All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 27, 2023 - Jimmy Dore Show
01:01:31
20231227_TJDS_20231227_Podcast_-_122623_8.44PM
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Come see us do a live stand-up show.
We'll be in Venice, California, Palmdale, California, Omaha, Des Moines, Milwaukee, Lansing, Bend, Oregon, Portland, Oregon, Seattle, Washington, Boston, Massachusetts.
And we're going to Europe.
Do you live in Europe?
We're going to be there.
Go to jibbydoor.com for a link for all those tickets.
Establishment media sucks.
All gaslighting, so good luck.
Bullshit we can't afford.
He's fomenting this.
Watch and see as his jack off.
The median speeds and jumps the medium.
And hits them head on.
It's the Chimitor Show.
Oh.
Welcome back to the show, Whitney.
Hey, great to be here, Jimmy.
Do you ever think of changing your name to Whitey?
No.
Okay, I was just curious.
I thought about using my middle name, though, because I live in Latin America and everyone, I have to explain my name by saying I have the same name as Whitney Houston.
And I've gotten very tired of that.
See, that's what I'm saying.
Go with Whitey.
She should have went whitey Houston.
Whitey Houston.
That's what I would say.
So you live in Chile.
Is there less surveillance in Chile?
I don't, you know, I don't really have illusions of privacy for like really any country at this point because I think, you know, a lot of the tech that anyone uses really in any country is Silicon Valley dominated.
And all of those companies have deals with signal intelligence agencies in the U.S. and elsewhere, right?
So I don't know.
I mean, Chile's not perfect, but I definitely think it's a little, you know, some of the surveillance tech, like, you know, street cameras, facial recognition, when you're walking on the street, that kind of stuff isn't really here yet, the way it is in like some U.S. cities.
Is it easier to protect your children from propaganda there?
Yeah, I mean, I think, well, my kids are pretty young, honestly.
And I kind of try and, you know, curate what they watch and stuff.
And my daughter goes to a school that's pretty like free thinking, encourages critical thought and like art and stuff.
So, I mean, that's nice that you can, you know, kind of have the freedom to choose different schools like that.
Why do you think so many people who are able to see through the COVID lies aren't able to see through the government propaganda on Israel?
Yeah, that's interesting, isn't it?
Well, you know, one thing that I think is kind of interesting and that I've thought about and talked to some friends about is that I think there was an effort during COVID to sort of prop up a certain class of people who were telling the truth about COVID, but then to have them at the same time sort of rebuild trust among specifically like Trump's base and people like that for like neocon foreign policy.
So you had groups like Steve Bannon's War Room, for example, basically saying that everything that happened with COVID was the CCP, even though the Trump administration was doing like the exact same policies.
And later, you know, the Biden administration and sort of trying to link it with these with these different policies.
And a lot of these neocons from back in the Bush administration or around that era, people like Frank Gaffney set up websites like stopvaxpassports.com and were trying to sort of like rebuild trust by being critical of the COVID narrative.
And then they regain that trust that they lost, you know, in past eras, like the Iraq war era.
And then they're sort of able to be like, hey, look what's happening now and manufacture, you know, consent with that particular group for what Israel is doing right now.
But I think it's not really working so much because so much of Israeli propaganda is about dehumanizing Palestinians.
And during the COVID era, people that didn't get vaccinated, that didn't submit to lockdowns and stuff like that were also dehumanized.
So a lot of these people are like, wait, well, I think there's more people anyway that maybe sort of see through that tactic because it just happened to a totally different class of people all over the world, right?
Yeah, I couldn't.
That's good observation.
Yeah.
Well, let's get into there's been some recent revelations.
Now, this is from Michael Schellenberger.
And he wrote this article.
I'm going to show yours also.
CTIL files, number one, U.S. and the UK military contractors created sweeping plan for global censorship in 2018.
New documents from new whistleblower shows.
And the sub-headline here is Whistleblower makes trove of new documents available to public and racket showing the birth of censorship industrial complex.
It came in reaction to Brexit and Trump election in 2016.
Now, that's when the establishment lost control of the narrative and democracy actually happened.
And when people voted, they voted for Trump and then they voted for Brexit, which are two things the establishment did not want.
And so they had to quickly snap into their plan of grabbing back the narrative, right?
And so, and a big part of that was this new censorship industrial complex.
Would you agree with that?
Yeah, I think that's fair.
And then also, you know, in the same period of time, another thing that was happening around that same year or so is that Microsoft launched their, what they called the Defending Democracy program.
And one of the parts of that, main components of that was called NewsGuard, which is a major censorship effort as well that I think was launched in 2018 also.
And basically was a built-in like sort of like a pop-up, I guess.
You'd go to a news website and NewsGuard would tell you if it was trustworthy or not.
And they were very suspect and funded by a bunch of, you know, private advertising companies and big corporations and stuff and have sort of been outed for being, you know, just like the CTI league here, censoring people just for having different political opinions, not really going after fake news, more about narrative control, which is pretty consistent with most of this, you know, industrial censorship that's been going on.
So I just heard Tim Poole mention that he uses NewsGuard.
I was going to hold back from saying that.
Really?
Yeah.
And I'm writing up, that's the first I heard of it was him saying NewsGuard was good.
I've never heard NewsGuard was good before, but I think he's, I think he uses that to show, hey, look, even their approved press is telling me this.
I've seen him sense, but this is the one that you're supposed to use.
Yeah, so, but so let me just this is who says you're supposed to use it, Microsoft?
Sure, so it was kind of like Peter Dow tried his own version of that too, with Verit Verit or something, and um, but he didn't have Microsoft behind him, so it failed.
But, um, here from this article, the whistleblower alleges that a leader of CTI League, what does CTI stand for?
Cyber cyber threat intelligence.
The whistleblower alleges that a leader of cyber threat analogy when they formed, they called themselves like the cyber justice league.
I mean, it's just it's it's it's like right out of a Saturday morning cartoon when I was a kid.
I like how this these elections were our Hamas election.
Yeah, that's right.
You can never have power, you're never allowed to be part of democracy again.
You voted Hamas, Trump, Brexit.
They're all the same thing.
Trump and President, like they're Hamas.
So the whistleblower alleges that a leader of the CTI League, a former British intelligence analyst, was in the room at the Obama White House in 2017 when she received the instructions to create a counter disinformation project to stop, quote, a repeat of 2016.
So there's Barack Obama's White House joining up with British intelligence and, of course, our own deep state.
And I wouldn't, I'm sure Mossad, because a deep state America is Mossad.
And what and what is this all about?
This isn't about getting rid of disinformation or conspiracy theories.
This is about making sure that someone who comes from outside the two political mainstream party systems never gets to do that again and that people never get to express their will in their vote ever again, right?
Isn't that what that says to you?
Yeah, that's a big part of it.
But actually, if you read the Biden administration documents on this kind of stuff, they say things like they essentially say like people can't disagree anymore about politics.
Like people disagreeing and debating politics like is supposed to be normal is a sign of like discord and threatens democracy and all of this stuff.
So I guess we all have to agree 100% of the time about everything.
So this idea that the Democrats and Barack Obama are about democracy is exactly backwards.
Barack Obama serves the same people that George Bush and Dick Cheney did, serves the same people that Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton did, the same people that Ronald Reagan did and George Bush I, and now Joe Biden and Anthony Blinken do.
They serve the same exact billionaire class military industrial complex, WEF, those Bill de Burke, those same handful of billionaires that run everything, they serve them.
Barack Obama was a fake.
He was a complete fake.
And it's funny to still see people who see through a lot of conspiracies and see through a lot of the propaganda say things like, Barack Obama was the best president of my lifetime.
Yeah, he was the best actor president of my lifetime.
He made you feel like he was a real friend.
He's a real west wing feel.
Yeah, he can pull off a real West Wing feel, as Kurt just said, but he was serving the exact same nefarious interests.
His entire cabinet came from one email from Citigroup.
And the reason I know that is because Julian Assange revealed that through WikiLeaks, which is why the establishment, including Barack Obama, have been trying to kill him ever since.
Okay.
So moving on a little bit more in this article, the whistle.
Okay.
So the ambitions of the 2020 pioneers of the censorship industrial complex went far beyond simply urging Twitter to slap a warning label on tweets or to put individuals on backlists.
The Amit, the adversarial misinformation and influence tactics and techniques called Amit.
So that's adversarial misinformation and influence tactics and techniques.
Their framework calls for discrediting individuals as a necessary prerequisite of demanding censorship against them.
And so I've experienced this.
So I knew that when the Bill Gates-funded fact checkers on Facebook would do a bogus fact check of some of my whatever it was, whether it was COVID or the vax or lockdowns or about Syria or whatever it was, that was a prerequisite to get me completely banned.
And then also to get our financial services cut off.
So that's the game that I could see that they were doing that.
I'm like, why would they care about this?
And why would they have this no-name journalist try to fact check me?
Oh, I get why they're doing this.
They're setting the predicate so they can censorship, censor me completely if they needed to and cut off my finances, right?
You're hip to that.
Yeah, totally.
I mean, the financial services has been their big angle so far, but they definitely have plans to escalate.
So the DOJ, the FBI, and the Secret Service of the U.S. right now are part of this public-private partnership that's under the, you know, operates under the World Economic Forum, but it's run by a career Israeli spy, and they want to label anyone that publishes misinformation online as a, you know, cyber terrorist, essentially, a cyber criminal.
And so because Barack Obama repealed the habeas corpus, he basically did that in the National Defense Authorization Act, Section 1021.
What that means is if they say you're a terrorist, meaning an ek, if you protest against a pipeline, that's they call you an environmental terrorist.
Ecoterrorism.
You're an ecoterrorist.
If you protest, if you put something they consider misinformation on the internet, you're called a cyber terrorist.
So if they consider you a terrorist, they can throw you in jail, what's called indefinite detention, meaning they don't ever have to give you a trial because they've already determined that you're a terrorist.
So we don't, this idea that, again, voting for Joe Biden or Democrats is saving democracy is the exact opposite.
It's ensuring that we'll never have democracy again and we'll always live under authoritarian rule.
I just want people to know that.
I think people who watch this show know that, but maybe somebody is watching this for the first time.
This is not what democracy is, Jimmy.
Democracy is when you have like really diverse MCU characters.
Yes, yes.
So the sum total of the documents is clear.
So you just mentioned this, that it's a coordinated, sophisticated effort by the United States and UK governments to build a domestic censorship effort and influence operations similar to the ones they have used in foreign countries.
In June 2018, this woman named Jane Terp, by the way, she spells her name J-Y-N-E.
Never trusted Jane that puts a Y in her name.
In June 2018, Jane Terp attended a 10-day military exercise organized by the United States Special Operation Command, where she says she first met this guy, Brewer, and discussed modern disinformation campaigns on social media.
Wired, the magazine Wired, summed up the conclusions they drew from their meeting that misinformation, they realized, could be treated the same way as a cybersecurity problem.
So somebody hacking into your database or somebody trying to shut down.
You hacked my narrative is what they're saying.
So they're saying if you have a counter narrative, that can be treated the same way they treat an actual hacking of cyber.
So reality is more classified than that's great.
Yes.
Brewer went on to describe how they first thought they were getting around the First Amendment.
His work with Jane Terp, he explained, was a way to get non-traditional partners into one room, including maybe somebody from one of the social media companies, maybe a few special force operators, and some folks from the Department of Homeland Security to talk in a non-attribution, open environment in an unclassified way, so that we can collaborate better, more freely, and really start to change the way that we address some of these issues.
So this was their attempt to get around the First Amendment.
This is their attempt to bring people in from social media in with intelligence operators and to censor people.
When asked whether TERP or the CTIL leaders discussed a potential violation of the First Amendment, the whistleblower said they did not.
The ethos was that if we get away with it, it's legal, just like the mafia.
And there was no First Amendment concerns because we have a public-private partnership.
That's the word they use to disguise those concerns.
Private people can do things that public servants can't do, and public servants can provide leadership and coordination.
Fascism?
So that's so when the government wanted to censor, they would set up a private censorship organization like they did at Stanford University.
And they would say, oh, no, that's Stanford University do it.
They're private.
But it was in coordination with the government and the deep state of the United States and the UK.
And so here's your article, which is at Unlimited Hangout.
Now, you wrote about this.
So Michael Schellenberg is getting to it now in 2023, but you pretty much wrote about this in 2020.
You were way ahead of the curve.
Here's your meet the IDF-linked cybersecurity group protecting U.S. hospitals pro bono.
And they say they're ruthless, but I mean, then they go and do this.
Anonymous volunteer.
They call themselves volunteering to help.
Do we have the dumbest country on the face of the earth?
Yes, we have the most propagandized.
That's for sure.
Anonymous volunteers from an opaque group founded by the former commander of Israel's Unit 8200 have been granted access to some of the most critical private and public networks in the United States healthcare and pharmaceutical sectors.
That's great.
With the help of the U.S. federal agency, now run by a former Microsoft executive.
You wrote this in August of 2020.
Yep.
So, and here's another article.
Oh, no, this is the same one.
So, hardly any media attention has been given to the dramatic and unsettling changes that have been made to a hospital and healthcare information technology systems and infrastructure under the guise of helping the United States healthcare system cope with the surge in data as well as an unsettling uptick in cyber attacks.
Now, were there really an uptick in cyber attacks, or did they just say there were so they can do this?
So, this was allegedly happening, and I wrote this during the first year of COVID, right?
But this alleged uptick in these issues where the healthcare system IT-wise couldn't cope was because at the exact same time COVID was happening, the department, well, HHS cut their budgets for IT in hospitals around the country.
So, basically, like putting them in a position where they would be overwhelmed.
And then, this group run by, you know, a guy that's basically still an Israeli intelligence operative and people at Microsoft with ties to the national security state in the U.S. come riding to the rescue to offer their services for free to hospitals and the pharmaceutical sector.
And then they expand to chemical plants, dams, and nuclear reactors.
And so then they later get involved in censorship, which is what Schellenberger covers.
But their CTI League has been doing a lot more than just alleged misinformation stuff.
So this is real Brave New World 1984 stuff that it's all about controlling the information.
It's all about controlling information.
It's all about propagandizing.
And it's all about censoring anybody who has a counter narrative to what the establishment wants.
It's a cyber attack.
If you're saying the wrong thing.
If you're saying the wrong thing, they're going to treat it as a cyber attack, literally.
So the surge of cyber attacks combined with major budget cuts has made hospitals even more vulnerable as many are compelled to do more with less.
As a result, there have been a renewed push for the improvement of cybersecurity in hospitals, clinics, and other healthcare institutions throughout the country.
Amid this backdrop, an odd group of cyber threat intelligence analysts with ties to the U.S. government, Israeli intelligence, and tech giant Microsoft have volunteered to protect U.S. healthcare institutions for free and have even directly partnered with U.S. federal agencies to do so.
They've also recently expanded to offer their services to governments and social media platforms to target, analyze, and neutralize alleged disinformation campaigns related to the coronavirus crisis.
Well, son of a bitch, they're just good-hearted volunteers, Whitney.
What problem do you have with these people?
Yeah, well, the fact is, there's a lot of problems.
One, the guy that created the CTI League is a guy named Ohad Zaydenberg, whose entire career at Israeli intelligence was attacking Iran.
And then he leaves formally Unit 8200 and works for this state, Israeli state-affiliated cybersecurity company, where he focuses on Iran, he says, is a strategic intelligence target.
And so he's still basically doing what he did in Unit 8200 for this private company, which he was at at the time he created CTI League.
And he has been, since CTI League was founded and before, blaming Iran for a series of cyber attacks conducted against the U.S. critical infrastructure and other systems, and also accusing them of misinformation campaigns with little to no evidence.
But you get this headline that'll say stuff like, Iran hacked this, Iran hacked that.
But if you actually read what Zadenberg's claim as to why it's Iran, he'll be like, medium to high probability it was Iran because this person's believed work history, so like not even confirmed work history, is similar to a previous operation conducted by an Iranian group that they don't specify or even say what the overlap is.
I mean, it's just whatever.
So anyway, this guy has been attributing attacks to a foreign power for a long time.
And specifically, Israeli intelligence for years has had basically unlimited funds and powers to try and goad the U.S. into striking Iran first so Israel doesn't have to do it first, either via a preemptive strike or some other attack on it for the purpose of advancing regime change in Iran.
Or if you look at what's going on with Israel and Gaza right now and the possibility this could spread to a regional war, if it does and they want to get the U.S. involved, you know, it's not that hard with a group run by Ohad Zadenberg being in all of our critical infrastructure systems.
You know what I mean?
And then being like, oh, the guy I've been blaming, the country I've been blaming for cyber attacks my whole career is responsible.
Also, why are we letting a foreign spy into our critical infrastructure?
Free.
It was for free.
Because it says volunteering and it's for free.
You don't like it.
Right, it's for free.
So here you say, while these analysts have claimed to have altruistic motives, its members who have identified themselves publicly have notably dedicated, just as you said, much of their private sector careers to blaming nation states, namely Iran, but also China, for hacking and most recently for cyber attacks related to the coronavirus crisis, as well as the 2020 presidential campaign.
So that explains why the child pornography I found planted on my hard drive was in Mandarin with a strong Hebrew accent.
Am I right?
So the idea an Israeli is going to do that kind of work for free just out of the goodness of their heart.
I know a lot of Israelis.
That's not a thing they do.
I think you're trafficking in anti-Semitic tropes.
So Jews are very generous.
Very generous.
I said Israelis.
No, they don't.
They look at us the way we look at Canadians.
Like we're kind of pussies.
Yeah.
So the final slide from your article, I'll read is: these individuals and their employers rarely, if ever, make their reasons for assigning blame to state actors available to public scrutiny and also have close ties to the very governments, namely the U.S. and Israel, that have been attempting to gin up hostilities with those countries in recent years, particularly Iran, suggesting a potential conflict of interest.
So potential.
So how so we have to go to you to get this information, and we have to go to Michael Schellenberg to get the whistleblower talking about the censorship wing of this.
Why do you think this isn't being reported to the world's number one news journalist, Rachel Maddow?
Why isn't she reporting this?
Or Sean Hannity?
He's always got his finger on the pulse.
Yeah, I mean, I think it's pretty clear that corporate media, the same people that essentially own corporate media, own our politicians and influence a lot of what gets censored and what doesn't get censored by the state.
I think essentially, basically, the U.S. is a giant public-private partnership, and they work together to decide how to keep the little people down at the end of the day.
Right.
So corporate media and, you know, in the U.S., it's the line between being corporate media and state media, I think, is like, you know, it's essentially the same thing.
It's like a CBS.
At this point, yeah, this is.
They toe the line and they'll never not toe the line if you're talking about like cable TV news, you know, like the big channels and stuff.
They just don't cover this stuff.
And they definitely don't, you know, very rarely criticize Israel.
I mean, it's taking, you know, an underestimated 20,000 death toll in Gaza to get like critics and light criticism of Israel of the IDF from CNN and stuff.
I mean, what about their hurt looks that they make when the Israelis show up on American TV?
I don't believe any of the videos of destruction.
Watch the actual Israeli people, politicians coming on American TV and openly saying the craziest shit.
It's like right after I just got done hearing what a madman Putin is.
The same channel, I'm watching a guy go, yeah, war sucks.
You got to kill civilians.
We got to do it in Dresden.
We got it.
Hey, America's did Dresden and they did Nagasaki.
So we're going to do this to Gaza.
I mean, you got war as hell.
That's when they just sit there looking hurt.
And then Will Flitzer goes, he makes a sad face.
He used to work for APAC, Enity, Blitzer.
Yes, of course.
Yes, he did.
And I'm sure Jake Tapper wanted to.
So how much in control is this deep state, this international deep state of the Mossad, UK, and the CIA here?
How much in control are they, you think?
You mean of what?
Of like the U.S., of global happenings?
Yeah, of yes.
Influencer stuff.
Yeah.
So I think it's actually a lot bigger, frankly, than just, you know, the U.S., UK, and Israel, though I definitely think that's like a very core group.
So let's take, for example, the stepfather of Anthony Blinken, the man that raised him, Samuel Pissar, right?
Who was also Robert Maxwell's lawyer and best friend?
Samuel Pissar testified to the Congress in the early 70s and said that what was happening at that time was what he called the rise of the Trans Ideological Corporation, where the big corporations or the big CEOs and oligarchs basically of the West were going to the people that owned state-owned companies in the East,
like communist Russia and China, and making deals with them to create the Trans Ideological Corporation, where there would be basically a group of businessmen that would run the world and would make national sovereignty completely irrelevant.
And a lot of this group is essentially trying to do that.
And I think that kind of explains why you have every country in the world, including, you know, in the Russia-China sphere and then also in the West, following the same playbook with stuff like COVID-19 and pushing for all the stuff like digital IDs and central bank digital currencies and all of that stuff at the same time.
So, I mean, there may be like, you know, these hostilities between, you know, the West and the East in terms of, you know, geopolitical tensions, but there's a lot they agree about at the end of the day.
And that is because you have this group, this really hate to use this word because QAnon ruined it, but basically a cabal of businessmen, you know, basically directing a lot of policy because they have the money and they have the power and they've been accumulating that for a very long time, right?
So this is the guy that raised Anthony Blinken, by the way.
Wow.
That was telling that to Congress.
And a congressman asked him, asked Samuel Pissar if he thought this trans ideological corporation was good or bad.
He was like, mostly good.
But basically, I mean, it was basically a plan to something like that.
Yeah.
And it was definitely tied up with like organized crime in the U.S. You had like Chicago mobsters and stuff sort of involved with this effort too.
You had Israeli intelligence assets like Robert Maxwell and he had all these different actors involved.
And they've been doing a lot of stuff for a very long time and are a big part of the deep state in the U.S. and Israel, which honestly, I've argued for years, the U.S. national security state.
Try not to use deep state that much because it's really, you know, military and intelligence, right?
Generally speaking, like the most unaccountable parts of government.
So the U.S. and Israeli deep states, national security states have essentially fused, I think.
I think it's really a binational national security state.
You can't really separate one from the other anymore.
But you can see this stuff about the trans ideological corporation, even in that too.
So like one of the ways Samuel Pissar, when he was testifying to Congress, said this was going to happen or it was happening was through technology transfer.
So Israel, because of its special relationship with the U.S., gets all this U.S. military tech, but they've passed a ton of that to China, right?
To sort of like equalize the playing field, but it's part of this sort of plan for transnational global governance at the end of the day.
So a lot of these guys, in order to push through the agendas, they all agree about like digital ID, CBDCs, need there to be various types of catastrophes to sort of implement the types of infrastructure they need for this sort of global governance by the trans ideological corporation to come through.
And so digital ID is like a huge part of that.
And so is this programmable surveillable money that we're seeing being implemented everywhere.
So did you say they leaked it to China like on purpose for China to like reverse engineer it or something?
Yeah, they literally passed it to them.
So we since like a Roswell event, but to help China have surveillance.
It started at the end of the 70s and went through the 80s and 90s, even before Israel had official diplomatic relationships, a relationship with China.
It's actually the reason Epstein was visiting the Clinton White House in the mid-1990s so often was because that was what was going on there.
Have you read that?
You know, guy Richard Grove, he sent me that.
Yeah, he sent me that tragedy and hope book by Carol Quigley about the development.
And the guy writing, it's the same kind of thing.
He's writing the history of this like shadow gun.
Sounds exactly what you're talking about that Cecil Rhodes started.
Yeah.
And he's for it.
He's like, why is this a secret?
It's going to be great.
A new world order.
And then he found out they didn't want him talking about it.
Hey, you know, here's another great way you can help support the show is you become a premium member.
We give you a couple of hours of premium bonus content every week.
And it's a great way to help support the show.
You can do it by going to jimmydoorcompany.com.
Clicking on join premium.
It's the most affordable premium program in the business.
And it's a great way to help put your thumb back in the eye of the bastards.
Thanks for everybody who was already a premium member.
And if you haven't, you're missing out.
We give you lots of bonus content.
Thanks for your support.
Let's have a look at some of Bill Gates' financial activity in Africa up to now to help us work out whether he's been an influence for good or bad just by looking at some facts, which we should be frightened of, right?
Bill Gates, for so long, the world's richest man, who famously announced he would give most of his away.
Yeah, is he?
He's like, I promise he's not a guest.
The giving pledge.
The giving.
He hasn't gotten around to that yet, is he?
Yeah, no.
Okay, that's so funny.
Yes, as Mr. Gates's powerful friends gather in Davos, the latest warning that the Gates Foundation has become too powerful and may not be the force for good so many world leaders say it is.
If we can't trust billionaires and world leaders at Davos, I don't know what the world's come to.
What's going on?
Even in Davos now.
The study from the pressure group Global Justice Now paints a picture of the Gates Foundation, partly as an expression of corporate America's desire to profit from Africa and partly a damning critique of its effects.
You could have a case where the initial research is done by a Gates-funded institution and the media reporting on how well that research is conducted is done.
The media outlet is a Gates-funded outlet, and maybe a Gates-funded journalist from a media program.
And then the program is implemented more widely by a Gates-funded NGO.
I mean, there are some very insular circles here.
How much?
So we've reported on this before.
For instance, like PBS NewsHour, they didn't have their own science and news segment thing.
So Bill Gates decided to fund it.
So now he gives money to the PBS News Hour and he funds their science reporting.
Do you think it affects their reporting?
I don't think so.
So then Bill Gates puts all this money into vaccine development.
And then he tells the PBS people that he just gave the money to cover this vaccine thing I just developed.
So they cover it.
And then he also has the manufacturing distribution through another NGO, non-government organization to distribute that vaccine, Gavi.
He also has a pays for a journalism school.
That's right.
So he also pays for the literal journalism school that the journalists that are going to cover this at the journalism outlet, he also funds.
Yeah, but Trump University is the worst thing of our time.
But Trump did that.
Not this.
This is Trump was just to.
Are Trump University graduates saddled with debt their whole lives, by the way?
I don't think they are, are they?
Which is the bigger scam?
Does it cost six figures to go?
No, I don't think it does.
There are some very insular circles here.
So that's what she's talking about.
Yeah.
Is insular circles, meaning it's all funded by the richest man in the world, Bill Gates.
He develops a product.
He funds the journalists that are going to cover it.
He funds the news outlets that they're going to be employed by that cover him and then also cover him distributing it through the non-profit organizations that he developed.
It's unbelievable.
And then I have people like my old roommate saying to me, Jimmy, he's trying to save people in Africa.
That's what he said.
Jimmy, the guy's good.
I've never heard anyone say something that stupid, even who is a Democrat that I've ever been around.
They usually are like, I don't know, Bill Gates.
I don't care.
That's the best I've ever heard.
I've never heard someone actually go, because someone older than me should remember that he's a piece of shit like I do when you're hitting him in the face of pies and what have you.
Remember that?
And like, I remember before he bought the news.
I get a millennial or somebody, somebody I know is a millennial, like, don't tell me the giving pledge isn't real.
So that's somebody young, somebody older.
I mean, I don't even know.
There's no excuse for that.
The guy who signed the giving pledge invested $55 million into Biotech Pfizer right before the pandemic and then cashed out for $500 million.
Isn't that amazing?
The guy who's going to give it all away.
Well, that's great.
He made a profit and did good.
Yeah.
How much help can one man provide?
Among the many criticisms, the idea that private finance can solve the problems of the developing world.
Should poor farmers be trapped into debt by having to use chemicals or fertilizers underwritten by offshoots of the foundation.
Oh, I know this one.
It's yes.
Covid finance initiatives like the one behind this hospital in Lesotho, paid for partly by Mr Gates's philanthropy, also come under attack.
The repayments for this now cost Lesotho more than 50% of its entire health budget.
Is this global philanthropy?
Or is it like an intercontinental version of the Simpsons monorow episode where someone turns up in a town and goes, do you know what you guys need?
You need an AI hospital and we can handle that for you.
Yes, we do have some investments in AI.
Don't think about that now.
Just think about your new sparkling, fantastic, rasmatastic, splendiferous new incubator machines.
Well, where are we going to get these incubator machines?
We'll handle that for you.
And are they going to be expensive?
Is there a chance the truck will bend?
Not on your life.
I've sold monorails to Brockway, Oddinville, and North Haberbrook.
And by gummet, put them on the map.
So there's the creation of a problem.
There's the offering of the solution.
There's the pretense of philanthropy.
In the old days of colonialism, like the British used to just turn up with guns and nick people's countries and gold and diamond mines and tea and coffee, spices, whatever the hell was there, human beings.
At least then we knew this is evil.
If Bill Gates was doing the slave trade, he'd call it some sort of philanthropic initiative to take people on a cruise to America and then a kibbutz working in the cotton industry.
Some aid experts have warned repeatedly that the focus on high-profile headline-grabbing diseases undermines wider attempts by African governments to reduce the poverty that causes them.
Supporters of philanthropy would argue that it can get past corrupt governments and produce results without having to go through the bureaucracy of the United Nations.
But critics of Mr. Gates ask whether it's right that one foundation with more money than entire African countries should wield so much power and influence.
And the answer to that question is, of course, yes, it is right, because how else would you be able to impose all these pilot schemes on the people of Africa and still call it kindness?
Whether it's the BMJ, those charity workers that are on the ground there in Africa, or the people of those regions themselves, it seems like the voices that are most important are ones that actually oppose what they're saying, even though some of us might think that they have an agenda to create a cashless,
social credit scored, highly managed, centralized, controlled, Authoritarian system where all of the resources and power funnel upwards into an establishment elite, and the rest of us are essentially automatons and drones, unable to make decisions for ourselves, and they can point to the success of Africa.
Come on, it worked in Africa.
Why don't you give it a try?
If it really was philanthropy, you would listen to the voices of the people that they're reporting to help.
If it really was philanthropy during the pandemic period, you'd have heard a lot less talk about patents and a lot more talk about issuing effective medicine.
So, you know, Bill Gates has the thing to turn poop into water.
He financed this whole thing.
I believe, by the way, California, I don't know if it's his specific company.
I bet it is.
California has approved that.
Top water will be wastewater.
There's been that just happened.
I don't know if it's a Bill Gates one, but I'm sure it is.
I was the only guy I've seen talk about it.
But he was in Africa.
I'm watching because we're making fun of him on the talk down, you know?
And he's telling him, like, yeah, in Africa, like, they have clean water is a problem.
And we're like, now we can't build sewage systems in all these countries.
That's the first thing he said.
Like, why?
I'll bet it's cheaper than the contraption that you made by like a lot.
But I think that's probably a public, it's a public thing.
That will be a public works.
Yeah, and you won't be able to control that.
There's no way this high-tech poop alchemy system was more cheaper than just building infrastructure.
Basic infrastructure.
There's not a chance.
But it really stuck out.
He goes, well, they're not going to do that.
Why?
Instead, you're going to drink like airplane water.
You know, what Bill Gates is doing seems actually seems a little worse than letting Alex Jones tweet.
It really does.
Remember, they said about Elon Musk.
In fact, Sasha tweeted this.
Probably somebody gave it to him to tweet.
Yeah, one man shouldn't be able to control that much.
They're talking about Elon Musk.
It might have even been out at Mark Zuckerberg back after Brexit because of Facebook they were mad at.
How come one man can control so much?
But not Bill Gates.
Yeah.
So here's reveal.
Documents show Bill Gates has given $319 million to media out.
Oh, that's why.
That's why he came.
Oh, that's why.
Keep in mind, that's just the money he pays the media under his own name.
Yeah.
That's not the money that Microsoft gives the media.
Gavi gives some.
That's not the money that Gavi gives.
Bill Gates, after reaping huge profits selling biotech shares, he trashes the effectiveness of COVID vaccines.
We covered this.
Yeah.
Yeah, of course.
We didn't know.
I like how he does this.
At the time, we know.
But that then we didn't know, but now we know.
And boy, they were effective for him.
I'll tell you what.
Yeah, it worked pretty good for him.
Remember this?
Remember when he said this?
Anyway, so antibodies, antibirls.
We think we can also have very early in an epidemic the thing you can heal that will mean that you can't be infected, a blocker, an inhaled blocker.
We also need to fix the three problems with vaccines.
The current vaccines are not infection blocking.
They're not broad.
So when new variants come up, you lose protection.
And they have very short duration, particularly in the people who matter, which are old people.
And every one of those things is thick.
So that's him after he cashed in his stock for $500 million.
He invested $55 million before COVID, said everybody's got to get vaccinated.
Everybody should be.
And then all of a sudden afterwards, when he got his money, he's got a new thing.
It's an invection blocker that you're going to inhale.
Do you know why he's doing this?
Because guess what?
He's funding that thing too.
No kidding, Jimmy.
No kidding.
Do you know why?
He's very passionate about this.
Helping people.
He wants to help people.
Well, yes, but more specifically, it sounds like I'm saying this to attack him, but I'm telling you what he said is to lower the population, not by the vaccine being dangerous.
It's, of course, not dangerous.
It's because he read statistics that when people are more vaccinated, they have more medical care, they tend to have less kids, you know, because in his weird half an AI mind, people only have kids because their kids might die.
So obviously they would do the math and have less.
But this is for the goal of lowering the population.
That's what this is for.
According to him, he's not trying to poison people with it.
He literally believes that's the path.
And what happens when people don't want to just have les kids?
I wonder what other great ideas he'll come up with.
By the way, the vaccines were safe and effective.
And they didn't, although they weren't infection blocking, they certainly slowed the spread.
The safety is what's supposed to make less population.
I swear to God, that's what he says on his thing.
And they're not going to, you know, they're great.
They keep you out of the hospital, keep you from getting sick or dead.
They keep you from slowing up the hospitals.
Oh, my God.
You don't want to clog up hospital beds, Kirk.
You could turn them unprofitable.
Hospital beds.
Yeah, they're not going to make a profit.
SK advances Gates-backed COVID-19 antiviral spray to, oh, no kidding.
South Korea?
What's SK?
I guess that's South Korea.
Oh, yeah, of course.
No kidding.
It's the way Bill Gates-backed.
You mean backed?
You mean funded?
So that's what backed means.
It means funded.
Well, South Korea is funded.
Right.
Yeah, backed with money.
It's not like students backing Hamas by making a sign that says don't kill Gaza.
It's actual backing.
Let's remember that Bill Gates met with Jeffrey Epstein many, many times after he was convicted.
He knew him since the 90s, early 90s.
Yeah.
He's supposed to abandon a guy who's done so much good around the world.
Let's remember this.
Remember this interview?
This is when Bill Gates tried to threaten Judy Woolwolf.
Watch him.
Watch him try to.
Watch him try to threaten Judy because he funds this.
Bill Gates is funding this, so he did not expect this question from her.
Watch this.
It was reported at that time that you had a number of meetings with Jeffrey Epstein, who, when you met him 10 years ago, he was convicted of soliciting prostitution from minors.
What did you know about him when you were meeting with him, as you've said yourself, in the hopes of raising money.
You know, I had dinners with him.
I regret doing that.
He had relationships with people he said, you know, would give to global health, which is an interest I have.
And if there's anybody who needs money, it's Bill Gates.
So that's why I'm meeting with a pedophile because I thought I could get some money.
Signer of the giving pledge, Bill Gates, hasn't given me away.
He's meeting with other people, like Oprah, asking people for Lahaina donations, going around.
Yeah.
The balls, the balls of these people.
Well, I wonder how much money Oprah has actually donated to Lahaina now.
I'm going to guess not much, more than the, was it $5 million?
She's worth $2 billion.
She could go in and rebuild Lahaina herself.
Yeah, Oprah is a huge gumbag.
Always has been.
I don't know why people thought she was great.
You just watch it.
You could tell something's way, way off.
Something's way off with her.
Here we go.
Not nearly enough philanthropy goes in that direction.
You know, those meetings were a mistake.
They didn't result in what he purported, and I cut them off.
You know, that goes back a long time ago now.
At least a couple of years.
There's nothing new on that.
It was reported that you continue to meet with him over several years.
And that, in other words, a number of meetings.
What did you do when you found out about his background?
Well, he's dead.
You know, I'm sad.
I regretted having those dinners.
And there's nothing, absolutely nothing new on that.
Is there a lesson for you, for anyone else looking at this?
So here comes the lesson he's going to give to Judy Woodwood.
This should be a charisma on command class online.
Watch this.
Watch what he says to her.
What's the lesson?
Well, he's dead.
So, you know, in general, you always have to be careful.
That's an evil, evil, evil, nefarious, evil MF.
Did you see what he said to her?
He's dead, bitch.
So, you know, you should be careful.
So you should be careful.
And did you see like that smile?
He got it.
You should be careful.
Your career could commit suicide.
That's right.
We could suicide your career.
You know, I could pull the funding from this show right now.
I own global health technology.
Be careful.
That's what he's saying.
He's saying that to her.
I interpret it that way.
Yes.
That doesn't really correspond to the question.
So you better be careful.
He's dead, so you always have to be careful.
That's for you, though, not for me.
And look at, and look at that.
That's a clenched job.
That's a you.
Judy, I'm worried you might self-harm.
You son of a bitch.
Yeah, Judy.
You know, my friend Jeffrey self-harmed.
My entire senior high school class that picked on me self-harmed.
Look at that.
That's a clenched jaw, tight lip.
He's not really.
So he's like, you son of a bitch.
You got it coming.
And, you know, the, you know, I'm very proud of what we've done in philanthropy, very proud of the work of the foundation.
You know, and that's what I get up every day and focus on.
Yeah, I bet.
Not your crimes.
Sure.
But also, that's not so hot either, the foundation.
For the record, that's not much better than Epstein.
That's right.
CNN, Jack Smith wants Donald Trump.
So this guy, Jack Smith is the prosecutor.
The prosecutor that's trying to get Trump's trial as speedy as possible.
Watch this.
Watch what they say about it on CNN.
What do they say about it on CNN?
Agree with me that Smith and Judge Chutkin are acting based on the election schedule.
I do agree with you, Michael.
And I think any.
So they're acting based on the election.
So that's bad they're doing this so they could get this trial in before the election to damage Trump before the elect.
That's what they're saying.
Follow-up question.
Has this judge already decided that Trump's guilty too?
Or are they going to wait till the trial to blurt that out?
Okay, so listen to what this guy says.
Fair-minded observer has to agree with that as well.
Just look at Jack Smith's conduct in this case.
The motivating principle behind every procedural request he's made has been speed, has been getting this trial in before the election.
Let's take a couple examples.
The trial date.
The average federal conspiracy and fraud trial takes about a year and a half to two years between indictment and trial.
In this case, we have dozens, hundreds of January 6th rioters caught on video, straightforward cases.
They too were given about a year and a half to two years between indictment and trial.
Jack Smith originally requested a trial date for Donald Trump, a far more complex case five months out.
He wanted a January trial.
It was set for two months later.
So Donald Trump is being given far less time to prepare than other defendants.
And the actions this week.
Jack Smith won an argument on immunity in the district court and then went right to the Supreme Court.
I think a right move.
I think the smart move.
The only reason you ask the Supreme Court to do that on an expedited basis is if you're racing against the clock.
And Jack Smith clearly is doing that here.
Okay, I referred to the election as the Voldemort of the petition that he filed.
Why not say that?
Why not simply say there's an election on the horizon and I'm afraid this guy's going to get away?
You will never hear either Jack Smith or Judge Chutkin utter the E-word, election.
They will not specifically say it.
Instead, they use this sort of euphemistic language about the need for resolution, that kind of thing.
Here's why I think Jack Smith is not willing to do it.
Two reasons.
First of all, DOJ rules, unwritten and written, both say you are not supposed to do anything that could impact an election.
In fact, you're supposed to affirmatively try not to take steps that might impact an election.
And the second thing, and I think Jack Smith is right about this, is If he is to say, okay, Judge, we really need to try this case before the election, Donald Trump is going to seize on that aggressively.
He's going to say, see, folks, when I tell you this is political, Jack Smith has now admitted that he wants me tried before the election, and that's political.
So I think he's very wary of that.
He's going to seize on the truth.
Okay, so then evaluate the, we agree.
He's going to seize on the truth.
Yeah.
This ain't really helping it either, by the way.
You guys' discussion that you all seem to be aware.
So we all know that's what this is, something that should lose immediately because it's unethical.
I got to think illegal, isn't it?
It seems illegal.
It seems to go against Department of Justice guidelines, but it's amazing how quick the right to a speedy trial comes back when an establishment wants it, isn't it?
Obama banished him.
We need a speedy trial as quick as Me Too goes away when it's Tara Reed.
I hope they appoint the appropriately creepy-looking judge.
That guy.
Yeah.
Something right.
Here we go.
We agree that he is acting.
Judge Chutkin is acting with an eye toward the election calendar.
Now I want to hear Ellie Hoenig assess the propriety of him doing exactly what he's doing.
Because on one hand, you could say, well, he's being political.
On the other hand, I guess you would say, Ellie, like you, probably back in the day, he's an aggressive prosecutor.
He's worked the case up.
He wants to get before a jury.
Right.
I don't like the artifice here.
I don't like the game playing, the wordsmanship that we're seeing.
I think Jack Smith ought to just come out and say, or not.
Here's the arguments both ways.
First of all, if Jack Smith is trying to get this case tried before the election, and he clearly is, look, that is political.
I mean, the counter argument would be, well, Jack Smith just wants the American voters to have resolution before they go to the ballot box.
And I understand that.
As a voter, I would like to know.
But here's the problem with that argument, Michael.
Jack Smith doesn't just want to get this trial done and let the chips fall where they may and let the consequences be what they can be.
He's the prosecutor.
He believes this case.
He wants this case to result in conviction.
And so his position isn't just, well, I want this case tried before the election.
His position, really, as a practical matter, is I want Donald Trump convicted before the election.
I have no problem with the first part of that.
It's his job to want and try to convict Donald Trump now that he's indicted.
But the second part of that before the election, that's where it crosses the line to the political, in my view.
Well, even CNN.
So that's what, I mean, it's Murcanish.
So I don't know how they let him have a show.
Because he went from being right-wing, conservative studio to the establishment, Nikki Haley-style uniparty.
He did tell the truth about masks and he confronted Fauci on it.
Remember that?
That was him.
I forgot about that.
That was him.
And now it seems like he's admitting that this is a completely political prosecution, or at least the timing of it is.
Wow, he's only half an idiot.
Good for him.
And, well, I got an update.
The Supreme Court has denied Jack Smith's request for an expedited review of the case against Trump.
There won't be a trial in D.C. before the 2024 election.
This is a big loss for the special counsel.
What was this trial about?
Not the same politician.
No, I don't even know what this one was about.
What a nonsense thing was this about?
That he asked his lawyer a question, maybe?
Is that Trump was consulting with his lawyer?
I don't know.
You look it up.
Was it Story?
Yeah, is it like Stormy Daniels related?
I like that one where they're like, you know, like if I were Chris Titus, God bless his old show.
They think people are, he paid to have this prostitute shut up and his people still follow him.
Yes, Christopher.
Yes.
In fact, I think better of him that he paid a dumb porn star to shut her trap.
That's not like instead of just having her killed.
Yeah, like he did the kinder, gentler thing.
Tara Reed had to run off to Moscow and she didn't even want to do stuff Joe Biden.
It would have been better if Joe Biden paid her off.
I'm sorry to bring up Titus, but I just happened to say it.
It's amazing how dumb that podcast is.
The Christopher Titus podcast.
Oh, Chris Titus.
Oh, I like Chris has always, he was always nice to me when I opened for him.
He doesn't know jack shit.
And they only talk about it.
But I will say that we totally disagree on politics.
And when I did go, I was invited on his show one time and we yelled at each other the entire time.
The entire time we screamed at each other.
I've never been at a podcast like that in my entire life.
It was so weird.
Oh, he's got a similar background to you, though.
Yeah.
The dad, that's like some weird thing happening, not enough.
Oh, that must have been a clash of the.
If you go back and listen to me on Chris Titus' podcast, it would be hilarious.
Is he Irish?
I don't know.
He should be.
But yeah, we totally disagree on that.
All they talk about is Trump.
No other thing going on.
There's nothing else going on.
And racism.
Yeah.
But no, I mean, we did say we totally disagree on politics.
I mean, he was also for these, but like the rest of the comedy community, he was you're a dummy if you do your own research and just take the jab and don't question big pharma or Fauci or anything.
And if you do, you're a crazy right-winger.
That was all comedy did that.
Almost all of comedy did that.
All my, almost most of the people I look up to in comedy did that.
So I'm so happy to go from to be in that circle of like he got a TV deal and all that, that these are the good people and I'm in the, I'm with good people.
Like people that are in that circle, they can't.
Chris was always nice to me.
He was always a good guy to me.
So well, maybe he's cool.
His takes with his podcast are dumb.
I disagree with his politics for sure.
I wouldn't say he's dumb.
I'm not saying that.
I'm saying we disagree, but I was disappointed.
A lot of people, I mean, and I don't want to, I don't, again, I don't like to name names.
I did name David Cross the other day because he's a superstar.
So it's also he should know better.
And they, of course, he shouldn't screw that.
You know, me too, he got screwed with the most bullshit.
Oh, remember that?
And then his own wife had to condemn him.
And then I know from friends of her going, can you believe I had to do that?
How ridiculous that is.
No, you didn't have to do that, sweetie, to your husband.
You didn't have to.
You could have said, that's bullshit.
It wasn't anything sexual.
It was Charlene Yee said one time at a party.
He said something that made her uncomfortable.
He said, yeah, I couldn't believe it.
And they threw that in with people talking about sexual assault as if it's anywhere near.
But he got through that without any problems, right?
Well, because his wife publicly sold him out.
And I guess that really happened.
What's his wife's name?
I forget.
She's an actress and she shoots.
Amber Tamberlin.
Yeah, she went on Twitter.
I mean, honestly, that's a good question.
I would worry someone because she really come on.
What do you think I'm making an upside on Twitter?
She was like, oh, this is no.
Yes.
And this one I'm telling you is, which you take it with the greenest salt because this was on Twitter, was she was like, I can't believe I had to do that.
Can you?
I mean, it's so ridiculous.
So obviously she didn't believe the bogus ass thing, but Me Too, if you recall, was very important.
Great movement that Bill Maher still thinks was overall a good movement, even though he's exonerated Andrew Cuomo on his show.
Yeah, I know.
That's right.
It just went a little too far, the lack of due process.
Not the very concept of no due process going too far.
It just went a little too far.
I guess also with Biden.
That was a little too far.
But anyway, just recap.
I respect Chris Titus for what he accomplished in show business.
He created that show.
Norman Rockwell is bleeding.
Everybody and their brother told him not to do it.
Everybody, comedy, his calendar fell in half.
People didn't want to book him anymore because he was doing that show.
He stuck by his guns.
I mean, he went from being a happy-go-lucky comedian to being this guy with this dark story to tell.
And they didn't want him to tell it.
And he told it.
And that's what gave him that television show.
And that television show was great.
It was a great television show.
But Stacey Keeches.
As great.
I used to love that show.
I love that show.
I watch it.
It's a great show.
I really did like it.
Stacy Keeches is.
Stacy Keech is.
Stacy Keech is tremendous.
The show was great.
His takes on politics are as bad as that was good.
So think of how good his show was.
His ideas about Trump and Biden.
But he's no different.
I mean, I agree.
I think he's a good idea.
I disagree with his guy.
Bill Maher has figured out Biden's a vegetable by now.
Bill Maher has figured that out.
Come on.
Chris Titus is my buddy.
You know, I mean, 99% of the.
I love that show.
I cannot deny it.
That was a great show.
Absolutely.
It was a great show.
And so, and then, you know, he took me on the row with them, and he was very generous, very nice guy, and very funny.
So, tip of the hat.
But so, yeah, we disagree on politics.
Only there were a vaccine for TDS.
Hey, become a premium member.
Go to JimmyDoorComedy.com.
Sign up.
It's the most affordable premium program in the business.
Freak out.
Freak out.
Don't freak out.
All the voices performed today are by the one and only the inimitable Mike McRae.
He can be found at MikeMcRae.com.
That's it for this week.
You be the best you can be, and I'll keep being me.
▲
Export Selection