#618: November 15, 2021 dissects Alex Jones’ default judgment in the Sandy Hook lawsuit, where Mark Bankston exposed his courtroom evasions—like QuickBooks charades—as self-sabotage. Jones pivots to blaming media bias, falsely linking vaccine stabilizers and mask mandates to globalist plots, while callers peddle dangerous pseudoscience like nebulized bleach. Flynn’s theocratic rhetoric and Drew Hernandez’s morally twisted Rittenhouse defense highlight Jones’ alliance with extremism, proving his financial losses won’t curb his conspiracy-fueled crusade—only platform bans can. [Automatically generated summary]
I am probably good chance, 50% chance that I will be killed within the next five years.
I don't say this for theatrics, and I don't say this to scare you, but we need to go ahead and be honest about where we're at in this group psychology realm.
I'll tell you earlier today after the big news and everything that was going on, CNN invited one of us to come on and talk to them, speak to Anderson Cooper's night in prime time.
And I told my partner, man, hey, I think you're going to have to do it.
You're honestly, you're absolutely right about that.
It's, it's, I don't want to give anybody like the faith of, oh, we're, we're, the legal field's doing kumbaya and we're all starting back.
No, no, like you have to understand that this is when you go to the Westminster dog show and like a lot of people are going to have different opinions on judges of which dog is the nicest dog or whatever.
But if you just bring in a random mutt off the street with mans, like they're all going to go, ooh, what's going on here?
Like it doesn't even fit with their schema.
And when you have a defendant who comes in and treats the court like just like as his own personal playground or whatever, like you're going to get the same reaction from yeah.
And I think in doing some looking into like past examples of people who got hit with default judgments, like a lot of times I think it happens to celebrities who don't want to have the unpleasantness of being in court.
Like Kelly civil case ended in a default judgment.
See, you've been researching a lot of those cases where celebrities just at one point or another decide the only way to win is not play and they just take off and leave.
Right.
What's what's really ironic about Jones' situation is he was there to play and he was trying to play whatever game he was going to play.
And it was so abhorrent and offensive to the court that even his behavior there, it wasn't, you just don't see this that much.
You know, we've talked about it a bit at these hearings of other cases where it's happened under pretty egregious circumstances.
But to see a really a first time we've seen a celebrity high-profile case end in a default with not just the celebrity walking away.
It is it is a bit like Alex was invited to play a game of chess and then he was like, wait, what if I ate shooting shoots and ladders and shat it on your face?
Well, you got to remember he's doing this in two different cases in two different places on two slightly different timelines and has to keep whatever, whatever shell game is happening has to be kept up in both cases on an on a two to three month flag timeline to stay consistent.
And as you know, like day to day, he's not going to be able to stay consistent.
And the real irony of it is so much of it is they would discover stuff going on up there that's affecting their discovery.
And I'd be like, honestly, I can't even brief that to my court because I'm too busy telling them about the other stuff that's going on in my you can't even keep up with it.
All this stuff you saw about Google Analytics and all the fact the trial balances that they brought in some accountant who did a bunch of stuff that's all of that.
I never even got a chance to talk to that about my court.
I mean, we were done before that even happened.
And it's stunning that if I hadn't have gotten that default judgment that I'd got back in September, there's absolutely no question I'd have it now, just because it's unreal.
But yeah, the difference between the two cases is absolutely stunning that he has two very different styles of law and he lost them both.
But what was stunning about it is in Texas, their transgressions are mostly just an abject, like not even just a refusal, but just didn't even show up to play kind of ideas of discovery.
They didn't answer the discovery.
The court would order them to do something.
They just flat out wouldn't do it.
And then they'd expect to show up in the next hearing and everything would be okay.
In Connecticut, they actually tried to do the stuff.
And that's actually maybe what got them in more trouble.
It just took longer is that the stuff they did was really absurd.
And so it's, really the offense and disrespect in Texas was really something.
But the absolute clown show that was what they tried to fix the situation in Connecticut was maybe even worse.
No, no, look, all I can speak of is from what's in the public pleading.
Sure, true.
What ended up in Connecticut?
But from what is stated in those pleadings, from what I can gather from what is stated there, is that they were asked to have their accountant, their QuickBooks person, press the button on QuickBooks that produces the subsidiary ledgers and all the financial trial balances for the company.
And then they said, here they are.
Here's what she gave you.
And then a little bit later on, they discovered because of some weird irregularities in there, the info has had to admit, well, actually, we printed that button and then we gave it to an accountant.
And then that accountant, well, he said that the figures were misleading.
So as I listen to these hearings about what's what's going on there, I'm like, honestly, like, again, the difference between the two forums, those guys are lucky they didn't even try to pull that stuff down in Texas because I would have oh, your honor, your honor, your honor.
I'm glad you brought that up actually because that was one of Alex's big defenses on his show today when he was responding to the default judgment in Connecticut.
It was that, oh, they said I didn't give them bank records.
I gave them a spreadsheet.
Like that.
So it's interesting to hear that the reality is they had changed some numbers.
I mean, and look, I want to make clear too, just for people who are listening here.
When I say that I'm reading the public records and I'm telling you about what's going on in Connecticut, realize one, I don't represent those Connecticut plaintiffs, but I can the dockets online.
You can read all the documents.
And when I say I'm reading from public record, what I'm describing to you about an accountant going out and then making the numbers that were misleading turn correct, that's not taken from the plaintiff's pleadings.
That's taken from Infowars pleadings, right?
unidentified
Like you read Infowars pleadings, and that's what they say they did.
And so, like, I don't, I don't feel like I'm telling tales out of school or anything.
You go into like, I mean, Houston's got a place in a different one now, but then that Austin courthouse where he's going to be, where I grew up in Fort Ben, you look outside the direct window of the courthouse you are, and there is a giant oak tree with a straight, you know, horizontal branch that's been trained that way.
And that, like, that brand, you know what that is.
I mean, that too, but also mostly just largely alienated and disenfranchised and not people who have the power of the state array against him in perhaps unjust ways.
The fact that Alex Jones is going to have to spend two weeks in that courtroom looking out that window is, you know, that's a good feeling that he has to be in that courtroom.
I'm told maybe something else in his calculus could be that the last time he tried to appeal an adverse ruling in the Hesslin case, he ended up owing me $25,000 for wasting my time.
So, one of the things that I wanted to ask you about, because I think that I find this fairly interesting, is that like the Texas cases, if I understand correctly, the defendant in that is all Alex, right?
You have Jones himself, and you have his two companies that are primarily again.
At the time, we filed the suit, the two companies we thought was primarily involved in Infowars, which is Free Speech Systems LLC, Infowars LLC.
Turns out you get into the suit, and even though Infowars LLC's name's all over the website, as it was at that time, that company does not exist.
It's a paper thing.
It has no employees, no revenue, no assets, no nothing.
As far as we can tell, the other entities that are being sued up in Connecticut, for instance, Infowars Health LLC, Prison Planet TV LLC, also completely paper entities.
Totally, these were a bunch of entities that were spun off in 2013, right around the time of the divorce to try to reorganize the business.
None of it really seemed to take off.
I don't really understand why, but they put every egg in the basket in free speech systems.
So, really, in terms of that's really it.
It's Jones and Free Speech Systems.
So he has some assets personally, he has some in a corporate form.
Surely, no, that organization strategy, yeah, no, it's totally above board business, so they would never do that.
But the other defendant in our cases, uh, that is not up in Connecticut, which is just delightful, is Owen Schroyer.
Oh, that's right, that's right, and Owen Shroyer is because he had he went on and said specific things about Neil Huss and went ahead and put his self on the line.
That's you know, it's funny when you, one of the first questions you gotta, you gotta ask the guy when you're in deposition with him.
He's got an author page on Infowars.
And it's like, I am, it's, they haven't updated it in a while, you know, so it's like still very much like, I am, I am most well known for my confrontations with Carl the cuck and Ad Spillets.
Is you know, we brought that up last year and we were a little concerned about that.
You're putting off your deposition forever and he's got pending criminal indictment and all of that.
And the thing is, is yeah, they've they've been for the past three months, they've just been on InfoWars making noise as much as they want with not challenge, not whatever.
And now finally, they get, you know, a guy like Owen sits down in the chair and he's going to have to answer questions.
I would, those would be the last depos we take, hopefully.
So, like, when he's doing these things in 2017, it's weird, though, because he becomes sort of in Jones's hatchet man for this.
Jones knows he can't talk about the family specifically.
So, if he wants to talk about the families, he sends Owen Schroyer out to do it.
The Owen Schroyer does the thing about Neil Hussle not holding his kid.
He does the video about Erica Lafferty and confronting her.
I don't know if y'all have seen that video, but Schroyer just goes off about, I don't understand what your problem is, ma'am.
You know, I don't understand why you're not listening to men like Wolfgang Halbig and Jim Fetzer who've done the most reliable reporting possible on this event.
And I don't know why you're trying to butt heads of people who are trying to figure out what happened to your mom.
I think that is, I think a lot of that could be slightly motivated by trying to prove that he belongs in that space, like that Alex Jones Info Wars space.
Well, and you know, the English guy threw him under the bus, so now I can replace the English guy, you know, that's fine.
Oh, totally, yeah, like I don't, I, he is an interesting case, and and people aren't talking about him enough in this suit because he is he's Jones's protege, and and people don't realize that he just got on and did those marching orders and did those things, and he's just as much a part of all of this.
Yeah, it's one of the things that we've kind of looked at over the course of us doing the podcast is like, who is the heir apparent?
Like, who is the person who's supposed to do this after Alex has a heart attack or uh crashes his any number, any number of possible ways for him to die?
What happens?
And it always seemed like Paul Joseph Watson, but at some point he seemed to want to distance himself a bit and became kind of clearly Owen, yeah, and that was a disappointing point for pretty much.
You know, when I came on this case, I was probably less busy, so I was better in touch with right-wing online media.
But like I said, the last couple of years, too, I'm just who can stomach it, right?
No offense to you guys, um, um, um, like, for instance, I haven't been keeping up with Paul and seeing what Paul Watson's career looks like right now and how much it's still part of InfoWars and what he's trying to carve out for himself.
But it seemed like that's what he was doing in some way.
And I, I figured he was going to be on the level of like a Ben Shapiro, he's going to like he's going to eventually be that kind of figure, and it's, you know, I don't know what he's up to now.
I think he started this site called Summit.news that was basically just like a you know news blog kind of thing uh with a bunch of basically another gateway pundit you know yeah um but i think his mistake might have been getting too involved um in like some european politics and some british stuff like uh nigel Nigel Farage and those folks.
I don't know if you like, I've never seen a man like so desperate for like online engagement and like just to have like the rabbling, clapping seals of right-wing Twitter just clap for any crap he pretends he's doing.
But like the idea that you haven't able to like successfully monetize that into making yourself a star, like just give it up by now because I swear it's the right-wing grift right now is so easy.
I saw, not to like completely change the subject, but I saw Alex Berenson, the COVID misinfo guy, had started a sub stack and the dude's going to, he's bringing in a million a year on that sub stack, just like blogging three times a week about COVID misinfo.
And if you're Robert Barnes, how can you work this hard and not be like just the, I don't know.
But you know, you did, it was weird to see, and I always wonder about that with Barnes of like you're hosting Infowars constantly while you're representing this case, and then all of a sudden you get like your own show.
Well, you know, my mom raised me on people like Gore Vidal and some of those great debates of the 1950s and 60s where William F. Buckley would get in there.
And you can't help watch Alex Jones and not really feel shades of that, you know.
Another thing, as that was all happening, like him ascending in Infowars and being Alex's lawyer, me and Jordan were both like, Alex, he's trying to take over.
It's not good if somebody who's clearly wanting to become like an on-air personality talent is also the person who gets paid more the longer you're in court.
I'm a kind of weird guy, but I came from a world of kind of like, you know, regular lawyers who do things the regular way, even though we're like absolute pirates and going after who we go after.
But like, we, when we came to these people and saw, like, yeah, here's just a guy who's just like, hey, send me money and crowdfund me to be like, that's not how law works.
It's really interesting because he tried to come into this lawsuit and portray himself as a First Amendment hero to be anti-you know, I'm going to take out these slaps that we're facing.
And this is, and then like every little other thing I've ever seen him do is go to a state without a slap law and file some crazy suit against it.
You know, I mean, really, as you've known from the hearings, the elephant in the room has been Mark Randonzo this whole time.
Like the other like weird guy who's like branded himself a First Amendment lawyer who kind of came out of, I mean, like at first, he was very much an anti-First Amendment lawyer in a way of like working for porn companies to go after people who are posting their porn videos online and stuff like that.
And then like kind of like switched gears off of that.
I mean, a bunch of stuff happened in that.
And you can read all about that online.
But then he switched into like, I'm now a First Amendment crusader.
But it's, it's weird how every single, like anytime you see, oh, Randonza is involved in that, like you're like, oh, I understand what the defendant's going to be like then.
Like, I, okay, let's go, let's say I was going to be some First Amendment defense lawyer, which I'm not.
I'm a planner's lawyer, but like, if I was going to be a defense lawyer on that front, I would be proud to list on my resume a Nazi that I represented, right?
Or like a KKK guy, right?
And like, I'm in there defending his free speech rights, principally, not like doing a bunch of underhanded stuff to do it, but like surely.
And maybe, maybe I'd even be proud if I had like one or two or even three Nazis, or if I had four Nazis or five Nazis or something like that.
But like, once you start getting above that number, like now you're just a Nazi lawyer.
And so that ought to, that, that's what honestly just like threw my switch about Mark Randonza getting involved in these cases.
But as you'll see from like the recent stuff in front of the court, when we discovered what his professional history really is, when we discover the things that he has done in his career, all of a sudden, like it stopped being about like, this guy seems weird, maybe hangs around Nazis too much.
Like this guy seems like a genuine menace to us, like could potentially be really dangerous in this courtroom.
And so we brought a bunch of briefing about that.
And our court said, no, Mark Randonza cannot come anywhere near the state of Texas courtroom.
It will not happen.
And now there is, they have actually launched an appeal on that.
Like they, you got to understand the default judgments have been entered.
They haven't appealed those yet, but Margrandans is appealing already.
So they're they're trying to appeal Mark Rondaza being allowed to be involved in the next stages of the case to come defend him during these last stages.
He's the person who came up with all these corporate forms that we were talking about.
He's a corporate guy.
Like he arranged all of that.
And so his name's on all of that stuff.
So he's been around for age for maybe more than a decade.
I don't know.
Well, in the midst of the Fontaine case, real recently, after these default judgments and some other things went down, Eric Taub moved to withdraw as his counsel and filed a motion with the court saying, I can't tell you why because attorney client communication, I can't tell you why, but my continued representation would force me to violate the Texas disciplinary rules of conduct and violate my ethical duties.
Nobody knows what that means.
Nobody has any idea what the conflict is, what the unethical thing that he would be forced to do is.
You know, there's you could speculate a million different ways under the sun, but from attorney-client, we don't know.
All we know is something's rotten in Denmark in terms of that relationship.
That I don't think it is, but this would be like a super benign one, right?
Like if I'm representing a client and I've been representing them for three years or whatever in the suit, and then all of a sudden I realize I find out for some reason that that client and who he's suing is actually somebody I used to represent.
Right.
Like I'm like, let's say I sue Infowars, right?
Or something like that.
Or let's just make it really easy, right?
Like I sue, you want, you come to me and you want to sue Target, and I'm representing you suing Target.
And then somewhere in the suit, I reckon I realize, oh, shit, I used to represent Target, but I didn't know that because they must add a different name.
They must have been named something different back then.
That could give you, that would lead to the same result, right?
You could say, now I can no longer ethically represent it.
The deal about that is, is you'd be able to disclose that because like your representation of Target, like that's all public and stuff.
This is something inside the relationship, something that deals with the attorney-client relationship itself.
And therefore, nobody knows.
Like, you know, it deals with that relationship.
You know, that there's something ethical going on there, but nobody really knows what it is.
Oh, well, the thing that the thing that typically comes up like would be: this client asked me to do something six months ago, and I thought it was all above board when it happened.
And I've recently discovered facts that say that's not above board.
And now I can't, if I would need to reveal it or leave, one of the two has to happen.
If you won't let me reveal it, then I have to leave.
So his feeling on that one, look, you got to say, what is what his argument there is, is that that suit is against Free Speech Systems, Kit Daniels, and the company, because Kit Daniels is the one.
Alex Jones never didn't like pre-approve his article or get on and say something about Barkland.
So Alex Jones is an individually, right?
But it's Infowars and Kit Daniels are our defendants there.
So Alex's like, hey, I'm free, but hey, all your money is next door at the studio of South Lamar.
I've known that that default judgment was coming in Connecticut probably for about three, four months.
Like that seemed pretty obvious to me that that's where they were heading.
Yeah.
I mean, look, it's really, I'm not Nostradamus.
I'm just looking behind me.
You know what I mean?
Like, I know where we've been.
I know where they're going.
And I see the orders they're getting.
And I'm like, I remember being there.
And so like, I know where they're going.
And they're just going right in our wake.
It's the same place.
There's nothing, like you said, there's nothing too different about it.
It did surprise me.
I guess it's what really surprised me is that once they were in super hot water in Texas, that they didn't wise up a little bit and change their tactics a little bit, both in Texas and Connecticut to mitigate the damage in Texas and not have this happen in Connecticut.
And if they come back and they decide they're going to play nice, give them another chance.
When they came back after appealing this summer and then things just were just a mess, just falling apart, I knew something was up.
Then when they had the whole thing up in Connecticut where they released the plaintiff's information to try to depose Hillary Clinton and all the weirdness, I was like, okay, like any idea that this was going to go normal, that's gone.
So there's only one way it can go.
The water can only roll one day on this hill.
And so I knew where it was going.
Sure.
It's interesting.
I think I said to God today, obviously, as you can imagine, reporters just calling me off the hook.
And I think I said to one reporter, I always knew we were going to beat Jones.
I just didn't think it would happen in this ridiculous of a fashion.
It's actually kind of infuriating on some.
And part of it is that the case is so obviously meritorious that you don't need the default judgment.
You don't need it.
It's ridiculous.
Like, so, and when Jones has the default judgment, it allows him to point back to it and say, I got railroaded this old kangaroo.
Yeah, this is all just, you know, and so it does deflate from the importance of it.
But I think on the other end, there's the, there's the other end that it is almost kind of poetic that it demonstrates like what an absolute ridiculous character he is.
That he won't even participate in these suits right or respect the family's ability to have their day in court against him.
None of that even happened.
It is almost fitting of like, yeah, this does show.
Yeah, I think maybe some cold comfort is that you can really look at this as him being basically a coward and not being willing to engage with this process for what you can only assume is probably a keen awareness that he was not going to win this.
And, you know, I think that masculinity and bravado is such an important thing to him.
And just sort of being able to look at this and be like, well, you couldn't even stand up and face responsibility and prove yourself right if you if you were right.
I mean, I think, I think the largest problem, though, is it seems very clear to me that once the case was brought and his lawyers actually spoke to him, he was essentially like, okay, I've lost.
And so what he's managed to do is wring the end of fucking democracy out of it for an extra few years.
I mean, I think that's, look, it's, it's a good theory, but the problem with that is, is that I really think that Jones was led astray by some really bad legal counsel in this case.
And I feel like some people came in and told him, you are going to win.
You're going to be a Larry Flint hero at the Supreme Court if you don't.
And you are going to win.
And we're going to vindicate this for you.
And they feed his own BS back to him and say, yeah, this is all globalist shows who are coming out.
That is, it's very interesting that they have strung him along on this idea that he doesn't have to play fair.
I mean, I'm not, look, when we deposed him and some of the stuff we asked him about discovery, and I really do feel some of it was honestly, yes, I just turned this over to the lawyers.
That's why we went after the lawyers on those bits.
But I think they really did at some point, the worm started to turn that the only way that these lawyers could convince him that their series of failures wasn't due to really bad, potentially actionable things on Jones' behalf.
Like, if you got to understand, Jones has the right to bring malpractice actions against his attorneys, right?
Like, if there was, that was a thing, he can do that.
If he thinks that there was malpractice done in the way his case was done, I think we have a next chapter.
I think what seems to me from what we see, how the court proceedings played out, is that they convinced him that, no, this wasn't a result of anything that we've done wrong.
It's because the system is rigged against you and you're in a kangaroo court and this is a show trial.
I don't from my position, knowing like from everything I can tell based on my hours of listening to him, I don't think anyone needed to convince him of that.
No, but I really think that event at the beginning, he thought that he was going to win.
He was going to go into these courts and he was going to prove himself right.
He was going to embarrass me and the globalists and all of that.
I mean, at the very beginning of the case, he thought he was going to collect money from the parents.
Like, that's how he really did think that for a while.
He was relishing watching me fall on my face.
That was something he could not wait to see happen.
And when it didn't happen, and when every time his attorneys came back to him and said, you owe more money now, you have to pay because we owe more attorneys' fees now, then they just convinced him you're getting railroaded.
It's not that we're doing anything wrong.
It's you're getting railroaded.
And then that's what caused him after these default judgments to just not and why I feel kind of free to speak out like this is because he just spent days on his show saying that our judge was like, you know, a satanic cannibal with the globalist pedophile Pizzagate people or whatever.
And like has now just done the worm's turn.
He's like, now you just don't play.
Now I'm just not participating.
I'm not going to play these people's games.
And so from here on out, I'm just expecting it to just be just an absolute circus.
I don't think anything is going to happen normally from here until trial.
No, I mean, that's why I have to push back on this stuff.
Why I have to come out and like, again, I'm doing part of the reason why I like to come on your show.
I know it's weird and I know we cuss and we say weird stuff and maybe we're a little bit, you know, different than normal mainstream media.
But the problem is, is like mainstream media is really bad about getting these stories wrong and they're really bad about just taking whatever they want and using it to do their agendas and Jones will use that too.
So I do like to use this kind of form to say the things that are being said about the conduct of the attorneys, about the conduct of the court, about the conduct of the plaintiffs.
And it's, it's so disrespectful to see a person who has already gone through all of these links and then now gets these orders against him and is now just like, no, that's that's lost.
Like I can't, I have to get on here and tell you like these things that are being said by Jones out of his mouth are simply not true.
And then it's not just the people you think, right?
Like, like my words are kind of being watched a little bit.
And when I go out on to say, if I was to go on MSNBC and try to fit what I'm trying to say there, it would be butchered to hell.
But when I'm here with you guys, I think I can say the realities of what the public records shows.
And that I've had to sit by and watch him get on his show and say the most insane things about this case that it feels liberating to be able to now say that those things aren't true.
And so that this is a record and people will take my words down.
I was curious if there are any consequences that he might be facing in Connecticut that are different than the possibility of what he could be facing in Texas, or if they're both financial.
I mean, what you've described so far, though, I cannot imagine the nightmare after all of the legal aspects are over.
Just that, like, okay, let's apportion what it is that we need to give to people through two different courts, through two different lawsuits, through multiple plaintiffs, through all of this stuff.
They're going to have to find a really, really evil accountant to get out of some of that shit.
Everyone that has stood up to the globalist deep state is being indicted.
They're being SWAT-teamed.
They're being denied trial by juries.
They're being imprisoned.
This is the weaponization of the judiciary in this country.
There's still pools of honorable people in the judiciary, like you're seeing in the Kenosha case with the judge there who's actually doing a fair trial.
But in all the Soros-controlled zones like Austin, Texas, and New Haven, Connecticut, you see naked corruption, mafia-level organized crime, in my view, from the judiciary.
Just complete lawlessness.
And here's a great example of that overhead shot police on this November 15th Monday transmission.
Look at this headline out of the Associated Press.
Alex Jones loses lawsuit over Sandy Hook hoax conspiracy.
But whatever you have to do in order to make your own victimhood being, you know, losing these cases by default judgment, you have to fit it into a larger narrative, and that's a perfect way to do it.
So Alex is, I think he's trying to pretend that he didn't actually lose these cases, which is fun.
Look at this headline out of the Associated Press.
Alex Jones loses lawsuit over Sandy Hook hoax conspiracy.
Now, what really happened?
This came out again back in October, the last default in Austin.
Now it's November.
Default there.
But before I show you this, what's happening in Connecticut, father of Sandy Hook victim wins defamation lawsuit against Alex Jones.
That's from 2000 and 19.
Now, did I lose the suit?
It says a father of victim of the Sandy Hook Elementary Massacre has won defamation lawsuit against the authors of a book that claimed the shooting never happened.
It goes on to say, I've lost the suit.
I'm not in the book.
I didn't lose that suit.
Didn't happen.
We contacted AP.
They said, sue us.
We're not changing it.
That's the level here.
If anyone wants to understand what's going on against InfoWars that we deal with.
So Alex is correct that default judgments are uncommon, but that's just, you know, because most people accept their responsibility to take part in legal proceedings.
But even though this is rare, it's not like default judgments never happen.
And Alex should be super aware of this since his buddy John McAfee had a default judgment against him in the civil case regarding his neighbor in Belize, who was murdered.
Forcing a default judgment is one of the preferred strategies of high-profile people who don't want to have to engage with the legal system in civil cases, like R. Kelly and Cuba Gooding Jr. did.
It's not hard to think that Alex is refusing to cooperate with the discovery process because he has something he really doesn't want to be public, like the exact nature of his finances or sources of funding.
There's probably a good chance you knew he was going to lose these cases if they ever went to trial.
So, if you're going to lose anyway, why not protect your business secrets and simultaneously create a situation where you can claim you weren't actually found guilty?
This is a good PR strategy, but it probably won't matter.
And it doesn't affect the real world.
He's going to be on the hook for so much money, and it's already too late generally for him to do all that much about it.
That's such a disgusting expression of Alex's out-of-control narcissism.
Like, how dare he be so self-centered that he thinks that when you hear the word Sandy Hook, the first thing you think of is him.
I study for Alex for a living, and he's not even the first thing I think of when I think of Sandy Hook.
He's just an absolute monster who can't experience anything in life unless it revolves around himself.
And it honestly kind of makes me sad because ultimately what you end up realizing is that there's a fair amount of people in the world who base their political beliefs on what they think is researched information, but it's really just the product of Alex's moody, narcissistic outbursts.
So Alex will probably end up getting double defaulted in this case.
But again, it's going to be his fault if he does.
The next phase of the trial is about determining what is a fitting financial penalty.
And if Alex doesn't cooperate with Discovery on this part, by refusing to turn over the appropriate financial documents, he can fuck around and get another default judgment.
And no one can shut down Alex's show except himself.
And he can talk big all he wants, but I have absolutely zero doubt that he would quit if he didn't have the flashy studio, the weird pill line that he runs himself, the ability to travel wherever he wants and buy things like tanks, the ability to pay a staff to gather headlines for him and work out all the technical aspects of the show.
He would quit in a second if he didn't have those things.
He would be losing essentially all of the things that allow him to pretend to be a legitimate show and sets him apart from any dumb asshole on YouTube who makes videos about how vaccines are evil.
He'd be the washed up guy who had his time and he didn't get anything done.
The hungry young buck conspiracy theorists would probably resent him trying to take up space in their world, siphoning off attention and possible donations that could be going to them.
Personally, I hope he does continue to do the show, even if he goes broke, just because, you know, as someone who watches this show, I think it would be a fascinating narrative arc.
I don't think it's going to happen, though.
I just don't think Alex has the humility to go back to being a DIY guy.
Like when he shows up for these interviews on like Rogan or with Patrick Bett David or the Logan Paul, like he just gets wasted and he's just like a dumbass.
And like eventually that'll wear out if he wasn't like had this show that looks super professional.
So people ask, how am I doing when I get demonized and I get lied about and I get put through kangaroo courts?
And I'm like, well, how do you think the children are?
Shared country being forced to wear a mask over their faces with teachers taping them to their heads and screaming at them and telling them that they're bad because they're white.
Like tornadoes are super deadly, but there have been documented cases of people being inside cars that are actually picked up by tornadoes and they survive.
But I don't think it's a super common thing, although there are plenty of tornadoes in Texas.
It's conceivable.
I don't believe it, but I'm open to the possibility of it being true.
Me and my buddy Nikki Gifts, one of the things that we were taken aback by is how, like, yeah, a lot of the stuff in these episodes are things that happen to, you know, people in school.
I mean, it does seem like he's living in a never-ending the days of our lives episode where everybody has an evil twin and shit's going crazy on the shit.
So the drug in question here is tromethamine, and it's being put into the Pfizer vaccines.
That's definitely true, but it's not related to heart attacks.
And the explanation of replacing saline, it's a little more complicated than Alex is making it seem.
For one thing, tromethamine has been an ingredient in the Moderna vaccine all along, and the reason is really straightforward.
Tromethamine is a very effective preservative, and it helps increase drugs' shelf life.
This is actually a really big deal because one of the arguments that Pfizer has made about being unable to send their vaccine to many parts of the developing world is that it has, as Reuters put it, a quote, strict storage requirement at ultra-low temperatures, which this will help address.
Tromethamine is used as a stabilizing ingredient in many vaccines and even humolog, a diabetes medication.
Reuters notes that it's also used as a stabilizer in many fragrances and cosmetic products.
As for the part about replacing saline, it's not that it's replacing saline solution the way that Alex is sort of implying.
That saline is just salt and water.
And, you know, it can help used to clean wounds or reduce dehydration.
The saline that's being replaced by the tromethamine is phosphate-buffered saline, which is a very different thing that has a very different effect from the standard saline solutions.
Phosphate-buffered saline has disodium hydrogen phosphate added to it, and this has the effect of helping stabilize the pH level of a solution that it's added to.
However, for the needs of this vaccine, tromethamine can do what PBS can do and then some, so it makes more sense to switch that up.
The thing about this being a heart attack drug is also kind of dubious, the tromethamine itself.
Tromethamine isn't a drug really that you'd give to someone to effectively reduce their risk of having a heart attack.
The primary connection between this drug and cardiac issues is that tromethamine is used to treat metabolic acidosis, which is a common side effect that someone may experience if they're having cardiopulmonary bypass surgery.
It's not that tromethamine addresses the heart attack.
It's used to deal with a common side effect of the bypass surgery itself.
In the interest of total fairness, it is true that a small amount of heart attacks are thought to possibly be due to metabolic acidosis, but the causal link is a little bit iffy, and there's an important qualifier.
Tromethamine doesn't really help with heart attacks per se.
It just helps with metabolic acidosis, which is a condition where a person's body is too acidic or where the kidneys can't filter the acids in the body quickly enough to keep the acid base level in check.
Typically, this connection between metabolic acidosis and a person having a heart attack is seen in the elderly who are experiencing difficulty with other organs like the kidney.
And generally, the situation is that someone has late-stage chronic kidney disease.
So it's not really relevant to the story that Alex is trying to do.
Also, let's not forget that this doesn't even work as a conspiracy theory for Alex.
The point of the globalist plans with the vaccine is supposed to be to kill everyone off.
So what sense does it make for them to create a vaccine that gives people heart attacks and then change the formula to include something that would stop people from having heart attacks?
So Alex is mad about an NBC or MSNBC anchor named Stephanie Rule because she made some comments about how Americans can pay for inflation affected products.
It was a little bit tone deaf, but Alex is a little bit off base here, too.
So Stephanie Ruhl absolutely doesn't make millions a year at NBC, although I'm sure she does fine.
If Alex wants to talk about how she's really rich, he should.
But it's not so much about her salary from NBC.
It should be a conversation of her activity in the world of hedge funds, which I'm pretty sure brought in way more money than anything that she's done on NBC.
Yeah, I mean, I think that there is a conversation to be had about like people in the like, especially on the 24-hour news networks, people say stupid shit on there all the time.
But I don't think that you get any closer to achieving that by talking about the individual instances and making a big deal out of the individual times people say stupid shit.
So according to PayScale, the average salary for news anchors at NBC is $69,317, with the high range being $110,000.
No one has presented a shred of evidence to prove that she makes 18 times the high end of the salary range, but that's the salary that's listed for her on one of those very sketchy celebrity net worth type sites.
That's just a guess on my part, but it's funny to think that he's doing this story about how out of touch Stephanie Ruhl is, and he might be just exposing how out of touch he is.
So you're just mad about Jennifer Rubin going on an MSNBC show and saying that there should be rules where news outlets shouldn't be able to call Republicans normal anymore.
I mean, but if one day we just woke up and you were about to listen to the show and all of a sudden you just heard, Lionel, Lionel, Lionel, Lionel, and Alex came out and was like, I hate book bags on the train.
You know, I have a lot of people I know, a lot of great people, a lot of good people texting me right now.
One of them is a very well-known podcaster just during the break.
He was asking, hey, we know the inside baseball on this.
You should respond to the big national news story that they're pumping out on every channel, every newspaper from Japan to Germany to the United States.
You know, tens of thousands of articles are being posted.
Alex Jones found guilty by judge.
That's a judge totally abusing their discretion, absolutely engaging in what I would say is fraud.
So, yeah, Alex is, you know, he's getting jammed up.
Judge committed fraud.
Now, when we talked to Mark, Bankston, one of the things that we discussed was the bank records and the way Alex saw fit to have an accountant clean them up a little bit.
They defaulted us mainly for saying that the accounting firm, it's a well-known, respected accounting firm, gave them, they demanded our financial records, which you wouldn't think you'd get in a civil defamation case.
It shouldn't be about what I said or did.
And so I said, no, just give it to them.
They're planning to default us, and I want to make them do it all the way.
And then they just said, this isn't your real finances.
And we said, well, you can't prove a negative.
I mean, it is.
And they said, well, it's not a QuickBooks file.
It's a spreadsheet.
And I talked to like four accountants, different accounting firms about this.
And they said, this is fraud.
And we talked about this.
Yeah, you can't give somebody a QuickBook account because a QuickBook account's a database.
It goes back to the beginning of our QuickBooks over 20 years ago.
They said from this date to that date, so what you do is you take it out and put it into a spreadsheet.
That's what I'm defaulted for, is a spreadsheet scan of every transaction at this company.
And you think that's outrageous that you would even let them do that.
Folks, they were always going to default us.
And they're always going to do it at the appeals court level, too.
I've known that.
I'm just going to illustrate the whole thing for everybody.
And then that gives us the time to, you know, to move forward fighting the globalists.
I mean, it's, it's, this is not my battle.
This is not my war.
This is kind of like a rabid chihuahua that has rabies is biting me in the leg.
And I've got a pack of wolves tearing my children apart.
That's the allegory.
I've got real wolves, not the chihuahua chewing on my leg.
Somebody needs to call QuickBooks because, I mean, obviously they had this massive oversight where you can't choose what dates you want to print out the files from.
You know, like there's no way.
You can only, when you go into the QuickBooks software, you can only download all of your finances or none.
And if I spend my time tactically talking to HBO or talking to the Wall Street Journal or running around trying to defend myself from the fake things they've launched against me, we're going to lose the whole country and the planet.
So the implication of what Alex is saying is that if he doesn't stay focused on the work that he's doing, the very specific work that he's doing, all hope for the planet is lost.
I like that, though, in terms of like it's such an illustration of narcissism.
Oh, I mean, it's if I stop for a second to address the fact that I just lost these cases, if I give a comment to a media outlet about this, we will lose the world.
Yeah, I mean, it's fun that, like, default judgments, you know, as we talked about with Mark the first time, you know, they were like, this is exceedingly rare and they only use, they only really teach these in schools.
You know, now we've got Alex as an example to teach in law school.
Why not remember that in psychiatry school, they're going to use Alex as a narcissism example as well.
He's going to be taught in a lot of different schools.
And you say, oh, well, they'll never get away with that.
Really?
Really?
They are getting away with all of it, but separately.
Let me tell you how you can fight back against this because we're very close to winning.
And the globalists see InfoWars as the tip of the spear and rightfully so.
And I'm very proud to be the tip of the spear.
And I'm very honored to be in this position because I want to be a champion for liberty.
I want to be a champion for freedom.
I asked to get in the arena.
And I asked for this fight.
And I expect a lot more to happen.
But I also know in the end these evildoers will be punished, will be defeated across the board.
I know they're going to stage false flags and try to blame me for them and others.
They already have, like January 6th.
And I understand that somebody's got to not be a coward and stand up to these people.
So I'm doing it.
All I ask is that you pray for us and you spread the word about the broadcast and you financially support us so we can go into this fight strong and give it our 110%.
So please pray for InfoWars.
Please pray for me.
Please pray for my family.
And please pray that I be given focus and clarity and a calm, steady heart and mind and hand.
I got an interview with General Flynn Saturday down in San Antonio, and he was speaking to a crowd of 5,000 people at a big event being held at Cornerstone Church, Pastor Hage's Church.
And I really respected and liked the general a long time ago, but I didn't know him, and I've gotten to know him the last few years.
And I've gotten a chance to see him as he's basically gotten accustomed to being a civilian leader.
And I think he's a great guy and the type of person that can be George Washington 2.0.
And I, quite frankly, think he's better suited than somebody like Trump because he understands it's a globalist New World Order operation.
Now, I think I actually agree with Alex that Flynn could be another George Washington, but from my perspective, it's the dark version of our first president.
Flynn made some comments that we're going to get into later when he was speaking at the Cornerstone Church in San Antonio over just before this.
But it's also important to note that this was part, it wasn't just like a speech at a church.
It was part of the fairly QAnon-leaning Reawaken America tour.
Other speakers included Mike Lindell, Roger Stone, the Q Patriot Street Fighter, former Overstock CEO Patrick Byrne, and of course, Stella Emmanuel, the Ivermectin doctor who believes that we're living in Revelation and also has a promo code on her website so Alex's listeners can get 5% off their drug purchases.
These creeps and weirdos were advertised speakers, but strangely missing from that advertisement was Alex, though he did get a speaking slot at the event.
Now, as for General Flynn, his speech was a little more interesting.
There were many news stories covering how he said, quote, if we're going to have one nation under God, which we must, we have to have one religion, one nation under God, and one religion under God.
Yeah, it's so fucked up, I don't really even know how to engage with it.
Like, these are the people gathering who yell about the Constitution all the time, and they're here worshiping a lunatic ex-general who's advocating something in direct opposition to the First Amendment.
What I think we should do is our constitutional duty, which, of course, is to overthrow the United States government and turn this into theocracy, just like the founders intended when they wrote that constitution that specifically outlawed that.
Anyway, my point is that based on his stated beliefs and the way the QAnon and the other right-wing communities respond to him, Flynn does have the potential to be there, George Washington, the first president of the fundamentalist Christian nationalist dictatorship they so desperately want to be.
I really am blown away that these people with the Constitution in their fucking pockets are looking up at General Flynn say obvious bullshit about nothing and thinking, I want to overthrow democracy for that.
They have the Congress, they have most of the courts, and they have most of the cities, but they don't have the people that live in those cities.
They've maintained their control through election fraud, and they know that.
Victory.
Florida School District ends mask mandate after eight-year-old girl told them they should be in prison.
Palm Beach County School District has ended a mask mandate just days after a second-grade girl told school board officials they should all rot in jail for forcing children to wear face coverings against their will.
This is a fun story, and I can see how Alex would want to present the idea that this second grader shamed a school board, and that's the impetus to stop a mask mandate in this Palm Beach County schools, but that's just not true.
The state of Florida's Department of Health had released an order that prohibited schools from having mask mandates unless parents could opt out of them.
This school district, however, decided to go against that order.
The second grader Alex is talking about is the daughter of a woman named Bailey Lachells, and for about two months, she'd been suspended for refusing to wear a mask at school.
Ultimately, it wasn't her activism or the mom having her eight-year-old daughter go on Fox News shows that ended the school district's mask mandate.
The decision was based on a court ruling that was made that determined that the school district was in violation of the Department of Health's order and the fact that children could now be vaccinated and that local COVID rates had fallen dramatically since that decision was made to not let parents opt out of children wearing masks.
It's fun to imagine that a second grader yelled at a school board and they were so taken aback by the truth she was spitting at them that they cowered and stopped requiring masks, but that's just not true.
So if a news network is so rabid for any content that reinforces their bullshit that they will grab up anyone anywhere who has fulfilled any part of their narrative and put them on TV.
Is it possible, Dan, that might be an incentive for people who want to get on TV?
You know, I would like, I would really, I think the problem with me not having kids is that I don't get the thank you from the kids that I don't have that I didn't later on go tell jokes about them or talk about them on this podcast or something along those lines.
Yeah, I get a sense that there's a little bit of disappointment on Alex's part that his daughter would not be his proxy in this fight that he wants to have so he could get a lot of attention.
Are you telling me that you don't want to go to school, stand up in front of all of your friends and tell them that your dad, Alex Jones, says he thinks that this is all bullshit?
You're telling me that at this very delicate moment in the sort of maturation process, you don't want to alienate yourself from literally everybody around you because you're taking a stand publicly for my bullshit.
I would have a tough time processing Alex talking about this eight-year-old that he admires and being like, well, that's what I wanted my daughter to do.
Well, I'm not sure if it's a blackmail threat, but it makes it clear that if you don't do the things that I want you to do, there will be disappointment.
Like, if you're a high school basketball player and you're not very good and like you're, you know, you go to a game and the opposing team has a really good player on it, and your dad's like, ah, they're great.
Yeah, he built his clinic on using iodine and hydrogen peroxide.
And when you did talk about using nebulized peroxide, it didn't really get across how effective it is.
My wife and I were exceedingly sick, and we used X2, two drops of X2, and you have to really cut it down on the peroxide.
Recommend the food safe, the food-grade peroxide, 12%, and cut it down like exceedingly light.
And every time we use it, it just cleans the lungs, it cleans the sinuses, because that's where the majority of the infection is going to transfer into us, is through the sinuses and then down the throat and then into the lungs.
And people just need to know.
I think if you interviewed Dr. David Bronstein, it'd be pretty enlightening because his clinic was basically built on that.
Well, I mean, I'm fully aware that most people are deficient in iodine, and most iodine is bound to another substance, so it's not really absorbable like it should be in the body.
For some context, the type of hydrogen peroxide most people would be getting from the store is 3% hydrogen peroxide.
And food grade is 35%.
There are some medicinal uses that make some sense, but pretty much all of them are strictly topical applications, like softening corns or disinfecting small cuts.
But even in these cases, it's got to be super diluted, which is why the stuff you buy at the store is 3%.
I hate that I have to say this, but just because this guy is saying you should nebulize and inhale this bleach cocktail instead of drink it, that doesn't make it any more safe.
This definitely can still be toxic, particularly if you mess up your measurements when you're diluting.
I would say that Alex has no idea who David Bronstein is, and he was just bluffing when the caller asked.
But in this case, he might actually know who that dude is, since one of Alex's anti-vax compatriots, Dr. Mercola, has promoted him in the past.
So it's possible that Alex does know, but man, fucked up, fucked up call.
Why don't you inhale a bunch of hydrogen peroxide?
I'm consistently blown away because the one truth about humanity that has stayed consistent through our entire history is when people feel bad, a lot of them are going to try and solve it with poison.
That's a very weird thing that has stayed with us from the very fucking beginning.
I hate that I have to say this, but there are not studies that show that inhaling hydrogen peroxide through your nose clears out COVID before it has a chance to hurt you.
Well, there are some ideas that hydrogen peroxide could have an effect when it's used for nasal irrigation or mouthwash, like that type of thing.
If it's very diluted, but it's not ingested.
Right.
There's no compelling evidence or actual studies that show this conclusion, but there's some ideas that it's possible.
Even then, doing a nasal rinse with a diluted solution is a bit different than inhaling hydrogen peroxide, which there is no evidence is effective.
And in September, actually, the Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America released a statement warning people that regardless of what you've seen on social media, do not put hydrogen peroxide in your inhalers.
But in his show, Black Books, there was a moment where he's really, really sick and he's by himself and he looks over at his oven and he sees the oven cleaner and goes, if you can clean an oven, you can clean me.
And I feel like that's so much of how people think.
I think because we have asymmetrical warfare against us, and they're using our good graces and our politeness against us in terms of basically murdering genocidists, I think we need to see, and I think there must be enough data and information out there to start doing some Nuremberg II hangings.
I think once you start doing one or two of those, the people that are kind of like, well, they told me to do it, they're going to realize that they are culpable for violating international law, national law, and numerous local laws.
Once they see that, hey, this is for real and their life is on the line, I think that would be a major turning point.
I was blown away by how we went from because, and I think this is how this dude thinks, is like, I guess it's because we're so polite that we're allowing them to hurt us.
Now, I don't want anybody to go out and shoot any of these minions or actual globalists because there's a globalist system they've got in place that Satan runs.
It's spiritual.
They would use that as a preject to expand more control over us.
Our resistance needs to be financial, spiritual, physical in a non-violent way, civil disobedience, things like that.
But they are going to go ahead and just keep moving at us in a violent way.
And so at a certain point, we do need to take back some governmental systems, and then we do need to have Nuremberg II.
And people that do knowingly roll out depopulation and sterilization weapons against the public obviously do need to be executed.
So there's never been sort of like a opposition party that's kind of a minority that decides to then overthrow the government and through the government justify their actions despite them being incredibly immoral.
I mean, I wouldn't be surprised if at a certain point he's like, let's overthrow the Texas governor and install the lieutenant governor as the supreme overlord of the Texas fucking ethno-state.
French officials are investigating a new strain that they've detected, but it's not entirely clear as of yet how different this strain is going to end up being.
According to an article in Reuters, it looks like researchers are interested in how he can possibly hide from PCR tests, since, quote, several of the patients delivered negative PCR tests and returned a positive result only from samples taken from blood or deep in the respiratory system.
However, even if this does end up being the case, quote, France's health ministry said late on Monday that early analysis did not suggest the mutation was more contagious or more deadly than earlier versions of the virus.
There's a lot of information yet to be learned about this variant, and it very well may turn out that it's not a huge deal and that the vaccines we have are still effective against it.
So it could end up being more or less an academic issue.
Or it could turn out that its ability to evade PCR tests means that an alternative screening method might be needed in some cases.
It's also possible that significant enough mutations to the spike protein would make it resistant to the vaccines, but it's way too early to jump to that conclusion.
Are you telling me that it's way too early to jump to the conclusion that Bill Gates financed the creation of a new variant of Delta of COVID in order to continue killing people and blame the Patriots, even though the vaccine he's already given us is going to give us a death sentence?
The way this gets at me is having to spend time and energy knowing we didn't do the things they said and telling lawyers they're going to default us years ago.
And then when the lawyers are like, nobody's ever given them all their bank accounts, this judge is crazy.
I said, give them all to them, but they're going to default.
Still did it.
Because I wanted to show the world all that and make them sit there and follow their political orders to engage in such outlandish, incredible corruption.
I knew all this.
I told them all that.
I remember again, I was sitting there one time when they deposed me in Texas and they're like, you don't take this very seriously.
You don't know this is serious.
Like later, we're driving home and like hold my dad up and I was laughing.
I'm like, these people have no idea that I already know all about this stuff.
That I was born researching this information and actually hearing family talk about things that they witnessed themselves.
And what is it about white people the globalists don't like?
Well, the Christian ethos and what happened in the West about 500 years ago, the Renaissance, the idea of empowering the average person, people having basic rights, people having free speech, people having a right to a jury, the Gutenberg printing press, books.
Well, and even legalistic concepts that Alex is fascinated by and insisting that white people invented, like the very basis of freedom, a lot of that's not based entirely or created out of whole cloth by European Western cultures.
It doesn't make any sense because this caller and Alex have the story backwards.
They're saying that these hundred kids in Virginia were giving adult doses of the vaccine three times what they were supposed to get, but that's not true.
In reality, according to a story in the Washington Post, quote, the doses of Pfizer vaccine given at the clinic were diluted more than recommended, according to the health department.
It's not clear if this is what happened in this other case, but in another incident in Loudon County, Virginia, a pharmacy was administering incorrect doses to children, but their mistake kind of makes sense if you don't think about it too much.
Children's doses are one-third of the standard dose.
So you might think that you could dilute one-third of a standard dose, and just like that, you've cooked up a child's dose.
Yeah, I imagine that if I were one of the people who designed the vaccine, the knowledge that some pharmacist was just like, oh, well, if I have three little cups, I'll just pour a little bit of this vaccine in there each one.
1122, 2010, and I got fired on 1123, 2010 after Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, Google, all of them called up Orlando Examiner and said, if you don't fire this guy, we're going to terminate our contract with you.
And that's why the Democratic Party and these billionaire philanthropists, as they call themselves, have been financing the attacks on the Second Amendment and on the First Amendment in this country and financing an attack on the judiciary.
They have been buying up the judges.
They have been buying up the courts.
They've been paying for all the DAs.
They've been putting in the county attorneys as well and even the state attorney generals.
They admit this.
And the witch hunts against their political opposition are now legion.
And that's all that's happened here.
I have spent millions of dollars fighting these fraudulent Sandy Hook lawsuits against me.
And they never wanted me to have my real day in court in front of a jury.
It's too dangerous for the establishment that uses those dead children to try to destroy the First Amendment, not just the Second Amendment.
And so we gave them all of our documents, all of our bank records, things that had nothing to do with the defamation suit.
And the judge in Texas and the judge in Connecticut in lockstep said, Jones has failed to give us documents.
All of this is because the establishment is in its death rows and it's lost control of the American people.
And so, they think if they can target leaders of the populist opposition and demonize us and do all sorts of corrupt things to us, that that's going to intimidate other people to not stand up politically against them.
But that's not going to work.
It's just like when Hitler bombed civilian targets in England, is it?
And the general public went from being 90% against a war to 90 plus percent for a war.
And so, that's what's happening: this is nothing but the judicial system being weaponized, trying to intimidate me and others.
It's not going to work.
I'm going to work harder.
I'm going to put out more films.
I'm going to do more interviews, and I'm going to continue with my pro-America freedom advocacy.
Yeah, so the bombing of Britain during World War II lasted over eight months in 1940 to 1941.
The United Kingdom declared war on Germany in 1939, so that already happened.
No, I'm going to need to see Alex cite some sources on this 90% against to 90% for figure in terms of British support for the war because I can't find anything that comes close to that.
There was a spike in morale and support for the war at the end of the Blitz, but it also coincided with when the Soviet Union officially entered the war.
So these motivators could be working in concert together.
Also, there was a spike when the U.S. joined the war.
Anyway, the point Alex is making about Germany hoping to demoralize the British with a Blitz, but that only making them more in favor of the war is maybe somewhat accurate, but only if you interpret it really generously.
Also, an important point is that the enthusiasm in Britain went up when the Blitz ended, not while the bombing campaign was still active.
This dynamic kind of hurts Alex's metaphor, but I don't want to split too many hairs.
It's just something that he brings up over and over and over again.
He only really has maybe 100 sort of word blocks that he uses and just sort of fits them in where they need to go.
What you talked about, how the left and wokeism is a new religion.
Klaus Schwab came out two days ago and gave a speech.
The head of the WTO, Bilderberg Group, Debos Group.
I mean, he's the head of all those globalist organizations.
He's really like the world corporate president, the chairman of the board.
And he openly said, We're creating a new religion of the earth, and that's how we're going to unify everybody.
It's a religion where humans are bad and evil, and they, the high priest, are going to make sure that they suppress us and control us for the good of the earth.
I mean, this is a very authoritarian system.
So, can you elaborate on your point about how they are an oppressive religion that wants control of our bodies?
Because, I mean, when you take a look at this from like a biblical worldview, that's the end game for Lucifer and for Satan.
Now, we're going to get into some theology because that's what is going to happen with the advent of the Antichrist.
He's going to be a superstar that is going to unify the world, that is going to usher in a one-world religion, one world economy, and one world system.
And we are seeing this unfold right now.
I'm not saying that we are literally living in the book of Revelation right now because there are some precursors that need to take place according to the Bible.
But we are literally watching right now is the Bible would refer it to as the spirit of the Antichrist because this is the grand finale before the second coming of Jesus Christ.
I can't believe that you have here's here's the thing about being a witness: I understand because the judge is a piece of shit, and that's not unusual.
But I mean, if I'm on the jury, I would like the defense to always question or anybody to always question their witnesses.
When people think that they can dictate and control and know what's best for your own babies over you as a parent, how the hell could you ever allow that?
But also, I think that him saying things like this next clip that I'm going to play, I think this is a problem for him being involved as a witness for the defense.
And that is exactly why they didn't want it to come out in the trial because they knew if the jury knew this, they exactly knew that possibly this guy deserved to get shot because Kyle Rittenhouse was a minor when Joseph Rosenbaum was charging him from behind.
It's like if I liked murdering people and then I pushed somebody off a cliff and then I was in court and they were like, ah, but did you know this guy was also a murderer?