Today, Dan and Jordan check in to see how things are on the Alex Jones Show the day after a couple of his employees were suspended from Twitter for trying to promote a rally in the middle of a pandemic. In this installment, Alex spends most of the show building narratives about a specific science fact-checker he's mad at, and the show ends with some very good comedy bits.
If you're out there listening and you're thinking, hey, I enjoyed the show, I'd like to support what these gents do, you can do that by going to our website, knowledgefight.com, clicking the button that says support the show.
We would appreciate that.
Or, if you'd like, please feel free to take that energy and direct it to a local charity in your area that's helping people who are affected by the current trouble.
And there's an actual very clear reason for who got kicked off and who didn't.
It's not about getting rid of...
It has to do with the fact that the two of them, Rob and Owen, were actively promoting this protest against the quarantine or the social distancing measures.
And it's not the fact that they actually did the protest.
It was that they were using Twitter to spread promotion of it.
You know, of course, because these people who work for him were kicked off social media, obviously there's going to be some social media grievances on this episode.
So I have a strong suspicion that he's starting off this way so he can complain about Owen and Rob getting kicked off Twitter, but he can couch it in this language of universal censorship.
That's the way that he can get away with throwing a little titty baby tantrum while pretending that he's mad about something other than his employees just losing their social media account and their ability to market on Twitter.
According to reporting on Media Matters, Twitter had announced on March 18th that they were not allowing...
And if you think about it for any time at all, Owen using his account to promote a giant rally in the middle of an active pandemic is basically as clear an example of that as you can come up with.
Now, will Twitter apply this logic to Trump?
Probably not.
But even if their enforcement is less than ideal, it's pretty indisputable that Owen was acting in ways that are directly counter to the rules that had been established by Twitter.
They took action and he was suspended.
The same is true, most likely, of Do's account.
And like I said, it's probably why David Knight and Paul Joseph Watson's accounts are still up, because they weren't explicitly engaging in behavior that would directly lead to people putting themselves and the community at risk.
I have no idea what Congress members Alex is talking about, since I can't find any stories about this, even on his completely unnavigatable website.
But I would assume that it's just a situation where they're subject to the rules of the platform as well as anybody else.
I have zero faith in Twitter's commitment to upholding these rules, and considering that Trump literally tweeted out multiple exhortations for various states with Democratic governors to be, quote, liberated, it's pretty clear that the problem is far past the point where any social media company can even handle it now.
It's super clear what the message of those liberate tweets are, but according to NBC News, a spokesperson for Twitter said, quote, the use of liberate in the tweets is too vague to be actionable.
When the president of the country is on social media saying, liberate Minnesota and liberate Michigan and, quote, liberate Virginia and save your great Second Amendment, it's under siege.
if your rules consider those statements to be too vague to be actionable, then your rules are meaningless and really just sound more like a cop-out than anything else.
Of course, kicking Trump off Twitter wouldn't be good either and would ultimately likely lead to a far more severe backlash particularly in an election year.
There's essentially no good answer here, and the people in a position to actually make a decision like to say that there's no reason they would ever suspend Trump or to apply the rules to him refuse to because of the fear of the outcome.
Whenever Alex wants to complain about his own personal problems, whenever he does that, he has a tendency to externalize them and exaggerate.
When he got his DUI, one of his first responses was to put on his Jonathan Swift hat and suggest that all restaurants should be closed because if you have one drink, you'll get a DUI and that everyone's just getting jammed up.
It was a massive societal issue that he was upset about, not the fact that he drank and drove and spent the night in jail.
This is the same thing.
His employees got punished on social media, and Alex knows that having the lead stories like that, like, hey, my employees got kicked off Twitter, that sounds weak and petulant.
So you reframe it as a story, you know, it's not about your personal interests.
It's about the world.
That way you can portray yourself as a champion and not a weak loser.
I mean, sure, maybe I'm talking about this because it personally affected me, and if it hadn't personally affected me, I wouldn't give a shit about that.
The fact checker that runs the science group for Facebook that's being used by the other sites works at the level four bioweapon lab and is number two in command.
The real story is that there's apparently someone who works for one of the groups that Facebook uses for fact checking.
This person goes by the name of Dr. Danielle Anderson.
She's an assistant professor with many published articles on the field of virology and infectious diseases.
She's a professor at Duke NUS Medical School, which is a collaboration between Duke and the National University of Singapore.
And it's a very legitimate and accredited school.
In her time in the field of virology, she's done some collaborative projects with the researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, and the right-wing media is spinning this into the Wuhan lab running the fact-checking about the virus, which just isn't accurate at all.
So Anderson was an expert who was consulted by an organization called Health Feedback.
Which is not owned by Facebook.
It appears they're an independent, non-political entity that fact-checks medical claims, and then many of the outlets end up using their work as a source because it's solidly produced.
Health Feedback is one wing of a group called Science Feedback.
In terms of this relationship with Facebook, that's where things get a little bit complicated.
In April 2019, Science Feedback was approved as one of the entities that helps with Facebook's fact-checking.
But it wasn't approved by Facebook.
Facebook has a pre-existing relationship with a group called Pointer's International Fact-Checking Network.
Pointer is the group that approves the fact-checking entities, which then help fact-check stuff on Facebook.
If I had to guess, I would say this arrangement exists so Facebook can duck as much responsibility as possible for what happens on its platform, which is kind of lame.
So the reality is that there was an expert in virology and infectious disease who teaches at a university in Singapore who has worked at the Wuhan lab in the past.
She was consulted by Health Feedback for a fact check on some claims that were made about the lab in Wuhan.
This story is now being changed by Alex into a situation where the fact-checking is being run out of the Wuhan lab, which you can easily see is a complete lie.
So before I get to the point here, I should say that what you just heard there was Alex making a real big show out of drinking from a paper cup and swirling the ice around.
I'm not convinced, necessarily, from the way this episode goes, that he was drinking.
I'm not sure.
It's possible, but I'm not sold 100% on it.
He does get real weird by the end of the episode, but it's not definitive in the same way that so many of these other films have been.
So, as to that clip, first of all, Hillary was not co-president.
That's just nonsense.
Second, Alex isn't talking about comments Hillary made back in the 90s, and she didn't say 1984 was a how-to manual.
That's just a stupid headline that fringe conservative blogs ran with when discussing an excerpt from her 2017 book titled, What Happened?
In the book, she writes, Our leaders, the press, experts who seek to guide public policy based on evidence ourselves.
For Trump, as with so much he does, it's about simple dominance.
Alex is making up a Hillary quote, and here's the fun part.
I know exactly where it comes from.
There was an article in 2017 about this passage from Hillary's book on the website Conservative Review, and the headline is, quote, Hillary Clinton thinks Orwell's 1984 is a how-to manual.
In the article, if you actually read it, it doesn't include any quotes for saying that.
It's just the insinuation of the author of this blog post.
His gripe is that he feels that Hillary got the wrong message from 1984 and that her point was to encourage blind trust in the government and media.
I think that's a little bit of an unfair reading from the text, particularly considering the last thing in her list of people we need to rely on are ourselves, but whatever.
I'm not going to spend my time discussing this article in any way past saying that this headline is absolutely where Alex is taking his imaginary Hillary quote from.
He has either not read this article at all, or he's willfully lying about it.
The Associated Press reported two days ago, knew the virus came from the Wuhan lab, knew it was weaponized, knew it was spreading, and they covered it up and then told Trump, don't block flights from China, you're a xenophobe.
That's the Associated Press.
But Facebook has announced AP will not be allowed to be shared on its platform, and anyone sharing the article will be banned.
I'm going to show you those articles here in a moment.
Again, this is just Alex misreporting the same AP story that suggested that the Chinese government knew that the virus was more serious as a situation than they admitted publicly for six days between January 14th and January 20th.
The rest of the stuff relating to the Wuhan lab is just stuff Alex read in a Fox News headline, and he's trying to disguise it as an AP story, because even he knows that AP stories are far more credible than Fox News posts citing anonymous sources that are full of caveats like, none of this is certain.
Alex wants the audience to think that the mainstream media is reporting on the same stuff he's covering, because he knows that even among the most strident conspiracy theorists, there's a recognition that real journalists do different work than people like Alex.
If Alex says something, maybe you'll believe it.
But if the AP reports something, then you know they can back it up.
This is the fascinating dichotomy in the paranoid conspiracy world.
They hate the mainstream media and yet constantly appeal to it to give themselves credibility when they think they can.
Alex further wants the audience to think that this totally legit outlet is reporting this news and censorship has gotten so out of control that if you even post this AP story, you'll get banned.
This is the primary function of rewriting his own bans from social media platforms, because saying that they only kicked him off because they knew he was right about all this stuff, and even now the AP is saying it.
You know, that kind of thing.
None of this is real.
It's all just the ramblings of a liar circling the drain, desperately flailing for anything to grab onto in hopes of saving the ship.
It looks like I forgot to cut out this clip, but Alex is also claiming one of his other big pieces of evidence is that the co-discoverer of HIV has come out and said that Alex is using headlines to say that he's saying this was definitely 100% made in a lab.
This is all good and well, but as far as I can tell, no one has in any way demonstrated that there are HIV pieces that have been inserted into the coronavirus.
The only reference people can make on that is that unpeer-reviewed and retracted Indian study, which was shown to be seriously flawed.
A follow-up paper published in February 2020 in the journal Emerging Microbes and Infections looked at these inserts that were said to be HIV and found, quote, all results demonstrated no evidence that the sequences of these four inserts are HIV-1 specific, nor the 2019 novel coronavirus viruses obtained these insertions from HIV-1.
First, the results of the blast search of these motifs against GenBank shows that the top 100 identical or highly homologous hits are all from host genes of mammalian, insects, bacterial, and others.
They found that these four inserts that are said in the Indian study to be HIV-related have a ton of other non-HIV sources.
Further, they found that these insertions are also present in multiple other coronaviruses.
So the conclusions reached by that Indian paper were definitely hasty, at least.
So basically what you have there is Dr. Montagier making an if-then statement.
If the virus has HIV sewn into it, then it must have been done in a lab.
That statement's probably fine, but I dispute the if portion of it.
In logic, when you have an if-then statement and the premise is false, you can completely ignore the conclusion.
It legitimately doesn't matter what the conclusion is because there's no truth to preserve through the process of inference.
Also, this dude is theorizing that the lab in Wuhan was working on an HIV vaccine, and this leaked out, which is not really in line with Alex's bioweapon narratives, but whatever.
Alex will run with whatever he can to give the appearance of credibility to this dumb shit.
Also...
I don't think that Alex should be able to use these guys, like this guy who co-discovered HIV is some kind of by-proxy expert, seeing as he doesn't believe HIV is real, nor does he believe it's connected to AIDS.
So he kind of has to believe that Luc Montagier has to be in on the conspiracy, right?
So just to be clear, most of the people who would be the right age to have been in a Stasi are dead or are pretty old.
I would imagine you'd be hard-pressed to find 10,000 Stasi members still alive today, let alone 10,000 of them who are in the kind of shape you need to be in to run a modern tech company.
Leaving aside how stupid that is, it's based on what you might call a kernel of something real.
In 2015, the Justice Ministry in Germany established a task force to look into online hate speech, particularly directed towards immigrants.
The goal was to get a sense of the scale of the problem, which they would then use to encourage Facebook and Twitter to take the matter seriously.
One of the groups that was included in this NGO, and this was an NGO called the Amadou Antonio Foundation.
Named in memory of an Angolan immigrant killed by neo-Nazis briefly after the reunification of Germany.
The group's chairwoman is Annette Kahane.
When she was a college student, for a time, she was an unofficial informant for the Stasi.
I can't really defend that, except to say that I see no indication that she's been dishonest about that part of her past.
And since around 1982, when she stopped being an informant, her career of advocacy kind of speaks for itself.
In September 2015, Paul Joseph Watson wrote a really misleading article about this task force, tending to imply that it is a body within Facebook, as opposed to a German entity studying the issue and aiming to advise Facebook.
I'll give Paul credit that in the body of his article, he does say that Kahane was an informant.
But I'm going to take that credit right back because of the headline, quote, ex-Stasi agent hired to censor xenophobic Facebook posts.
Anyway, this is all really just probably an issue for Alex because Kahane's advocacy is surrounding the rising right-wing extremism and their agitation towards immigrant communities.
According to a 2004 story that's now mysteriously gone from their websites, though it's still in the Wayback Machine, Paul Joseph Watson wrote about how a political analyst named Al Martin had alleged that Homeland Security had hired Marcus Wolfe.
There's no substantiation of this claim in the article outside of this.
Oh, oh, and this line.
Quote, sources close to Martin have told Alex Jones confidentially that the appointment of Wolf was also confirmed by U.S. congressmen.
He was the head of the main directorate for reconnaissance, the foreign intelligence wing of the Stasi.
In 2004, when this would have happened, he was 81 years old, and I can find absolutely zero concrete evidence that he was employed by U.S. national security.
I tried to figure out who Al Martin is, since he's the only real source that this traces back to, and suffice it to say, I was not surprised by what I found.
He has a long-dormant website called Al Martin Raw, where he would write blog posts, but what interested me the most was that he wrote a book called, quote, Shocking Secrets of Iran.
Contra.
Al Martin is yet another guy who's claimed he was in on Iran Contra.
Like Larry Nichols is like, I was hanging out with Holly North.
All right, buddy, whatever.
Anyway, I don't believe any of this until they can provide a little better evidence than this weak shit.
Also, just a small point, even if all of that is true, this happened in 2004, when there was not a Democratic administration in charge of Homeland Security, and both houses of Congress were controlled by the Republican Party.
I have literally zero idea how the Democrats could have hired the head of the Stasi to be involved in Homeland Security in a period of complete GOP control of all the parts of the federal government.
So Alex, in his next clip, he's talking about how he's going to really get down to business.
He's going to really get down to it.
And as far as I can tell from listening to the rest of this episode, the only thing he has to get down to is more yelling about the Facebook censor fact checker person story.
I'm ready to lay it out to the American people, to the people of the planet, to the Pentagon, to everybody about the choices we all have to make right now.
Well, the Wuhan bioweapon lab and the Chinese operatives running Facebook and blocking the Pentagon and the president and AP saying it came from Wuhan, which is confirmed.
And I just sat back and asked myself, is the president in an incremental trance not resisting this, or is he part of it?
If you go to the CDC's website, you can find plenty of information about the 2019-2020 flu season.
And there were plenty of influenza-related deaths that have happened that have not been double-counted as coronavirus deaths.
There's a little truth to what Alex is saying, though.
It is true that as of April 4th, the CDC's website will not be posting updated flu season burden estimates, but that isn't because there's some kind of a cover-up.
It's because flu season is mostly over, and any updates would be kind of irrelevant.
States are continuing to collect their data, which will be used to update and revise the CDC's numbers after the fact, but given that flu season has crested, the CDC's role in this has ended for now.
Almost certainly, Alex just saw a headline that the CDC was going to stop releasing revised estimates about the flu season sometime after this April 4th data came out, and he's just completely unaware of what he's talking about or willfully lying about it.
If you want to find out information about the flu season, all you have to do is look for it.
It's pretty available.
But Alex isn't interested in information.
He wants to pretend that the coronavirus deaths are all secretly just flu deaths being passed off as something else so the globalists can grab power.
He should recognize that if he's wrong about what he's saying, which he is, He stands to be personally responsible for the deaths of people who look up to him as a voice of guidance.
I really hope that he's ready and prepared to handle that kind of spiritual weight.
Because that is going to be devastating if he ever has to look in the mirror about that.
Yesterday, the FDA announced a new collaboration with UnitedHealth Group, the Gates Foundation, Quantigen, and U.S. cotton to greatly expand the supply of essential swabs, including a new polyester Q-tip-type swab for the coronavirus testing.
All of these actions will help our testing capability continue to grow dramatically.
So at this point, Alex takes on another theme that he has throughout this show that is like, he's getting real close to just straight up advocating literal war.
These people at the local level, the international level, the national level.
And it's a horrible thing.
But we're at war and they're attacking us, cutting our economies off.
They launched the damn attack.
They've been caught doing it.
The communist Chinese are now publicly running the censorship in the U.S. It's suddenly all over the news.
unidentified
and Everybody's kind of like, well, we're all invested in each other, and, well, they're everywhere, and the Chinese spies are everywhere, and the big foundations fund them, and can we beat it?
If I were reading 1984 as a how-to manual, I would suggest convincing everybody in a certain group that they are constantly and eternally at war with everybody in another group.
That's what I would say if I were reading 1984 as a how-to manual.
So Alex goes out to break with this talk of, like, if Trump comes out and says the truth that I know, like, if I'm right about this stuff, then we're at war.
So he goes to break, and he comes back, and man, he is just rambling about how, like, I will be destroyed, but my destruction will be the true destruction of my enemies.
The enemy will push the boulder to the peak of the hill.
As world government stands for a year, it will collapse down on the enemy, and those of us that stand against it through this tribulation will be spiritually like Samson in the temple, though blinded and tortured, the dignity in the end of breaking in and knocking it down.
At six after, I just pray to God to give me the focus and the clarity to hit it with just the facts, and just lay out the big dimensions of this without going into a little minutiae like I like to do to prove each little factoid.
But...
It is untenable and outrageous and unacceptable to have the communist Chinese officially given the run of the big five tech companies to censor people all over the world and to ban anyone off their platforms that says they're going to go out and protest to reopen America.
You've heard, oh, Twitter and Facebook let armies of Chinese trolls put out this info.
But then when you read deeper, whether it's Google, whether it's Twitter, whether it's Facebook, whether it's Apple, they have over the divisions the Southern Poverty Law Center, the ADL, Media Matters,
Snopes, But now they're giving way to the Communist Chinese Party and are actually in there heading up the divisions with armies of Chinese and AI watching what you do.
So, I want to clarify something in case it's not clear already.
Dr. Anderson, the person who's done some work at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, is not employed by Facebook.
Dr. Anderson is not in charge of Facebook science, whatever Alex imagines that is.
As for the people who are trying to say that her work at the Wuhan lab is somehow a conflict of interest, again, I have to stress that in her comments about the assertion that this virus originated at that lab, she brings up the fact that she worked there.
I have worked in this exact laboratory at various times over the past two years.
I can personally attest to the strict control and containment measures implemented while working there.
The staff at WIV are incredibly competent, hardworking, and excellent scientists with superb track records.
This doesn't work well for Alex's narrative, because he needs this to be an instance of China being in charge of this internet censorship, not just an instance of someone who had done some work at the Wuhan lab being consulted in an effort to assess the accuracy of an editorial column in the New York Post.
And why does Alex desperately need that right now?
It should be pretty obvious.
Owen and Rob Du just got kicked off Twitter, and he can't possibly accept that it was the result of them trying to start a mass rally in the middle of a pandemic.
It has to be because China is secretly in charge of social media censoring.
It's all just very lame and desperate.
Also, there are about 2.5 billion Facebook users.
Alex is off by about a billion, but who gives a shit?
All this information in Steve's article about Danielle Anderson is just ripped directly from the Zero Hedge article, so it's barely even a new blog post.
Neither article in any way demonstrates that Dr. Anderson is in charge of Facebook science fact-checking.
That's just completely made up, even if you accept everything in these dubious sources.
I think that what must be happening is that Alex doesn't realize that science feedback is the name of a separate business.
He just thinks it's a department of feedback related to science within Facebook.
That would explain at least part of the confusion.
But even that doesn't explain the assertion that Dr. Anderson runs Science Feedback.
That's just not true.
And his article on InfoWars even includes a link to Science Feedback's website, which lists their team, which doesn't include Dr. Anderson.
This article doesn't show any of this stuff, nor does it show Gates' funding.
None of it's supported by the evidence that he's providing at all.
For Alex to present this kind of information, he has to either be consciously making things up, or he has to do so little work that he just sees the words like Science Feedback and assumes that he knows the whole story.
Either way, this is a scary level of unpreparedness he's showing as it relates to his clear lead story.
So Alex is deeply insinuating there are things going on behind the scenes, and he might be off the air any time now.
So, about that.
It came to my attention, thanks to a listener named Rashawn over the weekend, that Alex has a gigantic legal battle going on that we've not heard about at all.
When he was out of studio over the past couple days, it seemed like it might have had something to do with the FDA or possibly his DUI, but now that I've reviewed some court documents from Pacer, I really think that there might be a completely different hidden picture going on here.
Back on January 24, 2020, Alex's ex-wife Kelly filed a petition in bankruptcy court.
She was making a claim of involuntary bankruptcy and requesting relief under Chapter 11. A claim of involuntary bankruptcy is one where a party who is owed money can file a petition to get that money they're owed, and if the party that owes the money can't pay it, they can be forced into bankruptcy involuntarily to pay the debt.
According to court filings, when they got divorced in 2015, Alex testified that he could not afford to pay the money that she was awarded in the divorce.
So he signed a real estate lien, which promised Kelly a certain amount of money related to their shared property, as well as 10% of the value of, quote, the businesses created during the Jones's marriage in the state of Texas.
I'll just read to you here from the filing that Kelly put into court.
The note requires Alex Jones to make monthly payments to Kelly Jones in the amount of $43,933.
When Alex Jones defaults in any way, the note may be accelerated by Kelly Jones.
It goes on to say that on June 28, 2019, Alex stated that, quote, he would not pay the entirety of the July 2019 note payment and that he would not pay part of the August 2019 note payment.
I can't possibly claim to know whether or not Kelly's claims are accurate, but she's alleging in this filing that Alex defaulted on paying her for a promissory note in the amount of $786,861.
For some context, that's approximately 32,786 bottles of Alex's Vaso Beats.
That's a lot of sales to make that up.
So Alex naturally tried to get this case dismissed, and a hearing was scheduled for March 11th.
Interestingly, March 11th was one of those days that Alex happened not to be in studio last month.
He hosted the first little bit of the show, then Owen took over.
When we covered that, the feeling was that he had just gotten a letter from the New York Attorney General about his silver sales, and he'd just gotten DUI, so it looked like what was going on was, you know, he had these desperate sales pitches going on, but maybe it was...
Maybe what was really going on was that his ex-wife was suing him for three quarters of a million dollars.
I watched it and it's just one non-stop guy going from creditor to creditor trying to handle all this money and move it around so he can finally pay everybody off.
But with his gambling addiction, he's trying to gamble his way back into more money the whole time.
And it's just a constant...
It's so stressful to watch this movie because you're like, just pay a bill and stop!
So Alex left the show in Owen's hands on March 11th, and then they had this hearing.
But prior to that, on the night of March 9th, Alex got arrested for his DUI.
And the next day, Kelly filed an emergency restraining order on the grounds of child endangerment to get their children out of a clearly chaotic environment.
On March 11th, Kelly filed an emergency motion for clarification of the law.
You see, she's representing herself.
So she was requesting the court inform her if there was a conflict between the pending involuntary bankruptcy case and this emergency protective restraining order.
She was worried that the bankruptcy case would preclude her from being able to file the restraining order.
And in this motion for clarification, she makes it very clear that if it would, she would automatically dismiss the bankruptcy case.
A document like that is a real testament to her priorities and in this horrible world of Alex that we spend our time in, I couldn't help but be a little bit moved by the fact that she was willing to completely dismiss this case if it meant that it would impede her ability to try and...
So on March 11th, they had their hearing, and the court decided that Kelly's cases were not in conflict, and she would not have to withdraw her bankruptcy case in order to file the protective order.
The court also dismissed Alex's motion to dismiss the bankruptcy case.
With the court determining that there was a legitimate dispute here, they set a trial date of April 23, 2020.
This will be a, quote, evidentiary trial on the merits of the involuntary petition and to determine whether to enter an order of relief against the alleged debtor, Alex, to dismiss the involuntary petition, or to enter any other appropriate order.
I normally might have considered something like this to be an element of Alex's personal life, which I generally err on the side of not covering, since it involves his divorce, and ultimately, it's not about his worldview or rhetoric.
It's just a dispute about his payment or non-payment of money he owes his ex-wife, but I'd like to explain a couple reasons why I decided to bring this up on the show.
In the past six months or so, Alex has been way, way more fatalistic on air than I've ever seen him be before.
He's been finding himself talking about quitting and recognizing that the end might be near in ways that I don't find to be similar to other periods of his career that I've looked at.
Many of the things that he's dealing with could be what's driving that.
From his supplement warnings to his upcoming Sandy Hook trial, there's a lot for him to worry about, and a lot of various things that you could think might be what he's worried will sink the ship.
I've considered all the dynamics at play, and I've become fairly convinced that this pending trial with his ex-wife is what's been motivating most of Alex's behavior over the past months.
Let me walk you through that reasoning.
According to her filing, the notification of nonpayment from Alex came regarding the July and August no payments back in 2019.
You would assume that talk of filing a lawsuit over these defaulted payments wouldn't happen immediately.
So there's probably a pretty good chance things were normal for a little while.
Early September 2019 is when we started to hear Alex repeatedly have breakdowns, where he was talking about how InfoWars might not make it another year, and how he didn't know if he was going to reorder supplies.
Some of that definitely could have been about his need to sell out stock so he wouldn't have to pay taxes on carried-over inventory, but if you recall...
He talked a whole lot about selling his house.
This is interesting because the debt that Alex has to Kelly is secured by liens on two properties that they had.
And if Alex was found to be in default of his debt, one way it could be paid is by foreclosing on that property.
Alex knows that these houses are what is used to secure his debt.
So if he knew that he wasn't making payments, it would stand to reason that he knew it was only a matter of time until he lost his house.
January 24th was the day that the bankruptcy filing was made.
And there are a couple of interesting things that come from looking back at that show.
The first is that Alex couldn't start the show on time that day.
And when he did come to the mic, this is how it started.
Reading all the news and all the information, this is probably one of the first times that I just physically could not go on air at the start of the broadcast.
And there really just comes a time when the world's just going to have to be judged.
Now, interestingly, that was the episode where Mike Adams declared it over for humanity.
And Alex might ride along with him.
That's less relevant to Alex's mental state because it was coming from Mike.
But what we pay less attention to about that episode in hindsight is the other guest that was there that day.
John Rapaport.
I've noticed that Alex doesn't really bring John Rapaport around much these days, except when he needs a bro.
I've long suspected that Rapaport is hypnotizing Alex, but maybe it's a benign kind of trance where talking to Rapaport really does make Alex feel better.
On this episode, it really did deteriorate into Alex kind of needing some therapy from John about identity issues.
So after this point, Alex goes back to normal for a bit.
There aren't so many instances of him saying that everyone's going to die or the world is bound to be judged.
But I think that there wasn't any real reason for Alex to be too worried after the immediate situation since he was going to and did file his motion to dismiss the case.
So the ball had been successfully kicked down the road.
The one thing, though, is that there's dramatically increased sales pitches surrounding the food buckets and his silver right then.
That is when everything went through the roof.
It is.
So at this point, he's engaging in the coronavirus as he might with any other sort of completely made-up and zero-stakes conspiracies that he engages in.
On January 31st, he's freaking himself out about Resident Evil memes, to give you some sense of how seriously things were being taken at that point.
For a while, stuff is just Infowars business.
The coronavirus narrative takes some twists and turns.
In late February, Alex gets distracted by Roger's sentencing, and then he launches into a full-on publicity stunt about going to CPAC and associating with Nick Fuentes.
Kelly had until March 5th to file her response to Alex's petition.
So Alex, up until that point, if she doesn't file, he assumes she'll get kicked out.
She doesn't file on the 5th.
She ends up filing on the 6th.
But it was still accepted by the court, given the coronavirus situation making things difficult for everyone.
So, by March 6th, Alex had a good reason to think this wasn't just going to magically go away, and he knew that the hearing was on for March 11th.
On air, things aren't too different, but on March 10th, he does his show after a night in jail for a DUI.
On March 11th, Alex only hosts the first part of his show before Owen takes over.
If you recall, most of the part Alex hosted was about his vaso beats and how they have nitric oxide in them, which Alex thinks is nitrous oxide.
Also, this is the show that he ends his segment when he's hosting, before he leaves, by surprising everyone with free shipping, which he swore he'd never do again.
Things get pretty complicated at this point, because by March 12th, two things have happened.
One is that he's learned from this court that his motion to dismiss was rejected, and he'd have to go to bankruptcy trial.
The second is that he received the letter from the New York Attorney General ordering him to cease and desist from the sales tactics he was using surrounding his silver.
March 13th on his show is a complete breakdown.
He started talking about how we're all dead already.
He got really mad at callers.
He promised to hit himself on air if he didn't take enough calls.
He started rambling about how easy it was to kill other people.
And notably, he ends the show predicting the imminent end of his show.
There was no show on the 14th because it was a Saturday, and Alex didn't do his show on March 15th, 16th, or 17th.
But by the time he got back, the coronavirus situation had developed to the point where things were so crazy that it's legitimately impossible to discern what input is leading to what output from Alex.
Since then, we've seen Alex increasingly be unable to do his show.
He's left the show on a number of occasions.
He's descended into rants about how the public deserves to be exterminated.
He's gone out to break yelling things about how his listeners were going to burn in hell, only to come back from commercial and apologize.
There's something very serious up, and this case seems like a possible candidate for what it is.
I could be entirely wrong.
I admit that entirely.
But I think that this timeline somewhat suggests that a large secret contributor to Alex's complete inability to do his job, his frequent dalliances into thoughts of impending doom, and his notable recent absences could be this bankruptcy case that he's due in court for this Thursday.
This is another reason I wanted to discuss this a little bit.
I have no idea how the case is going to shake out, but there's a real possibility that this week could end with Alex losing a massive settlement that could stand to bankrupt him.
I would hate for that news to break and have just been sitting on this information and not discuss it.
At the same time, it's entirely possible that the court will decide in Alex's favor, or the trial could go on longer than one hearing, or Alex could lose and appeal the decision.
I have no idea what's going to happen, but the more I looked at the timeline of this stuff, the more I saw possible overlap.
Please, though, just take this as a possible thing.
Definitely not something that I'm claiming is definitive.
Most of the things that you can see that line up as being possibly Alex responding to things in this case could easily be explained by other things.
Yeah.
unidentified
Like the New York attorney general's letter coming right at the same time that his motion to dismiss was rejected.
He's kind of got so much chaos going on in his life right now that it's almost pointless as an exercise to try and figure out what contributes to what.
But I thought that if we had some information about a case that could possibly wreck Alex, it's worth discussing.
Also, small point.
My birthday is this Friday, the day after Alex's trial.
So if the universe really wants to give me an amazing present, I think they know what I want.
Whenever I've been in a situation where it's like just one thing after another, everything pisses me off until it gets to that point where I'm like, this is just so bad, I can't even feel angry about this.
I just have perfect clarity of how I'm going to be fucked, and I just got to live through this, and he just cannot do that.
He's saying that Trump needs to say the same things as him, even though that means war, and then in the middle of a thought, he's like, my earpiece isn't in, I'm gonna go off air.
How little does he care about the seriousness of the topics he's covering?
Alex knows damn well that Alexa Pure water filters are not sold out because they can never really be sold out because he doesn't actually keep them in his warehouse.
If you go to his website, you'll immediately learn that he doesn't really sell Alexa Pure filters.
They're a product that he sells through MyPatriotSupply, his survival food sponsor.
Sure.
My Patriot Supplies orders.
He said on many occasions that they take the orders directly from Alex's website and they go to My Patriot Supplies Fulfillment Center.
Then they ship it from there.
Obviously, this would be needed to sell any of the food buckets at any kind of scale because no matter how big a space Alex is renting, he couldn't possibly afford to have a warehouse big enough for bulk food and water filtration systems.
And this is spelled out on his website's shipping information.
Quote, to ensure quality and reduce costs, this item ships directly from the supplier.
If you purchase additional items, they will be shipped separately.
In order for Alexa Pure water filters to be sold out, it must be true that MyPatriot's supply itself is sold out of water filters.
And in that case, it makes no sense to say they're great, just try and find them somewhere.
It's not real.
This is an involuntary reaction for Alex to say things are sold out or near sold out because that creates the perception of artificial scarcity in the listener's mind.
It's a pretty old school manipulative sales tactic and what you're selling isn't the product.
What you're selling is the fear that you might be unable to get said product.
Generally, I don't believe Alex when he says things are sold out or near selling out, but typically I can't really do anything to confirm or deny his claims.
In this case, however, it's a clear-cut instance of a complete lie.
I'm going to lay this on the White House and on Trump's lawyers and on the Pentagon and on everybody else.
Dramatic action is the only way out of this.
Leveling with the people is the only way out of this.
That we're in a total war with globalist criminals allied with the communist Chinese who developed the virus, prepared the propaganda, prepared the TV shows, the movies, the tabletop exercises with governments that literally spent hundreds of millions of U.S. taxpayer money through Bill and Melinda Gates.
They don't ever spend their own money.
Oh, you're such a philanthropist.
It's such a sick joke.
To pre-program the response you're seeing that is the takedown of the industrial world.
Something that thousands of bombers couldn't do with conventional munitions.
So we have two claims being made there, primarily.
First is that Dr. Anderson is involved in the development of COVID-19 test kits, and the second is that she stands to make a ton of money from it.
Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security has a list up on their website of all the tests for COVID-19 that are currently used or are in development.
And if you want, we can take a look through all of them.
There are currently four tests that have been approved for diagnostic use in the United States, nine that have been approved for diagnostic use in other countries but not here, 26 that are, quote, approved for research and surveillance purposes only, and 11 more that are currently still in development.
This alone should give you a pretty good sense that there isn't really a race to make this test in order to corner the market.
There are a lot of people working on a very similar goal.
One of the tests that is not used in the United States was developed at the Wang Lab, which is a part of the Duke and U.S. in Singapore.
This test is only used in Singapore, and it's for antibodies to the virus.
The test was developed by Professor Wang Linfa, and though it took a while to find evidence that this was the case, it is actually true that Dr. Anderson did collaborate with him on it.
In a March interview with NUS News, Professor Wang said, quote, in my research with Assistant Professor Anderson, we are working.
That's great.
this is kind of a half truth being used to create a whole lie.
Yeah.
unidentified
Dr. Anderson is involved in the development of a test at Duke and U S, but there's no reason to believe that she's motivated by profits so that she stands to make billions off of it.
If Alex wants to complain about that, he should start with Celex or ChemBio, who are the two companies that own tests, or two of the companies that own tests that are approved to be used in the United States.
According to an article in the Straits Times, an English newspaper in Singapore, the development of this test was actually very difficult for exactly the reason Alex is suggesting.
This is a serology test that looks for antibodies against COVID-19, so it's important that they actually find the exact antibodies, or else this test is kind of useless.
As it turns out, Singapore is kind of the perfect place for that kind of thing to be developed, primarily because the country was hit hard by the SARS outbreak in 2003.
So there's a lot of people who have antibodies for SARS in their body there.
SARS and COVID-19 are both coronaviruses, and according to Dr. Wang, they're approximately 80% similar.
So the challenge he faced was to develop an antibody test that was so precise that it wouldn't bring up false positives if it was used on someone who had antibodies for SARS in them.
They came up with a screening test that was approximately 90% accurate and is very quick, as well as a, quote, gold standard test that takes four to five days in a level three biohazard lab, but is supposedly completely accurate.
What's important here is that the test developed in Singapore is actually the worst possible example Alex could come up with when he's randomly trying to accuse people of creating a test that will just call any cold COVID-19.
The team of researchers set out from the jump with the awareness that they would have to create a test that doesn't create false positives for very similar tests.
Anyway, no one...
The imaginary globalists, least of all, are worried about the alleged truth that Alex is spreading on air.
I think people want him off air because he's an unstable narcissist who seems to be drifting deeper and deeper into calling for a simultaneous civil and cold war, curiously right when his own personal life is falling apart.
That someone who, leaving politics aside, should not be on air is only a danger.
So, another obvious problem with the narrative that Alex is selling here, at least as far as the U.S. goes, is that most schools in the country are closed, so there's no class where they'd be playing these videos for kids.
I'm not sure how elementary schools operate, except for outside.
In my experience, they don't have periods.
I feel like that's for older students, like in junior high and high school, but I have no idea.
I haven't been to school in a long time.
So this video isn't something that's played for kids at school.
It's a news piece that the Canadian Broadcasting Company did about the uncomfortable situation that a lot of people find themselves in, where someone in a group chat, possibly a family member, is spouting insane conspiracy theories.
The piece is basically just explaining that your instinct might be to call them crazy, but that kind of shaming behavior will often just reinforce the belief the person previously had as a defense mechanism to deal with the embarrassment of being called out.
They recommend inclusive, empathic language, like reminding the person that we're all in this together.
It doesn't recommend anyone use the resources put out by Danielle Anderson, nor does it mention health feedback.
They just suggest sending them a good link to a real source.
But if Alex is laughing at the idea of good sources, we are well past the point where his point makes any sense.
Yeah, and then it jumps back and forth, because in this next clip they're talking about how, like, hey, we could end this in three hours if we had leadership.
The whole Democratic Party, the entire, all of big tech, all of the healthcare system in the country, all philanthropy, all foundations, I already said Democrats.
We'll play that clip when we come back and we'll get into your thought crime because imagine you're like, yeah, I'm going to go out and exercise my right to assemble, you know, like black folks did in the 1960s or whatever.
I use that on the left.
Like, imagine they just said there was a virus back then.
We wouldn't even end in segregation.
I mean, it's just like, it's like you just literally, everything stopped because there's a virus.
Yeah, I would hope that Martin Luther King Jr. wouldn't be like, well, we've been being fucked over and murdered by the white oppressors for our entire lives and the entire lives of our families and back and back and back, so I think it's a good idea for all of us to get together and wipe out 2-3% of us at the same time.
In this next clip, though, I should say, at the end of that last one, Owen started fucking around and saying, like, hey, if we stop breathing, we won't spread the virus.
Twitter is in no obligation to protect Alex or Owen's right to assemble somewhere.
The First Amendment is about what the government can and cannot do.
And the government can't stop free assembly.
That's the rule.
Twitter can suspend people for trying to put together huge gatherings in the middle of a pandemic.
That's totally within their rights.
And guess what?
These rallies over the weekend went off mostly without a hitch because the government didn't infringe on people's right to assemble as completely fucked up and stupid of an idea as it was.
I can find one story about a person in Raleigh who was arrested at a protest, and this introduces an important point.
The right to congregate or assemble is not absolute.
For instance, if you're breaking a different law at a protest, you can still be arrested.
Like, let's say you're at an anti-war demonstration and you punch someone.
It's a very common thing that left-wing protesters will mention if you talk to them.
Protesters are arrested for trespassing all the time.
Some other charge, too.
This is one of the fundamental realities that people in activist communities are well aware of, and it's part of the price of doing protests.
In the context of a declared emergency, like the one we're in now, state governments do have the ability to do things that they might not have had the ability to do in other circumstances.
When there's a stay-at-home order in place from the governor, the police can arrest people who are protesting.
Not because of the assembly, but because the act of being assembled is a breach of another legal order.
So a lot of this will vary state by state, but generally speaking, you can still go protest.
But if you do, you very well might get arrested.
Your First Amendment rights are still intact, but exercising them in a way that jeopardizes community health could run the risk of getting What that is so exemplary of is the difference between right-wing and left-wing protests.
Well, something that I thought was really interesting when I was listening to this and then I went and watched it was like, there have to be some people, probably not a ton, but some people who are like, this is hilarious.
What I learned last night, that you and a bunch of other crew members were banned off Twitter.
And they said, because you're going to violate social distancing.
Imagine that level of tyranny where due process and where, before you even did it, and off.
Platform activity and the right to assemble and basic, the First Amendment's gone and it's all being overseen by the same tech companies that help police the Chinese people.
Maybe that kind of talk hurts a person's credibility, but to be fair, Alex doesn't have much to begin with, so he's probably fine.
Alex's three complaints about Owen's suspension seem to come down to the issue of First Amendment, due process, and the question of off-platform activity.
These are all bullshit complaints.
As to the issue of the First Amendment, it doesn't apply here, so I just reject that as an argument.
In terms of due process, what rights of due process does Owen have with Twitter that are being violated?
The fundamental concept of due process relates to the state respecting a person's rights and how a person has a right to a trial before they're executed, imprisoned, or have their property seized by the state.
None of that's relevant to Twitter.
Twitter doesn't owe anyone a trial before they suspend their account.
This is just word salad Alex is throwing around.
The question of off-platform behavior is even lamer because that's not applicable at all.
If Owen were just organizing this rally and he didn't mention it on Twitter, there's a good chance he'd still have a Twitter account.
However, he mentioned it a bunch on Twitter.
Oh, and he did Periscope videos where he promoted it and went to hospitals to show that there weren't cars in front of him.
He did a ton of on-platform activity that was meant to promote his off-platform activity, which is kind of the problem here.
All three of these complaints are complete bullshit.
He's just trying to grab victimhood to wear like a cape.
And folks, I knew with China shutting down and what was coming, I said you better get ready, you better boost your immune system, you better get food for the economy shutting down.
And you should normally have your immune system boosted anyways.
I'm very glad to get folks to get vitamins and minerals they need, plus it funds the operation.
I'm totally transparent, but speak of this, I haven't even really plugged today.
We have a new product here, ladies and gentlemen.
Let me tell you about this.
This was planned.
Six months ago, before this even started, I said, you know, there are all these hand sanitizers that are toxic and have problems with high-quality organic alcohol and with essential oils.
Off the top of the head, you have Dr. Brawner's, EO, Vegamore, Air, Primally Pure, and plenty of others.
This is only new to someone who didn't know it existed.
It's in no way an innovation.
I looked at the bottles and the ingredients of Alex's hand sanitizers.
Emmerich's Essentials.
And I would bet just about anything I own that Alex is just private labeling Dr. Bronner's hand sanitizer.
They're both packaged in almost identical two-ounce bottles, and they have identical ingredients.
Ethyl alcohol, water, essential oil, and glycerin.
Dr. Bronner's sells hand sanitizer in both peppermint and lavender scents, but they also sell a number of other soap products with eucalyptus scents, which covers the three scents that Alex has hand sanitizer in.
So it would be well within their ability as a business to create those three.
Tentatively, I would guess that Alex has just entered into a reselling agreement with Dr. Bronner's, and he wants to pretend that he's been developing this amazing hand sanitizer for six months, which I have no idea how he would even do that.
Yeah, and I don't think he would be saying that about the Sandy Hook case, because that's not until the end of the year, if it's not even going to be postponed because of the coronavirus.
You could easily see that happening.
So, I don't know.
There's some sort of immediate thing he refuses to discuss on air, and there's only a few possibilities that that could be.