Today, Dan and Jordan enter Part 3 of their coverage of Alex Jones' 2009 "documentary" The Obama Deception. In this installment, we see Alex completely blow it with list-making, misrepresent some history, and make a few decent points for the completely wrong reasons.
The other voice you will hear shortly is my co-host, Jordan.
We are a couple dudes who like to sit around, drink novelty beverages, and talk a little bit about Alex Jones.
As is the case this week, talk a lot about him.
In particular, the Obama deception, his 2009 quote-unquote documentary.
We are here on part three of our investigation of said...
And if you're listening to this episode, you haven't listened to the other ones, I recommend.
Please go back and listen to the other ones.
It'll help it sort of make sense, but not really all that much, because this documentary doesn't really make sense at all.
It's incredibly difficult for me to cut this into episodes, because we just end up jumping off in the middle of one thing, he comes back in the other.
There's no segmentation, there's no chapters in this documentary, so it's a real challenge, and I hope you guys are all enjoying it and keeping, it's not whiplash or anything like that.
But today we got part three.
That's exciting.
But before we get to that, I'd like to take a moment to say thank you to some of the people who have signed up and are supporting the show.
So we'd like to give a shout-out and thank them.
First of all, I'd like to say thank you to Leslie.
If you'd like to support the show, this show is entirely listener supported.
We have no ads, nor do I ever think, no matter how popular we get, anyone would want to advertise on a show that's just basically about Alex Jones, and then every now and again we talk about space weirdos.
But if you'd like to support the show and join up with the folks who are making this possible, you can do so by going to our website, knowledgefight.com, clicking that button.
It says support the show.
We would appreciate it oh so very much.
But for now, let's jump back into part three of our coverage of the Obama deception, if you recall.
Where we left off the last episode, Alex had just got done lying about the Federal Reserve and how it's private, and I explained why that is a load of bullshit and told you how the Federal Reserve System works.
Now we'll jump in on a completely different topic that Alex is talking about, but it is just immediately after in the documentary.
She attended in 1997 when she was first lady, but there's no evidence she attended any other conferences.
Hillary is listed as a CFR member on Wikipedia, but there's no citation in their public membership roles on the Council on Foreign Relations website.
Bill and Chelsea Clinton are listed as members of the Council on Foreign Relations, but Hillary is not.
The Trilateral Commission's member list from this time is also available online, and Hillary Clinton is not a member or a former member of the Trilateral Commission.
But much like Tim Geithner and Susan Rice, Jones was previously a member of the Trilateral Commission, but left the position when he became Obama's National Security Advisor or before.
He was also a former chairman of the Federal Reserve, and in his role as the economic recovery chairperson, he felt that Tim Geithner was being real fucking rude to him, and keeping him isolated from meetings, which I would think Alex would be super thrilled about.
The idea that Tim Geithner's like, no, no, no, Paul Volcker, get out of here.
The only source I can find that says he was a Bilderberg attendee is a post on the New American website that says, quote, Not on the public list, but spotted at the conference, according to unconfirmed reports from correspondents in St. Mortis, was Secretary of Defense Robert Gates.
The word correspondence is a hyperlink that leads to an Infowars story that says, quote, Infowars reporters Aaron Dykes and Paul Joseph Watson have received confirmation from an inside source that five other influential people who are not named on the official attendee list are in attendance at Bilderberg Conference 2011.
He left the trilateral committee by this point, and he's been a CFR member since at least 2003.
I know that because the CFR, which is so fucking secretive, that he put out a press release announcing his membership, complete with a dateline at the top and the contact information of the director of communications for the Council of Foreign Relations.
Obama appointed him as a, quote, special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan, where he advocated for such nefarious globalist plots as focusing on, quote, boosting the agriculture sector in Afghanistan.
Holbrook is a lifelong diplomat, so the post really makes sense.
I'm not going to argue with it.
Holbrook was ultimately ineffective in his position, and he died about a year later after he was put in the post.
His last words to his doctor were, this was kind of joking around with the doctor, but it's so adorable.
These were his last words.
He said to the doctor, quote, you've got to end this war in Afghanistan.
If you count the people who have left the Trilateral Commission as Alex being wrong, then he really only got one of these people's description right at all, and that's Paul Volcker, and he didn't even mention that he was the founding member of the Trilateral Commission.
It was just 13 people cherry-picked out of the hundreds that Obama had on his team.
Even if you've been absolutely correct about each and every one of these people being members of all three of his shadowy organizations, what the fuck does that prove?
It's just a drop in the ocean.
There's 19 people in Obama's main cabinet.
The main positions in his cabinet.
Alex didn't mention any of them, and they aren't members of any of those groups.
So, like, you could play this game every single direction if you want to.
Like, I could flash up on screen, Eric Holder, not member of any of these groups.
Now I'm more interested in an hour-and-a-half-long documentary that is just who is and is not in Obama's cabinet is a member of those groups, and we're going to start alphabetically with the entire population of the world.
So people who voted for Obama were trying to express, I think, first of all, something worthwhile.
The hatred for Bush, Cheney, the neocons, the desire to punish the Republicans for their adventures, their police state, and their economic depression.
The second question was on the economy.
People felt that Bush was selling them down the river into a world depression.
He is, of course, the new Herbert Hoover in that regard.
So they were trying to get something different from that.
Tragedy, of course, is, and this is really why Obama was groomed and prepared over a period of almost 30 years.
What?
unidentified
That Obama is there to frustrate and to deceive all of those hopes.
There's something very strange about Alex's world and the politics of everyone around him that's so profoundly self-censored.
Self-centered.
That it can't see any action or belief outside of its relation to themselves.
Tons of people excited about the prospect of Obama and liberal policies he discussed on the campaign trail are minimized into people who were just expressing their anger at Bush.
Which is a positive to Tarpley, I guess.
Everything that's good or bad is a response to what their side is doing.
What this in essence does is rob the left, or really anyone who's not in their weird patriot conspiracy tip, of any agency.
You don't really believe in gun control.
You're just responding to how much we love guns.
It's that same dumb thinking that really is a dead end.
It's really, really fucking stupid.
It's childish and self-centered to a level that it's painful to some extent.
Because I would never think...
Like, oh, you conservatives are just mad that I have a lip ring.
I don't have a lip ring.
But if I did, they're going, I have a mohawk and a lip ring, and you just, you old fuddy-duddies, you just don't like my coolness.
But that is the equivalent of what they're expressing.
Like, Webster-Tarpoli literally said that the people who support Obama are expressing something positive, which is a hatred of Bush.
It's like, yes, they do hate Bush, but that's not what they're expressing.
You are looking at only the negatives applied to you as opposed to the positives that exist externally because were you to recognize those for a second, you would have to either debate those positive points or admit that you don't give a shit and ignore those because you're a dumb fuck.
But at the same time, really hitting the point of what he's expressing is so important because it really does underlie so much of this.
When we talk about Alex Jones, I think I don't...
I don't deal with that, but I've felt that in the back of my head for a really long time, and it took something as overt as what Webster Tarpley just said to really, like, oh, that's what they're doing.
You look at stuff like that, and you're just like, it's hard to look at that and be like, oh, you're a great historian.
It's really tough to hear that mentality.
But again, this is why Webster Tarpley is so interesting to me.
Why was he able to break the conditioning?
But why was he able to come out and be like, Trump is trying to institute fascism, and part of it is a real failure of Ron Paul and the fake principled libertarianism that has been around forever?
Why did he get there in early 2016?
And also, why does he still have a show on the Genesis Communications Network?
The American people in mass were swept into a mob psychology, irrationally throwing their common sense to the wind and doing whatever the administration told them to.
The general public eventually caught on to the fact that George W. Bush was a deceitful thug.
From his official website, quote, I'd go to the Wayback Machine to gather this one.
Quote, Barack Obama believes we must be as careful getting out of Iraq as we were careless getting in.
Immediately upon taking office, Obama will give his Secretary of Defense and military commanders a new mission in Iraq, ending the war.
The removal of the troops will be responsible and phased, directed by military commanders on the ground and done in consultation with the Iraqi government.
Military experts believe we can safely redeploy combat brigades from Iraq at a pace of one to two brigades per month that would remove all of them in 16 months.
That's where the 16-month number comes from, not from a promise to bring everyone home within that time period, but that it was assessment that what military experts...
It's not something that we would like to be the case.
But there's more important things to talk about in terms of what he said there.
Because he was talking about Samantha Power doing this interview, which he said was in The Scotsman, but it was actually on BBC Hard Talk.
So Samantha Power was an advisor for the Obama campaign in 2008.
In her Hard Talk interview, she expressed doubts that Obama could realistically withdraw the troops in the 16-month time frame.
She clarified that Obama would take all the advice available and would work on making the best path for the country.
forward once he was in office and knew all the variables, stressing that the plans that he's able to make as a candidate and a senator are not the same as what he would be able to make once he's the president.
She was just clarifying, and she said that the 16-month window reflected a best-case scenario, which I think is a fair way to put it, even from what Obama promised.
I don't think that that's unfair at all.
But interestingly...
Based on the fact that Webster Tarpley mentions that interview incorrectly as Power doing an interview with the Scotsman, I know that he knows that she also was no longer with the Obama campaign, having resigned in March 2008, in the immediate aftermath of her interview with the Scotsman.
The problem was that she said this, We fucked up in Ohio.
In Ohio, they're obsessed, and Hillary is going to town with it, because she knows Ohio is the only place that she can win.
She's a monster, too.
That's off the record.
She's stooping to anything.
If you're poor, and she's telling you some story about Obama is going to take your job away, maybe it'll be more effective.
The amount of deceit she's put forward is really unattractive.
So he already knows that this is something that happened in March 2008, presumably nine, ten months before this interview happened.
He's referencing an interview that was done on a different medium than he's reporting, which is just her clarifying...
A misconception about the position that Obama had.
And he knows that immediately, almost immediately after both of these interviews, because they were pretty close together, she ended up leaving the campaign.
The idea of like, hey, everybody being self-resilient and self-sustaining, that is a great outcome, but the path towards that outcome that you are suggesting will lead to everyone dying.
It's the same thing, you pull all the troops out, you are just willing innocent people to die in a much greater number than already have.
Well, and even to change the subject, like, let's go with any kind of unilateral action like that.
I think a single-payer healthcare system is the best way to go.
The idea of Congress tomorrow instituting, even if we had supermajorities in both houses that could overcome a veto, the idea of them setting up a single-payer healthcare system tomorrow is a terrible fucking idea.
That would be chaos on a scale that nobody could comprehend.
They are also beholden to the idea of singular variables about things and don't consider all of these external ideas like, oh, well, doing that will affect all these other things.
From a July 2009 article on America.gov, quote, Obama and
then Russian President Medvedev said they have directed their missile experts to, quote, conduct a joint review of the entire spectrum of means at our disposal that allow us to cooperate on monitoring the development of missile programs around the world.
Obama was working on cooperating with Russian President Medvedev to make the region safer in ways that serve both countries'interests.
To present this as some sort of an aggression towards Russia is complete bullshit.
And even though this joint agreement wasn't finalized until July of 2009, there were news reports all over the place earlier in the year when Alex was working on this documentary that testified to the fact that Obama was trying to find a way to work together.
That narrative that Alex is putting into the world of the idea that Obama is trying to work to encircle Russia, it does serve the propaganda interests of Russia that we know today.
It feels very weird and very in line with Alex's feelings about Russia, generally speaking.
But in terms of this documentary, it also is like Occam's razor could tell us that it's just a way for him cheaply to misrepresent something to lie about Obama.
That is the only time Soros' name is mentioned in any way in this documentary, which is super fucked up because with the idea that Webster Tarpley is coming in saying that he is one of the people who runs Obama...
Why wasn't he listed in that list of people that included three people who aren't in the Obama administration?
You had Kissinger in there, Haas.
Why didn't you throw Soros in there?
Because he's not someone who's on Alex's radar in any meaningful way in 2009.
In terms of all this stuff, I think it's kind of outside of our purposes, really, to do a deep dive into the geopolitical situation in Eastern Europe in 2009.
I'm just going to leave that alone for now, just because it's outside of the thrust of the documentary.
I'll say that it's just important to remember that that conversation about the fascist creeps around Russia, what that was predicated on is the idea that Obama was putting missiles around Russia, and that's absolutely not true.
And that's the most important thing in terms of the discussion of what's happening here.
I don't care to get into the petty squabbles of whether or not Soros was working for good or ill, because it's all lies.
Obama pledged that he would filibuster any attempt to give retroactive immunity to the telephone companies, the telecom companies, except he then turned around and voted for that bill.
Candidate Obama told desperate factory workers in speech after speech that he was going to renegotiate NAFTA and GATT to make it more fair for American workers.
Real quick, I forgot, this is also still a news camp article.
unidentified
Barack Obama was publicly criticizing the North American Free Trade Agreement in a bid for votes, but privately telling Canadian officials not to worry about it.
So this is all an interesting piece of bullshit that Webster Tarpley is spinning.
And they are using news reports that were erroneous in order to back up their story.
This is absolutely a case of a smear.
Absolutely a case of...
So here's the situation.
Tarpley is saying that during the 2008 campaign, Obama was just saying that he was against NAFTA, but he was going around telling people in Canada that it was just blustery campaign.
So the first problem is that Obama wasn't anti-NAFTA.
He was just insistent that it needed to be improved to add labor and environmental protections into it.
That was his take on the campaign trail.
He was pretty consistent about that.
Second, the story about him privately.
Thank you.
Thank you.
The story that Alex flashes up on screen, that article from CTV, they reported on February 27th that there was a memo that an Obama advisor had contacted the Canadian embassy and told them that Obama's rhetoric was just, quote, political maneuvering.
In the fallout from this story being published, Obama's camp denied the story.
The Canadian embassy denied the story.
No records could be found of an Obama advisor contacting the Canadian embassy.
There was no record or transcript anywhere to be found.
This was days before the Ohio primary, a place where NAFTA was particularly unpopular.
So both Clinton and Obama were painting each other as the one who secretly was most in favor of NAFTA.
By March 3rd, the story had changed to being about Austin Goolsbee, Obama advisor, visiting the Canadian consulate in Chicago.
The story likely changed because Goolsby did visit the consulate on February 8, 2008, and NAFTA was a topic that came up in his meeting.
But he flatly denied saying anything close to what was alleged.
When a write-up of the full meeting was offered, it included this text.
Quote, That's pretty much exactly what Obama was saying on the campaign trail.
There were also parts in this write-up that involved that, quote, political maneuvering comment that were roundly denounced by Goolsby, who said he didn't say anything even close to that.
And it was an inappropriate inference made by whoever had written that report.
The Canadian Embassy issued an apology that same day, on March 3rd.
Quote, in the recent report produced by the Consul General in Chicago, there was no intention to convey in any way that Senator Obama and his campaign team were taking a different position in public from views expressed in private, including about NAFTA.
We deeply regret any inference that could have been drawn out to that effect.
In the fallout, accusations were made that Ian Brody, the chief of staff for the conservative prime minister, Stephen Harper, an ally of Bush, had been behind the leak with the interest of interfering with the United States election.
Yeah.
It's hard to say.
Obama was gaining ground, and he had a chance to win.
And in the aftermath of that, she did end up winning the Ohio primary.
More or less by someone within this, conceivably someone within the Canadian consulate who was working across purposes in order to paint the picture that Obama was a flip-flopper and a liar.
Which is another part of this documentary that's terrible.
It's visually unsatisfying.
To the nth degree.
Which is why, legitimately.
When I was going through this, trying to find what are the points of this documentary, I would end up watching three minutes and then have to walk to the bathroom and look in the mirror.
So, I feel no obligation to respond to any of these complaints that George Humphrey is making here, because they're recording this fucking documentary less than two months after Obama got into office.
He's talking about campaign promises, and sure, some of it is fair, like fair criticism.
Like the idea of Obama saying he wasn't going to have lobbyists in his administration, and then a lot of waivers for people.
Like that sort of thing.
Sure, fair criticism.
But some of these other things that require time, it is so unfair of them.
What I've realized from this, like, when we've been listening to 2009 episodes and Alex was talking about, like, I'm going to finish this documentary up.
I think one thing that this makes eminently clear, and I've already been on this tip, and I've said it furiously and loudly so often, but these people...
I mentioned this really early in the first episode.
When I was going through trying to find those points from those speeches that Alex was taking out of context, I ended up watching the whole speeches because Obama is an amazing speaker and he's able to convey points in a way that's really interesting to listen to.
Like, oh, that's what you're getting at.
He lays out an argument and it's not just like, hey...
Those people in the back in the media, they fucking suck.
The people of the United States and the world were filled with hope that Obama was the real deal when in his first week in office he signed an executive order supposedly closing Guantanamo Bay and other secret prisons.
Then the press actually had a chance to read the executive order and were shocked to find...
That the executive order only said that Obama was thinking about closing Guantanamo in a year.
The substance of the actual executive order sets a timetable of a year when they're going to reevaluate the position of all of the people who were held there.
It also reinforces the idea that they have to be kept in humane conditions, according to the Geneva Conventions.
Now, while it's bad...
Oh, sorry.
This refers to something that Alex is about to say.
The consequences of that need to fall where they may, and one of those things that is going to inevitably be a part of that is all of the people who you are now releasing, maybe some of them were actual terrorists, and now they are fucking licks.
If you are a terrorist that has been held indefinitely and force-fed...
You are not going to suddenly be released and be like, oh, okay, cool.
Now I'm not a terrorist.
The whole reason that they didn't fucking close it is because they knew that there were so many people that they were holding who were innocent, who were going to sue the fuck out of them, and who were going to fucking win to the tune of a lot of money.
I think that he's signed off immediately on closing Guantanamo, but he's allowing prisoners now to be taken to foreign countries and not knowing where they're sending them and to be tortured in foreign countries.
They don't know that they kept that provision in there.
Because by this time, like by 2009, by the time Obama was even running for president, everyone knew that the Bush administration's position was pro-torture.
In 2009, Alex saying that Obama is trying to block these documents coming out in some way to be a denial or hide the fact that Bush tortured people is ludicrous.
Everyone fucking already knew already at that point.
And Obama was clear on his position that he would end torture and waterboarding, and he fucking did.
In this argument, Alex is trying to imply that Obama was trying to protect the secrets of Bush.
And that's not fair because the secrets are already out there about Bush torturing people.
So it's impossible that that's what his motivation was.
In reality, if you look into this, Obama threatened to limit intelligence sharing with the United Kingdom if they released that information.
But not because it revealed torture, but because it would reveal some of the information that was gathered through the course of the interrogations.
Now, I still don't think that's great, but it's very different.
It's a very different scenario than what Alex is painting.
He's not trying to protect Bush or the idea that we tortured people.
We'd already owned up to that.
And we felt bad about it.
He's trying to protect the idea that there is some information that was gathered from interrogations of people that would be released if the British put these reports out.
Some people have speculated that contained in that information that the British would have released was the information that Obama used to track down bin Laden.
But again, just like with our last documentary, I'm rapidly forgetting that we are watching a documentary, because this is a series of visuals and chyrons and all of that shit that have very little relationship to each other.
Now, Obama did say on the campaign trail he was not going to allow lobbyists to work on anything that was related to the industries that they had previously lobbied in.
So, but when he got into office, Obama did sign an executive order strengthening ethics rules about the hiring of lobbyists, but it also allowed those waivers to be filed, which kind of undermines the enforcement power of the executive order to begin with.
I'm not interested in defending Obama on this front or any front really, and I wish he would have stuck with that commitment, but ultimately it's also the sort of thing that all presidents do.
Like, if Alex had this big of a problem with Obama doing this, I just can't imagine how Oh, boy.
I know.
I know.
Drain the swamp, Dan.
Drain it!
I know that our idealism and what we wish would be true is so caught up in this, and Alex is exploiting that to a certain extent, because we wish that this had been the case.
But if you look at almost every president ever, they're like, special interests are out when I'm in.
And then they find a way to...
So Alex is going to get into some of the lobbyists that were involved in...
It's definitely not a good look, since he had been recently working for Raython.
It wasn't even like...
The argument was that he was very qualified for the position at the Defense Department, given that he was also an Undersecretary for Defense from 1997 to 2001 in the Clinton administration.
He'd also been a senior fellow at the National Defense University, so he had qualifications for the job.
In his waiver, it was specified that he'd not be able to work in any matters that related to any of the six programs that he'd previously been a lobbyist for.
Is that good enough?
Probably not.
Does using that as your first example of Obama's malfeasance mean you probably have a weak argument?
Like, he's ostensibly saying that it's about these people, individuals, when in reality, it's about the entire system that has created the government that we exist in now.
wrestle with are the things that we're talking about in terms of these people's actual resume.
Right.
unidentified
And it's like, well, if you had just taken a lobbyist for Rayathon who had no experience in the Defense Department or as a fellow at the National Defense University.
So Mitchell is an interesting case because leave aside the unproven Saudi lobbying claims and you have a perfect candidate for the job and simultaneously maybe the dirt worst.
On the one hand, Mitchell has a resume a mile long of lobbying for big tobacco, manufacturing interests, and the insurance lobby.
It makes me very uncomfortable about him.
At the same time, the position Obama was looking to fill was the Special Envoy for Middle East Peace, and Mitchell had a fucking good set of qualifications there.
He'd previously served as Special Envoy for Northern Ireland from 1995 to 2001, where he was involved in the Belfast Peace Agreement, and that earned Mitchell a Liberty Medal and the Presidential Medal of Freedom, because he resolved a very tense situation in Northern Ireland, which isn't perfect still, but it was way worse.
In 2000, Bill Clinton sent Mitchell on a fact-finding mission to see what he could learn about the Arab-Israeli conflict.
In 2001, he released the Mitchell Report, which called for the Israelis to fucking stop building settlements in Palestinian territories and called for the Palestinians to work on preventing violence.
Beyond that, he was a senator from Maine from 1980 to 1995.
He was a Senate Majority Leader for six of those years, and he was a senior fellow and senior research scholar at the Columbia University Center for International...
I don't fucking know.
Diplomatic and conflict resolution experience and is someone in good standing with a 15-year record as a senator.
It's see what you can do on this issue that you already had experienced in 2001 and probably have a lot of connections in that world.
A lot of people who would be more willing to talk to you than other people.
It's someone who is easy to plug into that role.
I don't know.
I don't fucking know.
I don't know what to do with this.
Because if he was able to be in that role and there were ethics rules in place about nothing you do, Can in any way touch any business that you have lobbied for.
And that's when you have a shit ton of hotels that are making a lot more money because you're the president and people want to stay there in order to get good graces.
We are trying to, and we're not, but it could appear, or someone could hear it as us being like, well, let's let Obama off the hook because here's what Trump did.
And that is in no way our interest.
And I'm not saying that.
I only want to...
The only reason that that's important to bring up at all and is relevant in any way is to highlight the level to which Alex Jones has given up on any principles he ever pretended to have.
Because those principles didn't exist even here.
He's complaining about stuff for points.
He doesn't really care about that.
Because if he did, he could never be what he is now.
So, I'm reticent to, like, constantly...
Because I could have brought up Trump a whole lot of other times.
The list goes on and on, but Alex rushed this documentary.
Like I said, Obama nominated Daschle, but then it came out that Daschle hadn't filed his taxes correctly, and he might have misfiled some deductions in his past.
so on february 3rd 2009 daschle withdrew his name from consideration for secretary of health and human services and was replaced by katherine sebelius this is embarrassing for alex like he has every reason to know this based on when he's making the documentary when it came out yet he kept this in why would he keep this in by the time he released this it was a month past when daschle took his name out of consideration it's already he's acting as if that he made The footage plays.
So, I can't find any evidence that Rahm in any way wrote the 2008 bailout bill or had any meaningful involvement in its passage outside of, like, he was a member of the House before.
But I don't know.
There's not even any articles on InfoWars.
Like, I searched through all of InfoWars, like, looking for Rahm articles and stuff like that.
There's no evidence of this anywhere.
So I just have to, like, I just assume it's bullshit.
And especially considering earlier in the documentary they said it was Larry Summers and Alan Greenspan who did it.
I don't understand all of them, all three of them together.
I can't be expected to prove a negative because then all I can do, the only way I'm going to ever satisfy this is, like, I find Rahm and I'm like, give me a detailed accounting of literally everything you did in 2008 or Alex Jones.
I think a lot of people, they would hear this, like, Rob did the bailout, and then they'd be like...
I don't know that to be true.
I don't think that's true now.
It's going to be like, prove me wrong.
Show me how he didn't do that.
Show me that he didn't do that.
I have HR 1100011111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 If you prove to me in any way that this is true, I'll revise my position.
But until then, I'm not going to spend my fucking life trying to disprove a position that history denies.
Within one month of the passage of the first banker bailout bill, the press reported that over $5 trillion had just disappeared out of the U.S. Treasury.
So we've already been over that, which is fun to hear him yelling into a bullhorn at a couple people working on the top of a building who are laughing at him.
Folks, I am so sorry that that's where we're cutting it off, but look, here's the deal.
We're about to jump off into a section of this documentary that I've been teasing the last couple minutes that you've just been listening to quite a bit, and it turns into a long discussion of how stupid the Paul family is, and if I'd left that in, this would have just been too long of an episode.
But now you know.
From the end of this episode that we're about to learn about Wayne Paul.
And that, you know what, there's very few times on this podcast that I'm actually able to do a cliffhanger.
And so I'm going to make the most of it.
And, you know what, tomorrow...
Next episode, Thursday.
It's Thanksgiving.
What better way to celebrate Thanksgiving than to learn about just how off-base Ron Paul's brother is.
Anyway, you've got that to look forward to tomorrow.
I hope you enjoyed today.
There was a little bit of wishy-washiness in this episode, but hey, that's how history is sometimes.
Until next time, we do have a website.
It's knowledgefight.com.
You can follow us on Twitter.
It's at knowledge underscore fight.
You can follow us on Facebook.
We also have a group on there called Go Home and Tell Your Mother You're Brilliant.
It is a private group for no reason, really, but we let people in, so if you'd like to be a part of the fan community, just send a request and we'll let you in.
Also, we are on iTunes.
You can follow, subscribe, leave a review.
That sort of thing is all very much appreciated.
But, hey, until next time...
You know what?
I realized on the last episode that I talked about, here at the end, I talked about Survivor Series, the WWE pay-per-view.
I didn't feel right about it.
When I was editing this together, putting out the episode, I realized that much better than Survivor Series probably was NXT's War Games on Saturday night.
And that featured probably someone who you think might have killed somebody.
And that is the great Aleister Black.
Pro-wrestler Aleister Black.
Kicks people really hard to the face, but has not killed anybody with his black mask kicked to the face.
Has not killed anybody, but there's one guy that I know of who technically probably killed a dude, and that's Alex Jones.