fact, Edward Stowden actually warned against it when he came out against the NSA too, which is an interesting note.
But we have an agreement with them called the Five Eyes Agreement.
Like it's an intelligence sharing agreement.
And one of our theories is one of the main reasons the British government opposed Trump and was relaying intelligence to John Brennan is because you can't be in the Five Eyes Agreement with anyone or any nation that supports torture.
And Trump obviously vowed to bring back waterboarding and, quote, much worse.
So we think that was a large motivation for them in trying to relay damning information to John Brennan and then to the FBI.
Because they don't want America to be in the Five Eyes.
No, they want us to stay in it and we're worried we wouldn't be able to and share info because they can't.
We can't lose information if we get booted out.
If we get booted out for support of torture, yeah.
Which obviously hasn't materialized regardless, but with fear.
So we're doing a lot of hopping around here.
Yeah.
With the Donald Trump meeting the Russian thing because of dirt on Hillary, where did that go to?
Where is it?
So she claimed she had dirt on Hillary, and she ended up just talking about the McNitsky Act and like Russian adoption or American adoptions from Russia.
So she didn't have anything she claimed to have.
And what's interesting is she brought a translator with her, who used to work for Hillary Clinton in her State Department.
So basically, if Donald Trump said anything incriminating, they were pretty sure it would not get lost in translation, which is why I imagine he was there.
Oh, I see.
Yeah, yeah.
So obviously he did not take the bait at the end of the minute, the meeting after 20 or so minutes.
Trump released all the emails when it came out.
But I assume they were trying to entrap him with that meeting, and he just did not take the bait.
Well, when you think about it, they've got absolutely everything.
Because I was going to say, why say Russia?
Why say you were colluding with Russia?
Why not say you were screwing a porn star?
No, they did say that.
Why not say that you didn't deserve your wealth?
It was a tax scamp.
No, they have said that.
They've come at him with pretty much everything but murder and alcoholism for throwing him.
They're not going to get out of drink.
All right, let's go through this.
What about the general rule of thumb?
No, it's Robert Hannigan, is the head of the GCHQ.
Who's John Brennan again?
CIA.
CIA, right?
Yeah, so Hannigan actually flew down to D.C. in the summer of 2016 to relay a lot of information to Brennan, who then related to the FBI.
And Brennan claims, as I mentioned earlier, that's what sort of the FBI counter-intelligence investigation to the Trump campaign, which is now the special counsel.
What's interesting with Robert Hannigan, the guy who related info, is right after Trump was inaugurated, he stepped down.
And he was only in the position for less than two years, didn't give any weeks, like two weeks' notice, and just claimed, oh, I have family issues.
And there's no evidence there's actually anything, you know, no sicknesses in the family since then or anything.
So this timing seems suspicious.
It's like, did he think something was going to come out damning to him or something since Trump won?
I don't know the explanation for that, but it's just an odd coincidence.
You know what's incredible about this whole book?
Yeah.
How much money and power and authority, and then not just in politics, but in the media.
How much came at him?
Right.
And he still won.
He made it a WWE match, and they were not ready for that.
Well, it's kind of heartening because it shows you that there's still democracy in this country and the people still have power.
People are still thinking for themselves.
I know this is off topic, but even with the Christine Ford things that came forward recently, the Huffington posted a poll and I think 25% of women thought it was credible.
And if that's up with the Huffington poll, I was just saying it's probably less.
Well, I'll never forget when he was in Florida during the campaign and he pulls up his phone.
And we were hearing about how he's a loser and no one likes him and he's not going anywhere.
And he just has it on, what's it called?
Portrait thing.
And he just goes like this.
And it is, I'm going to say, 50,000 people.
I mean, it was just a sea of human beings.
It looked like M ⁇ Ms. It's like a concert almost going to one of the homes.
Yeah, really.
I want to go to one.
I've used that analogy before.
It was like Rolling Stones and Rio de Janeiro.
I had friends in college who weren't political who were like, you guys want to go to a Trump rally sometime?
I went to one.
It was really fun.
I wish I did.
Especially when he would say, build the wall.
Everyone would go nuts.
We went in Long Island, and it was a manufacturing town where they used to make planes for the military, and all those jobs are gone.
And so to be in one of these big hangars where they used to make F-15s, and there's all these people whose dad used to have a job right in that very spot, it was really inspiring.
And you realize, wow, we can get people elected.
And the media cannot brainwash us.
I think they have a lot of power in Britain and Canada with the BBC and the CBC, these government-funded media things.
But you've got 80% of the media here, maybe 90 left-wing.
We had, what was it, last summer?
They did a study and they found 90% of the stories about them were negative.
Yet the people can see through all that bullshit.
And not only are 90% negative, I think it's 6% or 7% of journalists are Republicans.
So yeah, it's good.
now take that to academia and professors and then teachers and even kindergarten teachers.
And you've got just this tsunami of prejudice on top of anyone who wants to love America.
And it's not even that, too.
It's like, I think, more than the media, I think celebrities, like your favorite musician, your favorite actor having a left-wing view, is going to be much more influencing than somebody on ABC.
Because if you're a young person, you're going to be much more likely to idolize or connect with these people and be much more likely to adopt or mimic those kind of views.
Well, that's probably why they are so in such a state of panic when it comes to Kanye West.
Yeah, it's hilarious.
I just read this morning that Pete Davidson went up to him backstage with SNO and said, having mental illness is no excuse to be a jackass.
Take the hat off.
Oh, God.
Someone was joking that the election is now a proxy war between Kanye and Keller Swift after last night.
Yeah, they do have a lot of influence.
But at the end of the day, I think that Americans are more independent, more independent thinkers than Britain and Canada and a lot of other Western countries.
And that might be because that's the origin of America.
It was a lot of opposing views, and they started talking to each other, which was Britain's idea, by the way.
And they said, let's have lots of different viewpoints.
And then they said, hey, while we're hashing this out and learning how to use guns and training our own militia, let's kick Britain out.
Yeah.
Well, I'm like, I mean, it does amaze me how pro-gun this country is, despite how relentless the media is on that issue.
Yeah.
Like, yeah.
Well, it's also weird when you leave.
Like, I was in Israel and all these teenagers have AK-47.
Yeah, this water.
Yeah.
Because they can't let a Palestinian get it.
So they have to sleep with it and take it to prom and everything.
But then when they get out of the military and they become adults, they become pretty anti-gun.
Sorry, they remain anti-gun.
It's weird.
They're not pro-gun over there.
You know, like, so I remember reading their number one in concealed carry per capita, but that could just be because of military.
It's probably just during those years.
Okay, guys.
Because as soon as they're done in the military, they're like, get that thing away from me.
I don't like those.
And I've noticed in Australia, I'm going on tour there, so I've been talking to a lot of Australian media, and they're with me with the Venerate the Housewife, entrepreneur.
They love all that stuff.
Free speech.
Yeah, we need more free speech.
And they go, and guns, and they go, eh.
I actually, you ever hear that argument in Australia that like, you know, the 20 years before they had their worst shooting, there was 13 shootings, now there's zero?
So I looked into each individual public shooting.
So to give some summary, they claim that there's a really bad shooting in 1996, and that in the 20 years before, there was like 13 shootings.
In the 20 years since, there have been none.
So I looked at every shooting individually, and only four of them were committed by guns that were banned in 1996.
Meaning, all the other ones could still happen today, just for whatever reason they have not.
Which is interesting.
Yeah, you're really good at that.
You're good at myth.
It kind of concerns me, though, because we are free thinkers, and we are independent thinkers, but if you're slightly lazy, then there's plenty of straw men that you've got to sort of push out of the way.
John Lott refutes the Australian argument.
It's so good.
It's just frustrating because when people make the Australia argument, you can make it on Twitter in 100 characters, and Kim Kardashian can tweet it and get 50,000 retweets.
Jim Jeffries gets it.
Yeah, exactly.
But then I wrote a rebuttal that takes 20 hours to research, and I get like 2,000 people read it.
And it's like, are you kidding me?
Like, it took so much time to go through those.
The other one that you debunked was this whole idea of Northern Europe is socialist, and it works great.
No.
The left, that's one of their main talking points with socialism.
They go, yes, Venezuela failed.
Yes, Cuba failed.
But look at Norway.
Yeah.
Look at that.
The difference is Venezuela and Cuba are what they would call, quote, real socialism, while those countries are free market capitalist with really high taxes.
And in fact, I mean, yes, they are prospering, but you can look at them before these welfare state eras and their GDP was higher and all that.
No, they're on the way to Venezuela.
And they are literally spending their parents' money.
And what I think is the most convincing, you look at Swedish Americans who, and obviously we don't really get much immigrants there.
So the Swedes here, their families have been here since the 1700s.
They're wealthier than Swedes in Sweden.
And the same is true of the Danes and the Norwegians.
So they're doing better off here under our system than they are back where no matter how well it works, we're still doing better here.
Well, they also don't have illegal immigrants riching off the system and not paying their fair share.
They also don't have an obesity epidemic, which is very expensive.
Now that they're rich, they decide to try socialism and it's not turning out.
Yeah, the average age of their large companies there is like 50 plus years.
Well, here, you know, Amazon's been around 20 years and it's now the biggest company in the world.
So it's just, there's not as much innovation there.
Like, I think IKEA will be their namesake brand for the next 400 years because they're not going to come up with anything else in Sweden.
Yeah, I think you're right.
Yeah, yeah.
I think you're right.
All right, so we're running out of time here.
Have we covered every myth in Spygate?
I'll give a very Dick Morris answer and say if you want to learn more.
Ooh, that's good.
Hold on.
Read my book, Spygate, The Attempted Sabotage of Donald.
Do you get the feeling that they're kind of done with Russia?
Why move so fast?
Like, Kavanaugh is over.
That was the week.
We're never going to hear Kavanaugh.
That was like a century packed into a week.
That was bizarre.
It really is.
Like my wife, she's kind of left-wing and she hates controversy and she goes, now they're saying that you, whatever.
I remember when they were saying they separate kids from their parents.
And I said, the place they're putting these kids look really nice to me.
And what's the alternative?
Putting them in like a jail cell with their parents as they're awaiting trial?
That goes back to the saying, oh, yeah, I keep saying the left.
What do you want?
Yeah.
Wait, tell me your scenario.
Yeah, or have you heard the talking point that they're now missing thousands of kids?
Yes.
You know the origin of that?
So once the kids are placed with a family, they call the family every couple of months to follow up.
And if the family shows an answer, they're quote unquote missing.
So that's how you get a missing child is the family just not answering your survey.
Yeah.
Yeah.
And so when my wife was panicking about that, going, they think that you think that kids should be separate.
And I go, I know it's uncomfortable.
Give it two days.
And we're all forgetting it.
Two days, and it'll be on.
And it's moving that fast.
Kavanaugh went a little longer than I thought it would.
But now Kavanaugh's dumped.
They've shed their tears.
And I don't know what will be in the next one.
My prediction, Ruth Getter Ginsburg will die within the next two weeks, and then we'll get a new cycle after that.
Oh, we've already figured that out.
Yeah.
What's going to happen is she's going to die, and then they're just going to keep her propped up there.
You won't notice a difference.
I don't know what they're going to do about the blinking.
That's going to be tricky.
Maybe there's a way you can do electrical searches and the eyes just sort of instinctively blink.
Maybe they'll do it in post.
Did you see her interview about the Kavanaugh confirmations where someone asked her, like, do you think this is better than previous hearing?
And she just goes like, I liked the previous hearings for other justices.
And I don't like how these are going.
Then everyone just clapped as if it was some brilliant answer.
Did you see the video that's going around of her doing push-ups and pull-ups?
She's in great shape.
It's sort of like when Hillary was diagnosed with pneumonia and Pat and Oswald goes, can we just take a second to talk about how badass it is and brave it and learning while having pneumonia?
Well, I'm glad you finally finished this video.
Yes, it took forever, but it was well worth it.
No, it's nice to just have a rebuttal where you can sit there and go, no, that's not what happened.
But I'm actually getting to the point now where I go, A, I don't know what you want.
I don't know either.
I don't know what your version of events is.
And B, everything I can glean from your accusations doesn't sound that bad.
Like, I don't care if Kavanaugh jumped on a girl when he was drunk and rolled off the bed.
I don't care if prostitutes pee on beds.
I don't care if you meet with Russians and hear what they have to say.
Yeah, I mean, I'm definitely on poor with the last two.
I mean, I don't care if you screw up prostitutes.
If the first one happened, like, A, it's something you should, I don't think it's a disqualifying thing.
I think it's somebody you should own up to.
I just don't think he did it.
So it's, I don't know.
It's just so bizarre.
And I know like some liberal experts are going to tell me this is very consistent with other victims, but the level of detail for certain things versus others.
Like I came in the house and music was playing.
We went upstairs to this bed and the bathroom was right here and I was wearing a One Piece, but I don't know how I got there or left.
And I guess we're supposed to believe she left in front of the house.
It doesn't make any sense.
I don't give a crap.
And I, I guess this makes me a Christine Ford Truther.
I will bet you $1,000 it's not her voice.
What do you mean?
The vocal fraud.
That cannot be what she sounds like at all.
I tried, okay, so the internet is scrubbed of anything that has to do with her.
I tried to find any example on YouTube of a student who recorded part of her lecture or a public speaking thing.
I could not find anything on this woman.
And I swear to God, if I do, I bet her voice is different.
Huh.
That claim right now is a Jared Holt article.
The Republican Gadfly.
We're on Media Matters now for you.
Yeah.
All right, Matt.
Well, we're out of time.
That was a lot of fun.
I like you more than a friend.
As always, Ditto.
▲
Export Selection