Knowledge Fight’s #368 dissects Alex Jones’ November 11–12, 2019, rant—where he demanded "good people" resort to violence if Trump lost, falsely accused Nikki Haley of treason, and gloatingly linked James Le Messourier’s death to MI6. Dan and Jordan mock his biblical misquotes, Roger Stone’s recycled defamation, and Michael Graves’ Soros pedophilia claims, exposing Jones’ contradictions: from dismissing MAGA attacks as false flags to endorsing caller-driven violence. His extremist rhetoric reveals not just absurdity but a pattern of incitement, proving why InfoWars remains a menace despite its fringe audience. [Automatically generated summary]
I'm sure some of the other stuff that was in the other candies that were in the package are much better than this complete stud level of licorice, but I felt like that might be the most interesting thing to try.
But with only 357 days left to this historic election, I'm doing it because I want to note visually to everyone that we're not in Kansas anymore.
That the world is really on the brink of total breakdown and disaster if good people don't exert our full political, cultural, economic, and spiritual will.
Because if we fail at that, we're going to have to exert our physical will because we'll have no other choice.
Because what's coming at us is so damn evil.
There will be worldwide massive civil war and violence.
So his main storyline throughout at least the beginning of this episode is about the revelations that Nikki Haley brought forth, particularly about how Rex Tillerson and who was it, McMaster?
A man who's made his brand on defying authority and disobeying every possibility is, of course, the one who's going to tell you that if you're not going to be able to do it.
We even had sources who would be out at dinner, high-powered donors, billionaires with McMaster, and he would be drunk saying Trump's an idiot, Trump's a fool.
We hear in the establishment know how to run things.
He'll be out in just a few months.
They called the president up and couldn't even get him on the phone, so they called Roger Stone.
And they had Roger's phones tapped, and he got a bunch of death threats the next day, and so did I.
We got told: if you don't keep your mouth shut, you're dead.
And I had people I know call up that have worked high-level CIA, you name it, and threaten me, basically.
I told them, piss up a rope, and you better make sure I don't see you coming.
But I don't believe most of that stuff happened for particular reasons that I think I'll be able to lay out as we go along.
Also, how is this supposed to work with that whole notion of like Trump sits up till three in the morning just sitting by the phone so people normal people can call him?
I think that this show is starting out weird because what Nikki Haley is bringing out does match up pretty closely with what Alex has yelled about for a long time.
Yeah.
And so it's a sort of miniature version of he doesn't know how to win.
He doesn't know how to take this and just let it be.
There's got to be more to it.
So Alex starts talking about plans to demoralize the country.
Because when you are conquering a nation and selling it off and butchering it and dumbing it down and psychologically demoralizing it and poisoning it, that's all in the WikiLeaks.
You can turn the damn TV and see it, though.
You don't need to know it's in a secret document because you can see it.
Breaking up the family, everything.
We're being poisoned.
That's how you do it from within.
The rot from within.
There are the 49 secret plans of the communists to bring down the U.S. and all the famous senatorial reports.
But it wasn't the Russian communist.
It was the globalists already taking over Russia and were using the same poison on us.
I didn't read all of them because there's way too fucking.
There's a few.
So I searched around for articles about the most damning things that were in those email dumps because I'm not going to look through everything for the podcast.
There's just no way I have that time.
So it's a little bit voyeuristic of an exercise for me too, like to read these emails because I know that they're hacked and they weren't meant to be public, which makes the whole process feel like it's less like research and more like snooping.
None of that's to say that there isn't stuff that's worth being covered in those email dumps.
I just think that they've been covered pretty extensively at this point.
And I can't really find any material about demoralizing society being the cornerstone of some Democrat globalist plot.
The term demoralize only shows up in completely unrelated contexts in the Hillary emails and only in one email in the Podesta files.
That email from May 24th, 2015 was a campaign cable that served as a rundown of stories in the media about Hillary.
The word demoralize shows up in a copy and pasted chunk from an article on Real Clear Politics with the headline, quote, why less competition is hurtful to Hillary.
The article is basically positing that without a strong rival from within the Democratic Party, she won't have an opportunity to defend her record in the primary.
So questions about her controversies will still be on the table when she enters the general election.
This dynamic also means that all the media attention would be on Hillary prior to the general.
The article says, quote, while media attention is a positive for a candidate, being its almost sole focus on the Democratic side has not been easy.
And this could well serve to demoralize Democratic voters.
There are already signs of that in the national polls.
I'd like to say that this is what Alex has taken and misrepresented, but honestly, I have no idea.
Because it does say demoralize Democratic voters.
It's the only time it appears in the Podesta emails.
I don't know.
I have no idea.
He always just says it's in the WikiLeaks and never explains it any further.
So I don't, you know, if he doesn't care to be more specific, I'm just going to assume he's making shit up until I can find evidence to the contrary.
So now, about those 49 plans of communism, the first thing I should tell you is that there's only 45, and I should tell you that it's bullshit.
On January 10th, 1963, Representative Hurlong of Florida took to the floor of the House.
He said that a constituent of his was an ardent enemy of communism and had requested that he read the 45 current goals of communism into the official congressional record.
Because a representative read these goals and it was recorded, now all these people think that it's something real, but it's not.
These 45 goals of communism were read directly out of The Naked Communist by W. Cleon Skousen.
I mean, to some extent, a lot of the stuff, that is part of this literary tradition, if you will.
There was a list of communist rules for revolution that popped up in the mid-50s, which was said to have been discovered by Allied soldiers back in 1919.
Of course, it was a complete hoax, but it served to give focus to the fears and paranoias that were popping up in the Cold War era.
The communist enemy was so mysterious to people that it became insanely easy to demonize your enemies by releasing fake documents that purport to show that what they stand for is secretly in line with the secret plans of the commies.
So they're basically commies and therefore the enemy.
That's all Skousen's list is.
It's a completely fake pile of shit he wrote to push his politics by calling the things he disagreed with communist.
Number 24 is, quote, eliminate all laws governing obscenity and calling them by calling them censorship and a violation of free speech and the free press.
If I'm not much mistaken, Alex fancies himself a bit of a free speech absolutist these days and absolutely would support getting rid of all obscenity laws that limit free expression.
Alex has spent the last three years of his on-air career screaming about how the FBI is completely infiltrated by globalists and Trump needs to clean house and jail all of them.
To be fair, that rule about insurrection is in the context of the rules, the fake rules that Skousen wrote, is specifically about disenfranchised communities.
So, Alex, you know, he's saying here that you got this globalist plan that's being furthered by people like Kelly and McMaster and Tillerson and Nikki Haley.
At least she stood up against it.
You know, it's all to demoralize society as proven by the WikiLeaks and this fake 45 list of globalist communist plots.
And how it's going to manifest and how it has manifested is a list of curses upon our country that Alex reads.
It doesn't read off.
He just starts discussing here.
I'm going to take these one by one after this clip and explain means nothing.
We already knew what Nikki Haley has come out and said was true.
That they would come to her and say, Trump is an idiot.
He's going to destroy the country.
You've got to help us undermine him and not support him and block his agenda.
When the globalists have sat here and presided over the deindustrialization of America, the dumbing down of America, our life expectancy plumbing, plummeting, infant mortality exploding, and all the other curses that are upon the nation.
And then Trump comes in, gets elected, tries to be the president.
Because those aren't a perfect test of intelligence by any means.
And even if they were, a January 2018 paper in the journal Intelligence notes that while there were drops in Nordic nations' IQ scores that had been observed, the U.S. was on an upward trajectory, rising 0.3 points per year.
Plus, again, IQ scores don't really mean anything.
To demonstrate how dumb this whole conversation is, allow me to read to you two headlines from the INC, Inc., the website.
The first is, quote, we're all getting dumber, new science proves, and no one is sure why.
That was from June 14th, 2018.
Flash forward to June 27th, 2019, and you get this headline: quote, humanity might not be getting dumber after all, new study suggests.
A year apart, the same publication, and both articles were written by the same person.
In 2018, everyone saw this study about a drop in IQ that was observed in a study of people living in Norway and reported it super irresponsibly.
Then, when more data was in, it was all, whoops, I guess we're not getting dumber after all.
Every single article I can find that discusses the we're getting dumber idea as being proven links to that Norwegian study, and it's all shit, or at very least, woefully oversimplified.
If Alex wants to suggest that the population is getting dumber, he needs to explain what he means by that.
I'm almost certain that he just read headlines that came out in 2018 about this Norway study, and he hasn't cared to read any of the newer information that completely contradicts it and actually shows the opposite.
And again, IQ scores don't mean anything.
Standardized test scores, I don't necessarily believe is even a good indicator of intelligence on this scale.
To even have a full conversation about the idea that America is getting dumber, you really need to dig in to figure out what are your indicators.
A recent paper in the journal Population and Development Review observed life expectancy rates among non-Hispanic white Americans increasing at a lower rate than the general population.
They weren't able to pinpoint the exact reason for this, but some of the prevailing theories had to do with the opiate crisis killing more young rural white people and with obesity levels.
Whatever the exact reason for the phenomenon is, you can find articles with headlines that are, you know, you can just imagine how easily they would trigger Alex.
From AJMC, quote, study reveals declining life expectancy among white Americans.
There's some real issues behind this stuff, for sure, like dealing with what researchers call deaths of despair, like overdoses and suicides.
But from listening to as much Alex as I have, I'd be very inclined to think that he's read some of these headlines about white life expectancy, and then he got really mad.
Yeah, that was decided life expectancy is plummeting in the United States.
We got diarrhea running down our legs, but our eyes are getting clear and we see what's going on.
And even though we're in a debilitated state, we're bigger and stronger than these gremlins that had us tied down on the operating table and that we're about to finally finish us off and sell our organs off to the highest bidder.
Sure.
That's the metaphor.
And I personally am doing everything I can.
I got my hands on a couple of the gremlins and I'm squeezing them and they're dying.
Ah, well, they're stabbing me in the guts.
I'm just, ah, I don't want to throw these down and grab some more.
The only way I can do that is when you spread the word and when you buy the products and when you pray for it, you do that.
I can just start smashing goblins, smashing them, smashing them, smashing them and just fling them up against the wall and break every bone in their body.
And then I'm just going to aim like a big rhinoceros and just run through them.
It's just as important to support Infowars as it is to support the local affiliates who are these shows put us on.
We're standing up for babies.
Most your churches aren't.
I would give your money to the local radio stations to hear us on.
Literally, I'd make a tithe weekly or monthly instead of those local churches that won't do a damn thing but make you feel good about eternity while selling out civilization.
If somebody just tithes to a radio station, does Alex, in that agreement that they have to sign for Alex to broadcast on their channel, is it's one part of that if somebody tithes, he gets a cut?
No, no, what I would guess is that Alex is aware that almost nobody would send money to a radio station that airs a certain show.
And so if you are like working at this radio station and some people, even if it's a minuscule amount, send money as like a here, thank you for airing Alex's show.
It would make you much less inclined to take it off the air because it would like in the same way they talk about how one phone call is equivalent to 100 people in Congress.
Congress members view that as being representative of a much larger thing.
Most people will think this thing, but not follow through with it.
You've got to assume if you're getting a fucking check from somebody because they listen to Alex's show and you're a radio station that airs it and you're still making all the ad money and all that shit, you'd be like, that's got to be 100,000 fucking people represented by this one check.
And that's probably not true.
But if Alex can trick like, I don't know, five people around the country to do that, he's got five stations he's far more secure in than he would be otherwise.
So here we have Alex insisting that General Kelly wanted to keep Alex's information away from Trump because Alex was just so accurate based on the fact that he'd been yelling about Fiona Hill in the past.
And apparently you'd mentioned Eric Ciomarella, Cioromella, which is the name that's being thrown around as being the whistleblower who brought up concerns about Trump's phone call with the Ukrainian president.
And I want to parse through this pretty carefully.
In terms of Eric Ciaromella, I can only find references to his name being on the Infowars dating back to November 1st, 2019.
And it's based on a tweet from Benny Johnson, who's a guy who has found a job working with Turning Point USA after getting unceremoniously fired from multiple publications for plagiarism.
He's someone with zero credibility.
And whether or not he has the name right about this alleged whistleblower, it's unwise to base your reporting on his say-so.
This is the source that Alex is pretending is some high-level guy, just some dude at Turning Point.
Benny Johnson tweeted out this guy's name a full two days prior to InfoWars even having an article about this dude.
It would seem like if the globalists in the White House, like Rex Tillerson, were concerned about rogue reporting like this, they would seek to keep people like Benny Johnson and Turning Point out, not people like Alex who were just reposting the shit two days later that they've already put out.
And interestingly, they don't.
Turning Point USA has a very close relationship with the Trumps.
And in fact, just the other day, they hosted a big event for Don Jr.'s new book, Triggered, which was disrupted by trolls associated with straight-up white nationalist Nick Fuentes.
I hate to use this sort of language necessarily, but that's an important thing to pay attention to that's going on right now.
Nick Fuentes and his dudes who are trying to, the way I would describe it is try to usurp the Turning Point USA by disrupting their events and heralding their true conservative values, which are really just Christian white supremacist views.
Well, I mean, that's why they were trying to keep InfoWars and Dinesh D'Souza and shit away from Trump is because you're not supposed to get high on your own supply.
You can't forget that you're running the game on the roops.
Because if you start to believe InfoWars shit, then it's over.
And to an extent, I think this is one of the problems that you see of these things like InfoWars or Turning Point entirely is that they aren't really based in anything.
No.
So when InfoWars exists as this conspiracy theory bullshit entity for a really long time, it leaves the audience and Alex himself pray for someone like Trump to come along.
You know, you have Roger Stone come in.
He completely validates.
It's not a hostile takeover necessarily, but you have this thing that's much more powerful than him come in, and now Alex has become that.
Turning point is pointless.
The sort of, what would you call it even, pseudo-libertarian values that they express are not appealing to college kids.
And so you have this thing, this entity that exists that is just ripe for the picking for someone like a Nick Fuentes to come along and use his trolls to do whatever he needs to do with.
And I think it's actually, I think it's a pretty dangerous thing.
I don't know if it'll amount to anything, but I do think it's something that's important for people to recognize.
Because when we talked about Nick, he was on InfoWars because he disrupted a Charlie, or his guys disrupted a Charlie Kirk event.
And one-off, it's like, eh, you might just be fucking with this guy.
There's a clear targeting that's going on by associates of Nick Fuentes that they're trying to attack Turning Point.
I mean, Turning Point, and it's a worse version of the election of Trump entirely is just this massive system that has been preying upon people and trying to keep them inert and just trying to fucking convince them of all kinds of things that aren't real will be inevitably taken over by somebody who is simply simply Jesus.
Who is making the message simple, clear, and pretending to stand up for something?
You make the message worse and point out how, like, what was it?
I read some great take on it.
That was like, you'll always end up, the way that the conservative shit works, you'll always end up falling victim to someone who claims that you're not the real conservative.
So all that aside, you know, Turning Point USA has a very deep, entwined relationship with Trump.
And get this.
One of the places that Benny Johnson was fired from was the Independent Journal Review.
Before he got fired, the IJR was the only media outlet invited to come along with Rex Tillerson on his tour of Asia.
Seems like Alex's narrative doesn't make a whole lot of sense here because the guy who outed this alleged whistleblower's name is a guy who works for Turning Point, and Tillerson was involved with the organization that he used to be at.
And now the Trump White House is totally fine with Turning Point.
They're not trying to keep that information away from him.
Just in Force.
I wonder why.
Maybe there's another reason.
So now, as for Fiona Hill, that one's a little more complicated.
As you may recall, Hill is the former National Security Council official who has testified that after becoming aware that there was a bit of a quid pro quo situation going on between Trump's people and the Ukrainian government, John Bolton told her to lawyer up.
And she's testified about some stuff.
And that testimony is going to be pretty important in terms of this impeachment investigation because it's very explicit.
She was in meetings where people like Ambassador Sondland were discussing the shit pretty openly.
So whatever actually ends up happening on that front, it's very important for Alex to discredit her as a source of any information.
And luckily for him, he's already done that.
On May 31st, 2017, Roger Stone appeared on Alex's show and announced that he learned that George Soros had infiltrated the Trump administration by installing Fiona Hill into the National Security Committee.
And then the first is that Alex and Roger spent the better part of three years calling literally everyone they disagreed with Soros infiltrators.
Reince Priebus, Steve Bannon, Sean Spicer.
Oh, and let's not forget Jared Kushner and Ivanka have all been in the crosshairs as Soros plants and globalist meddlers at various points in time.
Alex doesn't get to pretend that he was prophetic about Fiona Hill eventually testifying about Trump because he said on air that she was a Soros plant because he calls everyone a Soros plant.
He should have one episode at least where he just takes like an hour and just reads off every single name in the executive branch entirely and just be like, let's see, where are we at?
We're at assistant deputy director of the that's a Soros plant.
That way, six months from now, he can be like, see, I told you it was this one.
So probably the more important element to this is that in Hill's recent testimony, she talked about the real-life impact of Alex and Rogers' actions.
Quote, my entire first year of my tenure at the National Security Council was filled with hateful calls, conspiracy theories, which has started again, frankly, as it's been announced that I've been giving this deposition, accusing me of being a Soros mole in the White House.
She went on to say, quote, I received, I just have to tell you, death threats, calls at my home.
My neighbors reportedly reported someone coming and hammering on my door.
Fiona Hill's life very well could have been put in danger.
And at very least, an insane level of harassment was directed at her directly because of Alex and Rogers' on-air behavior.
According to her own resume, which you can find, it's very public, she was a member of the Central Eurasia Project Advisory Board of the Open Society Institute from 2000 to 2006, a good decade before she was appointed to the NSC by Trump himself.
That's the connection.
The smoking gun that's enough for people like Alex and Roger to point to.
That's all they need to risk your life because they're so desperate to come up with any kind of rationalization for why their supposed God-King isn't getting anything done.
These people are vile, irredeemable monsters.
No one should feel pity for Alex when he has to pay the Sandy Hook families for what he did to them.
We should instead feel for the countless other people who will never get any restitution for the abuse they've been subjected to by Alex.
Like, I don't give a fuck about this.
Like, this idea that, oh, we pointed out that Fiona Hill was a Soros plant.
Oh, she worked for the open societies.
Who cares?
Who cares?
Choose anybody on the NSC.
I bet you can find something to point to if you want to call them out.
And if you have a certain expertise, you'll find your way somewhere.
Like, I just think it's so insane to look at this sort of thing and recognize the real-life impact that you never hear about.
Like, you generally wouldn't hear about what Fiona Hill's experience was after being targeted by Alex.
And you almost think it's like a second thoughts, you know, like, or whatever.
You don't even think about it because he does this to so many people.
Yeah.
But there are real-life consequences, and she had to deal with clearly doxing, because if people were calling her home and someone showed up at her house, like, and sure, a lot of other conservative outlets were pushing that she was a Soros mole, but it traces back to Roger.
First things first, the founder of MI6 died in 1928.
The person who Alex is talking about is a guy named James Le Messerier, who, as far as I can tell, was a former officer of the British Army and co-founder of the White Helmets.
That's an organization that literally everyone in the world other than Alex and his weirdo friends view as a humanitarian group.
At this point, it's pretty unclear what the situation about this death is.
Sky News was reporting that James's wife told police that she and her husband had taken sleeping pills and gone to bed.
Then later, she was awoken by people knocking on her door.
She went outside to find him in the street, surrounded by police, having fallen off the balcony.
As someone who's taken sleeping pills before, I can say that it seems entirely possible that he might have had a weird reaction and sleepwalked off the balcony.
That's possible.
I don't know if that's the case for sure, but pharmacologically, that is a possibility.
His wife also apparently told friends that James had just begun taking antidepressants.
So the possibility of him dying by suicide is also not totally outside the realm of possibility.
There is a lot of possibilities of what could have happened here.
But Alex isn't acting like those things are possible.
He's treating this like it was a murder, and he's fucking gloating about it.
That's grotesque behavior, no matter what the reality is here.
Alex is acting like this is a murder because he believes that Russia killed this dude.
This is based on the fact that three days prior to his death, the Russian foreign ministry tweeted out, quote, the White Helmet's co-founder, James Le Messourier, is a former agent of Britain's MI6 who has been spotted all around the world, including in the Balkans and the Middle East.
The proof Alex has for his claim that this dude was MI6 is just the Russian Foreign Ministry's Twitter account.
And because of this tweet, Alex has decided that Russia killed him, and Alex is happy about this turn of events.
I know that I sound like a broken record on these modern-day episodes, but Alex Jones is severely mentally ill.
He's imagining a foreign government killed a man, and he's relishing it.
I'm not one to pretend that I know a lot or like that I'm an expert in the Syrian civil war, but everything that I can find that isn't Alex Jones related deals with this as a humanitarian organization that rescued civilians who were caught up in battle zones.
So I don't, I mean, even imagining that he is a bad person, this behavior is still no good.
I'm begging you for yourself and your family's future and for the commitment of this broadcast that I want to defeat these people to please, please remember that it is only your word of mouth that gets us around the censors.
And it is only your financial support that funds the operation and only your prayer that I know if two of us agree upon it on earth, it's done in heaven.
That it is your intercession that is literally giving us discernment and it's not luck.
It's a man's heart chooses his path, but God guided our steps.
So that first verse he's paraphrasing is Matthew 18, 19, which says, quote, truly I tell you that if two of you on earth agree about anything they ask for, it will be done for them by my father in heaven.
You could read that verse and think that you can get a buddy to join you in agreement about whatever you want, then God's going to make it so in heaven.
Well, that's a painfully dumb reading of the text.
If you take the verses that come before this and around it and context from the book of Acts, it's very clear that this is about the functions of the early church.
This is what this verse is about.
It has nothing to do with, you know, hey, you know, you guys get together.
In the same way that all of his Thomas Jefferson quotes come from like memes and Patriot and right-wing extremist stuff, I bet a lot of his Bible stuff does too.
Like, and the weird sermons of extremist radio preachers, Christian identity preachers yelling about stuff.
So we got this whole vibe that's been going on that's like, hey, man, why is everybody so worried about InfoWars?
And obviously, Alex's rhetorical answer is because we revealed Fiona Hill and this whistleblower.
Just this week, it came out that a man who was one of the victims of the Ohio State Athletic Doctor's sexual assaults in the mid-90s directly reported the act to Jim Jordan, who was then the school's wrestling coach, and Jordan did nothing.
43 men have filed the lawsuit claiming that they were victims of this doctor.
And an independent investigation that OSU did found that he abused at least 177 students in the 20 years that he worked at the school.
Consistently in the past, Jordan has tried to claim that he never knew anything about the doctor's abuse of students, but this definitely seems to make that sound like bullshit, especially considering this is the second victim to say that they directly told Jordan about it.
And to be clear, this is a much bigger issue than just focusing on Jim Jordan.
There's a whole system of complicity that needs to be held to account.
And the plaintiffs in that case do not deserve for their day in court to be reduced to a political sideshow.
So please do not let that be the image of my point.
All that being said, when Alex has to come up with any politicians he's into, all he can come up with is a dime store David Duke, a thrift shop Joe Paterno, Devin Nunes, and a guy from Missouri whose name he doesn't know but remembers has said some fucked up things that he liked in the past.
And we got another clip of him just a year and a half ago breaking down John Kelly, how they were working with Steve Bannon to bring in the deep state and all these Soros people like Fiona Hill and Eric Ciaramella.
He leaves in August, and by October, he has a financial deal with Kwok to finance a bid to finance Breitbart as the Mercers, who I do think are patriots, appear to be ready to throw in.
So let's be clear, he's calling Trump a traitor at the same time talking to a snake reporter that he brought Into the hen house and at the same time using national security intel to then go basically get money off of somebody so that he could be the person's political protector by every stretch of the imagination, by every historical yardstick.
This sounds like treason to me.
And then that's a particular clip dealing with Van and the clips we have.
So on one level, that clip is funny to me because once again, Alex's staff can't manage to play any of the clips that he wants them to.
He sets up what's supposed to be a slam dunk of Roger talking about Fiona Hill and this whistleblower, and it's just Roger from that same episode talking about Steve Bannon.
But here's where this gets really funny.
You might have heard Roger say something about a guy named Quok in that clip.
And this is a reference to a man named Miles Kwok having nefarious intentions behind some alleged financing of Breitbart.
You should know that Miles Kwok sued Roger Stone for defamation for this claim, along with a few others, like Roger saying that Quok was a convicted criminal.
Part of this settlement was that he had to pay for three advertisements retracting his statements in national newspapers.
Part of the story that Alex is currently using to attack Fiona Hill is based on stuff that got Roger sued and led to him having to buy ads in the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, and Washington Post to retract.
Oh, also, I hope that re-airing the story doesn't end up getting Roger's settlement agreement voided.
If all of a sudden Alex got a part of this narrative that Alex is now trying to repurpose because Fiona Hill is testifying against Trump in this impeachment investigation, part of the original context of it is stuff that got Roger sued and he had to retract.
So I told you at the beginning of this episode that about halfway through or so, we would get to like a very clear reason why I need, you know, we have to do this episode.
And here's what it is.
Alex believes that that book that the New York Times is putting out, or is, I don't know if the New York Times is putting out, but anyway, that anonymous.
Saying they're getting ready to publish this anonymous book.
The word is it's John Bolton who we know wants to testify against the president.
Even though there's a separation of powers, the president by law supposed to be able to keep him from doing it.
He wants to go bear the false witness because he's a neocon, was always a neocon, but lied to Trump's face that he would try to carry out the president's agenda, the person that we elected.
Book review is a warning anonymous author makes case against re-election.
And Steve Pieczenik, who's worked with a lot of these people, says that John Bolton is today's Benedict Arnold.
Here he is from his YouTube channel.
unidentified
Okay.
Hi, this is Dr. Pieczenik, and today I want to talk about John Bolton, the Benedict Arnold of America.
Does Alex expect his audience to legitimately have no memory of the side characters in his little play?
How can he play a clip from Steve's YouTube page after their unceremonious falling out where Alex decided he was still working for the CIA doing psyops against InfoWars by trying to convince Alex that the Las Vegas shooting didn't even happen?
Legitimately, what the fuck is this show?
Some guest is determined to be a deep state spy running operations against you, so you just put them in timeout for a little while.
But that is what happened back when their falling out happened.
But Alex gives a little bit more detail about that in a little bit.
Before we get there, I want to say this about Steve Pieczenik.
He's a lunatic, but he's consistent.
Steve Pieczenik hates neocons and has consistently, insistently tried to get Alex to be on the same page as him with no real success.
Steve was always there telling Alex not to trust neocons like Neil Gorsuch or John Bolton, but Alex didn't listen.
He let Roger Stone talk him into being okay with those dudes.
Steve Pieczenik is a big old fraud and a con man, but I will tip my hat to him for being pretty consistent.
He's crazy and a liar, but he has some form of principles, which is more than I can say for Alex.
Like, legitimately, how fucking humiliating is it for Alex to say on his show that Steve is probably still working for the CIA, which he didn't actually work for to begin with, and running psyops on his own audience, then allow him back on the show.
Do you think it's possible that Alex just doesn't even remember that he and Steve parted on those bad terms?
Well, I think everybody should know you took a lot of flack, Alex, you know, because Dr. Steve was the one who originally brought up the idea that there could be some kind of ulterior motive with Sandy Hook.
And you know what?
All those press people that say that they protect their sources, I mean, you're actually that guy, Alex.
You're the one that didn't say, put anything on Dr. Steve.
So what you kind of are left with is they probably did have a fight behind the scenes about whatever petty nonsense Alex making him hold or maybe it is not letting him say everything is fake.
And then Alex on air, the way he talks about it is he's probably still working for the CIA.
And what did they tell you in Transcendence with Johnny Depp?
Because AI becomes a dust that is in the sky.
That is a smart dust where they can have a whole computer system, you know, way more advanced than even a smartphone in a single molecule.
And then it will be everything and absorb us.
And that's the endgame plan where you can't escape it.
And they're now already putting the binary weapon system into you, the aluminum dioxide and the other systems, so that then when the nanotech hits, they believe it will then be able to find a place in your body and bind to that.
And then through the 678G they're already rolling out and test, it will then be able to oscillate and program that to basically kill you, fry you.
He actually last year got kicked off a festival because he had made some social media posts supporting Alex Jones really aggressively about white genocide fury.
So this guy, Mark Zaid, is the lawyer for the whistleblower who made the complaints against Trump.
For most of the show, Alex has been peppering in references to him being a pedophile based on a tweet where he says that he has gotten security clearances for people who have child porn issues.
Alex, and now the former lead singer of the Misfits seem to think that he's just bragging, but they don't take into account that that's not just something he tweeted.
It's a reply to another tweet.
The original tweet is from Slate.
It's a link to an article about how Rob Porter, former Trump White House staff secretary, was able to get security clearance even though he'd been accused of domestic violence by both of his ex-wives.
In context, it's clear that Zayd's comment is about how a lot of things don't actually preclude people from receiving security clearances.
It seems more like a you think that's bad kind of comment more than anything else.
So they're twisting that.
So another thing that Alex points to is a tweet that Zayd made from August 29th, 2019.
And Alex is claiming that it's him bragging about knowing Jeffrey Epstein.
The tweet is a link to an article with the headline, quote, Jeffrey Epstein's little-known lawyer lands in the spotlight.
Zayd commented, not sure if being a little-known lawyer is a good thing or bad, though associated with Epstein, probably a good thing.
This is being taken to mean that Zayd is saying that associating with Epstein is a good thing.
That's what Alex is saying, which is a terrible reading of the tweet.
No.
He's saying that for this lawyer, if he's associated with Epstein, being little-known is a good thing.
That article in the Wall Street Journal is not about Zayd.
As for this guy taking pictures at Disney, who knows?
Maybe he's got a family.
I have no fucking idea.
I'm not going to sit here and tell you that this guy definitely isn't a major cog in the globalist blood-drinking child ring, but I am going to say that the evidence being presented here is not what I would call convincing.
I really expect more from the non-Danzig lead singer of the Mistance.
Also, the bigger picture problem exists here with Alex's narrative surrounding pedophiles in general.
I generally try not to cover this side of Alex's rhetoric too much because I feel even deconstruction of it is toxic.
And I really, really hate what he does about this sort of topic.
However, I need to point out one gigantic problem with his beliefs.
We know that Alex believes that there's a gigantic globalist blackmail ring where the evil blood-drinking globalists keep their politicians and media figures in line with threats of revealing that they're pedophiles.
We also know that Alex believes that the globalists are trying to normalize pedophilia, which he screams about all the time.
From lies about Nambla being a UN organization to screaming about articles in Salon to lies about the LGBTQ community adding a P to his disgusting rhetoric surrounding Drag Queen story time.
It's very, very constant as a thread of his rhetoric that they're trying to normalize pedophilia.
Now, the problem with these things are that they both cannot be true at the same time.
If the globalists use pedophile blackmail to maintain their power, the last thing that they would ever do is try to normalize pedophilia.
The second they achieve normalization, they instantly lose literally all control they ever have had over politics, the media, or the economy.
To put it bluntly, these two things are in direct opposition, and no evil organization would ever pursue both.
It's also on the board of the James Madison Project.
That's connected to John Podesta, which is connected to the Center for American Progress, which is connected to the Southern Poverty Law Center, which is connected to the ACLU funded by George Soros.
A guy named David Kahn is also one of the board members of the James Madison Project.
Kahn started a journal called Cryptologia, which is put out by Rutledge Publishing, which was founded by George Rutledge, who distributed many of the writings of Benjamin Disraeli, who is seen as the founder of British conservatism, which has led us to Boris Johnson.
So another board member is Thomas Sussman, who is a partner at the law firm Ropes and Gray.
You know who else was a partner at Ropes and Gray?
Jane Willis, who was also a member of the famous MIT blackjack team, whose story was turned into that movie 21, which starred Jim Sturgis, who was also in the movie Cloud Atlas, which Soros probably had something to do with.
Deserving strong condemnation, shockingly bad in quality.
We were talking about Auschwitz.
We were talking about camps before.
That was signaling to us what's going to happen when somebody like Hillary Clinton and her minions get control when they cede control back and push what they are trying to do.
And one of the things that I find when you read about that history, when you read about the people that were involved in that, it's always the same thing.
The people in these communities, in the Jewish communities that were sort of far removed from it, were always said, ah, well, you know, we heard about it and we didn't really think it was a big deal.
And then it got a little bit worse.
And then we got concerned.
Next thing you know, they were on a train headed to a death camp.
The fact that he's now escalated this from his original rhetoric, which was just this vague ideas about he's a Nazi collaborator.
Now he's turned it into very consistently saying that he would actually, he was a bloodhound and he would go around and hunt out Jews and report them.
The fact that he says this on his own show and would go on Joe Rogan's show and say, when he gets pushback, when Rogan says, that's not true, that's not what this interview that he did says.
When Alex says on Rogan's show, it's an open question, that is proof of malice.
Yeah, I mean, before he went on Rogan's show, I think it would be very difficult to demonstrate that he doesn't or that he knows that what he's saying is shit.
So we have a little bit here from the 12th because I was listening because I wanted to see if Steve was going to come on because that is very relevant to my interests.
I think he is literally saying that there are wars going on in space.
there are space wars and he's not doing any.
He's, he said, God needs us, but this isn't, this isn't him talking about like heaven and hell wars.
This is him being like, we need to get off this rock, the planet, in order to join wars in space, the universe.
So I'm going to go with, he believes that his fictitious enemies know that he has pierced the veil of human consciousness and is capable of, let's say, viewing remotely wars happening around the universe.
I mean, because yes, the war is now, and these people are relentless because it's a spiritual fight.
unidentified
It is a spiritual battle.
And the reason why is because good Christian people have permitted a lot of things to happen.
By controlling the language, they can control what you think.
By controlling your thoughts, they can control your actions because thought precedes action, and it keeps you in a very controllable state.
And then whatever you allow to happen, there was a time in history when Christians control this arena so powerfully that cockroaches like these people had to live in the shadows and do their business in the shadows and under the cover of darkness.
Now it is in plain sight.
It is in daylight.
And there is not enough good Christians that are calling them exactly what they are, which are demons.
And they need to be hunted, found, and politically assassinated is what they need to be.
So this caller is expressing political assassinations are needed for our rivals who are demons, and they've been allowed to run around because Christians aren't in control strongly enough anymore.
I mean, I also think that there's probably, I mean, there's really no difference, but there is a linguistic difference between these people need to be assassinated politically and politically assassinated.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.
There's a contextual difference between those two things that I think makes what this guy's saying, I think he's trying to play Alex's little verbal game, but what he's saying is incredibly scary.
So what Stewart said there at the end was that, well, I mean, you know, we've done everything we can, so we can not feel bad about having no restraint with our violence.
Like, they've always been right on the cusp of doing some violence.
And I don't know if that makes me think that it's less likely that these people will do anything or more likely because eventually the damn's got to break.
Right.
I mean, you know, it's not like people who are listening to this didn't end up going out and doing things or quote-unquote lone wolf actors.
I mean, the thing that I'm getting so much, because it ties back into so many of these guys have that like, well, if we're going to do it, we better do it while Trump's in office.
Like that idea is that there's not going to be a civil war.
If there's going to be a civil anything, it's going to be a civil fucking slaughter.
And the difference is going to be if Trump is in the White House and we start that slaughter, then maybe Trump will let us get away with it and give us our fucking cover for it.
Or if Trump's not in office, then we're going to be an insurgency and we're the ones who are going to get fucked up.
What Alex is doing here is trying to pull off some kind of bizarre no-true Scotsman fallacy to argue that any instance of violence not perpetrated against globalists can't possibly be patriots and conservatives and therefore must be anti-fascists false flagging the patriots.
The way this basic fallacy works is to serve as a protection of a group's purity.
Alex would find a story about, let's say, a right-wing individual killing a bunch of innocent civilians.
And his response would be, no true conservative would do something like that.
So he would conclude that this person wasn't really a conservative.
That's the basic version, where the function is to maintain the image of what a conservative is in his mind, despite evidence that the group includes people who fall short of the definition.
People do this sort of thing all the time.
And on some level, it's part of human instinct to protect our own identities as being part of a group.
It's hard to reconcile that you might be a member of a group that also includes people who you find morally repulsive.
But that's sometimes the case.
This line of fallacious thinking is how a lot of people ignore that internal conflict.
But what Alex is doing is taking the bad thinking that he's engaging in one step further than that.
He's determined that because no true conservative or patriot would kill civilians, then this someone who does isn't a conservative.
That's already a complete disaster from a logic perspective.
But then he insists that because this person is not a conservative, they must be an anti-fascist pretending to be a conservative to demonize the patriots.
It's really hard for me to put this any other way than to say that this is not adult mental processing.
So the much simpler reality is that there are absolutely conservatives and right-wingers who plan and carry out attacks on civilians.
These are real events with real victims and real loved ones whose pain Alex doesn't give a fuck about because it threatens the purity of his own self-image.
In his desperation to glorify his political side, he behaves in callous ways that belie the fact that his side is nowhere near as pure as he likes to pretend.
But since he's saying that any real conservative would target globalists, then I guess he's taking ownership of Caesar Sayok, the MAGA bomber who sent bombs to the Clintons and George Soros, among other globalist targets.
If he's saying that attacks against civilians are just anti-fascists false flagging the patriots and any real conservative patriot would target the globalists, then surely that one was real.
Alex's worldview and narratives are childish constructions he's propped up in order to make sure that he never has to feel the impact of the rhetoric that he puts into the world.
And he's too much of a coward to even stay internally consistent and play by the rules that he's made up for himself.
If it's somebody who doesn't fit his definition of what a patriot would do, it's an anti-fascist false flagging the patriots.
And if it's somebody who does, then hey, it's the globalists false flagging themselves in order to get pity.
So in order to reinforce his idea that these shootings are just anti-fascists who are coming out there and false flagging, he brings up the Dayton shooting.
And I find his take on it's really boring.
And we've heard it.
Like, they tried to cover up online.
But Stewart, his reaction to this, I think, is telling.
And as we saw in 2013, when Alex was trying to say that those people in the pictures that he found on 4chan at the Boston Marathon were secretly SEALs, Stuart said, I don't, I can't say that based on just whatever they're wearing.
Anyway, one of them is about the writ of Cuo Warianto.
Anybody that any judge that tries to violate any right that you have, the Second Amendment, any of them, anybody can file a writ of Cuo Warianto against that judge and anybody connected with him that's trying to do that.
And so just to end this on a softer, lighter note than maybe Stuart Rhodes justifying political violence or one of Alex's callers calling for political assassinations.
And there's also some scary shit, some really dumb stuff.
And hopefully, if I can do anything to bring to light the fact that Alex is repurposing stuff that got Roger Stone sued, I'm very happy to do that because I hope there's some consequences.
Or at least to demonstrate that a lot of this whole new narrative about Fiona Hill and this whistleblower relies on.