All Episodes
Previous Next
Aug. 2, 2024 - Jimmy Dore Show
01:01:02
20240802_TJDS_20240802_Podcast_-_8124_11.46AM
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hey, come see us on tour.
We'll be in Chicago, Grand Rapids, Michigan, Duluth, Georgia, right outside of Atlanta, Jacksonville, Florida, Tempe, Arizona, and Burbank, California.
go to jimmydore.com for a link for those tickets.
Outro Music We have special guests with us, Anya Parampel, is a Washington, D.C.-based journalist, contributor to the Gray Zone.
She's produced and reported several documentaries, including on the ground reports from the Korean Peninsula, Palestine, Venezuela, and Honduras.
Her recent book, right there, it's corporate coup, Venezuela and the end of U.S. Empire, is currently ranked number one on Amazon in the Venezuelan history category.
So congrats on that.
Welcome back to the show.
Happy to be here, Jimmy.
So I wanted to play you a few clips, and then I want to get your reaction to it.
The first one is Donald Trump said this on the campaign trail this year.
I'm pretty sure is when he said this.
Let's listen.
Venezuela.
How about we're buying oil from Venezuela?
When I left, Venezuela was ready to collapse.
We would have taken it over.
We would have gotten all that oil.
It would have been right next door.
Now, correct me if I'm wrong, Anya, but my interpretation of what he just said is the reason why we're putting sanctions on Venezuela and we're undermining their economy is to create instability so that we could take over their country and steal their natural resources the way the economic hitmen in the United States have always done.
Is that how you read that?
Absolutely.
And it's even come out now in the Washington Post this past week that Trump, the Trump administration, was warned by Treasury officials and other experts that if they continued with the sanctions package that they unleashed in 2019, that it would inflame a migrant crisis and further destabilize the country.
And John Bolton actually went on the record in that article claiming that he thought that was a plus to the regime change gambit because it would make it put more pressure on the government in Venezuela.
So that's pretty cynical in my opinion, considering that the border and migrants are one of the main main campaign issues that Trump has harped on, kind of just blaming it all on Biden.
But yeah, Biden did issue temporary protected status for Venezuelan migrants, which attracted them here.
But the demolition of Venezuela's economy absolutely occurred under Obama and then Trump.
And Bolton himself crafted many of those sanctions packages, actually fought with Steve Mnuchin, the Treasury Secretary, to get them pushed through.
And at the time, openly admitted, yes, we would love to get U.S. companies back in there to exploit Venezuelan oil.
And so when people see, well, I see protesters in Venezuela, they all can't be being paid and things like that.
I heard people say and see them on Twitter.
And there's a lot of people who oppose.
And so would you agree with that?
Well, yeah, that's because the United States has been manufacturing economic pain in that country.
So they would foment that unrest so then they could have a color revolution so that we could then install a puppet so then we could then steal their oil.
That would be the logical conclusion, correct?
Yes.
And this is something that Agatha Damaris, she is an analyst for the Economist Intelligence Unit, which is an offshoot of The Economist magazine.
She actually did a segment or an interview about a year ago or maybe more with Matt Dusk, the former foreign policy advisor to Bernie Sanders, in which she admitted all of this.
She said, you know, it's tricky because on one hand, the sanctions are designed to make people feel uncomfortable so that they rise up and overthrow their government.
But on the other hand, we really don't want people to suffer.
So it's like, well, when is it?
Which one is it?
So, and that's, I mean, to me, that's really letting the cat out of the bag.
So, I mean, this is kind of why they hate Donald Trump, not because it's because he lets you know the actual game that everybody's playing.
And that's, that's the actual game that everybody's playing right now in Venezuela.
That's, we've been playing that since at least 2002 for the last over two decades.
We've been trying to, ever since Chavez decided to keep the oil and keep for his own people, in a sense, the profits of the oil and give it to his own people, we've been trying to find a way to get rid of that guy or those people who want to do that.
It was Chavez and now Maduro.
And we want to find a way to put in a puppet like Juan Guaido and exploit it.
That's really why they hate Donald Trump because he just says it, right?
Yeah, he says it.
And on the other hand, he also, I think, based on his own instincts, would probably be someone that would sit down and talk to Maduro directly.
Those are the sense that I got of Trump based on reading the memoirs of his officials, such as John Bolton and Mike Pompeo.
They said that Trump basically viewed Maduro as a tough guy that we all know that is something Trump kind of responds to and respects.
And he repeatedly asked to sit down with Maduro and solve these issues directly.
Of course, there's the corporate financial deep state that he went along with ultimately with Pompeo and Bolton, but then there's that foreign lobby that we have to worry about, not the Israel lobby in this case necessarily that reigns supreme, but the Cuba, Venezuela expat community in Florida, which basically uses its base there to hold our government hostage and pressure our officials to use our taxpayer dollars.
And if Maria Karina Machado, one of the leading opposition Figures had her way.
She's called for U.S. military intervention in Venezuela.
They would spill U.S. blood as well to return themselves to power in Venezuela.
So that's the issue here is that these are people who come here and claim that they're Americans wanting to participate in our democracy, but then actually they are mainly interested in trying to return to power back in their homeland, even if that means killing their compatriots and spilling U.S. blood as well.
So it's a very cynical game.
And that's why the Venezuelan opposition figures in the shadow government recognized by the U.S. had lobbied for so long.
They tried to get Trump to issue temporary protected status to Venezuelan migrants.
He resisted.
Biden did that.
But the goal was to bring even more people here so that they could weaponize them against our system and say, look, they're voting now here in Florida or New York and wherever.
And now you have to pander to this base that in order to have a voice here is saying we need regime change back home.
And oh, I was oppressed.
I mean, you're creating an incentive even for people to come here and just talk about how they were mistreated or make up stories in order to get asylum and status when you're giving them that kind of benefit through the immigration system.
Venezuelans who come here are able to work without a green card and are fast-tracked to citizenship thanks to the Biden administration.
And they're here in the first place, thanks to the sanctions that was put on by the Donald Trump.
So this is really a bipartisan screwing of not only Venezuela, but our immigration policy.
Yeah, it screws the U.S. worker too at the end of the day.
It seems that no one cares about the American people that are here, and no one cares about the Venezuelans that are at home.
It's a nasty policy.
And actually, the Venezuelan government has an official policy to repatriate their citizens because, in many cases, thousands of people left and went to Colombia and Peru and Argentina, Chile, and found out, oh, I thought I lived in a socialist hellhole, but it turns out these capitalist paradises in Latin America aren't so great either.
And so the Venezuelan government, with the cooperation of those other governments, actually has chartered planes to bring back hundreds, almost thousands of Venezuelan migrants from Latin America back to Venezuela because they actually wanted to go home.
And I recently did an interview event with the current Venezuelan foreign minister, Ivan Gil in New York.
And he said his government, because the Biden administration refuses to recognize its legitimacy, has been unable to implement a similar program in the United States, which the government would actually like to try to do, give people the opportunity to return.
Can you imagine that?
That the Venezuelan government would actually like to give some people the chance to return.
And not to mention the fact that they don't have an embassy here because of this recognition of a shadow government.
There's no functioning Venezuelan consulate.
The embassy in DC sits completely empty.
So people come here as migrants and then they don't even have a way to get services from their country to get visas or anything that has to do with going back home.
So it's a pretty dark picture at the moment.
So if you're a conservative voter or a voter who votes on the idea of immigration, you should be upset at Donald Trump for what he just said.
You should be upset at him for imposing sanctions on Venezuela and destabilizing that country because that led to somewhere around 7 million Venezuelans leaving Venezuela and most of them coming to the United States.
Yep.
And there's just not a good option because then on the other hand, you have the Biden administration that openly encourages this migration.
Trump maybe does it more subtly by overseeing the controlled demolition of the economy, but still running a hard line on the border.
Still people came, but not as much.
So it is this symbiotic relationship between the Democrat and Republican Party.
So I want to play one more.
Here's Donald Trump talking about Syria.
What was the big goal in Syria?
We're keeping the oil.
We have the oil.
The oil is secure.
We left troops behind only for the oil.
You know, I'm no linguistics expert, but it sounds like he's trying to send us a message here.
If I could find one word that keeps repeating and coming up, I mean, Donald Trump loves oil more than Hunter Biden at a massage parlor.
Am I right?
Come on.
Yeah.
I mean, let's not forget that he originally selected Rex Tillerson, the former CEO of Exxon, to be his secretary of state.
Oh, that's right.
Tillerson was one of the most aggressive when it came to Venezuela because Exxon had a huge stake in the country before Chavez and actually battled legally Venezuela's attempt to nationalize its oil reserves throughout the early 2000s.
And the individual who litigated that case on behalf of Exxon, Carlos Vecchio, is now the U.S. or Venezuela's U.S. ambassador recognized under the shadow regime.
So that's why I just call it all a corporate coup because all of the figures involved in the coup were actually agents of foreign capital and ultimately corporations based in the United States and Europe.
Why do you think Trump gets a pass from his voting base on things like this?
I just think they don't know.
I mean, how many people know anything about Venezuela other than it's a communist or socialist dictatorship?
I think.
Now, can you it when Americans say they're communists?
So they all to me, to me, when I hear Americans when they say, oh, well, Maduro's a communist, they equate communists with being like Hitler, right?
It's, but what he really, is he anything like that?
Is he really a dictator?
Is he anything like an authoritarian ruler?
Or is he just a guy who decided to keep the oil profits for his own people, spend most of it on the poor and raise them out of poverty?
Am I pointing too rosy of a picture?
No, I mean, that's definitely what the Chavismo and the Bolivarian Revolution, that was the whole point of it, was let's get the IMF out of our domestic policy and get foreign corporations out of our national industry.
When it comes to labeling Venezuela communist or socialist, there's something else that Americans might not understand, which is Venezuela is in no way anything like the Soviet Union or even Cuba.
It's far more restrained in its brand of socialism.
It labels itself socialist, but really only 20, 25% of its economy is controlled by the private sector.
If you go to Venezuela and you mean controlled by the government?
Yes.
Okay, you said government.
Yeah.
So if you go to Venezuela and you're staying in hotels and eating in restaurants and going shopping in stores, everything that you're dealing with is operated by the private, the private sector, the oligarchy.
And the government, I'm sorry, I guess I meant to say the public sector earlier if I didn't, that they operate 20, 25%.
And that is what that means is that they own the industry.
Like they don't own everything.
They don't control everything in the country.
I think they learned the lessons of previous models that there's no way that you can just come in immediately and control every aspect of an economy.
And it's actually good to have small businesses and a free market.
But they run into issues then because when these sanctions came down, some of the oligarchy that was still at war with Chavismo and controlled supermarkets and a lot of the import lines actually began hoarding goods.
And there was a period where the government would raid warehouses full of toilet paper and filled with medicine because the private sector, which again controls the vast majority of the economy, was hoarding, were hoarding goods in order to make the government look bad.
And they came out of that period of mass shortages.
But again, the sanctions have remained in place and it's still tiring to live under sanctions.
So it doesn't surprise me that certain segments of the population might be exhausted at this point.
That's the goal.
That's the goal of the agenda.
So let me play you this.
This video has been going around.
And they're going to break it down to you.
I'm going to let you know I'm here with Anya Parrimpel.
And this video, it's about five minutes long.
I want to play it for you and get your reaction to it.
And you tell me what it got right, what it got wrong from your perspective.
But it's basically telling you that the media is almost 100% lying to you about what's happening in Venezuela.
And the reason why is because the economic hitmen that want to foment discord through economic pain in Venezuela, so there will be unrest so they can then install a puppet so they can then steal their oil are the same people who run the U.S. media.
Okay, so let's watch.
This is very interesting.
The media is lying to you about Venezuela.
By now, you've probably seen the videos of people in Venezuela protesting, tearing down statues, burning banners of the current president, and blocking Venezuela's main airport.
They're protesting because Venezuela just had an election and the country's electoral authority announced that Nicolas Maduro, the candidate of the United Socialist Party, beat the right-wing opposition candidate Edmundo Gonzalez.
For months, the opposition said they'd only respect the election results if they won.
And sure enough, they immediately said the election was fraudulent after they lost.
So what's their evidence?
The first thing they say is that they've collected 73% of the voting precinct's paper results and that the paper results don't match the electronic results.
For those who don't know, Venezuela's voting system was designed with multiple controls to prevent fraud.
There's a two-step voting process.
First, where the voter has to produce his or her national ID card and scan their fingerprint to cast an electronic vote.
And then the second part, the paper ballot, where the voter receives a paper seat of their vote, which they drop into a ballot box, creating two tallies which can be checked against one another, one electronic and one paper.
The opposing candidates each have witnesses in the precincts for the counting of the paper ballots to check against the electronic tally that gets released by the electoral authority.
There were also over 900 election observers from 95 different countries present.
And if you look at the reports from Sunday, people were overwhelmingly reporting a calm, orderly process at the voting stations.
The opposition is claiming that they already have three quarters of the paper ballots collected, but they haven't actually produced any of them.
So until that happens, it's just talk.
Another talking point the media has been running with is this exit poll that allegedly shows Edmundo Gonzalez winning by over 30%.
The poll has been cited by the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, Reuters, and seemingly shows that the results being reported don't match what voters were saying as they were leaving the polls.
The only problem with this, the polling firm they're citing is basically an arm of the U.S. government.
As research done by Ben Norton over at the Geopolitical Economy Report shows, the polling firm Edison Research counts among its top clients, Voice of America, Radio Free Europe, Radio Liberty, and the Middle East broadcasting networks, all of which are U.S. state-owned media that were created to disseminate pro-U.S.
messaging in their respective regions.
They all work under the U.S. Agency for Global Media, which is a U.S. government agency, and its website says that the media outlets serve, quote, the long-range interests of the United States.
Exit polling is also illegal in Venezuela.
So they did this outside the law with no way of cross-checking it.
U.S. policy towards Venezuela has been incredibly hostile for the last 20 years.
So it's hard to believe that a polling firm whose whole business model is based on conducting polls for U.S. state media would suddenly turn out a poll completely contradicting the U.S. narrative.
But by far the most telling aspect of all this is that the Venezuelan opposition said they weren't going to recognize the election results way before the election even started.
In a video interview with the Financial Times a month before the election, opposition leader Maria Karina Machado said that they expected to win by a landslide, but that if they didn't, it could only be because Maduro committed fraud.
And that's exactly what we're seeing now.
Venezuela's electoral authority is supposed to have 72 hours to release the full results, but the opposition decided within one hour to declare it illegitimate, and within 12 hours, they were staging an insurrection.
The U.S. did the same thing too.
Almost immediately after votes started being tallied, Anthony Blinken, the U.S. Secretary of State, immediately tried to cast doubt on the election results.
This begs the question, how could U.S. officials have known their position on the election before it was even finished?
And the answer is they already had their minds made up.
They were going to declare the election fraudulent no matter what.
In fact, if the U.S. respected the outcome of this election, it would be the exception to the rule.
In 2019, a Venezuelan politician named Juan Guaido claimed he should be the real president of Venezuela after Nicolas Maduro won the election in 2018.
Guaido was basically unknown in Venezuelan politics prior to his declaration and wasn't even a candidate in the 2018 election.
And yet, despite this, the Trump administration pushed this ridiculous idea that he was actually the president of Venezuela.
The U.S. not only met with Guaido like he was the president, they also handed him state assets like Citco and the Venezuelan embassy, while they funded extreme right-wing opposition Groups in Venezuela and openly called for the overthrow of the elected government.
In 2002, the Bush administration backed a coup against Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez, who had begun redistributing oil revenue from Venezuela's state-owned oil company from the rich to the poor.
U.S. leaders met with the coup plotters, who were hand-picked stooges of the Venezuelan elite, and openly endorsed the coup during the brief couple days when the coup mongers had taken power.
There's a great documentary about the 2002 coup called The Revolution Will Not Be Televised, which you should all watch.
This all begs another question.
Why does the U.S. want to overthrow the Venezuelan government?
And the simple answer is: Venezuela has the largest petroleum reserves in the world.
For the longest time, Venezuela's oil was there for the rich to plunder.
The Venezuelan elite and multinational corporations treated Venezuela's oil sector like a personal piggy bank, while the Venezuelan people lived in absolute poverty.
This went on until Hugo Chavez, a socialist, won the 1998 election and decided that Venezuela's wealth should be enjoyed by the Venezuelan, not the elite or foreign corporations.
Both the 2002 coup attempt and the 2019 coup attempt were directly tied to oil.
In fact, in one interview during the 2019 coup attempt, Donald Trump's national security advisor, John Bolton, openly stated that he wanted to see U.S. oil companies take over Venezuela's energy sector.
So if you think of a company like Sitco, which is owned by Petevesa, which is the state-run oil company there in Venezuela, we have a lot of those Citco assets right here in the U.S. Is that something, for example, sir, that you're looking at?
Yeah, look, we're in conversation with major American companies now that are either in Venezuela or in the case of Sitco here in the United States.
It'll make a big difference to the United States economically if we could have American oil companies really invest in and produce the oil capabilities in Venezuela.
It'd be good for the people of Venezuela, it'd be good for the people of the United States.
But Hugo Chavez wasn't just a resource nationalist.
He was also an anti-imperialist.
Part of what he did to change Venezuela was that he decided that Venezuela would no longer be a cog in the U.S.'s imperialist fever dreams in Latin America, that it would advocate for a new international order based on peace and cooperation instead of invasions and economic exploitation.
Venezuela became one of the first countries to oppose the U.S. wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and also became an unwavering supporter of the Palestinian cause.
Nicolas Maduro, Chavez's successor, has continued this legacy of forging closer ties with global South countries, seeking a new international system, one that's not based on U.S. domination.
Venezuela's Bolivarian revolution has inspired other progressive movements throughout Latin America that have undermined U.S. power in the region.
Anthony Blinken, Marco Rubio, and all the other war criminals that have been managing and overseeing the genocide in Palestine didn't suddenly wake up one day and realize that they care so deeply about the little boys and girls in Venezuela.
In fact, the U.S. government is currently enforcing a sanctions regime that's estimated to have killed at least 100,000 people in Venezuela through manufactured poverty and scarcity.
U.S. sanctions against Venezuela's oil sector, which is its primary source of income, caused the oil sector to collapse and the subsequent decrease of government income by 99%.
So yes, the poverty and scarcity you hear about is very real, but it's caused by U.S. sanctions, which have forced Venezuelans to live off 1% of their pre-sanctions income.
This is also what's behind the wave of Venezuelan migration that you hear about on the news.
It all comes back to this policy of manufactured poverty.
If the United States actually cared about the well-being of Venezuelans, they wouldn't be strangling the Venezuelan economy to the point where there are shortages of fuel and medicine.
In fact, the United States tends to be the most violent when it feigns humanitarian concern.
They manufacture social crises and then use it as an excuse for regime change.
The U.S. has a long history of supporting these color revolutions.
When they know they can't directly invade a country, they create a social crises to undermine it.
And now they're doing the same thing to Venezuela.
Don't fall for it this time.
But Americans are falling for it again this time.
What do you say about anything to add to that or correct?
Yeah, I've seen a lot of really great reporting on that polling company because they've just had such a horrible record in Georgia, for example.
And I think RT did a really great breakdown of all of the various elections that Edison polling company have meddled in over the last several years.
But the issue right now that I think a lot of alternative media are not addressing is the fact that the reason that Venezuela's election system is so great is that it's very easy to audit.
That step that they described in the video, I also go in depth about in my book where, you know, because they have that, I mean, imagine physical ID, electronic fingerprint scan, physical paper ballot receipt that is automatically used to audit the electronic vote.
It's very hard to fudge those numbers.
And while the CNE did come out and declare Maduro the winner, they've yet to release the individual local polling site data that would show which localities Maduro and Edmundo Gonzalez won or lost.
And so this created space over the last few days for the opposition to come forward and claim that they have evidence of fraud.
And that video claims they haven't produced evidence.
Maria Carina Machado actually has a website up right now where she's posted all of the actos and the polling data that she claims shows there was fraud.
The CNE has yet to release that data that would show what exactly happened at those localities.
And today, Nicolas Maduro actually announced that he's turning it over to the Supreme Court now and that all 10 parties that participated in this vote will now have to present their polling data and the Supreme Court will do an independent audit based on the information it receives from the parties.
So it's become a little bit more complicated than in past elections in Venezuela.
But honestly, that's why at this point, I don't even want to get into a debate about who won or who didn't, because I know that the U.S. doesn't actually care about democracy in Venezuela.
The fact that they've prevented opposition, moderate opposition candidates from running, threatened them with sanctions in order to limit the voting choices that Venezuelans had.
The fact that we know the U.S. is happy to be allies with the king of Saudi Arabia or the Emir of Qatar.
This isn't about voting.
It's not about how one gets in power.
I think a rational U.S. foreign policy would just look at a country and say, who controls the government, who controls the borders, and that's who I'm going to deal with.
I'm not really going to get worried about human rights and voting.
That's the future of foreign policy, I think.
I think the Russians call it strategic partnerships, And that's kind of the Chinese way as well, where you're not getting involved in arguing who won or who didn't.
If a government and a military can maintain order and stability in a country, then that's who we're going to deal with.
I think getting into the nitty-gritty about polling and data at this point, and especially at this stage while there's no data is actually giving energy and momentum to the opposition because you can't win with the back and forth with that.
I couldn't agree with you more.
And the point that I've been making since the election in Venezuela is that if you have an opinion on it, the only reason you have that opinion is because you've been fed that opinion by the economic hitmen who want to who have been fomenting social unrest in Venezuela so they can call create a color revolution so they can install a puppet so then they can steal their oil.
That's what this is all about.
Why do you give a shit about the integrity of an election in Venezuela when the integrity of the United States elections have been in question?
And because there's people protesting, does that mean that the people protesting on January 6th were correct?
Because there were people storming the capital?
That's the same logic they're using.
And the only reason you care is because you've been told to care by the economic hitmen who control our media and defense contractors who are billionaires who run Twitter.
That's the only reason you care is because you've been told to care.
We don't live in a goddamn democracy here in the United States.
We don't have elections.
We have selections and we've known that.
And it's not, again, it's not hyperbole that we live in an oligarchy.
Your vote doesn't actually matter.
And whatever the rich people want, the rich people get the people, a handful of billionaires who actually run the things in the West.
And even though we don't have a functioning democracy in America, which we don't, I still don't want another country coming in and imposing their idea of democracy on my country.
I want Americans to be able to work out our electoral process and figure out if we don't have a functioning democracy, how to fix it.
Just like it's not up to us to figure out what the will of the Venezuelan people are.
Exactly what you said before.
The people like Anthony Blinken and the oligarchs running America claim to care about the will of the Venezuelan people.
You know that's bullshit because they don't care about the will of the people in Saudi Arabia or the will of the people in Libya or the will of the people in Africa.
They just elected a dictator with 95% of the vote.
America supports that.
It's got nothing to do with the will of the people.
This is exactly the same old story.
Economic hitmen that run the United States government want to overthrow that government, no matter who it is, as long as they could get that oil.
And that's all this is about.
So if you have an opinion about the election being not on the up and up, you don't even have a right to have that opinion because it's got nothing to fucking do with you, your ass, or the United States.
That is an internal problem in Venezuela and let them work it out.
Would you agree with that?
Yeah, let them work it out and don't get involved because if we do get involved and we escalate here when there are violent gangs in the street, and let's be clear, the Venezuelan opposition do this every time they lose an election.
They don't do January 6th, I say this often, made look like a Macy's Day parade compared to what the Venezuelan opposition do, where they go out for weeks and months at a time, build barricades in the street, block off major throughways and try to strangle trade and the movement of goods and shipping in the country.
They burn down public warehouses and doctors offices and burn people alive in the streets.
I mean, they fire guns at National Guard and police troops.
Can you imagine if Americans did that?
What would happen?
We would be in civil war.
And that is what people, including MAGA conservatives who claim to care so much about the border, are cheering on right now.
They're cheering on a figure, Maria Karina Machado, who is trying to push the country in the direction of a civil conflict.
Venezuelans, people don't realize this.
I see so many stupid posts online right now, people saying, oh, you can't vote your way out of socialism because they take your guns away.
Venezuelans are armed.
The Venezuelan Shabista Revolution has actually encouraged the formation of citizen militias outside of the government because they want the people to actually be able to defend themselves from foreign intervention.
And this happened.
You may remember the Bay of Piglets invasion in 2020.
Those U.S. mercenaries that came in to capture Kilmaduro were stopped by fishermen, armed fishermen.
Okay.
So that's what we're dealing with when we're dealing with Venezuela.
If we throw a match on that, on all of that gas, then it's going to explode.
And then, then it will be our problem.
Then it will be our problem because there will be a Syria-style civil war in our hemisphere, right south of the U.S. border.
Okay.
There are people in the Guaido shadow regime who have called for a no-fly zone in Venezuela.
Do we know like that these are the people that we're dealing with?
They want to have a Syria-style war here.
And let's not forget Russia has deep military ties with Venezuela for almost 20 years now since we cut off our own.
Venezuela has relied on Russia for military imports.
There are now Russian military hardware.
There is in Venezuela.
There are Russian military advisors, Russian training.
They do joint exercises.
So if this escalates, what we're really asking for is World War III coming to the U.S. continent.
We already have, or to the, I always say that, the American continent.
We already have it raging in Europe.
We already have it raging in Asia.
Why not just light a little match here and have some Russia confrontation with the region in the Americas?
I mean, this is totally loco.
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 jimmydoorcomedy.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.
Everybody have special guests with us.
Patrick Korelchi is the co-host of the weekly audio documentary series Red Pilled America, which he and his wife Adriana Cortez have produced since 2018.
I've been on that show.
They recently launched their show's first video documentary called Rescue Ruse: How Sound of Freedom Conned Christians.
It reveals the shocking truths behind the surprise box office smash sound of freedom and its alleged hero, Tim Ballard.
Those are big doses.
That's fighting words there.
So, well, here it is.
Here's what you tweeted out.
Breaking RPA's first video documentary, early access.
So here, I want to just play the, I'll play the trailer, okay, Patrick?
Let's play that and we'll come back and talk about it.
The box office smashed Sound of Freedom, portrayed her as a monster.
It sold children into sex slavery.
They called her character Katie, but the hero of the film made sure the world knew her real name.
Her name is Kelly Suarez.
Kelly Suada is a real person, right?
Kelly was Miss Cartagena, famous in town.
And she recruited kids to her modeling agency.
And she was selling them.
12-year-olds.
Kelly Johanna Suarez was branded the kind of supervillain few could even imagine existed.
A ruthless businesswoman whose product was child sex slaves.
and they branded her that before a global audience.
In the case of Kelly, who is the real person.
She is also a real person.
Yes, very real.
Kelly became despised on an international scale.
But what the filmmakers didn't tell the public is that she was never convicted of child sex trafficking.
She'd eventually sue the filmmakers for destroying her life.
And the Christian team behind the movie now claimed that their true story was really just a work of fiction.
Now, Kelly Johanna Suarez speaks out for the first time since the movie's release.
she has a message for the world.
Et in Valar es un fraude.
Sous-titrage Société Radio-Canada So that's today.
Today is July 25th.
So Red Pilled America.
So you released that documentary today.
Where is it released at?
Today.
It's on redpilledamerica.com and it's also on our Twitter account.
Okay, so why not YouTube?
It's on YouTube as well.
It's on YouTube.
It's on Rumble.
It's everywhere.
It's on all the social medias.
We also have an audio version out because we have an audio podcast.
So it's on all audio platforms as well.
So no, I did not see the Sound of Freedom movie, but I remember it was the biggest deal going.
And it somehow became like a Christian thing or a right-wing thing.
And now, so tell me what the story is behind Sound of Freedom and how is it wrong?
Yeah, you know, it is, I can't exaggerate what a big deal it was within the conservative media.
I mean, it was huge.
Every big name was covering it.
Elon Musk was tweeting it out.
I mean, I think Trump was in on like a premiere of it.
Every major conservative and Christian figure was on it.
And the reason being is that this man, Tim Ballard, purports to save child sex slaves.
That is his thing.
He's been doing it since, I guess, professionally since October of 2014.
I guess I take that back since 2014 or so.
But before that, he worked for the Department of Homeland Security and the child trafficking internet, child internet crimes, something like that.
And he worked there for a number of years.
I want to say around a decade or so.
And he had this novel idea that he wanted to privatize saving child sex slaves.
So he went around, he raised some money and does this raid in Colombia.
Turns out he says something like, you know, he saved 55-something people, children, actual child slaves, he says, like that he had proven that they were slaves and that they had been abused and that they have catalogs.
They have waves to know that these people are child slaves.
So he goes around, you know, trying to pitch a show.
He has a TV show that he puts out on it called The Abolitionists.
Eventually, they make a movie, 2018.
The movie sits on the shelf for about four years or so, and they kind of insinuate that Disney, who ended up getting the film's rights after a merger or after a purchase of another company.
They claimed that they were shelving it because they were trying to protect Hollywood pedophiles, was what they suggested.
The movie finally comes out, major, major hit.
And we looked at it and we're like, let's, we were excited.
We're like, oh, this is kind of cool.
And kind of an independent film blowing up.
Let's do maybe a film review on it.
Or we've done like makings of the movie before.
We did one for Milt Gibson's movie.
So we thought, maybe let's do that.
We go and we check out the film.
And I've, for a living, I write scripts for True Stories.
And I'm watching this thing.
And this is based on a true story.
And I'm like, this is not, this cannot be a true story.
I can see right through this.
At the very end, the pitch that kind of raised my spidey senses the most is that they basically said that you can save child, you could stop child sex slavery by buying tickets to their movie.
And I'm like, okay, this doesn't sound right.
So we start doing a deep dive into this thing and we start uncovering untruth after untruth.
At the end of the day, with this film, what we ended up finding is this major Colombian raid that he did that became the plot of the movie.
There wasn't a single child sex slave saved.
We got our hands on the Colombian court documents, went through them all, went through depositions, went through various kinds of court arguments and evidence and what have you.
There was no child sex slaves saved.
None of the people had been trafficked before That day.
Some of them were being paid to be there like an attendant, like almost like they were a cast in a reality TV show.
And so we're like, this guy makes Jesse Smollett look like a truth teller.
He's just one of the, as we were starting digging into this thing, I started looking at this.
I'm not a homicide detective, but I watch a lot of Law and Order, which probably makes me a homicide detective.
I started getting that feeling that a homicide detective would get when they start to realize that they're on the case of a serial killer.
And I'm not saying this man is a serial killer, but I'm saying that he's a unicorn.
He has fooled an entire niche, which is the Christian community, which is a huge Christian community, with these bogus, at least every story that we've looked into that he's promoted have been bogus.
And it's so, it's the shocking thing about it, Jimmy, is the lies that he says are so easily verifiable because all you got to do is go to court documents.
You go in and you look and see, compare what he says happened to the actual court documents.
This isn't conjecture.
This isn't hearsay.
I mean, it's, you're looking at court documents.
In some cases, he filed the reports and you're comparing his reports to what he's actually saying in the public about saving children.
And they're in complete contradiction to each other.
So we decided we got to do a documentary on this thing.
I watch a lot of the cooking channels, so I consider myself a top chef.
And this, so you're so he didn't expose.
So what you're saying is that he was working at the Department of Homeland Security.
He was like, hey, this would be, I could privatize this, make a lot of money, make a movie out of it, and it would all be fake.
He didn't first, so there's two questions.
The first question is, he didn't think anybody was going to fact check him, do you think?
Well, this is, I think that the man is one of the most, I'm almost impressed by him.
I shouldn't say almost.
I am impressed by him, by his ability and his charisma to convince people.
It's one of those topics that people don't want to delve into.
So they're kind of like, okay, we got somebody over there doing that.
Let's just kind of throw some money at this thing.
I don't want to hear about child sex slaves.
I don't want to hear about, you know, what happens to these people.
Let's just kind of let this guy deal with it.
And he kind of is taking advantage of this human kind of behavior of just kind of not questioning somebody that's going after child sex slaves.
I'm going to give you a perfect example.
When we started questioning his stuff, he has this moment, this dog tag.
This dog tag thing is the thing that launched his company.
And we pulled up the court documents on it and we proved that it didn't happen, that the court documents clearly show that he didn't interview the kid, didn't have the kind of interactions that he said that he had.
The dog tag would have been in evidence, would have been part of in these reports.
It wasn't in anything.
So we're looking at that.
And I'm like, how can this guy get away with something like this?
And I'm coming to the conclusion that people just don't want to question this kind of work.
And so I go out there and I start questioning things.
And I talked to Prager Yu, who produced a documentary on him, and who I've also produced a documentary on.
And I approached them as kind of a friendly, like, hey, we're doing this story.
We did an eight-part series on this.
And I said, I want you to know the documentary that you did, he said some things that are provably false in your documentary.
And so I kind of want to get a comment from you.
The CEO of the company, who I interviewed, I spent a month of my life producing a documentary on them, basically suggested that we are protecting pedophiles.
And so that is what people go up against when they question him on these kinds of things, is that, is this accusation that you're potentially a pedophile if you are questioning anything that they're doing.
Well, Patrick, why are you protecting pedophiles?
The fascinating thing is anybody that knows our story, we launched our show because we called out this guy getting in bed with other people's kids.
My daughter was at this really elite, prestigious private school in Hollywood, had all the studio heads there.
Van Jones had his kid there.
I'd see him on campus all the time, all the celebs and what have you.
Caught this guy getting in bed with other people's kids, called him out, became this five-year battle at the school.
We ended up telling our first story of the show based on that.
So this is not something that I, you know, I don't take these kinds of things lightly.
I've done a two-part series on the show where my mother was, you know, sexually assaulted.
So we take these things very, very seriously.
Yet the conservatives, and in particular, the Christian, these kind of Christian influencers who promoted him like no other.
And I'm talking major, major names.
They will not cover this story now because all of their hands are dirty.
And the mainstream media won't cover it because they all did glowing stories on this guy who doesn't want to do a story of some Superman that's saving child sex slaves.
CBS did this glowing piece on him, ABC, MSNBC.
And so it's just been one of these kinds of frustrating things.
And so this woman that we interviewed, her name is Kelly Johanna Suarez, she was effectively framed because she was cast as this part.
She was going to this party trying to meet a rich American, and they framed her as basically a child sex slave.
There's no evidence of her being a child sex slave.
She's still been dealing with this now for 10 years in a Columbian court.
You mean a child sexually trafficker?
Trafficker.
Trafficker, sorry.
Yes.
There's no evidence of her being a trafficker.
But they had someone else say the things that they are claiming that she said.
And then they just projected it onto her and got because they had her on camera.
It is this kind of like casting.
So does she have a lawsuit against this guy?
Yes.
She sued them here.
She sued Angel Studios.
She sued in a court in California?
In Utah.
In Utah.
In Utah, because that's where they're based.
And it was one of the things that we saw immediately.
They're going to sue because this is so clear.
Okay.
And that turn out what's still going on.
It just last week got the judge, the Utah judge, basically allowed it to proceed and said that, you know, in his decision that you guys knowingly made false statements about her or you did it with reckless disregard of the facts.
And so now it's proceeding.
And so this story is just going to get bigger and bigger because now they're going to have depositions.
Now there's going to be discovery.
You're going to really look at this case and see what I'm seeing.
I mean, I'm talking, it's irrefutable.
Watch our documentary.
It's called Rescue Ruse.
It's at redpilledamerica.com.
You could also see it on any of the social media platforms.
It's irrefutable.
And these companies, this film get $250 million.
Operation Underground Railroad has raised over $250 million.
It's around $250 million since their launch.
And this was the raid that launched their company.
So, I mean, child sex slavery, it's real, right?
I mean, it's not like he invented a problem.
That does happen.
We all know about Jeffrey Epstein, and I'm sure there's 10 more just like him that nobody knows about that are working for the Mossad and the CIA.
And so why would he invent problems?
Why wouldn't he just go find the real ones?
I think that it's hard to find problems like that.
And I don't think, I think it's obviously out there and it obviously happens, but I don't think that it happens on the level that this man tries to claim.
I think that perfect example, he says that the California, excuse me, United States is the biggest kind of market for child for child sex slavery and all the assault and that kind of thing.
Yet all of his operations are in foreign countries with corrupt governments.
Why is that?
Why are you working in these foreign countries?
I'll tell you why.
He goes to these countries, has a wad of cash, floats it around, gets some low-level street hustler coming up to him.
All of these countries have prostitution, or at least the ones that we looked at all have prostitution.
But pimping is illegal.
But he gets these guys to kind of say, okay, I can make 25 grand on this deal.
$6,000 is our annual income.
I could get $25,000 in a matter of a couple of days by just being a middleman between an act that's legal here.
And so they put on these sex parties, pay people to come.
So people are getting paid $200 to come to this party.
And then the police swoop in because pimping is illegal.
And so if you can get some minors there that want that $200 for the attendance payment, then now you got a story.
I mean, it's like you have a room and you're saying, here's a party in here.
Go in here.
You open up the door.
They all go in.
And then you go around the other side and you find that they're in a jail and you go, I'm going to free you from jail.
And you open up the jail and you let them out.
And then you claim that you freed them or you claim that you saved them.
And the people that he's brought up from this Colombian island raid that became the movie.
He's produced two people.
And one was an adult, but he tries to claim that he was a kid when the raid happened.
He was 18 years old.
The other one was 17.
He's tried to claim that he was 11.
And the guy went there knowing that there was a sex party and that there wasn't going to be, that he wasn't going to have sex with anybody.
He went there for the $200 payment.
But this man has been going around for years saying that these were child sex slaves and that they needed saving and that they've been stuck in this system forever.
And there's no evidence of that, at least in this Columbia raid case.
So, I mean, I'm familiar with the Jerry Sandusky story.
And he, you know, there are like kind of almost like mini conventions of these people that get together and do this sorts of thing, meaning child predators.
And he was, he ran in a homosexual ring of them.
And so, yeah, it doesn't make sense that he wouldn't, he couldn't uncover this stuff inside the United States.
I'll say that.
That's for sure.
And so it's not easy.
It's not easy to do that.
I mean, if it was, the man's claimed to save like 5,000, 6,000 women and children from being trafficked.
Yet, you know, all these kinds of accusations come out against him.
He has a line of women now that he, that worked with him that say that he, they did not witness a single child saved in these operations.
These are people that worked closely with him.
But when he's getting these attacks, if you'd saved 5,000 or 6,000 child slaves, don't you think you'd be able to fill a gymnasium of people that basically is saying, this man saved my life.
This man, I'm this uncle of this girl that saved.
I'm the aunt.
I'm the mother.
I'm the father.
I think it wouldn't be too hard to fill a nice hall of people that you've saved.
Well, those people aren't coming out.
I guess the two tells on this will be the court case in Utah and then to see if he sues you.
Trust me, I think if I'm doing it right, I'm expecting something along those lines.
We'll see what that, how that works.
Like I said, we've done an eight-part series on this, and he didn't come at us then.
So we'll see what happens with this one.
Okay.
And Tim, if you're watching this, because I know you're watching everything that I'm doing right now, aren't you tired?
You have all these people coming at you right now.
You know the truth.
You're going through these court documents.
You're going through these court processes right now.
The truth is going to come out.
You have a Christian audience.
They will forgive you if you come forward and say, I made a mistake and repent.
Christian audience, your Christian audience will forgive you for that.
I know that you're tired.
I could see it.
I've been watching hundreds and hundreds of hours of videos of you.
I've seen the progression.
Okay.
It's time.
Give these women some peace.
Give this woman that you've been trying to put into jail for 20 years.
You tried to put her into jail for.
Give them some peace and move on and fess up.
That's my message to Tim.
The movie is Rescue Ruse, How Sound of Freedom, Con Christians.
It's at redpilledamerica.com.
It's also at Twitter and YouTube.
Patrick Korelchi, thank you so much for being our guest.
Thank you so much for having me on, Jimmy.
I really appreciate it.
You're one of the few that are willing to platform this discussion, so I really appreciate that.
During a hearing at the House Judiciary Committee, Representative Stephen Cohen asked FBI Director Christopher Wright if any tapes of people high in politics were found during the searches of Jeffrey Epstein's Manhattan Townhouse, which may show them in compromising position.
Cohen notes the importance of knowing if such videos exist.
The public has a right to see those.
Wait, the public has a right to see things that a three-letter agency doesn't want us to see?
That's news to me.
But here we go.
Ready?
Jeffrey Epstein.
Been in the news a lot lately about involvement with certain people high in politics involved.
Did the FBI conduct the raid on his townhouse in New York when he was look at this?
Look at the look on his face.
That's the over, like, oh, I'm really thinking about this.
I'm really serious.
That's like that prosecutor of Trump from Atlanta.
Remember, hey, how many cabins did you rent?
I rent lots of cabins.
You remember that?
That's what this is.
That's a guy getting ready to, how am I going to lie about this?
There we go.
Jeffrey Epstein.
In the news a lot lately.
You see his face?
Involvement with certain people high in politics involved.
Did the FBI conduct the raid on his townhouse in New York when he was incarcerated in New York?
There was a raid on his Eastside Townhouse.
Well, I don't know about a raid.
I know we executed a number of searches in the course of our fairly extensive investigation related to the.
Can you tell me, Epstein, during that search, if you came across and have within your possession of the FBI tapes of him with other individuals that he might have taken in people in compromising people?
Yeah, I don't know that there's anything I can share related to that.
I can see if there's information we can provide and maybe get back to you on it.
If there were types of people in prominent positions, friends of his.
So in the Greg tradition of J. Ed Gahuva declining to publicly reveal his walk-in closet filled with pink taffeta ball gowns, FBI Director Christopher Wray eschews any knowledge of the list.
He is potentially on himself.
Here we go.
Post for pictures with possibly in compromising positions.
The public, I think, has a right to see those.
Look at him pretending not to remember.
Well, I mean, how we handle evidence recovered in a criminal investigation has all kinds of rules that apply to it.
I recognize the intense public interest in the subject, but we have to follow our rules.
But I'm happy, like I said, I'm happy to follow up with my team on.
Thank you, sir.
And I appreciate your service.
And thank you for being here tonight.
Look at how this asshole is acting like this is some far-off vague memory.
Ah, Epstein.
Ah, Epstein.
Yeah, it rings a bell, kind of.
No, there was not a fairly.
Oh, there was an extensive investigation.
There was not a fairly extensive investigation.
My guess is because the worthless three-letter agencies already know everything that was at Jeffrey Epstein's house because the CIA and the FBI are in on it.
We'd have to follow our rules.
Did you hear him say that?
What rules?
Burn after reading?
What rules?
Hey, asshole, this ain't the UFO or Bigfoot.
We know Epstein exists.
And by the way, how closely did the FBI follow their rules when they leaked photos of documents seized from Mar-a-Largo?
Were they following the rules then?
Remember that?
Also, which rules applied with regard to lying to the FISA court 17 times so you can get a tap on Trump's phone and his campaign phone?
Which rules did you follow then when the FBI lied 17 times to the FISA court so you could tap Trump's phone?
Oh, that's when, oh, not rules don't count then, right?
So here's what Trump has to say about it.
Would you declassify the Epstein files?
Yeah, yeah, I would.
I guess I would.
I think that less so because, you know, you don't know, you don't want to affect people's lives if it's phony stuff in there because it's a lot of phony stuff with that whole world.
But I think I would.
So, and this is why I think Trump may be one of the only three people at the top of government who don't have any incriminating Epstein dirt on him.
Because Trump doesn't do drugs.
He doesn't drink.
And they probably don't have anything on him as far as Epstein goes.
That's why they can't control him as easily as everybody else is.
Let's hear it again.
Would you declassify the Epstein files?
Yeah, yeah, I would.
I guess I would.
I think that less so because, you know, you don't know, you don't want to affect people's lives if it's phony stuff in there because it's a lot of phony stuff with that whole world.
Really?
What kind of.
I think I would.
What kind of phony stuff exactly?
They logged in and then they got, did they log in and then not get on the plane?
What kind of phony stuff?
Either they were on the plane or they weren't.
There's not a lot of wiggle room on what happens on Epstein Island, okay?
Nobody goes to Epstein Island just to get away and relax.
They even had Stephen Hawking rolling around on Epstein Island.
Can you imagine that?
It's staggeringly naive to think that anybody went to Epstein Island is innocent.
Or anybody hanging out.
Anyway, it's just, hey, let's all go to that creepy guy, Jeffrey Epstein's Island, where he supposedly rapes underage kids, you know, just for the free booze.
I hear he's got great finger food.
So I just, so he's not going to.
So this guy's not going to release the.
Can you give us the could you give us the Jeffrey Epstein?
Look at his face.
In the news a lot lately about involvement with certain people high in politics involved.
Did the FBI conduct a raid on his townhouse in New York when he was incarcerated?
Look at this fake.
Such a raid on his Eastside Townhouse.
Well, I don't know about a raid.
I know we executed a number of searches in the course of our fairly extensive investigation.
Oh, really?
Extensive investigation.
Really?
Of shit you already knew because you guys are all working together and you're in on it.
I love that.
I wish I could find that video.
What is the name of the prosecutor from Florida?
No, from Atlanta for Trump.
What is his name?
Remember where he was interviewed by one of the weigh-ins?
And what's that guy's name?
I would love to see because he like he did the same.
He does the same face.
He does the same.
I'm really, I'm really thinking.
That's the I'm really.
Oh, yeah.
What's his name?
Nathan Wade.
That's the Nathan Wade face.
Did I ever rent a cabin?
Mmm.
Then he does a little sniff.
That's what that face is.
Watch how it changes.
As soon as he mentions Jeffrey Epstein, it's the fake I'm thinking thing.
Jeffrey Epstein.
In the news a lot lately about it.
I'm really thinking involved with certain people high in politics.
Oh, did the FBI conduct the raid on his in New York when he was incarcerated?
I wouldn't call it a raid.
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 mikemcray.com.
That's it for this week.
▲
Export Selection