All Episodes
Previous Next
April 8, 2025 - Info Warrior - Jason Bermas
50:58
Trump 2.0 The First 80 Days A Report Card
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hey everybody, Jason Burmiss here, and we've got a banger of an episode for ya.
I've got Stuart J. Hooper.
We haven't really talked since Trump 2.0 set the stage.
We're well on our way to 100 days, almost 80 days in.
We're going to be talking about promises kept, promises not kept so much.
Tariffs, the economy, the Middle East, Russia, Ukraine, and beyond.
It's a banger.
You're not going to want to miss it.
Thumbs it up, subscribe, and share.
And now my guest, Stuart J. Hooper.
Thank you so much for joining us, sir.
It is a pleasure to have you here.
So there's obviously a lot to go over in these first 80 days.
I've liked a lot of it.
Haven't liked a lot of the policy in the Middle East.
Haven't loved the policy even with Ukraine and Russia, despite the fact that I really enjoyed Trump putting Zelensky in his place on television.
But then, unfortunately, it didn't seem like anything actually came out of that other than more death and the continuation of war, including some real shady shenanigans.
Drone warfare into Russia, limousines blowing up that the Western media did not want to talk about.
So what I'm going to do here is I'm going to give my overall grade, my real grade for Trump, and it's around at 80% of B-.
I mean, maybe that's a B. I don't know how much you could actually get done as president.
I've talked about this time and time and time again.
However, you certainly don't want to get into the arena where warfare escalates and you're on your back foot even more.
Number one, what is your rating of this guy?
And then give me a speed run through some of the things I just discussed.
Good.
Well, great to be back as always, Jason.
Really appreciate it.
Love talking with you.
You're one of the few alternative media personalities out there that doesn't come at this from the left or the right and doesn't really have an agenda, really, other than just getting to the truth.
So it's always great to chat with you.
Yeah, I think overall, I'd probably go a little bit lower on the rating for the first almost 100 days.
I'd probably go with a C, maybe a C-, 70%.
Again, you've got to be fair that he hasn't been in there a very long time, so he's going to be inherently limited on what he can and cannot do in that amount of time.
I think we have seen, almost at this point, more things that we could question than perhaps we could celebrate in some ways.
You've seen lots of the stuff around Ukraine that, of course, all blew up with Zelensky.
And I'm with you on that.
That was absolutely necessary.
That needed to happen.
That war needs to come to an end.
Biggest, hottest flashpoint for World War 3 that we have right now in the world.
So the quicker that's wrapped up, the better.
We need to get on friendly terms with Russia.
But then we had some back and forth there with Trump apparently saying that Putin has pissed him off.
And well, then there needs to be some more movement towards peace, towards a deal.
Then he kind of rolled that back a few days after that on Air Force One, where he essentially came out and said that Well, actually, things are moving forward and it might work out.
So that's been a bit of a mixed bag.
The Middle East has been a big time mixed bag as well, to say the least.
We had some good rhetoric, I think, on the Middle East to start out the administration.
The rhetoric surrounding the idea of peace and getting this issue resolved and reaching deals.
But then what do we have?
We have this massive escalation in the attacks on Yemen.
We have the continued support for what Israel is doing in Gaza, which at this point continues to just churn out video after video of atrocity after atrocity.
You also have this attack in Yemen, which Trump shared the video of this attack on a mass group of people which he claimed were Houthi rebels, Yemeni terrorists.
And then it turns out that was actually probably just a tribal gathering of civilians.
And I saw George Galloway made a comment on that, where he essentially said, well, they might not have been Houthis before the airstrike, but those who survived and their family members probably are now.
And this is the central problem of US foreign policy.
It spirals out control, we get blowback, and it seems that Trump still has some of these bad neocon voices in his ear.
So let's talk about a plethora of those things.
Let's start with the pissed off comment, right?
You know, I honed in on that.
I didn't just take the headline for what it was.
I watched the reporter.
And by the way, the reporter that reported on that, and supposedly was the core source for Trump, was the same reporter who was put in her place during the presidential debates by Vivek Ramaswamy and had that little smirkle.
On her face when the mainstream media got called out by him.
Now, again, they ran with Trump is pissed at Putin, but they didn't say why.
And he said that it pissed him off that Putin was continually challenging the legitimacy of Zelensky's presidency.
And basically that, hey, he's the guy that you're going to have to deal with and we're not going to get into any negotiations saying he's not.
Although Putin had nothing but correct points that this guy was establishment driven and has since suspended elections in that country.
So I think it was a fair point to make.
I think that's where, unfortunately, some of Trump's pig-headedness gets in the way.
You talked about Gaza and the atrocities there.
Literally this week, we have another story of Israeli forces killing health workers, murdering health workers, then throwing them in a mass grave.
And also destroying their vehicles, which are obviously ambulances, and going, what a no!
And then admitting it after the fact.
I'm sick of it.
And that's another huge problem with these conservatives.
I'm not pro-Hamas.
You know what else I'm not?
I'm not pro-killing health workers and throwing them in mass graves.
Period. I'm done.
I thought I was done.
I'm not.
Yesterday saw another one of a headless child being held by their ankles by the enemy and it being celebrated.
And by the way, it wasn't the Muslims holding the kids, everybody.
Just want to throw that out there.
The lack of acknowledgement of how dangerous that is and Trump leaning into Israel getting what they want is extremely dangerous to me.
In other words, I don't understand the idea that Gaza no longer exists for the Palestinians, that Palestine no longer exists, and you're just going to relocate literally a million and a half to two million people, whatever's left they haven't slaughtered, to some magical place that hasn't been decided yet.
And after they do it, it's going to be beachfront property with a golden Trump.
That's nuts!
Alright? Israel isn't done in the Middle East after Gaza.
They're currently full force in a war with Lebanon, whether we're saying that or not.
And then on top of that, they are the powder keg for Iran.
Now, it ain't no conspiracy theory.
The Greater Israel Project is real.
So if they've taken Palestine now, essentially, what stops them?
Yeah, I mean, absolutely right.
And you're absolutely justified in getting angry and frustrated about this as well.
I think we've all gone through that at this point.
And it just happens again and again and again.
And also, a really important thing to reiterate here, which I've said on your show time and time again, just like you just did.
Neither of us support Hamas.
Neither of us support terrorism.
Neither of us think that the October 7th attack was justified in any way whatsoever.
I think you actually did a really good job of illustrating that by really focusing in on the music festival that was hit and the rave kids and all that sort of stuff.
Is going and killing a bunch of rave kids, is that useful in any way whatsoever?
Does that help the cause of the Palestinians at all?
Absolutely not.
So Hamas...
Absolutely does, in one way or another, need to go, but evidently that's not what the Israeli military mission is trying to do.
It's trying to get everyone out of Gaza, not just Hamas.
But something, I'm not sure if you've seen this or not, there have been mass protests in Gaza against Hamas.
From the Palestinians.
So now we have thousands of people out on what's left of the streets of Gaza saying we want Hamas out.
You guys have got to get the hell out of here.
You've done nothing for us.
You've helped to bring us into this situation.
It's time to go.
So this is the brutal reality of trying to use terrorism as a method of political change.
It only opens, as you said, a powder keg.
Sparks it and it blows up and then it's completely out of control, which is what's happened here.
And some of those same Palestinians, maybe they probably did at certain points support Hamas and think that what they were doing was a good idea.
But now they've seen the error of their ways there.
And yeah, there's just no way you can justify that terrorism at all.
But yes, we have Netanyahu now back in the White House today, I think, and yesterday.
The only real thing that I saw highlighted over on X, which there may or may not be other things, was Trump apparently said to Netanyahu that he's gotta take it easy in Syria, something like this, which was about it in terms of putting the limits on what Netanyahu and his government can do.
Trump's gotta be really careful here.
One positive that I saw again today, headline out Fox News, that he wants to start direct talks with Iran.
I have been calling for that since day one of this administration, since well even before that.
That, yeah, if you want to solve this problem, let's not fight another war over it.
That's going to go exactly how we think it's going to go.
And how, by the way, the smarter people in the Pentagon also know, which is a complete disaster.
And they don't want to see their...
God only knows how many soldiers under their command, how many ships be killed and destroyed.
So that's good, but we'll see what happens.
Is this all just window dressing and he's going to try to make it publicly look like he tried to talk to them and then just bomb them anyway?
So he's in a really precarious situation.
If he wants to be the peace president, if he wants to be the dealmaker, it's time to really go back to the art of the deal.
Talk to the Iranians.
Don't Listen to what the people on places like Fox News have got to say about Iran, or even really what the far left have got to say about Iran.
Let's take a pragmatic approach in that we are two powerful countries here.
We've got significant militaries.
If we clash together, this isn't going to be good for either side.
How do we avoid that?
That's how this discussion should go.
It can't be about the mullahs, or it can't be about Islam.
It can't even really be about Israel.
It's got to be, how do we avoid the calamity of war?
That's got to be priority number one.
And, you know, again, this is why Trump is in that 80 percentile range with me.
The guy came in.
And said day one he was going to stop all these things.
I didn't know whether or not that was even possible with or without the rhetoric.
You know that he had actually reached out to some of the people, not only in the Middle East, but in the Russia-Ukraine conflict before being sworn in.
And I had high hopes.
Now... And we'll engage with the media and is talking about talking with.
I think that these are all positive things.
Let's look at the other elephant in the room before we talk about maybe some of the other positives out there, and that's these tariffs.
So, number one, I'm not against them.
But then again, I'm not invested in the stock market.
I totally see the fear of the average American who has bought into the system.
Has a 401k and lost a ton of money.
Now, I think that that's being exaggerated a little bit and amplified a bit for the real people that have lost the money, and those are the Wall Street gang, okay?
And that's the big problem I have, is all these lefties who talked about the Wall Street billionaires and back Bernie Sanders, he just took a direct attack on the globalist system that is Wall Street.
I didn't expect the economy to boom right after.
I still don't.
But at the same time, I think long term, this is what needs to happen.
And I think that when watching the markets, obviously, they will course correct eventually.
But this also shows you when the establishment doesn't want to step in, they don't.
Because when we had similar crashes during the COVID-1984 nightmare, when they were about to shut down the economy, and no one on the left had a problem with that!
Just totally shut down the economy?
Oh, sure!
They literally shut down the stock market several times as it was crashing to correct it.
They've done none of that under Trump.
And that's why, to me, This is a positive thing.
And on top of that, I actually love the fact that the old musker do is calling Peter Navarro a moron on the Trump tariff thing because I happen to like Navarro.
I've had Navarro on this program.
You know what Navarro did, Musk?
He got thrown in prison for nothing.
You know what you did in that time period?
You made hundreds of billions of dollars.
I mean, just on its face.
Think about that.
Musk attacking Navarro, the tariffs, the reality behind this, and the fact that if these things aren't going to work, we are talking about years and years of building infrastructure here in the United States that we will not see come to economic fruition, perhaps not in half a decade or even a decade.
It may actually take that long term in reality, no?
Yeah, no, definitely.
I take, I'm probably a little bit more critical of the tariffs than you are at this point.
So I'm definitely with Trump on all of the ills, all of the problems of globalization in the sense that has it shipped far too many jobs overseas?
Absolutely. Has it destroyed the industrial base of the United States?
Absolutely. Has it really damaged the potential for national wealth building in the United States?
Yes. Has it empowered a collection of transnational elites that are so far removed from the nation state now that they can really just move themselves and their wealth wherever they want and ultimately then have no real ties to a single country at all?
They can just pick up and...
Move, shop, wherever they want, whenever they want to do it with relative ease.
So all this stuff is correct in the sense that it's a problem and it's created massive wealth imbalances in the United States.
Wealth inequality is completely off the charts.
We have a service economy where we have...
Many college graduates out working in places like Starbucks and that's the best that they can currently find.
This is a huge problem.
Now when we get to the tariffs though, I'm not totally sure that this is the best solution here.
And the reason for that is because we're no longer in the early 2000s, we're no longer in the 1990s when...
The United States was really the only game in town.
So I think Trump is playing this game as if the United States is still the only game in town when it comes to economic power in the world.
That's just no longer really the case.
So you can do this whole method of trying to put tariffs on overseas producers What if
these corporations just say, you know what?
We don't want to deal with this.
We don't want to deal with this tariff situation.
Let's just focus on the Chinese market instead.
Let's just focus on the Indian market.
Let's focus on the Brazilian market.
So there's lots of ways that this could go, which much like the conflicts, when you start dropping bombs, you don't know how it's going to play out.
You don't know who's going to be on what side of which explosion.
That's very much the same thing.
So what you're telling me is you expect a lot of these countries not to rebuild in the United States,
but simply stop exporting to the United States as their main economics, and instead focus on, like you said, Brazil and South America, Other second and third world nations with emerging economies.
Because this is if, and again, I'm not an economist, right?
So I'm coming at this really from a more of a political theory angle than anything else.
So when you look at corporations, what they contend to do is they will avoid things like tariffs as much as humanly possible, and they will do anything to avoid.
Tariffs and taxes of any kind.
So for Trump to be doing this, you're almost calling the bluff of the corporations.
So do you really want to try to dodge this?
Well, what if they say yes?
Now, of course, giving up the American market is not going to be an easy thing for a lot of these corporations to do.
But what if, in their evaluation, that's actually easier than trying to go through this whole process and trying to keep their business afloat?
At the same time we see it with Nintendo right now.
Nintendo has just paused pre-orders of the Nintendo Switch 2. Because of the tariffs, and that's had its own massive set of problems, the Switch 2 reveal, for gaming reasons, which we won't go into here.
But seriously, wait, wait, let's do that for a second, because I think it is really important, because Nintendo is a Japanese company, which, yes, it does export to the entire globe.
Nintendo is a global phenomenon, but the main chunk of its economic business is the United States.
Period. Full stop.
We pay the most for the hardware and the software.
A lot of people don't know those sliding scales of prices, but I'll give an example on another system.
Xbox, Microsoft.
Again, Microsoft realizes that it's making most of its money in westernized nations paying first world prices.
So if you go onto a retail reseller site for those type of games, the new game That's $80 in the United States is probably $45 to $50 in Argentina, okay?
Then you go to the mid-range games that are now $50 or $60.
You can get those sometimes as low as $10 in places like Turkey, Argentina, etc.
And in some cases, hint, hint, hint, you can access that through a VPN.
So instead of spending...
$80 on a game?
You could spend $40, or instead of spending $50, you could spend $5 or $10.
Now, they do this because they realize getting some is better than getting none.
And a lot of this now is no longer hardware-based.
Yes, the system is hardware-based, but a lot of gaming systems are moving away from that.
You can now play your Xbox on your LG TV or just about anything else.
And they realize software and bandwidth I think right now they're economically reassessing that with these tariffs involved and possibly we could be in for a refresh or a reprice.
What that will do for sales, I'm not quite sure because you do have the Nintendo Fanatics.
But one of the features of Nintendo is the hardware has always been slightly cheaper and the games that you get your kids are usually kid-based and last a little longer than the adult stuff.
This is a microcosm of that economic impact, no?
No, completely.
So I think what a lot of other corporations are going to be doing right now is they are watching and waiting to see what Nintendo does.
Are they going to...
So they announced this the other week, like you said, $450 for the console.
If they come out at the end of this week or maybe the week after and they say, well, actually, due to tariffs, this is now going to be $550 or this is going to be $600.
I mean, you could be looking at...
Drama on the internet like you've never seen before in the gaming sphere and that would be something.
So yeah, a lot of corporations though, other corporations outside of this are going to be looking at Nintendo and seeing how do they deal with it.
You've got a brand new product, it's coming out, you've just been hit by these, what are you going to do about it?
Are you just going to maybe try to keep the price the same and then just eat a massive loss and then recoup that on the software side of things?
That's been the traditional gaming model for a while as well.
But I saw an interview with the head of Nintendo America yesterday, and he said he didn't say it directly, but he implied it that these consoles had a built in profit in that 450 price tag as well.
So do they just say, well, we'll knock that on the head.
We'll take a bit of the loss.
We'll just break even on these.
But yeah, Nintendo will survive this nonetheless.
They will want to sell here, of course, because like you said, all the money that's here.
But this is a problem.
For a company like Nintendo, they're probably going to be able to work around it.
But mid-sized companies, small-sized companies, they may just say, there's no way of doing this unless I jack the price up.
And who's then going to buy the product?
Hardly no one.
Why bother?
I think that's the real threat here.
When it comes to the market, of course, I know you've been a critic of Wall Street and all of the ills of that sector of American and global life.
And of course, you've been close with Luke Radowski and the Occupy movement and all that sort of thing.
Yeah, there was quite a lot of momentum in that direction for a while, really from the left, the political left.
And we see here, like you said, though, there is a bit of contradiction going on right now.
Yeah, and those same people have really put up quite a...
A vicious political argument on this and the state of economics and the state of globalization and the state of the marketplace itself and the stocks and the shares and these corporations and how negative they've been on the economy.
Well now they're getting a big hit but it looks like some of those people also are in some ways coming to the defense of the market at the moment.
Now I'm not really necessarily trying to come at this from the position of the defense of the market.
I'm trying to come at this from the position of Do we actually have the odds in our favor here?
That this is going to play out exactly as we want it to play out?
Now, I think the Republicans will need to ask themselves this question as well.
Because deep down, every Republican congressman doesn't care about Trump.
They care about themselves and their own chance of re-election.
So Trump also has to ask himself this question.
If I keep going down this road, I keep going down...
Tariff road.
Tariff lane.
I'm pointing these on and refusing to back down.
So yeah, if we do the 100% tariff on China, that will create almighty chaos in the stock market that you might not necessarily be able to roll back.
So then Republican congressmen are going to start thinking to themselves, you know, this guy Donald Trump, he's been pretty good for us, but this is his last term in office.
Do we actually want to sacrifice our own political careers for Donald Trump's agenda?
That's going to be the next question they're going to be asking themselves.
And I think a lot of them, if this keeps going in a negative direction and they start hearing from their constituents that my 401k has been destroyed, I can't retire now, so on and so forth, which also, by the way, is the constituency, elderly people, that vote the most.
And vote most often and are most politically engaged, they might start to push back on this.
They might not go as far as Rand Paul in terms of the pushback, which I think has been an interesting sight to behold.
He's really been against this just generally as a tax increase.
But I think we could see some political pushback from the Republicans who might start thinking...
Am I going to get re-elected if Trump keeps going down this road?
And we might see some congressional pushback against the administration, which would be a first time in a long time that we get that.
And look, we've already seen leopards changing their spots, right?
You look at somebody like Eric Adams, mayor of New York City, who was behind all.
...of the Biden policies up until almost the very bitter end, probably the last year, and then all of a sudden he starts getting investigated for his corruption.
I'm not here to stump for Eric Adams.
I think that all of those investigations were 100% legitimate, but unfortunately that's just the way the cookie crumbles in that region, and they did it...
For political means.
He's now declared himself an independent.
The Democrats are trying to rebrand Andrew Capo Cuomo.
Hey, folks, you get a Hocal-Cuomo combo in New York, it's over.
It's all right.
Listen, I'm not going to my alumni weekend in two weeks because the last time I was in my little upstate New York college town.
The entire Main Street was riddled with heroin addicts who were ODing to the tune of two to five times a week on Main Street in broad daylight.
This is not the city.
So much so that when I went to go to my favorite place to eat with a buddy of mine that I hadn't seen in a year, He told me that the way they're making money is the transgender surgeries they're doing multiple times a week there, including on children.
Okay, just throwing that out there.
And then he said, sometimes we get two to three ODs a day, but we get no less than five ODs a week.
And as he told me that, We look to our right, and on the corner of Main Street and Lettuce, as he tells me that, an ambulance is putting somebody who is ODing on a stretcher.
Yeah, let's put Cuomo in there.
Let's empower Hochul more.
The economy's shot there.
You can't get a one-bedroom apartment in upstate New York for under $1,200 a month.
You think people are making that kind of money?
It is the welfare state, everybody.
At least to the tune of 35 to 45 percent of the people of the 20 plus million that live there are subsidized by the government.
And those are the ones here legally, not the ones lined up at the Roosevelt Motel after that horrific border policy.
And that really does speak to the system, right?
You would think in a situation where, again, we're 70 plus days in, these people are completely illegal, that the Trump administration should have just rolled up with buses and said, you're going home!
Like, it can't get any easier than going into New York City and deporting these people.
I mean, they're all rounded up in very small areas.
It's a manpower issue.
But that also speaks to this border policy.
It sounds great.
The border is much more shut down and secure than it was under the Biden administration.
There is really no way to accelerate the mass deportation physically Yeah, I mean, this is a whole other issue as well.
I think what's important about the immigration issue is that I think...
people on the left and the right also have a point of agreement here, which I'm not sure they fully comprehend.
In the millions of people coming across the US border with literally nothing but the clothes on their back is a very bad thing.
I mean, if you're on the left, that's a humanitarian disaster.
If you're on the right, that's a potential economic disaster.
So that has to be solved.
And that has to be solved, again, in a way that I think requires a long term plan, a long term approach to figuring this all out, which I'm not sure that the Trump administration has right now.
And this also brings me back in a sense to the tariffs, what he's doing with the tariffs and taking this gamble where they may or may not work, it may or may not bring manufacturing back to the United States, jobs, wealth, you name it.
It's in some ways also being being a big distraction.
So every time the Trump administration is having to deal with one of these, I think there's over 50 countries that have been on the phones of the Trump administration since his announcement, that's a moment that they're not using to solve some other problem, such as the immigration issue, such as the Middle East, such as the war in Ukraine.
So in a sense, Trump You said he has kind of this pig-headed attitude, which I think is absolutely correct.
He kind of becomes like a dog with a bone on some of these issues and he just won't let it go and he just has to do it no matter what.
Well, in some ways, if he's making issues and not cleaning them up as he's going, this doesn't...
Look good for the long term of his presidency here.
I think we've both been very fair to him.
You probably even more so than I in terms of trying to figure out where he's going to go and if this will be a positive outcome or not.
But I think, again, he's got to be really careful.
He's got all of these potential landmines around him in a metaphorical sense that if you trip on one of these things and it explodes and you don't expect it to go in the direction that you thought, You're going to be in big trouble.
And with the immigration thing, that is one of the top two issues of why people voted for Trump.
It was the immigration and it was the inflation.
That was primarily it.
And when it comes to immigration, we've had quite a few high profile headlines.
But we've also had some major missteps there as well.
I mean, we got this guy who's apparently been deported by mistake.
I don't know the full ins and outs of that story, but the fact that you can deport anyone by mistake, that should be a huge red flag.
We've got these people that are on student visas that are having them revoked simply for being in a protest or near a protest or maybe said something or held up a flag or a sign or something.
I mean, that's...
That's a misstep.
That's also a distraction.
It's extremely dangerous.
It's extremely dangerous.
You know, the biggest and most egregious one for me was this South Korean student that had been a permanent resident here.
Just been here.
And nothing violent.
Destroyed no property at all.
Yeah, demonstrate a real crime before you start deporting people, because if you want to be a nation of free speech, that's not just for U.S. citizens, that's for everybody.
If you can prove that they're a government operative somewhere being funded, so that's a different situation.
I haven't seen that situation in this.
No, this unfortunately is there to appease AIPAC and the Israeli lobby and unfortunately, in my opinion, send shivers down the spine of anybody who would challenge the military establishment and what it is doing moment to moment.
And that is an essential right, and I would say an obligation, to critical thinking people that simply want peace throughout humanity.
How dare I?
No, absolutely.
I think with that case with that Korean girl, I think she's like 19, 20 now.
I think she actually won in court.
So yeah, she ended up not having the green card vote, not having herself deported.
Just by simply arguing that it was a First Amendment case.
So that's definitely a positive piece of news on the road there.
But yeah, broadly, I don't think this is also a good look for Trump either.
Of all the people you could deport, you're going to deport students and just revoke their visas and send them out here.
What about, like you said, all of the actual criminals that we have?
That have come over, that have committed crimes, that have done provably bad things, or actually are tied to foreign governments.
They are involved in some kind of espionage or sabotage or something really nasty like that.
But instead, you're going to deport students for holding up a sign on a campus?
I mean, that's not a good look for your administration.
Is your administration that weak that you have to deport students that hold up signs?
And so again, this is where Trump is opening the door for more problems than he needs.
He's got enough problems already.
Solve the ones you've got.
Stop creating new ones for yourself.
So let's talk about some of the positives, and some of the positives still that I think have to come to fruition.
The mass declassification of the JFK, MLK, RFK documents, and then we'll get into the Epstein debacle in a moment.
For those that are unaware, we're still about, I believe it's...
Three to five thousand documents shy of what we were promised with the 80,000 documents.
So if you see here, we actually got a release just four or five days ago, okay?
And that is the April 3rd release of about 704 pages.
Now you noticed above that is 53 pages on March 26th.
Like I said, there are several thousand.
This tells me that we're getting a slow trickle.
That there is obviously something in there that is being protected.
And as far as I know, I have yet to see the 800-page initial report done up by Warren C. DeBrew, who many people feel was Oswald's FBI handler and who followed Oswald from New Orleans into Dallas.
As it happened, and was the initial investigator.
Until I see that 800-page document, I know you're withholding stuff.
Now, number one, you have this one woman who believes that she's all in charge of it, and we're going to get to the bottom of it, but then that woman happens to be an ex-stripper.
Like, just so you know, the woman that they put in charge of the declassification was a Florida stripper that was a MAGA influencer they turned into a congressman.
Now, I'm not here to judge strippers, okay?
You do what you want to do.
If you don't think that stripping is a very trans-actional occupation where you are manipulating people, you don't understand the business.
What are your thoughts on these mass declassifications?
Obviously, JFK in particular, as that's the first round of documents that we're waiting on.
I get it.
We're 80 days into this administration, but...
How fast-tracked can they become, or is this going to get bogged down through the entire four years of the administration, and are we even going to get these documents?
Forget about 9-11, which we can get into, and then the Epstein can of worms, which we will get into.
What are your thoughts on the assassination documents?
Yeah, I mean, great points overall, Jason.
I think the central problem here is that even if we do get Everything.
Who is defining everything?
So this is often a problem in the world of academic political science research.
Usually in the field of quantitative research, so people that use numbers and statistics and statistical data.
Where does a lot of that stuff come from?
The government itself.
well then you have to ask the question can you trust the government to give you accurate numbers or is it only going to give you the numbers that it wants you to see or is it going to fudge the numbers in some way those same questions we have to apply to this qualitative
problem in government documents um so yeah are we getting absolutely everything and i think um we've seen through a lot of this already i think you posted some of this stuff um lots of these things that have been released have also been heavily redacted still to this day um so the idea that i think even that this is following what you'd expect in a democracy i think we're almost completely outside of that as well
you're in a completely misbalanced world here where the government clearly has far more sway, far more political power when it comes to information and secrecy, knowledge generally, than the average citizen.
So I would love to see all this stuff released and not only released but unredacted as well.
That's why WikiLeaks made such a splash when it released all of its stuff because they refused to redact anything You can actually find out the real story of what actually happened, but not just the parts of the story that the government wants you to read.
So that's really why you get this massive, ferocious response to organizations like WikiLeaks and people like Assange.
I think what you said towards the end there as well is a real fear in that this may drag on for the whole of the administration.
Just dragging the feet consistently.
I mean, dealing with government in any sense, it's tough to get it to move at all.
Even at the university level that I deal with, trying to get a university to do anything in any short span of time.
I mean, give up.
In the university world, again, public.
I think that's just ridiculous.
So there needs to be a move, I think, here in the government.
Not perhaps a department of government efficiency, but where's the department of government transparency?
That's what I think we need next.
So let's talk Epstein documents.
Obviously, the Pam Bondi influencer release wasn't a release.
It was 20 times ridiculous.
The fact that they walked out with binders.
When we knew from just the civil cases, right?
When Epstein settled the one civil case in Florida with Brad Edwards, they were literally standing in front of piles of boxes that would have been truckloads.
I don't know how people forgot this.
It was a big press conference.
It was a big deal.
This is before Epstein was arrested, okay?
He had dragged out this civil case.
All the way up to jury selection.
And when he got to jury selection, he was like, well, I guess we're going to pay some money.
So, unless the books had multiple thumb drives on them with all the evidence there, and then all the evidence that we saw in the New York apartment raid of the, not binder, but binders.
Of pictures and burned DVDs that the binding itself was blacked out so you couldn't see how they were labeled.
Although if you read their documents, they were labeled with names and people and victims.
All right?
If you are actually now going through that, which maybe the New York field office is.
The one guy did resign.
There's the Vanity Fair article out there where they tried to be very dismissive and angry that they were doing this.
Have you seen that one?
I don't know if I've seen that one.
Ludicrous situation.
Jeffrey Epstein case redaction takes over FBI's New York field office.
This is from March 21st and a couple people from the inside actually say this is real and that they have been put on hold in a lot of their other investigations.
Here's the deal.
If it is real and they're doing that, they're going to have to arrest and charge people.
You cannot.
Put out photographs or video or even documentation of prominent people raping children without charging them with anything, because then you look like you're complicit even after the fact, especially if you know about this stuff.
That alone tells me that if they are sincere about this, it will be another 18 to 24 months before we see anything.
And in that 18 to 24 months, If they are legit, we will see actual arrests.
I'm not holding my breath for any of it because Epstein was an arms dealer more than likely involved in the Iran-Contra situation, which they haven't been able to tell us the truth about.
What's your take on the Epstein documents?
Pam Bondi herself, is she ignorant?
Is she a useful idiot?
because Bondi was the assistant attorney general under Acosta during this whole thing.
But if you remember, I don't know how much Acosta really knew about the situation.
And he seemed to be just like a negotiation middleman that whenever he dipped his toe into information that was a little Yeah, I mean, excellent breakdown.
I think one of the key points in there...
that you mentioned is that well yeah if this fbi office is doing this how long is this actually going to take and if it does take 18 to 24 months what's going to happen in the meantime and that's where we could tie in the rest of the rest of the discussion that we've just had here I think?
ever to this?
If the Republicans turn on Trump, what if Republicans decide to impeach him or try to oust him in some way?
There's so many things that can derail everything he's trying to do here with things like this, which is why he needs to focus on, Pull back a little, come up with an actual plan and move to get these real things done.
Because the longer you leave this, the longer you drag it out, the less likelihood that it's ever actually going to happen.
And you've of course been very skeptical on the idea of this stuff.
Ever happening, particularly in the Epstein case, because of just who exactly is tied into it.
And we've got the pictures, we've got British royalty, we've got really the equivalent American royalty, in a sense, and those sorts of people.
We've had the comments from Bill Gates, and you played that clip, I think, before, where he's being interviewed, and then they bring it up, and he just kind of repeats his answers, has nothing to say at all, really.
So yeah, this is just such a kettle of fish here.
But I think if you open this, you may be sending yourself down a path that you might not be able to come back from for a lot of these people.
So who exactly is implicated in this?
To what extent does it drag the Republican and Democratic Party into it?
Who knew what and when?
If all these people in this office are finding this stuff out, like you said, we're going to have to know about it in one way or another.
It's going to have to come out.
And if it doesn't...
Why is it not coming out?
Because if, like you said, if real crimes have been committed there, and we're just not coming out with it because we don't like the names that we've found, well, there you go.
That's a government of, by, and for elites, not a government of, by, and for the people.
And by the way, the sitting president can't even get...
answers on the two different assassination attempts that took place.
Just as kind of the last crescendo of this episode, Trump assassination attempt suspect Ryan Ruth sought a rocket launcher from his Ukrainian contacts.
Folks, it's the real deal.
It's absolutely legitimate.
It should be an eye-opener.
And to think, again, you don't get rocket launchers on your own.
There's obviously some type of a conspiracy theory that is in motion there, that was in motion at Butler, Pennsylvania, and I'm not talking about one where everything's fake.
No. The guy got shot in his ear.
Someone was killed over there.
They wanted him dead.
That gives him credibility to me.
And I know some people question that, but certainly I've looked at it.
I'm willing to question it.
I just found no evidence whatsoever that it was staged.
You can follow him over at StuartJHooper on X. Stuart, what would you like to leave the audience with?
Just really the overall message is I want everyone to continue being critical thinkers.
Stop jumping on the bandwagon of people.
Stop just supporting people no matter what they do.
There is some talking around in circles right now coming from Trump supporters and some of the things that he's doing that they're having a hard time justifying.
You don't have to justify it.
What you should do is hold the people in power to account no matter who it is, no matter how much we like them.
And keep them on track.
Because like you, Jason, I've been optimistic about Trump.
I think he can do well.
People did try to kill him for a very real reason.
Let's make him live up to those promises.
Let's have Trump be the Trump that we all know and want him to be.
Badingo, badongo, my friend.
And that really lays it all out.
Because, folks...
It's never about left or right.
It is always about right and wrong, remaining consistent, and holding those two account.
I want to thank you for joining me here.
▲
Export Selection